A lifting of the Dieudonné determinant

and applications concerning the

multiplicative group of a skew field
Peter Draxl
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/a-lifting-of-the-dieudonne-determinant-and-application
s-concerning-the-multiplicative-group-of-a-skew-field-peter-draxl/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Algebraic Groups The Theory of Group Schemes of Finite

Type over a Field 1st Edition J.S. Milne

https://textbookfull.com/product/algebraic-groups-the-theory-of-
group-schemes-of-finite-type-over-a-field-1st-edition-j-s-
milne-2/

Algebraic Groups The Theory of Group Schemes of Finite

Type over a Field 1st Edition J. S. Milne

https://textbookfull.com/product/algebraic-groups-the-theory-of-
group-schemes-of-finite-type-over-a-field-1st-edition-j-s-milne/

Wild Urban Plants of the Northeast A Field Guide 2nd

Edition Peter Del Tredici

https://textbookfull.com/product/wild-urban-plants-of-the-
northeast-a-field-guide-2nd-edition-peter-del-tredici/

Second Treatise of Government and a Letter Concerning

Toleration John Locke

https://textbookfull.com/product/second-treatise-of-government-
and-a-letter-concerning-toleration-john-locke/
A Course in Finite Group Representation Theory Peter
Webb

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-course-in-finite-group-
representation-theory-peter-webb/

China as a Global Clean Energy Champion: Lifting the

Veil Philip Andrews-Speed

https://textbookfull.com/product/china-as-a-global-clean-energy-
champion-lifting-the-veil-philip-andrews-speed/

Generalized Intuitionistic Multiplicative Fuzzy

Calculus Theory and Applications Shan Yu

https://textbookfull.com/product/generalized-intuitionistic-
multiplicative-fuzzy-calculus-theory-and-applications-shan-yu/

A Synthesis of Depositional Sequence of the Proterozoic

Vindhyan Supergroup in Son Valley A Field Guide Subir
Sarkar

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-synthesis-of-depositional-
sequence-of-the-proterozoic-vindhyan-supergroup-in-son-valley-a-
field-guide-subir-sarkar/

Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals

Esther Engels Kroeker

https://textbookfull.com/product/humes-an-enquiry-concerning-the-
principles-of-morals-esther-engels-kroeker/
 A LIFTING OF THE DIEUDONNÉ DETERMINANT AND APPLICATIONS
CONCERNING THE MULTIPLICATIVE GROUP OF A SKEW FIELD

PETER DRAXL
IN BIELEFELD

an English translation [January 2, 2019 ] of the German original:

Eine Liftung der Dieudonné-Determinante und Anwendungen

die multiplikative Gruppe eines Schiefkörpers betreffend *
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BFb0095927

Lecture 10 (pages 101–116) of

P. Draxl and M. Kneser, eds.: SK1 von Schiefkörpern.
Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics #778.
Springer, Berlin, 1980.
ISBN 3-540-09747-3, MR 0591206, Zbl 0426.16022
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BFb0095915
* Revised German version of a series of lectures (in February-March 1979)
at the University of Grenoble (France) called “Sur les corps gauches.”
Translation by Dave Witte Morris (with the help of Google Translate).
Numbered footnotes appear in the original German manuscript.

1. Introduction
A classical result of Wang [20] states that if D is a finite-dimensional skew field over an algebraic
number field, then every element of D with trivial reduced norm is a product of commutators. A
careful reading of the original proof reveals that (contrary to first impressions) it does not give a
bound on the number of commutators required, except in the case of quaternions, where we have
the following general fact (cf. [20, Lem. 2]):
(A) In a skew field D with i(D) = 2,1 every element with trivial reduced norm is a commutator.
On the other hand, over local fields, the fundamental work of Nakayama and Matsushima [14] tells
us that 3 commutators always suffice (this is independent of i(D)), and this bound was improved
to 2 in [20, Lem. 5]. This result has the following generalization:
Theorem 1. Let K be a complete discretely valued field with residue field K, and let D be a
finite-dimensional skew field with center K and residue skew field D. Assume that the center of D
∗ ∗ ∗
is separable over K. If each d ∈ [D , D ] is the product of ≤ R commutators in D , then each
d ∈ [D∗ , D∗ ] is the product of ≤ R = R + 2 + i(D)2 commutators in D∗ .
A proof of Theorem 1 can be obtained by combining the following results in [4]: Theorem 4,
Lemma 2, and the first line of the commutative diagram on p. 127. 2
√
1i(D) := |D : K| = √dim D is the index of D over its center K.
K
2Note that the result cannot be derived from [11] and [15] (cf. also [18]), which are related to [4].
1
2 PETER DRAXL

