1. Introduction
In [1], Birkhoff and Pierce provided the enumeration of all two-dimensional lattice-ordered algebras (under the isomorphism) over the real field
to show how pathological lattice-ordered algebras can be ([1], Example 9, p. 48). In his book “Lattice-Ordered Rings and Modules” published in 2010, Steinberg supplied more details to Birkhoff and Pierce’s constructions ([2], Exercise 24, p. 140).
In [3], the authors corrected a typo of Birkhoff and Pierce’s classification ([3], Footnote 2) and claimed that they have added new cases to Birkhoff and Pierce’s classification of two-dimensional lattice-ordered real algebras. In Section 2, we show that the additional cases presented in [3] are actually isomorphic to the two-dimensional lattice-ordered real algebras classified by Birkhoff and Pierce [1], so the additional cases given in [3] are not new and Birkhoff and Pierce’s classification is complete. In Section 3, we classify lattice-ordered algebras
over a totally ordered field
. When
, we recover the Birkhoff and Pirece’s results for this case. It provides another proof that the additional cases presented in [3] are already covered by Birkhoff and Pierce’s classification. Section 4 is separated from the previous sections. It provides more information related to a statement in [3] on lattice-ordered division ring in which every square is positive.
The readers are referred to the references for undefined terminologies and definitions.
2. Two-Dimensional Lattice-Ordered Real Algebras
In this section, we show that the additional cases of two-dimensional lattice-ordered real algebras presented in [3] are not new and isomorphic to those presented in [1]. We consider following cases from [3].
(I) (Case 2 ([3], p. 2551)) In this case, the multiplication on
is given by
,
. In ([3], Case 2), it states that in the non-Archimedean case,
must be taken as
or
.
However in ([2], 24(a), p. 140), the only non-Archimedean lattice order was the one determined by
. In fact, two lattice orders determined by
and
are isomorphic as shown below. Let
be the reflection on
-axis, that is,
, for any ordered pair
,
. It is straightforward to check that
is an algebra automorphism of
with the multiplication defined above. The positive cone determined by
is mapped by
to the positive cone determined by
. Thus, the lattice-ordered algebra with the positive cone determined by
is isomorphic to the lattice-ordered algebra with the positive cone determined by
.
(II) (Case 6 ([3], p. 2551)) In this case, the multiplication on
is given by
,
,
, that is,
is the direct product of two copies of
. In ([3], Case 6), it states that in the Archimedean case, the positive cone
is determined by following five possibilities.
(1)
and
,
(2)
,
(3)
,
(4)
,
(5)
.
The authors in [3] claimed that Birkhoff and Pierce only listed (1) and (2) in [1].
The (3) seems a special case of (2) when taking
in (2). Let
be the reflection on the straight line
, that is,
, for any ordered pair
,
. It is straightforward to check that
is an algebra automorphism of
with the multiplication defined above.
Moreover,
sends the positive cone determined by (3) to the positive cone determined by (4), so the lattice-ordered algebra
with the positive cone determined by (3) is isomorphic to the lattice-ordered algebra
with the positive cone determined by (4). Similarly, by
, the lattice-ordered algebra
with the positive cone determined by (2) is isomorphic to the lattice-ordered algebra
with the positive cone determined by (5).
3. Lattice-Ordered Algebras
Let
be a totally ordered field and
be the direct product of two copies of
. Then
is a two-dimensional algebra over
with the coordinate-wise operations. In this section, we determine all isomorphic lattice-ordered algebras
over
.
We use 1 to denote the identity element of
, that is,
and consider two cases: 1 is positive and 1 is not positive. In the following,
denotes the lattice order on
and
denotes the total order on
. A
-basis
for the lattice-ordered algebra
over
is a vector space basis of
over
, and for any
such that
,
if and only if there are
. If
are nonzero elements such that
, then
is a
-basis for
([4], Theorem 1.13).
Theorem 1. Let
be a lattice-ordered algebra over
with
. Then
is isomorphic to the lattice-ordered algebra
with the positive cone:
1.
, or
2.
.
Proof. It is clear that the positive cone in (1) is a lattice order. For the positive cone in (2), a direct calculation shows that 1 and
are linearly independent over
, and
. Since
,
, by ([1], Example 6), it is a lattice order. We show that every lattice order
on
with
is isomorphic to the lattice orders given in (1) or (2).
