A variation on Dixmier's counterexample concerning centralizers in $A_1$












0














I have asked this question in MO, but have not received any comments/answers, so now I ask it here:



This question asks the following: "Suppose $k$ is a field of characteristic zero and $P$ and $Q$ are commuting elements of the first Weyl algebra. Is it true that $P$ and $Q$ are polynomials in some third element $H$?"



It was answered in the negative (the counterexample seems to be due to Dixmier and Makar-Limanov).



Now replace the field of characteristic zero $k$ by a non-normal integral domain of characteristic zero $R$, for example $R=mathbb{C}[t^2,t^3]$.




Is it possible to adjust $P$ and $Q$ to some $tilde{P}$ and $tilde{Q}$ satisfying the following three conditions:



(i) $[tilde{P},tilde{Q}]=0$.



(ii) $tilde{P}$ and $tilde{Q}$ are not polynomials in some third element $H$.



(iii) $tilde{P}$ has a 'Dixmier mate', namely, there exists $B$ in the first Weyl algebra over $R$ such that $[tilde{P},B]=1$.




Remarks:



(1) The analogous question in $R[x,y]$ can be found here.



(2) In contrast, in $k[x,y]$, it is true that if $operatorname{Jac}(p,q)=0$, then $p=u(h)$ and $q=v(h)$, for some $h in k[x,y]$, $u(T),v(T) in k[T]$; see, for example, Corollary 1.3 in Nagata's paper ($k$ is an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero) or this question ($k$ is an arbitrary field).
$k$ can be replaced by any normal integral domain of characteristic zero, see this answer.



Any hints and comments are welcome!










share|cite|improve this question





























    0














    I have asked this question in MO, but have not received any comments/answers, so now I ask it here:



    This question asks the following: "Suppose $k$ is a field of characteristic zero and $P$ and $Q$ are commuting elements of the first Weyl algebra. Is it true that $P$ and $Q$ are polynomials in some third element $H$?"



    It was answered in the negative (the counterexample seems to be due to Dixmier and Makar-Limanov).



    Now replace the field of characteristic zero $k$ by a non-normal integral domain of characteristic zero $R$, for example $R=mathbb{C}[t^2,t^3]$.




    Is it possible to adjust $P$ and $Q$ to some $tilde{P}$ and $tilde{Q}$ satisfying the following three conditions:



    (i) $[tilde{P},tilde{Q}]=0$.



    (ii) $tilde{P}$ and $tilde{Q}$ are not polynomials in some third element $H$.



    (iii) $tilde{P}$ has a 'Dixmier mate', namely, there exists $B$ in the first Weyl algebra over $R$ such that $[tilde{P},B]=1$.




    Remarks:



    (1) The analogous question in $R[x,y]$ can be found here.



    (2) In contrast, in $k[x,y]$, it is true that if $operatorname{Jac}(p,q)=0$, then $p=u(h)$ and $q=v(h)$, for some $h in k[x,y]$, $u(T),v(T) in k[T]$; see, for example, Corollary 1.3 in Nagata's paper ($k$ is an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero) or this question ($k$ is an arbitrary field).
    $k$ can be replaced by any normal integral domain of characteristic zero, see this answer.



    Any hints and comments are welcome!










    share|cite|improve this question



























      0












      0








      0







      I have asked this question in MO, but have not received any comments/answers, so now I ask it here:



      This question asks the following: "Suppose $k$ is a field of characteristic zero and $P$ and $Q$ are commuting elements of the first Weyl algebra. Is it true that $P$ and $Q$ are polynomials in some third element $H$?"



      It was answered in the negative (the counterexample seems to be due to Dixmier and Makar-Limanov).



      Now replace the field of characteristic zero $k$ by a non-normal integral domain of characteristic zero $R$, for example $R=mathbb{C}[t^2,t^3]$.




      Is it possible to adjust $P$ and $Q$ to some $tilde{P}$ and $tilde{Q}$ satisfying the following three conditions:



      (i) $[tilde{P},tilde{Q}]=0$.



      (ii) $tilde{P}$ and $tilde{Q}$ are not polynomials in some third element $H$.



      (iii) $tilde{P}$ has a 'Dixmier mate', namely, there exists $B$ in the first Weyl algebra over $R$ such that $[tilde{P},B]=1$.




      Remarks:



      (1) The analogous question in $R[x,y]$ can be found here.



      (2) In contrast, in $k[x,y]$, it is true that if $operatorname{Jac}(p,q)=0$, then $p=u(h)$ and $q=v(h)$, for some $h in k[x,y]$, $u(T),v(T) in k[T]$; see, for example, Corollary 1.3 in Nagata's paper ($k$ is an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero) or this question ($k$ is an arbitrary field).
      $k$ can be replaced by any normal integral domain of characteristic zero, see this answer.



      Any hints and comments are welcome!










      share|cite|improve this question















      I have asked this question in MO, but have not received any comments/answers, so now I ask it here:



      This question asks the following: "Suppose $k$ is a field of characteristic zero and $P$ and $Q$ are commuting elements of the first Weyl algebra. Is it true that $P$ and $Q$ are polynomials in some third element $H$?"



      It was answered in the negative (the counterexample seems to be due to Dixmier and Makar-Limanov).



      Now replace the field of characteristic zero $k$ by a non-normal integral domain of characteristic zero $R$, for example $R=mathbb{C}[t^2,t^3]$.




      Is it possible to adjust $P$ and $Q$ to some $tilde{P}$ and $tilde{Q}$ satisfying the following three conditions:



      (i) $[tilde{P},tilde{Q}]=0$.



      (ii) $tilde{P}$ and $tilde{Q}$ are not polynomials in some third element $H$.



      (iii) $tilde{P}$ has a 'Dixmier mate', namely, there exists $B$ in the first Weyl algebra over $R$ such that $[tilde{P},B]=1$.




      Remarks:



      (1) The analogous question in $R[x,y]$ can be found here.



      (2) In contrast, in $k[x,y]$, it is true that if $operatorname{Jac}(p,q)=0$, then $p=u(h)$ and $q=v(h)$, for some $h in k[x,y]$, $u(T),v(T) in k[T]$; see, for example, Corollary 1.3 in Nagata's paper ($k$ is an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero) or this question ($k$ is an arbitrary field).
      $k$ can be replaced by any normal integral domain of characteristic zero, see this answer.



      Any hints and comments are welcome!







      ring-theory noncommutative-algebra






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Nov 29 at 15:28

























      asked Nov 29 at 15:12









      user237522

      2,0871617




      2,0871617



























          active

          oldest

          votes











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3018747%2fa-variation-on-dixmiers-counterexample-concerning-centralizers-in-a-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown






























          active

          oldest

          votes













          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes
















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3018747%2fa-variation-on-dixmiers-counterexample-concerning-centralizers-in-a-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Wiesbaden

          Marschland

          Dieringhausen