The Math You Need

A one-parameter linear group in a vector space L is a continuous map \( g:t\mapsto {g^t}=g(t) \) on the space of parameters ℝ, taking values in a space of the linear operators on L and having the following properties: (1) g 0 = E and (2) the sum of parameter values corresponds to the composition \( {g^{s+t }}={g^s}\circ {g^t} \). Thus, one-parameter linear groups in ℝ are the continuous solutions of the functional equations g(0) = 1, g(t + s) = g(t)g(s). As is well known, exponential functions satisfy these equations. After solving the first problems in this chapter, readers will find that the continuous solutions are all exponential and, thus, will extract the usual properties of exponential functions from these functional equations (which corresponds to a real historical development).The second part of the chapter is devoted to proper generalizations for one-parameter matrix groups. Readers will find that all of them are given by the matrix exponential series, as in the one-dimensional case. However, a multidimensional picture looks much more complicated. Working on these problems will familiarize readers with matrix analysis. In addition, readers may need familiarity with some tools used by number theory and the theory of differential equations, such as Euclid’s algorithm, Chinese remainder theorem, and Poincaré’s recurrence theorem; we introduce and discuss these tools.In the third part of the chapter readers will find some elementary classic applications of one-parameter matrix groups in differential equation theory (Liouville formula), in complex analysis (e.g., complex exponential functions, Euler’s formula), for finite-dimensional functional spaces (spaces of quasipolynomials), and others. Readers will see how to deal with these problems using elementary tools of analysis and linear algebra.Further, part of this chapter contains problems for readers possessing more advanced preliminary experience (although we introduce and discuss the necessary tools). While working on these problems, readers will come across many interesting things regarding analysis and linear algebra and become acquainted with important concepts (symplectic forms and others).Readers will encounter far-reaching advances and applications of the subjects considered in the present chapters in powerful mathematical theories: of differential equations, Lie groups, and group representations (a guide to the literature is provided).KeywordsProblem GroupNumerical SeriesGreat Common DivisorExponential SeriesLess Common MultipleThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This note contains a linear algebra attack on elementary complex analysis which leads to a three‐fold unification between linear algebra, multivariable calculus and complex analysis.

It is a remarkable fact that for many statistics on finite sets of combinatorial objects, the roots of the corresponding generating function are each either a complex root of unity or zero. These and related polynomials have been studied for many years by a variety of authors from the fields of combinatorics, representation theory, probability, number theory, and commutative algebra. We call such polynomials cyclotomic generating functions (CGFs). With Konvalinka, we have studied the support and asymptotic distribution of the coefficients of several families of CGFs arising from tableau and forest combinatorics. In this paper, we survey general CGFs from algebraic, analytic, and asymptotic perspectives. We review some of the many known examples of CGFs in combinatorial representation theory; describe their coefficients, moments, cumulants, and characteristic functions; and give a variety of necessary and sufficient conditions for their existence arising from probability, commutative algebra, and invariant theory. As a sample result, we show that CGFs are "generically" asymptotically normal, generalizing a result of Diaconis on $q$-binomial coefficients using work of Hwang-Zacharovas. We include several open problems concerning CGFs.

Many problems in number theory have simple statements, but their solutions require a deep understanding of algebra, algebraic geometry, complex analysis, group representations, or a combination of all four. The original simply stated problem can be obscured in the depth of the theory developed to understand it. This book is an introduction to some of these problems, and an overview of the theories used nowadays to attack them, presented so that the number theory is always at the forefront of the discussion. Lozano-Robledo gives an introductory survey of elliptic curves, modular forms, and $L$-functions. His main goal is to provide the reader with the big picture of the surprising connections among these three families of mathematical objects and their meaning for number theory. As a case in point, Lozano-Robledo explains the modularity theorem and its famous consequence, Fermat's Last Theorem. He also discusses the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer Conjecture and other modern conjectures. The book begins with some motivating problems and includes numerous concrete examples throughout the text, often involving actual numbers, such as 3, 4, 5, $\frac{3344161}{747348}$, and $\frac{2244035177043369699245575130906674863160948472041} {8912332268928859588025535178967163570016480830}$. The theories of elliptic curves, modular forms, and $L$-functions are too vast to be covered in a single volume, and their proofs are outside the scope of the undergraduate curriculum. However, the primary objects of study, the statements of the main theorems, and their corollaries are within the grasp of advanced undergraduates. This book concentrates on motivating the definitions, explaining the statements of the theorems and conjectures, making connections, and providing lots of examples, rather than dwelling on the hard proofs. The book succeeds if, after reading the text, students feel compelled to study elliptic curves and modular forms in all their glory.