If we now contemplate Theorem 1 in the spirit of [4, §5] and assume the commutativity of D,
then we immediately realize that the number R of required commutators is bounded by a quantity
that is independent of i(D). This motivates the following question:
Problem 1. Is there a function F : N → N, such that if D is a (skew field
) of finite dimension over
its center, then every element of [D∗ , D∗ ] is the product of ≤ F i(D) commutators in D∗ ?
The present note is devoted to the study of this problem. At the moment I cannot completely
solve it, but, by a certain modification of standard methods, I can show, roughly speaking, that
the answer is “yes” for all those skew fields for which Wang’s original argument in [20] establishes
that “SK1 (D) = 1” (see Section 3). These include, for example, skew fields over global fields, and
so one can view Theorem 8 in Section 3 as a theorem of algebraic number theory, which states,
for example, that the number of required commutators is independent of the number of primes at
which D does not split.
The above-mentioned modification relates to the theory of the Dieudonné determinant. Namely,
by lifting the Dieudonné determinant to a function ∆ : GLn (D) → D∗ (see Section 2), explicit
bounds can be obtained from Wang’s original proof. (The definition of the lifting ∆ is straightfor-
ward, and already more-or-less known. However, unlike the determinant, the lifting is usually not
multiplicative.)
As indicated above, we can solve Problem 1 only in the cases where “SK1 (D) = 1” holds.
However, I do not believe that the eventual final solution of Problem 1 will be related to SK1 ; it
should be noted that Theorem 1 and Theorem 8 will also give the answer “yes” to Problem 1 when
D is a skew field as in the main theorem of [4], where it is known that SK1 (D) can be an arbitrary
finite abelian group (see [4, Satz 10] and [3, Thm Abis ]).
In the final section (Section 4), I show that analogous questions arise in the setting of skew fields
with an involution I of the second kind, and that results corresponding to the work in Section 3 can
be obtained; if, as usual (see [5]), ΣI (D) denotes the group generated by the I-symmetric elements
in D∗ , then the corresponding problem is:
Problem 2. Is there a function G : N → N, such that, if D is a skew field that is finite-dimensional
over its( center,
) with an involution I of the second kind, then every element of ΣI (D) is the product
of ≤ G i(D) I-symmetric elements of D∗ ?
For convenience, we will abbreviate
“d is the product of ≤ r commutators in D∗ ” to d= r
“d is the product of ≤ r I-symmetric elements in D∗ ” to d = r I.
The two problems can therefore be written as:
{ ( )}
• Is it true that [D∗ , D∗ ] ⊆ F i(D) for a suitable function F ?
{ ( )}
• Is it true that ΣI (D) ⊆ G i(D) for a suitable function G ?

2. A lifting of the Dieudonné determinant

The Dieudonné determinant is a homomorphism
det : GLn (D) → (D∗ )ab := D∗ /[D∗ , D∗ ]
whose kernel is [GLn (D), GLn (D)] (the condition on the kernel holds except for GL2 (F2 )), where
D is an arbitrary skew field (not necessarily finite dimensional over its center). (See, for example,
[1], [2], [6].)
 A LIFTING OF THE DIEUDONNÉ DETERMINANT 3

Write a matrix a ∈ GLn (D) in Bruhat normal form (see, for example, [6, p. 9] or also [13, pp. 79
and 113], but the normal form in the latter is not as useful for the proof of Theorem 3(a) below as
the one in [6]):
     
1 a1 1
.. 0  .. 0 
   v ij 
a= . · .  · p(σ) ·  . . .  ,
tij 1 0 an 0 1
(1)    

1
..
vij  
1
..
∗
where p(σ) ·  .  · p(σ)−1 =  . 
0 1 0 1
for a permutation matrix p(σ), so
( )
tij ∈ D (for i > j), ai ∈ D ∗ , σ ∈ Sn , and vij ∈ D for i < j, with vij = 0 if σ(i) > σ(j)
are all uniquely determined. Therefore, we have a well-defined (and obviously surjective) function
∆ : GLn (D) → D∗ defined by ∆(a) := sgn(σ) a1 · · · an .
I would like to call this the “predeterminant.”
Examples.
([ ]) {
a11 a12 −a12 a21 if a11 = 0,
1◦ ∆ = −1 (see, for example, [6, p. 13]) 3
a21 a22 a11 (a22 − a21 a11 a12 ) if a11 ̸= 0
   

a11
..
∗  
a11
.. 0 
2◦ ∆  .  = ∆  .  = a11 · · · ann (obvious)
0 ann ∗ ann
([ ]) ([ ]) ( )
a ∗ a 0 a ∈ GLr (D), generalization
3◦ ∆ =∆ = ∆(a) · ∆(b) for
0 b ∗ b b ∈ GLs (D) of (2◦ )
(See, for example, the existence proof of [6, (2.1)] (on pages 11–12).)
Theorem 2. For a, b ∈ GLn (D), we have:
(a) ∆(ab) = ∆(a) · ∆(b) · n2 − 1 .
(b) ∆(b−1 ab) = ∆(b)−1 · ∆(a) · ∆(b) · 2(n2 − 1) .

(c) If a is a product of ≤ r commutators in GLn (D), then ∆(a) = r + (4r − 1)(n2 − 1) .

