Skip to content →

Author: lievenlb

768 micro-sudokubes

Ibrahim Belkadi, one of my first-year group theory students invented the micro-sudokube, that is, a cube having a solution to a micro-sudoku on all its sides such that these solutions share one row along an edge. For example, here are all the solutions for a given central solution. There are 4 of them with ${ a,b } = { 2,3 } $ and ${ c,d } = { 1,4 } $

The problem is : how many micro-sudokubes are there? Ibrahim handed in his paper and claims that there are exactly 32 of them, up to relabeling ${ 1,2,3,4 } $, so in all there are $32 \times 24 = 768 $ micro-sudokubes.

The proof-strategy is as follows. Fix one side and use relabeling to put the solution on that side to be one of 12 canonical forms (see for example this post. Next, work out as above for each of these standard forms in how many ways it can be extended. A nice idea of Ibrahim was to develop a much better notation for micro-sudokubes than the above flattenet-out cube. He uses the fact that a micro-sudokube is entirely determined by the solutions on two opposite sides (check this for yourself). Moreover, fixing one side determines one-half of all the neighboring sides. His notation for the 4 solutions above then becomes

and he can then use these solutions also in other standard form (the extra notation using the names A,B,C 1-4 for the 12 canonical forms).

2 Comments

abc on adelic Bost-Connes

The adelic interpretation of the Bost-Connes Hecke algebra $\mathcal{H} $ is based on three facts we’ve learned so far :

  1. The diagonal embedding of the rational numbers $\delta~:~\mathbb{Q} \rightarrow \prod_p \mathbb{Q}_p $ has its image in the adele ring $\mathcal{A} $. ( details )

  2. There is an exact sequence of semigroups $1 \rightarrow \mathcal{G} \rightarrow \mathcal{I} \cap \mathcal{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{N}^+_{\times} \rightarrow 1 $ where $\mathcal{I} $ is the idele group, that is the units of $\mathcal{A} $, where $\mathcal{R} = \prod_p \mathbb{Z}_p $ and where $\mathcal{G} $ is the group (!) $\prod_p \mathbb{Z}_p^* $. ( details )

  3. There is an isomorphism of additive groups $\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z} \simeq \mathcal{A}/\mathcal{R} $. ( details )

Because $\mathcal{R} $ is a ring we have that $a\mathcal{R} \subset \mathcal{R} $ for any $a=(a_p)_p \in \mathcal{I} \cap \mathcal{R} $. Therefore, we have an induced ‘multiplication by $a $’ morphism on the additive group $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{R} \rightarrow^{a.} \mathcal{A}/\mathcal{R} $ which is an epimorphism for all $a \in \mathcal{I} \cap \mathcal{R} $.

In fact, it is easy to see that the equation $a.x = y $ for $y \in \mathcal{A}/\mathcal{R} $ has precisely $n_a = \prod_p p^{d(a)} $ solutions. In particular, for any $a \in \mathcal{G} = \prod_p \mathbb{Z}_p^* $, multiplication by $a $ is an isomorphism on $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{R} = \mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z} $.

But then, we can form the crystalline semigroup graded skew-group algebra $\mathbb{Q}(\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}) \bowtie (\mathcal{I} \cap \mathcal{R}) $. It is the graded vectorspace $\oplus_{a \in \mathcal{I} \cap \mathcal{R}} X_a \mathbb{Q}[\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}] $ with commutation relation
$Y_{\lambda}X_a = X_a Y_{a \lambda} $ for the base-vectors $Y_{\lambda} $ with $\lambda \in \mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z} $. Recall from last time we need to use approximation (or the Chinese remainder theorem) to determine the class of $a \lambda $ in $\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z} $.

We can also extend it to a bi-crystalline graded algebra because multiplication by $a \in \mathcal{I} \cap \mathcal{R} $ has a left-inverse which determines the commutation relations $Y_{\lambda} X_a^* = X_a^* (\frac{1}{n_a})(\sum_{a.\mu = \lambda} Y_{\mu}) $. Let us call this bi-crystalline graded algebra $\mathcal{H}_{big} $, then we have the following facts

  1. For every $a \in \mathcal{G} $, the element $X_a $ is a unit in $\mathcal{H}_{big} $ and $X_a^{-1}=X_a^* $. Conjugation by $X_a $ induces on the subalgebra $\mathbb{Q}[\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}] $ the map $Y_{\lambda} \rightarrow Y_{a \lambda} $.

  2. Using the diagonal embedding $\delta $ restricted to $\mathbb{N}^+_{\times} $ we get an embedding of algebras $\mathcal{H} \subset \mathcal{H}_{big} $ and conjugation by $X_a $ for any $a \in \mathcal{G} $ sends $\mathcal{H} $ to itself. However, as the $X_a \notin \mathcal{H} $, the induced automorphisms are now outer!

Summarizing : the Bost-Connes Hecke algebra $\mathcal{H} $ encodes a lot of number-theoretic information :

  • the additive structure is encoded in the sub-algebra which is the group-algebra $\mathbb{Q}[\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}] $
  • the multiplicative structure in encoded in the epimorphisms given by multiplication with a positive natural number (the commutation relation with the $X_m $
  • the automorphism group of $\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z} $ extends to outer automorphisms of $\mathcal{H} $

That is, the Bost-Connes algebra can be seen as a giant mashup of number-theory of $\mathbb{Q} $. So, if one can prove something specific about this algebra, it is bound to have interesting number-theoretic consequences.

But how will we study $\mathcal{H} $? Well, the bi-crystalline structure of it tells us that $\mathcal{H} $ is a ‘good’-graded algebra with part of degree one the group-algebra $\mathbb{Q}[\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}] $. This group-algebra is a formally smooth algebra and we study such algebras by studying their finite dimensional representations.

Hence, we should study ‘good’-graded formally smooth algebras (such as $\mathcal{H} $) by looking at their graded representations. This will then lead us to Connes’ “fabulous states”…

2 Comments

quotes of the day

Some people are in urgent need of a vacation, myself included…

From the paper Transseries for beginners by G.A. Edgar, arXived today :

Well, brothers and sisters, I am here today to tell you: If you love these formulas,
you need no longer hide in the shadows! The answer to all of these woes is here.
Transseries.

In a comment over at The Everthing Seminar

Shouldn’t dwarfs on the shoulders on giants be a little less arrogant?

by Micromegas.
Well, I’d rather enter a flame war than report about it. But, for some reason I cannot comment at the EverythingSeminar, nor at the SecretBloggingSeminar. Is this my problem or something to do with wordpress.com blogs? If you encountered a similar problem and managed to solve it, please let me know.

UPDATE (febr. 2) : my comment did surface after 5 days. Greg fished it out of their spam-filter. Thanks! I’ll try to comment at wordpress.com blogs from now on by NOT linking to neverendingbooks. I hope this will satisfy their spam-filter…

11 Comments