Strongly regular graphs (SRGs) provide a fertile area of exploration in algebraic combinatorics, integrating techniques in graph theory, linear algebra, group theory, finite fields, finite geometry, and number theory. Of particular interest are those SRGs with a large automorphism group. If an automorphism group acts regularly (sharply transitively) on the vertices of the graph, then we may identify the graph with a subset of the group, a partial difference set (PDS), which allows us to apply techniques from group theory to examine the graph. Much of the work over the past four decades has concentrated on abelian PDSs using the powerful techniques of character theory. However, little work has been done on nonabelian PDSs. In this paper we point out the existence of genuinely nonabelian PDSs, that is, PDSs for parameter sets where a nonabelian group is the only possible regular automorphism group. We include methods for demonstrating that abelian PDSs are not possible for a particular set of parameters or for a particular SRG. Four infinite families of genuinely nonabelian PDSs are described, two of which—one arising from triangular graphs and one arising from Krein covers of complete graphs constructed by Godsil—are new. We also include a new nonabelian PDS found by computer search and present some possible future directions of research.

We consider nonlinear equations in linear spaces and algebras which can be solved by a “separation of variables” obtained due to Algebraic Analysis. It is shown that the structures of linear spaces and commutative algebras (even if they are Le

We present a new package ZpL for the mathematical software system SageMath. It implements a sharp tracking of precision on p-adic numbers, following the theory of ultrametric precision introduced in a previous paper by the same authors. The underlying algorithms are mostly based on automatic differentiation techniques. We introduce them, study their complexity and discuss our design choices. We illustrate the benefits of our package (in comparison with previous implementations) with a large sample of examples coming from linear algebra, commutative algebra and differential equations.

It is well-known that sums and products of holomorphic functions are holomorphic, and the holomorphic functions on a complex manifold form a commutative algebra over C . The study of complex manifolds using algebras of holomorphic functions upon them is called complex algebraic geometry. The purpose of this paper is to develop an analogue of complex algebraic geometry, in which the complex numbers C are replaced by the quaternions H . The natural quaternionic analogue of a complex manifold is called a hypercomplex manifold. A class of H -valued functions on hypercomplex manifolds will be defined, called q-holomorphic functions, that are analogues of holomorphic functions on complex manifolds. Now, the set of holomorphic functions on a complex manifold is a commutative algebra over C . Therefore one asks: does the set of q-holomorphic functions on a hypercomplex manifold have an analogous algebraic structure, and if so, what is it? We shall show that the q-holomorphic functions on a (noncompact) hypercomplex manifold do indeed possess a rich algebraic structure. To describe it, we shall introduce a theory of quaternionic algebra, which is a quaternionic analogue of real linear algebra. This theory is built on three building blocks: AH-modules, the analogues of vector spaces, AH-morphisms, the analogues of linear maps, and the quaternionic tensor product, the analogue of tensor product of real vector spaces. As far as the author can tell, these ideas seem to be new. They enable us to construct algebraic structures over H as though H were a commutative field. Quaternionic algebra describes the algebraic structure of hypercomplex manifolds in a remarkable way, and it seems to be the natural language of hypercomplex algebraic geometry, the algebraic geometry of hypercomplex manifolds. We believe that quaternionic algebra is worth studying for its own sake. It has many similarities with linear algebra over R or C , which is why the analogies between complex and quaternionic theories work so well, but there are also deep differences, which give quaternionic algebra a flavour all of its own. Quillen [12] has given a sheaf-theoretic interpretation of the ideas of quaternionic algebra, based on a previous version of this paper. He finds a contravariant equivalence between a class of AH-modules and regular sheaves on a real form of CP. Regular sheaves on CP are equivalent to representations of the Kronecker quiver, and out of such a representation Quillen constructs an AH-module. Under Quillen’s equivalence stable AH-modules correspond to regular vector bundles over the real form of CP.