(d) ∆ (mod [D∗ , D∗ ]) = det, so ∆ is a lift of the Dieudonné determinant (but, in general, ∆
is not multiplicative).
Since (d) is immediate from Example 2◦ and (a), it suffices to prove (a), (b), and (c). For
x = b−1 ab, it follows from (a) that
∆(b) · ∆(x) · n2 − 1 = ∆(ab) = ∆(a) · ∆(b) · n2 − 1
so (b) is obtained by solving for ∆(x). Similarly, for x = a−1 b−1 ab, we have bax = ab, so by apply-
ing (a) three times and solving for ∆(x), we see that ∆(x) = 1 + 3(n2 − 1) . This establishes (c)
when r = 1. The case r > 1 then follows by induction using repeated application of (a). So all
that remains is to prove (a).
3This reveals a connection with the “designants” of Heyting [8].
4 PETER DRAXL

To prepare for this proof, note that the lower (or upper) triangular matrices with ones on the main
diagonal form a normal subgroup of the group of lower (or upper) invertible triangular matrices.
Therefore:
  
1
(2)
 0  
∆  . . .  · a = ∆(a).
∗ 1
On the other hand, we see by induction on n that

b1 a1 · · · bn an = b1 · · · bn · a1 · · · an · n − 1 ,

so
  
b1 0
 ..  
(3) ∆  .  · a = b1 · · · bn · ∆(a) · n − 1 .
0 bn

We now note that if p(i, i + 1) represents the permutation matrix for the transposition (i, i + 1),
then we have
( )
(4) ∆ p(i, i1 ) · a = −∆(a) · 1 (for the proof, see Lemma 1 below)

so
( )
( ) n
(5) ∆ p(τ ) · a = sgn(τ ) · ∆(a) · for all τ ∈ Sn ,
2
( )
because p(τ ) can be written as the product of ≤ n2 matrices of the form p(i, i + 1).
Now, we proceed to the actual proof of (a). Write a as in (1) and let τ be the permutation such
that
 
0 1
 
p(τ ) := p(σ) ·  ,
.
..

1 0

and note that sgn(τ ) = sgn(σ) (−1)n(n−1)/2 , so combining the definition of ∆ with (2),…,(5) yields:
      
1 0 a1 0 1 ∗
      
∆(ab) = ∆  . . .  ·  ..
.  · p(σ) ·  . . .  · b
∗ 1 0 an 0 1
        
1 0 a1 0 1 0 0 1
        
= ∆  . . .  ·  ..  · p(τ ) ·  . . .  ·   · b
.

.
..

∗ 1 0 an ∗ 1 1 0
( )
= sgn(τ ) · (−1)n(n−1)/2 · a1 · · · an · ∆(b) · (n − 1) + 2 n2
= ∆(a) · ∆(b) · n2 − 1 .

Therefore, all that remains is to prove (4). For this, the following is clearly sufficient:
 A LIFTING OF THE DIEUDONNÉ DETERMINANT 5

Lemma 1.4 If a is in the Bruhat normal form (1), then the Bruhat normal form of p(i, i + 1) · a
is as follows:
   
  ... 1 ∗
1 0  0
 ( )  ..
.  if either ti+1,i = 0 or
 ..   ai+1   
 . ·  · p (i, i + 1) · σ ·  
 ai   ..
.  σ −1 (i) > σ −1 (i + 1),
∗ 1 ..
0 . 0 1
   
  ... 0 1 ∗
1 0    .. 
 ..    ti+1,i ai 
  .  if ti+1,i ̸= 0 and
 .  ·  −1  · p(σ) ·  
−ti+1,i ai+1  ..  σ (i) < σ −1 (i + 1).
−1
∗ 1  ..
 .
0 . 0 1

For the proof, let eij (t) be the elementary matrix with t in the ith row and jth column (for t ∈ D
and i ̸= j). Then, for σ ∈ Sn , we have the following separation rule:
Lemma 2. Any product
∏
eiκ jκ (tκ ) ∈ GLn (D) (n ≥ 2)
κ
iκ < jκ
can be be expressed in the following form:
∏ ∏
eiλ jλ (t′λ ) · eiµ jµ (t′′µ ).
λ µ
σ(iλ ) > σ(jλ ) σ(iµ ) < σ(jµ )

There is nothing to prove if n = 2. For n ≥ 3, a short calculation shows that the lemma is true
even in the Steinberg group Stn (D) (cf. [6, p. 16]). Lemma 2 can also be written as follows:
 
1 vij
 
Lemma 2′ . Any  . . .  ∈ GLn (D) admits a decomposition
0 1
   ′
  ′′

1 vij 1 vij 1 vij
 ..   ..   .. 
 . = . · . 
0 1 0 1 0 1
with
 ′
  
1 vij 1 0
   .. 
p(σ) ·  . . . = .  · p(σ)
0 1 ∗ 1
and
 ′′
  
1 vij 1 ∗
   .. 
p(σ) ·  . . . = .  · p(σ).
0 1 0 1

4Lemma 1 is in a certain sense an analogue of [17, Lem. 4.6], which says something very similar for SL (D).
n
6 PETER DRAXL

We now establish Lemma 1 as follows:

 
[ ] .. [1 vij ]
1 0 . 0
..  a  −1
(6) p(i, i + 1) · a = .  i+1
ai  ei,i+1 (ai+1 ti+1,i ai ) p(i, i + 1) p(σ) ..
. .
∗ 1 .. 0 1
0 .
If ti+1,i = 0, then we are finished by Lemma 2′ (applied to (i, i + 1) ◦ σ). If σ −1 (i) > σ −1 (i + 1),
then the right-hand side of (6) is equal to
 
  ...  
1 0  0 1 ∗
 ( ) 
 ..   ai+1  
 . ·  · p (i, i + 1) ◦ σ) ·  . . .  ,
 ai 
∗ 1 .. 0 1
0 .

and we are again finished by Lemma 2′ (see above). However, if ti+1,i ̸= 0 and σ −1 (i) < σ −1 (i + 1),
then we utilize the identity
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
1 t 0 1 1 0 t 0 1 t−1
· = −1 · · ,
0 1 1 0 t 1 0 −t−1 0 1

in order to transform the right-hand side of (6) into

 
  ... 0  
1 0  1 ∗
 ..   ti+1,i ai 
 · p(σ) ·  
 . ·  −t−1   ...  .
 i+1,i ai+1 
∗ 1 .. 0 1
0 .

