On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Tom Bachmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > In my background "ring" is synonymous with commutative unital ring. As far > as I know there is quite a large body of mathematics (mainly related to > representation theory) devoted to the study of non-commutative rings as > well.
Yeah, I can confirm that. The institute I'm currently doing a bit of research at has a team of people who work specifically on non-commutative algebras. While I don't really know what exactly there are (or were) doing, I know that non-commutative algebras arise naturally somewhere around formal languages. > All of this is really just nitpick for saying: while some in contexts rings > without identity are fine, we should not be required to treat ideals in this > way. Yes, now that we've found the confusing point in the definition of ring vs. unital ring, I agree with the statement. Sergiu -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