In order to make progress in number theory, it is sometimes necessary to use techniques from other areas of mathematics, such as algebra, analysis or geometry. In this chapter we give some number-theoretic applications of the theory of infinite series. These are based on the properties of the Riemann zeta function ς(s), which provides a link between number theory and real and complex analysis. Some of the results we obtain have probabilistic interpretations in terms of random integers. For the background on convergence of infinite series, see Appendix C. For a detailed treatment of ς(s), see Titchmarsh (1951).

From their inception, Siegel modular forms have been studied extensively because of their significance in both automorphic functions in several complex variables and number theory. The comprehensive theory of automorphic forms to subgroups of algebraic groups and the arithmetical theory of modular forms illustrate these two aspects in an illuminating manner. The author's aim is to present a straightforward and easily accessible survey of the main ideas of the theory at an elementary level, providing a sound basis from which the reader can study advanced works and undertake original research. This book is based on lectures given by the author for a number of years and is intended for a one-semester graduate course, though it can also be used profitably for self-study. The only prerequisites are a basic knowledge of algebra, number theory and complex analysis.

In these notes we try to demonstrate the utility of the theory of theta functions in combinatorial number theory and complex analysis. The main idea is to use identities among theta functions to deduce either useful number-theoretic information related to representations as sums of squares and triangular numbers, statements concerning congruences, or statements concerning partitions of sets of integers. In complex analysis the main utility is in the theory of compact Riemann surfaces, with which we do not deal. We do show how identities among theta functions yield proofs of Picard’s theorem and a conformal map of the rectangle onto the disk.

David Rees completed his Cambridge undergraduate studies in mathematics in summer 1939; in his first three months of postgraduate work in autumn 1939, he produced a characterization of completely 0-simple semigroups. War then intervened: he worked until the end of the war at Bletchley Park, the British codebreaking centre in Buckinghamshire, where he was part of a team that broke the Enigma code regularly for some critical months during 1940. After the war, he first worked at Manchester University, but moved to Cambridge University in 1948. In the immediate post-war period, he continued with research into semigroups and non-commutative algebra. His first paper was very influential, and he is considered by semigroup theorists to be one of the founding fathers of their subject. At Cambridge, after attending a seminar by Douglas Northcott, Rees changed the focus of his research to commutative Noetherian rings. During an extraordinarily productive period between 1954 and 1961, he produced a string of far-reaching, foundational and deep ideas and results of lasting significance. Highlights include reductions of ideals, his Valuation Theorem, the theory of grade, the graded rings that are nowadays known as ‘Rees rings’, the Artin–Rees Lemma and his characterization of local rings whose completions have zero nilradical. Rees was appointed to the Chair of Pure Mathematics at the University of Exeter in 1958 and elected FRS in 1968. He was awarded the Polya Prize of the London Mathematical Society, and an Honorary DSc by the University of Exeter, in 1993. David Rees was born and brought up in Abergavenny; he was the fourth of five children of Gertrude (née Powell) and (another) David Rees, a corn merchant. The family lived above David's father's corn shop. There is history of both longevity and mathematical ability in David Rees's father's line: his father died at the age of 88, three of his siblings had 90th birthdays and one of his great-great-grandfathers was the Reverend Thomas Rees (1774–1858), a well-known non-conformist minister, who, according to one obituarist, was considered to be the best mathematician in Wales in 1802. David Rees was educated at King Henry VIII Grammar School in Abergavenny. At the time, the school had an excellent headmaster, Wyndham Newcombe, who was also a very good teacher of mathematics. Rees's early