The desired conclusion is obtained from this by applying Lemma 2′ (to σ). This completes the
proof of Theorem 2.

Now let us make the additional assumption that D has an involution I. If we let A := Mn (D),
then I can be extended from D to A by setting

(7) (aij )I = (aIji ),

5
which yields:

Theorem 3.
(a) Let a ∈ GLn (D) with aI = a. For the normal form (1) of a, we have

σ −1 = σ and aIi = aσ(i) for i = 1, . . . , n.

(b) Let D be a skew field that is finite-dimensional over its center and has an involution I of
the 2nd kind. If a is a product of ≤ r I-symmetric elements of GLn (D), then †

∆(a) = (3n − 4)r + 5(r − 1)(n2 − 1) .

I

5Theorem 3(b) generalizes (among other things) the statements on [9, pp. 376–377] and clarifies their proof.
†
Translator’s note: The formula in Theorem 3(b) is valid for n ≥ 2, but (obviously) not for n = 1.
 A LIFTING OF THE DIEUDONNÉ DETERMINANT 7

Indeed, for the Bruhat normal form of aI , we have:

   I   
1 0 a1 0 1 tIji
 . .  −1  ..   .. 
.  · p(σ ) ·  ·
I
a = . . 
I
vji 1 I
0 an 0 1
   I   
1 0 aσ(1) 0 1 ∗
 ..   ..   
 · p(σ ) ·  . . .  ,
−1
= . · .
∗ 1 0 aIσ(n) 0 1
where we have made use of Lemma 2′ (applied to σ −1 ) once again. Now (a) follows from this and
the uniqueness of the Bruhat normal form (1).
Now for (b): In the finite-dimensional case that we are now considering, the following observation
is due to L. N. Wasserstein (Vaseršteǐn): 6
(8) if d = 1 , then d = 5 I
(see also [16, Prop. 1]). Using the fact that either ai · aσ(i) (if σ(i) ̸= i) or ai (if σ(i) = i) is
I-symmetric, one proves the desired conclusion for r = 1. Then it is proved for r > 1 by induction
and the use of Theorem 2(a) and (8).
To close this section, we note that in the finite-dimensional case (with A := Mn (D)) we have
( )
(9) RNA (a) = RND ∆(a) for all a ∈ GLn (D),
where RND and RNA denote the reduced norms. Since both sides of (9) define multiplicative
functions, it suffices to establish the validity of (9) for triangular matrices (cf. [1, Theorem 4.1]),
in which case it is obvious (cf. Example 2◦ ).

3. On “Problem 1”
We briefly describe appropriate modifications of [20] to address Problem 1. Here, D is always
assumed to be a skew field that is finite dimensional over its center K.
Theorem 4. Assume L/K is a field extension of finite degree m, and d ∈ D∗ . If d ⊗ 1 is the
product of ≤ r commutators in (D ⊗K L)∗ , then dm = r + (4r − 1)(m2 − 1) .

The proof † proceeds exactly as in the proof of [20, Lem. 3], but using our Theorem 2(c) instead
of [20, Lem. 1] (see also [7, (6.2) on p. 48]).
If Theorem 4 is applied to a maximal (commutative) subfield L of D, then m = i = i(D)
and D ⊗K L ∼ = Mi (L), so a quantitative version of [20, Lem. 4] can be obtained with the help
of [1, Thm. 4.1]. On the other hand, a much better result can be obtained by noting that the
Skolem-Noether Theorem implies that the two elements
 
d 0
 ..  ∼
=
 .  and d ⊗ 1 ∈ D ⊗K L ,→ Mi (L) ,→ Mi (D)
0 d
are conjugate in GLi (D). Since the definition of the reduced norm RND implies ∆(d ⊗ 1) = 1,
applying Theorem 2(b) yields:
Theorem 5.7 For d ∈ D∗ with RND (d) = 1, and letting i = i(D), we have di = 2(i2 − 1) .

6To our knowledge, it is not yet known whether (8) remains true in the infinite-dimensional case.
†
Translator’s note: See Appendix A for additional details of several of the proofs in this section.
7In the case where i(D) = 2, Theorem 5 is a trivial consequence of (A).
8 PETER DRAXL

The following theorem reduces Problem 1 to the case where i(D) is a prime-power.
Theorem 6. Suppose D1 and{ D2 }are skew fields. Let ij = i(Dj ) and D = D1 ⊗K D2 .8 If
gcd(i1 , i2 ) = 1 and [Dj∗ , Dj∗ ] ⊆ Rj for j = 1, 2, then
{ }
[D∗ , D∗ ] ⊆ R1 + R2 + 2(i41 − 1) + 2(i42 − 1) .

