Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passaudited 2026-08-17
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Matrix rings over division rings are semisimple

Statement

Let D be a division ring and n1. On the set of n×n arrays over D, use entrywise addition and the product

(AB)ij:=k=1naikbkj.

These operations make a ring Mn(D), and this ring is semisimple. More precisely, its left regular module is the direct sum of the simple column ideals Mn(D)ejjDn for 1jn. See A semisimple ring as a ring whose left regular module is semisimple.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses and objects in the Statement.

[L1]

A unital ring R is semisimple when its left regular module RR is semisimple. This is a left-module definition and uses no Jacobson radical. For the zero ring, the regular module is zero and hence semisimple; the Wedderburn-Artin theorem below is stated for nonzero rings. (A semisimple ring as a ring whose left regular module is semisimple).

[L2]

A division ring is a ring D with 10 in which every nonzero element has a two-sided multiplicative inverse. (Division ring: a ring with 10 in which every nonzero element is a unit).

[L3]

A ring has an abelian-group addition, an associative multiplication with identity, and both distributive laws; multiplication need not be commutative. (Ring: an abelian group under addition and a monoid under multiplication, with multiplication distributing over addition on both sides).

[L4]

Finite sums in a commutative monoid are independent of the chosen enumeration, and the empty sum is 0. (A finite sum in a commutative monoid indexed by an arbitrary finite set).

[L5]

A left R-module M is simple if M0 and its only submodules are 0 and M. Equivalently, M has no proper nonzero submodule. (Simple module: a nonzero module with no proper nonzero submodule).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Entrywise addition makes the arrays an abelian group. Associativity of multiplication follows by expanding both (AB)C and A(BC) and reassociating the finite double sum; the two distributive laws follow entrywise from those of D. The matrix I=(δij1D) is a two-sided identity. Thus the displayed operations make the unital ring Mn(D) without any commutativity assumption on D.

L2L3L4givenalgebra
2.1

Let ej=ejj. Every matrix has the unique decomposition A=j=1nAej, and Mn(D)eijiMn(D)ej=0 because the two sides have disjoint possible nonzero columns. Hence Mn(D)Mn(D)=j=1nMn(D)ej.

step 1.1L4givenalgebra
3.1

Sending a matrix in Mn(D)ej to its j-th column identifies that left ideal with Dn under left matrix multiplication. If 0vDn, choose k with vk0. For any wDn, the matrix whose only possibly nonzero column is column k, with entry aik=wivk1, sends v to w. Thus every nonzero submodule of Dn is all of Dn, so each column ideal is simple.

L2L5step 1.1step 2.1givenalgebra
4.1

The decomposition in step 2.1 is therefore a finite direct sum of simple left modules, so [L1] makes Mn(D) semisimple. For n=1 it is the single simple column ideal, and the hypothesis n1 excludes an empty decomposition.

L1step 2.1step 3.1given

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 53 results over 15 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.

Sources