teenage years were affected by ill health, and he was absent from school for several terms. During those periods of illness, he studied at home independently, and his mother, armed with lists from the young David, became one of the best customers of the Abergavenny public library. This diligence stood him in good stead when he was able to return to normal schooling: under the guidance of mathematics master L. F. Porter, he was able to catch up quickly with his mathematics. He did rather well in School Certificate examinations in 1934 and 1936, and was awarded a State Scholarship and admission to Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, where his studies were supervised by Gordon Welchman. Rees started as a Commoner, but was made an Exhibitioner after one year and, after he had come top in the Preliminary Examination for Part II at the end of his second year, he was made a Scholar. Rees was persuaded to take Parts IIB and III together in 1939, and another candidate, Hermann Bondi, with whom he had a friendly rivalry and who only had to take Part IIB at that time, managed to just beat him into second place. Rees began postgraduate work in September 1939, without a proper supervisor, but inspired by ‘wonderful lectures’ by Philip Hall. In the autumn of 1939, he had a rather successful three months, during which he produced a characterization of completely 0-simple semigroups. Here are the relevant definitions. Let S be a semigroup, with operation written multiplicatively. A (two-sided) ideal of S is a non-empty subset A of S such that a s ∈ A and s a ∈ A for all a ∈ A and s ∈ S . A zero element of S is a (necessarily uniquely determined) element 0 ∈ S such that 0 s = 0 = s 0 for all s ∈ S . The semigroup S with zero is called 0-simple if { 0 } and S are its only ideals and there exist s , t ∈ S such that s t ≠ 0 . The semigroup S is said to be completely 0-simple if it is 0-simple and has a non-zero idempotent element e such that the only idempotent f ∈ S for which e f = f e = f ≠ 0 is e itself. Paper [1] was submitted in early May 1940, and represents a very successful start by Rees to postgraduate research. Given Rees's intensive work at Bletchley Park from December 1939 (see §3), most of the work for [1] must have been completed in Rees's first three months of research. In that paper, Rees does thank ‘Mr. P. Hall, both for his encouragement, while this paper was being written, and his very considerable assistance in preparing the paper for publication’. It should be noted that paper [1] is explicitly mentioned in the citation that accompanied David Rees's election as FRS. The phrases ‘Rees matrix semigroup’ and ‘Rees Theorem’ ensure that his name will live on among the semigroup community. By summer 1939, Gordon Welchman had been appointed to work at Bletchley Park, the British codebreaking centre in Buckinghamshire. In December 1939, Welchman knocked on the door of Rees's college rooms to tell him that he had a job for him to do. Rees naturally wanted to know details, but Welchman refused to elaborate, and only after prompting did he tell Rees to meet him a few days later at Bletchley railway station. Rees did so, and in this way was recruited to a team of codebreakers in Hut 6 at Bletchley Park. Welchman recruited several other young mathematicians he knew from Cambridge, including some he had taught at Sidney Sussex College. Even in later life after the veil of secrecy that covered the war-time exploits of Bletchley Park had been lifted, David Rees did not like to talk about his time there. However, it is now clear that he was part of a team that broke the Enigma code regularly for some critical months during the summer and autumn of 1940. The German operators of the Enigma machines were told which three of the five available rotors and which settings to use each day, but they had to choose the initial positions of the rotors and indicate their choices by means of the first three letters of their initial messages. John Herivel, who had also been recruited to Bletchley Park from Sidney Sussex College by Welchman, predicted in February 1940 that some German operators, when tired or stressed, might use short cuts that could be exploited by the Bletchley Park codebreakers. For three months, this lateral thinking by Herivel produced no result; but in May 1940 some of the German operators began to make the predicted mistakes, and David Rees and his fellow codebreakers were able to use the technique known as the ‘Herivel