For the proof, choose x1 , x2 ∈ Z with 1 = x1 i21 +x2 i22 , and let Djop be the skew field anti-isomorphic
to Dj . Then for each d ∈ [D∗ , D∗ ], the elements
 x
d 0 1
 ..  ∼
=
 .  and d x1 ⊗ 1 ∈ D ⊗K D1op ,→ Mi21 (D2 ) ,→ Mi21 (D)
0 d
are conjugate in GLi21 (D) (by the Skolem-Noether Theorem). Therefore, since ∆(dx1 ⊗ 1) = R2 ,
2
we see from Theorem 2(b) that d x1 i1 = R2 + 2(i41 − 1) . The desired conclusion now follows by
interchanging the roles of the indices i1 and i2 and then multiplying the two results.
In the following, we let
Q = { n ∈ N | n is square free }.
Theorem 7. There is a function F : Q → N, such that if i(D) ∈ Q, then
{ ( )}
[D∗ , D∗ ] ⊆ ker RND ⊆ F i(D) .
To prove the case where i(D) is prime, we adapt Case i) on pages 329–300 of [20], replacing
Lemmas 3 and 4 there with our Theorems 4 and 5. The general case then follow from our Theorem 6
and [7, (6.50), p. 49]. (The latter is not necessary if one is only interested in [D∗ , D∗ ], not ker RND .)
For the prime case, we have:
Addendum to Theorem 7. If p is prime, and Γ is the Euler Γ-function, then
F (p) ≤ 2p2 + 3 Γ(p)2 − 4.
Combining this with Theorem 6 and (A) yields the following bounds.

†
n 2 3 5 6 7 10
Table 1.
F (n) ≤ 1 26 1,774 217 1,555,294 3,053
Extensive difficulties are encountered in attempting to extend the function F of Theorem 7 to
a function on all of N that solves Problem 1. Because of this, we will place restrictions on the
center K of D. (See, in particular, the remark on page 121 of [4], just before §3.)
Definition 1. We say that a field K has “Property (∆)” if the following holds: for every finite,
separable extension L/K, every finite-dimensional skew field E with center L, and every cyclic
group G of automorphisms of L/K of prime order, such that RNE (E ∗ ) is a G-invariant submodule
of L∗ , we have ( )
H 1 G, RNE (E ∗ ) = 1.
Property (∆) is clearly satisfied by “reasonable” fields (in the sense of [4, §2], resp. [7, p. 53])
and therefore C20 -fields, including local fields and global fields (see [4], ibid.). (The Eichler Norm
is behind the last of these.) Therefore, the following result can be considered to be an “effective
Wang’s Theorem”:
8Note that D is a skew field, because we assume gcd(i , i ) = 1.
1 2
†
Translator’s note: The original German manuscript lists 457 as the upper bound for F (6) in Table 1, but
Theorem 6 yields the better bound 217. Our version of the table lists the improved bound.
 A LIFTING OF THE DIEUDONNÉ DETERMINANT 9

Theorem 8. There is a function F : N → N, such that if the center K of D satisfies Property (∆),
then { ( )}
[D∗ , D∗ ] ⊆ ker RND ⊆ F i(D) .
Theorem 6 (and [7, (6.5) on p. 49], if one if is not interested only in [D∗ , D∗ ]) reduces the
problem to the case “i(D) = pe with p prime.” This case is proved by induction on e. The base
case is Theorem 7, and the induction step proceeds along the lines of Case ii) of Wang’s proof
on pages 330–334 of [20], but using ∆ in the place of det, and in the improved fashion given by
Jančevskiǐi [10], which requires only Property (∆) (as I pointed out in [4, §2], or [7, pp. 53–54]).
Property (∆) is needed only in the induction step. This yields the following result.
Addendum to Theorem 8. If p is prime and e > 1 (and Γ is Euler’s Γ-function), then
( ) ( )
F (pe ) ≤ 2p2e + 3 + 4 F (pe−1 ) m(pe )2 − 4 + 3 F (pe−1 )
where
Γ(1 + pe )
m(pe ) :=
p(pe −1)/(p−1)
is an integer that is relatively prime to p.
This yields bounds that supplement Table 1:

