Talk:Noncommutative ring

Untitled

Isn't this line--"the naturally occurring ring of all continuous functions from R (the set of all real numbers) into R, equipped with point-wise addition and function composition (as multiplication) is certainly not commutative."--incorrect? Surely it does not satisfy distributivity so it is not in fact a ring. If someone backs me up, I'll take it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.115.166.166 (talk) 04:39, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article contains many problems and should be rewritten. Feel free to remove any particularly blatant errors (like the one you mention). JackSchmidt (talk) 16:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the quoted sentence. Not too long ago, User:Jorge Stolfi copied content from the article Ring (mathematics) and pasted it here (I partially authored the original version of this content). However, I think that it is at best inaccurate to say that "the article contains many problems and should be rewritten". Could you please support your claim with concrete evidence (other than that mentioned; errors often appear in a Wikipedia article, but that does not mean that the entire article has many problems and should be rewritten)? --PS T 02:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, I agree that there is a wealth of information that this article lacks (not to mention basic notions such as the Jacobson density theorem, the Artin-Wedderburn theorem, Wedderburn's little theorem, central simple algebras and the Brauer group, polynomial identity rings, applications to the Burnside problem and so forth), but that does not imply that the present information in the article is incorrect. --PS T 02:33, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Noncommutative ring/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article requires significant expansion. First and foremost, a thorough discussion of the current research in ring theory is necessary. Afterwards, certain concepts such as the representation theory of finite groups, should be discussed. The article should also describe concepts such as the radical theory of rings, the Jacobson density theorem and the Artin-Wedderburn theorems. At present, the article is in reasonable state, but I hope to improve it in the future. --PS T 10:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 04:59, 21 August 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 02:24, 5 May 2016 (UTC)