Since
contains nontrivial idempotent elements
,
cannot be a totally order. Thus there exist
such that
,
and
, so
. Consider following two cases.
(1)
and
. Then
implies that
form a
-basis. Hence
, and
. Let
and
. Then
form a
-basis and
. Thus
,
,
. Then the mapping that maps each element
to the ordered pair
is an isomorphism from the lattice-ordered algebra
to the lattice-ordered algebra
with the
given in (1).
(2)
or
. Without loss of generality, we may assume that
. Then
is a
-basis of
over
. Since
is a vector space basis of
over
,
for some
. Then
so
implies that
and
. Since
,
and
. For the first case, the positive cone of
is
Thus
is the positive cone given in Theorem 1(2). For the second case, the positive cone of
is
Then under the automorphism
for any ordered pair
,
is isomorphic to the lattice-ordered algebras
with the positive cone given in Theorem 1(2), since
.
Remark Let
in Theorem 1. The positive cone in Theorem 1(1) is the positive cone determined in Section 2 (II) (1):
and
; and the positive cone in Theorem 1(2) is the positive cone determined in Section 2 (II) (2) with
and
.
Let
be a lattice-ordered ring with 1 and positive cone
. Suppose
is a unit of
. Then
is the positive cone of a lattice order on
([4], Theorem 1.19). Let
. If
is also in
, then
. If
is not in
, then
is a lattice order with
. This method provides a way to produce lattice orders with
from lattice orders with
. For instance, for the matrix algebras
over a subfield
of
, each lattice order is isomorphic to
, where
is an invertible matrix and
is the entry-wise lattice order on
[5].
Theorem 2. Let
be a lattice-ordered algebra over
with
. Then
is isomorphic to the lattice-ordered algebra
with the positive cone
, where
is the positive cone given in Theorem 1(2) and
is an invertible element of
.
Proof. Since
cannot be a totally ordered algebra, there exist
such that
and
,
. So
is a
-basis of
over
. Let
and
for some
, where
. Since
, we have
so
and
. Similarly,
implies
and
.
We first notice that
. If
. Then
, so
,
, and
. If
or
, then
and
are linearly dependent, a contradiction. Let
and
. Then
and
. Suppose that
for some
. Then
. Since 1 is not positive, one of
is positive and another one is negative, and hence
is positive or negative. It follows that
is positive, a contradiction. Similarly,
and
will cause a contradiction as well. Therefore, we must have
. We consider following cases.
(I)
, and
. Then
,
, and
. Let us consider following cases.
(1)
. Since
implies that
([4], (17), p.~45),
, so
is a
-basis. Then the positive cone is given by:
where
is the positive cone given in Theorem 1(2) with
and
. Let
for some
. We have
, so
and hence
.
(2)
. Then
implies
, so
is a
-basis. Then the positive cone is given by:
where
. Since
,
is an algebra automorphism of
and
,
, where
is a positive cone given in Theorem 1(2). Let
for some
. Then
implies that
, so
. Therefore,
is isomorphic to
.
(II)
, and
. Then
.
(1)
. Let
. Then
, so
and hence
is a
-basis. Thus, the positive cone:
where
. We have:
Let
and
with
. Then
Thus
and
.
If
, then
and
. It follows that
, so
is a lattice order with
[1]. Since
and
,
is the lattice order given in Theorem 1(2). Let
for some
. Then
implies that
, and hence
.
If
, then
or
. Suppose
. Then
and
. Since
does not contain nonzero nilpotent element,
and
. We have
and hence
. Thus
is a lattice order with
,
, and
, so
is given in Theorem 1(2) and
.
(2)
. If
, then
and
, and hence
, so
. Let
for some
. Then
a contradiction. Hence, we must have
. Let
. Then
, so
is a
-basis and the positive cone is:
where
. Since
and
and
implies
,
. Thus
is a lattice order with
. Let
. Then
implies
, so
.
Let
,
. One may verify that for any
,
, so
, where
is a lattice order given in Theorem 1(2) and
. Thus
is isomorphic to
.
(III)
, and
. Then
. The proof for this case is similar to the case (II) and is omitted.