†
n 4 8 9
Table 2.
F (n) ≤ 88 35,224,735 2,147,532,880

4. On “Problem 2”
In this section, the results of Section 3 are transferred to the “case with an involution of the
2nd kind” in the direction of a solution to Problem 2.
To this end, let A be a central simple K-algebra of finite dimension, with an involution I. (This
means that I is an involutive anti-automorphism of A.) Denote9 by
SI (A) := { a ∈ A | AI = a }
the set of I-symmetric elements, and assume k := K ∩ SI (A) is not equal to K (which means that
I is of the 2nd kind). Then K/k is a separable quadratic extension and SI (A) is a k-vector space
of dimension n2 = |A : K|. As usual, let ΣI (A) be the subgroup of A∗ generated by SI (A) (see the
end of Section 1). Then we have:
ΣI (A) is a normal subgroup of A∗ . More precisely, if a ∈ A∗ is I-symmetric,
(10)
and b ∈ A∗ , then b−1 ab is the product of ≤ 2 I-symmetric elements,
because we have the identity b−1 ab = (b−1 ab−I ) · (bI b). Now, if J is another involution on A, then
defining that
I ∼ J iff I|K = J|K
yields an equivalence relation on the set of involutions (of the 2nd kind) on A, and we have (see,
for example, [9, Lem. 1]):
ΣI (A) = ΣJ (A) if I ∼ J. More precisely, if a ∈ A∗ is I-symmetric,
(11)
then a is the product of ≤ 2 J-symmetric elements,
Theorem 4 transfers now to the following result (by using (8), (10), (11), Theorem 2(b), Theo-
rem 3(b), and [5, 4◦ ], see, for example, [9, Lem. 3]):
†
Translator’s note: The original German manuscript lists 2,147,532,720 as the upper bound for F (9) in Table 2,
but the formula in the addendum to Theorem 8 yields 2,147,532,880, which is a slightly weaker bound. In order to
be correct, our version of the table lists the weaker bound.
9For this (and later terminology), see, for example [5], [9], or [12]).
10 PETER DRAXL

Theorem 9. Let ℓ/k be an extension of degree m that is disjoint from K/k, L := ℓK, and ι be the
nontrivial automorphism of L/ℓ. If d ∈ D∗ , such that d ⊗ 1 is the product of ≤ r (I ⊗ ι)-symmetric
elements of (D ⊗K L)∗ , then dm = 4r(3m − 4) + 10(m2 − 1) .
I

Corresponding to Theorem 5, we have (with i = i(D)):

Theorem 10. If d ∈ D∗ , such that RND (d) ∈ k ∗ , then di = 10i2 − 8 I .

To see this, let ℓ ⊆ SI (D), such that |ℓ : k| = i, and let L := ℓK. By the Skolem-Noether
Theorem, the elements
 
d 0
 ..  ∼
=
 .  and d ⊗ 1 ∈ D ⊗K L ,→ Mi (L) ,→ Mi (D)
0 d
are conjugate in GLi (D). Combining the fact that ∆(d ⊗ 1) ∈ ℓ with (8), (10), (11), and Theo-
rem 2(b) implies
di = ∆(b)−1 · ∆(d ⊗ 1) · ∆(b) · 10(i2 − 1) = 10i2 − 8 I .
I

Theorem 11. If i = i(D) is odd and ker RND ⊆ { R }, then

{ }
ΣI (D) ⊆ RN−1
D (k ∗
) ⊆ 5R + 10i2−7
I .

For the proof, let i = 2s + 1 and RNDI (d) ∈ k ∗ , and set e := d−s . Then d = di e2 = di · (e · eI ) · b
with RND (b) = 1, so b = 5R I by (8). Then the desired conclusion follows from Theorem 10.
The solution of Problem 2 can also be reduced to the case where i(D) is a prime-power:
Theorem 12. Suppose Dj is a skew field with an involution{ I}j of the second kind, for i = 1, 2, and
let ij = i(Dj ). Assume gcd(i1 , i2 ) = 1 and ΣIj (Dj ) ⊆ Sj . If D := D1 ⊗K D2 , with involution
Ij
I = I1 ⊗ I2 of the 2nd kind, then
{ }
ΣI (D) ⊆ 2S1 + 2S2 + 10(i41 − 1) + 10(i42 − 1) .
I

The proof is like that of Theorem 6, except that (10), (11), and (8) must be used at appropriate
points.
Before we continue, we will also transfer (A) to the “case with an involution of the 2nd kind.”
For this, combining [9, top of p. 379 and bottom of p. 380] with [5, Eg. (A), p. 68] gives:

(B) In a skew field D with i(D) = 2, and an involution I of the 2nd kind, every element with
I-symmetric reduced norm is a product of ≤ 3 I-symmetric elements.

Combining this with Theorem 7, Theorem 11, Theorem 12, and either [5, 5◦ ] or [12, Lem. 2.7] (the
last is not needed if one is interested only in ΣI (D)) yields the following analogue of Theorem 7
(with Q as above):
Theorem 13. There is a function G : Q → N, such that if i(D) ∈ Q, then
{ ( ) }
ΣI (D) ⊆ RN−1
D (k ∗
) ⊆ G i(D) .
I

Addendum to Theorem 13. Let F be as in Theorem 7. Then for n ∈ Q, we have

{
5F (n) + 10n2 − 7 if n is odd,
G(n) ≤ ( )
156 + 2G(n/2) + 10 (n/2) − 1 if n is even.
4
 A LIFTING OF THE DIEUDONNÉ DETERMINANT 11

Extensive difficulties are encountered in attempting to extend the function G of Theorem 13 to

a solution of Problem 2 for all of N (as in the remark after Theorem 7). Because of this, we will
again place restrictions on the center K of D, guided by [5].
Definition 2. We say that a field K has “Property (∇)” if the following holds: for every finite,
separable extension L/K, every finite-dimensional skew field E with center L, and every group G
of automorphisms of L/K that is either cyclic of odd prime order, or noncyclic of order 4, such
that RNE (E ∗ ) is a G-submodule of L∗ , we have
( )
H 1 G, RNE (E ∗ ) = 1.
Property (∇) is clearly satisfied by C20 -fields, including local and global fields (see [4, last line
of p. 120]). (The Eichler Norm is behind the last of these.) Therefore, the following result can be
considered to be an “effective Theorem of C.T.C. Wall” (see [19, Thm. 2] and also [16, Thm. 1]):
Theorem 14. There is a function G : N → N such that if the center K of D has Property (∇),
then { ( ) }
ΣI (D) ⊆ RN−1
D (k ∗
) ⊆ G i(D) .
I

For the proof, it suffices to handle the case where i(D) = 2e .