tip’ to break Enigma ciphers for some critical months from May 1940. Herivel has written an account 〈7〉 of the Herivel tip and related matters, in which he attributes the first successful use of the tip to David Rees: see 〈7, pp. 118–119〉. Interestingly, the same book contains a reproduction of a statement by David Rees about the Herivel tip in which he declared that he did not recollect being the person responsible for the first successful use of it, although he conceded that ‘it is possible that my memory is at fault’; see 〈7, p. 122〉. What is not in doubt is that the first successful use of the Herivel tip resulted in much rejoicing, shouting and standing on chairs. Rees thought very highly of Herivel's idea: he described it as ‘brilliant’ in the above-mentioned statement 〈7, p. 122〉; and he is quoted in 〈7, p. 11〉 as having said, in 2000, that ‘of course, the Herivel tip was one of the seminal discoveries of the Second World War’. Rees told the present author in 2007 that, in his opinion, Herivel did not receive the recognition that he deserved. In late 1941, David Rees was seconded to the Enigma Research Section at Bletchley Park, run by Dillwyn (‘Dilly’) Knox, and where the Abwehr Enigma used by the German Secret Service was broken. The so-called ‘Double Cross Committee’ used captured German agents to persuade Hitler that the D-Day landings would be south of Calais rather than in Normandy. It is said that, without the break into the Abwehr Enigma, British intelligence officers could not have known that the deception was working. David Rees subsequently moved to the ‘Newmanry’, the department at Bletchley Park led, for the second half of the war, by M. H. (Max) Newman, for which the first Colossus computer was constructed to assist with codebreaking. The list of subsequently famous mathematicians whom David Rees encountered during his service at Bletchley Park includes A. O. L. Atkin, I. J (Jack) Good, J. A. (Sandy) Green (who worked at Bletchley Park as a teenager), Peter Hilton, Max Newman, G. B. Preston and Shaun Wylie. Sandy Green and Peter Hilton were later to become coauthors of mathematical papers with David Rees, and Rees's third paper [3] (written after the war) was about a paper by Jack Good. There are now available in print numerous articles detailing aspects of the war-time exploits at Bletchley Park; two recent ones are The Guardian's obituary of Peter Hilton 〈23〉 and the Royal Society's Biographical Memoir about William Tutte 〈31〉. Following the end of the war, David Rees resumed his academic studies, and soon found himself working under Max Newman in a different context: he was appointed in 1945 to an Assistant Lectureship in the Department of Mathematics at Manchester University, and Newman was the head of that department. Rees remained at Manchester until 1948, when he was appointed to a University Lectureship at Cambridge; in 1949 he was appointed to a Fellowship at Downing College. He worked in semigroup theory and non-commutative algebra while at Manchester, and continued with these themes for his first years as a Cambridge don. He was very pleased with his joint paper [8] (with Sandy Green) from this time; in it they considered, for positive integers n and r with r ⩾ 2 , the semigroup S n , r (again written multiplicatively) generated by n elements in which each element x satisfies x r = x , but which is otherwise free, and they showed that the question as to whether S n , r is finite is intimately related to Burnside's Conjecture in group theory. Recall that the latter conjecture for r is the statement that, for all n > 0 , the group B n r generated by n elements in which each element x satisfies x r = e , but which is otherwise free, is finite. A striking result from the Green–Rees paper [8] is that the Burnside conjecture for r is true if and only if S n , r + 1 is finite for all n > 0 . David Rees wrote just five papers on semigroup theory, but their influence on the development of that subject has been very substantial. Interested readers might like to consult the tribute 〈11〉 to Rees in Semigroup Forum, where he is described as ‘one of the pioneers of semigroup theory’, as ‘one of the subject's founding fathers’, and as having ‘laid the foundations for a number of important avenues of future research’. However, as David Rees published about forty papers in commutative algebra, it is appropriate that the majority of this obituary be devoted to his contributions to that field. Another addition