In summary, any lattice-ordered algebra
over
with
is isomorphic to the lattice-ordered algebra
with the positive cone
, where
is a lattice order with
given in Theorem 1(2) and
. This completes the proof.
Remark. Consider the lattice-ordered real algebra
with
. Then by Theorem 2,
is isomorphic to
, where
is given in Theorem 1(2) and
is an invertible element of
such that
. Let
. Then
. From Theorem 1(2),
Then
. Since
is invertible and
, we need to consider two cases.
(1)
.
Let
and
. Then
Since
,
and hence
. Thus
and
, so
is the positive cone given in the section 2 (II)(2).
(2)
.
Let
and
. Then
Since tan
and tan
,
implies that
. Thus
and
, so
is the positive cone given in the section 2 (II) (2).
Therefore, a lattice-ordered algebra
in which
is isomorphic to a lattice-ordered algebra
with the positive cone given in the section 2 (II) (2) with
and
.
4. Partially Ordered Rings with Squares Positive
The topics in this section are separated from the previous sections. We provide here more information on partially ordered rings in which every square is positive. In ([3], Remark 4), it stated that in 2006, Yang first proved that a lattice-ordered skew-field (skew-fields are also called division rings) in which any square is positive must be totally ordered.
In 1956, Birkhoff and Pierce proved that a lattice-ordered field in which every square is positive must be totally ordered ([1], Corollary 2, p. 59). In the proof, they didn’t use the commutative condition for the multiplication. Therefore, as pointed out by Steinberg in 1970, Birkhoff and Pierce actually proved that a lattice-ordered division ring in which every square is positive is totally ordered [6], although they didn’t precisely state the result. Steinberg also generalized the result to the following result [6].
Theorem 3. Let
be a lattice-ordered ring with the identity element in which every square is positive. If
has the minimal condition on right ideals, then
is an
-ring.
Since a division ring has the minimal condition on right ideals and it is well known that a division ring that is
-ring must be totally ordered, a lattice-ordered division ring in which every square is positive must be totally ordered by Steinberg’s result.
For the readers’ convenience, we present an elementary direct proof that a lattice-ordered division ring
in which each square is positive must be totally ordered. Let
. Define
and
. Then
and similarly
. We have
It follows that
, so
. Thus
so
and hence
or
. Therefore,
is totally ordered.
A related question is how to characterize partially ordered field in which every square is positive. Recall that a partially ordered ring
is called division closed if for any
,
and
(or
) implies
(or
).
Theorem 4. Let
be an integral domain and
be a partial order on
. Then
is division closed and
if and only if
is the intersection of all the total orders containing
.
Proof. It is clear that if
is the intersection of all the total orders containing
, then
is division closed and for each element
,
.
Now suppose that
is division closed and for each element
,
. Let
be the intersection of all maximal partial orders containing
. If
, take
and define
. Since
,
and
. If
, then there are
,
such that
, so
and
is division closed implies that
, a contradiction. Thus we must have
, that is,
is a partial order on
. By Zorn’s lemma,
, where
is a maximal partial order. Since
,
implies
, also
, a contradiction. Thus
.
Let
be a maximal partial order containing
. Then
,
, so
is a total order on
([7]). Therefore,
is the intersection of all the total orders containing
.
When Theorem 4 is applied to a partially ordered field, we have following corollary.
Corollary 1. (Dubios) Let
be a partially ordered field. Then every square is positive if and only if the partial order is an intersection of total orders.
Proof. Let
such that
and
. Then
, so
. Thus, the partial order is division closed, the result follows from Theorem 4.
Summary. 70 years ago, Birkhoff and Pierce published the paper “Lattice-ordered Rings”. This was the first paper that provided a systematic study of lattice-ordered rings. The main purpose of the current paper is to show the readers that the classification of two-dimensional real lattice-ordered algebras presented in Birkhoff and Pierce’s paper is correct and complete. The method to produce the lattice orders in which
in Section 3 can be used for any two-dimensional
-algebras over a totally ordered field.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks Professor Wojciechowski (University of Texas at El Paso) for reading the manuscript and providing valuable suggestions. He also thanks the reviewer for providing valuable comments that have improved the quality of the paper.
This work was supported by Faculty Development Fund in the College of Science and Engineering at the University of Houston-Clear Lake.