This is because D decomposes
in the form Du ⊗K D2 , with i(Du ) odd and i(D2 ) = 2 , and for Du , Property (∆) is equivalent
e

to Property (∇), so (because of Theorem 8) Theorem 11 can be applied to Du , so the desired

conclusion follows from Theorem 12. (However, if one is not only interested in ΣI (D), then [5, 5◦ ]
or [12, Lem. 2.7] must also be used.) For the remaining case i(D) = 2e , proceed by induction on e,
with (B) as the base case; Property (∇) is not needed until the induction step. For this, proceed
as in [5, top of p. 71], but give a concrete meaning to the phrase “…en utilisant convenablement…,
un résultat classique montre…”, by constructing the field E1 as in [9, p. 383].

References
[1] E. Artin, Geometric Algebra. Interscience, New York, 1957. MR 0082463
[2] J. Dieudonné, Les déterminants sur un corps non commutatif, Bull. Soc. Math. France 71 (1943) 27–45.
MR 0012273, http://dx.doi.org/10.24033/bsmf.1345
[3] P. Draxl, Corps gauches dont le groupe des commutateurs n’est pas égal au noyau de la norme réduite,
Séminaire Delange-Pisot-Poitou, 17e année (1975/76), #26. MR 0444617, http://www.numdam.org/
item?id=SDPP_1975-1976__17_2_A2_0
[4] P. Draxl, SK1 von Algebren über vollständig diskret bewerteten Körpern und Galoiskohomologie
abelscher Körpererweiterungen, J. reine angew. Math. 293/294 (1977) 116–142. MR 0442028, https:
//doi.org/10.1515/crll.1977.293-294.116
[5] P. Draxl, Corps gauches à involution de deuxième espèce, Astérisque 61 (1979) 63–72. MR 0556665
[6] = 2nd lecture in Part 1 of these lecture notes: D. Scheringer, Präsentation der GLn (D) und Dieudonné-
determinante (pp. 9–20 of P. Draxl and M. Kneser’s SK1 von Schiefkörpern). http://dx.doi.org/10.
1007/BFb0095918
[7] = 6th lecture in Part 1 of these lecture notes: P. Draxl, Eigenschaften von SK1 und “vernünftige”
Körper (pp. 47–54 of P. Draxl and M. Kneser’s SK1 von Schiefkörpern). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
BFb0095922
[8] A. Heyting, Die Theorie der linearen Gleichungen in einer Zahlenspezies mit nichtkommutativer Multi-
plikation Math. Ann. 98 (1928) 465–490. MR 1512415, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01451604
[9] V. I. Jančevskiǐ, Simple algebras with involution, and unitary groups, Math. USSR Sbornik 22 (1974)
372–385. MR 0439819, https://doi.org/10.1070/SM1974v022n03ABEH001697
[10] V. I. Jančevskiǐ, The commutator subgroups of simple algebras with surjective reduced norms, Soviet
Math. Dokl. 16 (1975) 492–495. MR 0384859
12 PETER DRAXL

[11] V. I. Jančevskiǐ, Division rings over Hensel discretely valued fields and the Tannaka-Artin problem,
Soviet Math. Dokl. 17 (1976) 113–116. MR 0429840
[12] V. I. Jančevskiǐ, Reduced unitary K-theory and division rings over discretely valued Hensel
fields, Math. USSR Izvestija 13 (1979) 175–213. MR 0508832, https://doi.org/10.1070/
IM1979v013n01ABEH002018
[13] J. Milnor, Introduction to Algebraic K-theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1971.
MR 0349811
[14] T. Nakayama and Y. Matsushima, Über die multiplikative Gruppe einer p-adischen Divisionsalgebra,
Proc. Imp. Acad. Tokyo 19 (1943) 622–628. MR 0014081, https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.pja/
1195573246
[15] V. P. Platonov, The Tannaka-Artin problem, and reduced K-theory, Math. USSR Izvestija 10 (1976)
211–243. MR 0407082, http://dx.doi.org/10.1070/IM1976v010n02ABEH001686
[16] V. P. Platonov and V. I. Jančevskiǐ, The structure of unitary groups and of the commutants of a simple
algebra over global fields, Soviet Math. Dokl. 14 (1973) 132–136. MR 0320175
[17] U. Rehmann, Zentrale Erweiterungen der speziellen linearen Gruppe eines Schiefkörpers, J. reine angew.
Math. 301 (1978) 77–104. MR 0506073, https://doi.org/10.1515/crll.1978.301.77
[18] J. Tits, Groupes de Whitehead de groupes algébriques simples sur un corps (d’après V. P. Platonov et
al.), Séminaire Bourbaki 19 (1976/77), talk #505, pp. 218–236. MR 0521771, Zbl 0389.16007, http:
//www.numdam.org/item?id=SB_1976-1977__19__218_0
[19] C. T. C. Wall, On the commutator subgroups of certain unitary groups, J. Algebra 27 (1973) 306–310.
MR 0340444, https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8693(73)90107-5
[20] S. Wang, On the commutator group of a simple algebra, Amer. J. Math. 72 (1950) 323–334. MR 0034380,
http:dx.doi.org/10.2307/2372036
 Appendix A. More details for Section 3 (provided by the translator)
Proof of Theorem 4. Since L is isomorphic to a maximal subfield of Mm (K), we know that
D ⊗ L is a subalgebra of D 
⊗ Mm (K)  ∼
= Mm (D). Under this embedding the element d ⊗ 1 of D ⊗ L
d 0
 