to the Mathematics faculty at Cambridge in 1948 was Douglas G. Northcott, who had spent 21 post-war months in Princeton, where he had been greatly stimulated by a seminar with the title ‘Valuation theory’ run by Emil Artin and Claude Chevalley, and by much informal guidance from Artin. Northcott returned to Cambridge having become a dedicated algebraist (his PhD work concerned a theory of integration for functions with values in a Banach space). In Princeton, Northcott had, at Artin's suggestion, studied the famous paper 〈28〉 by Weil, and, as a consequence, began to work in the algebra underlying what some refer to as the ‘pre-Grothendieck’ era of algebraic geometry. Thus Northcott became a commutative algebraist. Back in Cambridge, Northcott organized a very successful working seminar on Weil's book 〈29〉. David Rees was a member of the audience, and he was so inspired by the seminar that he too became a commutative algebraist. (Another aspect of Northcott's seminar that was life-changing for Rees was the presence in the audience of Joan Cushen: David and Joan were married in 1952.) David Rees's transition from semigroup theory was gradual and his first paper in commutative algebra ([9], written jointly with Northcott) only appeared in 1954. That paper is central to the next section. Paper [9], written jointly with Douglas Northcott, is, by a long way, David Rees's most-cited research paper: Mathematical Reviews records more than 200 citations of it. It introduced the notion of reductions of ideals. This concept and the related concept of integral closure have had a major influence on research in commutative algebra in the more than 60 years since they were introduced; indeed, even in the present century, hardly a top-level international conference in commutative algebra passes without there being several mentions of reductions. Let b and a be proper ideals of R. The ideal b is said to be a reduction of a if b ⊆ a and there exists s ∈ N 0 (the set of non-negative integers) such that b a s = a s + 1 . One can view such a b as an approximation to a that nevertheless retains some of the properties of a: for example, a prime ideal p of R is a minimal prime ideal of b if and only if it is a minimal prime ideal of a, and when that is the case, the multiplicity of b corresponding to p is equal to the multiplicity of a corresponding to p. (The multiplicity of a corresponding to its minimal prime ideal p is the multiplicity e ( a R p of the ideal a R p of the R p The for the of reduction to David Rees while he was thinking about so-called ideals in a graded S = n ∈ N 0 S n that is as an algebra S 0 , by elements of S + = n ∈ N S n N the set of positive A = n ∈ N A n be a graded ideal of R generated by elements of Rees noted that A n = S n for all n is, A is if and only if there exists ∈ N 0 such that A ( S + = ( S + + 1 . This to the of the concept of The between reductions and integral can be as Let b ⊆ a be ideals of R. b is a reduction of a if and only if each element of a is on the set J of all ideals of R that have b as a reduction has a b b is the of the of and this ideal b is the set of all elements of R that are on The ideal b is called the integral closure of it has the that the ideals of R that have b as a reduction are those between b and b . that b is if b = b . The ideal b is said to be a minimal reduction of a if b is a reduction of a and there is no reduction of a with b (the of is written under the that R is a local with and so that will be in until also will the ideal of Rees and Northcott the ( a of this to be equal to the of ( a ( a , where ( a the graded ∈ N 0 a a + 1 of that reduction of a at ( a that a reduction of a is a minimal reduction of a if and only if it can be generated by ( a and that each reduction of a contains a minimal reduction of Thus all minimal of all minimal reductions of a have ( a on to that ( a can be as 1 , , t ∈ a are said to be in a ∈ N and f ∈ R 1 , , t (the of R in t is a of such that f ( 1 , , t ∈ a , then all the of f in if b is a reduction of a, ( b b = t and { 1 , , t } is a minimal set for it that b is a minimal reduction of a if and only if 1 , , t are in ( a is equal to the number of elements of a that are in a, and a ( a ( a a . mentioned the in the of the of reduction and integral closure in the 60 years since Rees and Northcott published are very and related have been studied in The can some of the influence that these ideas of Rees and Northcott have had, and to in commutative algebra by the book by and on integral That book is dedicated to and David a of and about of Rees's contributions to commutative algebra. In this in which to of the commutative Noetherian some graded rings used by Rees to good these rings are to as ‘Rees and Rees A between graded rings is an that There is an between R a and R ( a . that the graded R ( a a R ( a is to the graded ( a = ∈ N 0 a a + 1 of The R ( a is also called the up of this has its in the that the of R ( a is the underlying the by up ( R with to The of R a , 1 is and Rees used to very good the that, for an ∈ N 0 , the of the graded ideal R a , 1 of R a , 1 is just a . In other R a , 1 R = a . By means of this Rees was able to some about of an ideal in a Noetherian to the where the ideal is and generated by a In that case, are The of Theorem, on the in Rees his use of the above that R is r ∈ = 1 a , then there exists a ∈ a such that r = a r . first with the where a is the ideal R generated by a r ∈ = 1 a , for each ∈ N , r = s for some s ∈ R . s = s + 1 for all ∈ N , since is a in R. R s 1 ⊆ R s 2 ⊆ ⊆ R s ⊆ , and so there exists ∈ N such that R s = R s + 1 . Thus s + 1 = s b for some b ∈ R , from which see that s = s + 1 = s ( b , with b ∈ R . r = s = ( b s = ( b r . In the case, the Rees S = R a , 1 , and set = 1 , a of that Let r ∈ = 1 a . r ∈ = 1 S , and, by the first of this can r = f r for some f ∈ S . f = = b , where b ∈ a for all = , , . of 0 to see that r = b 1 r , and that b 1 ∈ a . In the same paper Rees also a of what is now known as Artin–Rees That also the Rees Lemma (The Artin–Rees Lemma Lemma that R is Let a , b be two ideals of R. there exists ∈ N such that a n b = a n ( a b for all n ⩾ . S = R a , 1 , the Rees of a, and B = b R , 1 S , an ideal of Thus an element = r of R , 1 to B if and only if r ∈ a b for all = , , . B is a graded ideal of the Noetherian and so has a finite set of { b 1 1 , , b } where b ∈ a b for all = 1 , , . Let = { 1 , , } . a n b = a n ( a b for all n ⩾ . (The might it to that ( a b a n ⊆ ( a + 1 b a n ( + 1 for integers n , with 0 n David Rees the name of the as David had his of the in but he did not it for until May paper appeared in in the very in which Emil Artin at a conference in about his of the same and result; M. was to as to who should receive the and that ‘it is the Artin–Rees There is a of the for which that if N is a of a generated then there exists ∈ N such that a n N = a n ( a N for all n ⩾ . This result means that the on N by the on is the on The might like to consult well as being well to the of of a ideal a of the Rees R a , 1 can be used to the integral of the of a, it that R a , 1 R = a for each ∈ N 0 = 1 However, Rees's Valuation Theorem, which is the subject of the next also about the integral of of In a of papers published during an productive period from to David Rees what he called his ‘Valuation which can be as the integral of the of an ideal a of R in of uniquely rings are nowadays to as Rees rings’, while the are called Rees related to the Rees is the as a be a proper ideal of the R. The of a is the a R N 0 { } for which Lemma and Lemma the of for each r ∈ R , the The name is in recognition of P. of the of the theory of ideals in work had a influence on The of the and the of integral closure can be in to the where the underlying A is not and the of Lemma see for a ∈ N 0 , an ideal of A and a , a ∈ A , one can that, if a ∈ , then ( a ⩾ , while if ( a > , then a ∈ . For the statement of Rees's Valuation Theorem, the concept of of including in the where R is not a For properties of and the the is to a of the of the R R p for some minimal prime ideal p of R and a of the of R p that is non-negative on R p . the values of and in { } that, for an r ∈ R , have ( r = if and only if r ∈ p . Valuation that R is Let a be a proper ideal of R. there exist 1 , , of R the of and positive integers e 1 , , e , such that the Rees come in an that their are that, in a ideal is and the Theorem, the statement of which the concept of is an integral such that for each prime ideal p of of the p is a = p ∈ ( , p = 1 p each non-zero a ∈ to only of the prime ideals of of (The that R is that R is an integral its integral closure R is a This result is to in the where R is local and to M. in the that R not be In the about the can be used to Rees's Valuation Theorem, will be on the where R is a in that it is to see where the Rees come A in the of the Valuation from a Noetherian to a commutative Noetherian R is the that, for an ideal a of R and r ∈ R , have r ∈ a if and only if r + p ∈ a + p p for each minimal prime ideal p of R. a of Lemma is related to the integral of of have noted in the that if r ∈ a for a ∈ N , then a ( r ⩾ the Valuation can be used to the statement in Noetherian R. for ∈ N and r ∈ R , it is the that r ∈ a if and only if a ( r ⩾ . This of the Valuation is in such as to about whether two ideals a , b of R are that is, such that a s = b t for some s , t ∈ N . Rees thought that was his best paper, but another of which he was and in which also was In that, he a that had been by in and was related to The latter can be as if S the of in n a and if is a of the of of S that contains must the S be generated In the if is a generated of a and S is a generated integral whose of contains must the S be generated himself in that if the of is 1 or then S is generated In Rees constructed an that showed that the to is For he used and very an Rees the of a of the ideal a on was by in The concept of grade, to the theory of is also to David 1 , , t in R are said to a if they a proper ideal and ( ( 1 , , 1 = ( 1 , , 1 for all = 1 , t . (The of this when = 1 is as ( 0 1 = 0 , that is, 1 is a on In Rees that, for a proper ideal a of each in a has equal to the such that R ( R a , R ≠ 0 . all in a have the same and Rees this to be the of His him to quickly that

I have touched upon certain aspects of each one of the LACSG recommendations. I have suggested that the focus on proofs should not begin in the first course in linear algebra, but should be emphasized throughout the mathematics curricula in all grade levels.

To put the issues in a broader context, these three number-theoretic problems were instrumental in the emergence of algebraic number theory-one of the two main sources of the modern discipline of commutative algebra.' The other source was algebraic geometry. It was in the setting of these two subjects that many of the main concepts and results of commutative algebra evolved in the 19th century. Thus commutative algebra can be said to have been well developed before it was created. To set the scene for our story, a word about mathematics, and especially algebra, in the 19th century. The period witnessed! fundamental transformations in mathematics -in its concepts, its methods, and in mathematicians' attitude toward their subject. These included a growing insistence on rigor and abstraction; a predisposition for founding general theories rather than focusing on specific problems; an acceptance of nonconstructive existence proofs; the emergence of mathematical specialties and specialists; the rise of the view of mathematics as a free human activity, neither deriving from, nor dependent on, nor necessarily applicable to concrete setting; the rise of set-theoretic thinking; and the reemergence of (a new variant of) the axiomatic method. As for algebra, its subject-matter and methods changed beyond recognition. Algebra as the study of solvability of polynomial equations gave way to algebra as the study of abstract structures defined axiomatically. While in the past algebra was on the periphery of mathematics, it now (the 19th and early 20th centuries) became one of its central concerns. Moreover, algebra began to penetrate other mathematical fields (e.g. geometry, analysis, logic, topology, number theory) to such an extent that in the early decades of the 20th century one began to speak of the algebraization of mathematics ([3, p. 135] and [22]).

Through this book, upper undergraduate mathematics majors will master a challenging yet rewarding subject, and approach advanced studies in algebra, number theory and geometry with confidence. Groups, rings and fields are covered in depth with a strong emphasis on irreducible polynomials, a fresh approach to modules and linear algebra, a fresh take on Gröbner theory, and a group theoretic treatment of Rejewski's deciphering of the Enigma machine. It includes a detailed treatment of the basics on finite groups, including Sylow theory and the structure of finite abelian groups. Galois theory and its applications to polynomial equations and geometric constructions are treated in depth. Those interested in computations will appreciate the novel treatment of division algorithms. This rigorous text 'gets to the point', focusing on concisely demonstrating the concept at hand, taking a 'definitions first, examples next' approach. Exercises reinforce the main ideas of the text and encourage students' creativity.