is mapped to the element  . . .  of Mm (D). Since, by assumption, d ⊗ 1 is the product of
0 d
 
d 0
 
≤ r commutators in (D ⊗ L)∗ , this implies that  . . .  is the product of ≤ r commutators in
0 d
Mm (D)∗ . Therefore
 
d 0
 
dm = ∆  . . .  (2◦ )
0 d
= r + (4r − 1)(m2 − 1) (Theorem 2(c)). □
Proof of Theorem 5. The Skolem-Noether Theorem implies that the two elements
 
d 0
 ..  ∼
=
 .  and d ⊗ 1 ∈ D ⊗K L ,→ Mi (L) ,→ Mi (D)
0 d
are conjugate via some g ∈ GLi (D).
∼
=
(We claim) that ∆(d ⊗ 1) = 1. More precisely, if f : D ⊗K L ,→ Mi (L), then we claim that
∆ f (d ⊗ 1) = 1. The Bruhat (normal form ) of f (d ⊗ 1) can be constructed inside of GLi (L), and
then it is clear from (1) that ∆ f (d ⊗ 1) = det f (d ⊗ 1). However, this determinant is RND (d), by
the definition of reduced norm, and we are assuming that RND (d) = 1.
Therefore
 
d 0
 
di = ∆  . . .  (2◦ )
0 d
= ∆(g)−1 · ∆(d ⊗ 1) · ∆(g) · 2(i2 − 1) (Theorem 2(b))
= ∆(g)−1 · 1 · ∆(g) · 2(i2 − 1) (∆(d ⊗ 1) = 1)
= 2(i2 − 1) . □
Comments on the proof of Theorem 6. Since gcd(i1 , i2 ) = 1, we may choose x1 , x2 ∈ Z with
1 = x1 i21 + x2 i22 . Let Djop be the skew field anti-isomorphic to Dj .
For each d ∈ [D∗ , D∗ ], the elements
 x
d 0 1
 ..  ∼
=
 .  and dx1 ⊗ 1 ∈ D ⊗K D1op ,→ Mi21 (D2 ) ,→ Mi21 (D)
0 d
are conjugate via some g ∈ GLi21 (D) (by the Skolem-Noether Theorem).
Let ∆2 : GLi21 (D2 ) → D2∗ be the predeterminant on GLi12 (D2 ). Since d ∈ [D∗ , D∗ ], we know dx1 ∈
[D∗ , D∗ ], so dx1 ⊗ 1 ∈ [GLi21 (D2 ), GLi21 (D2 )]. Since Theorem 2(a) tells us that ∆2 is multiplicative
(mod [D2∗ , D2∗ ]), this implies that ∆2 (dx1 ⊗ 1) ∈ [D2∗ , D2∗ ], so, by assumption, ∆2 (dx1 ⊗ 1) = R2 .
Page A-1
Page A-2 APPENDIX: MORE DETAILS FOR SECTION 3

Now, if we let ∆ : GLi21 (D) → D∗ be the prehomomorphism on GLi21 (D), then ∆2 is the restric-
tion of ∆ to GLi21 (D2 ), so we conclude that ∆(dx1 ⊗ 1) = R2 . So
 x 
d 0 1
  
dx1 i1 = ∆  . . .   (2◦ )
2

0 d
= ∆(g)−1 · ∆(dx1 ⊗ 1) · ∆(g) · 2(i41 − 1) (Theorem 2(b))
= ∆(g)−1 · R2 · ∆(g) · 2(i41 − 1)
= R2 + 2(i41 − 1) .
Now, repeating the argument with D1 and D2 interchanged tells us that
2
dx2 i2 = R1 + 2(i42 − 1) .
Therefore
2 2
d = d1 = dx1 i1 · dx2 i2 = R2 + 2(i41 − 1) · R1 + 2(i42 − 1) = R1 + R2 + 2(i41 − 1) + 2(i42 − 1) . □
Lemma 3 (Wang [20, Lem. 2]). Let x be an element of a central simple algebra A over K. If
RNA (x) = 1, and x is contained in a cyclic maximal subfield of A, then x is a commutator.
Proof (Wang). By assumption, there is a cyclic maximal subfield L of A that contains x. Let σ be
a generator of Gal(L/K). Since RNA (x) = 1, we have NL/K x = 1, so Hilbert’s Theorem 90 tells
us there exists y ∈ A, such that x = y −1 y σ . The Skolem-Noether Theorem provides g ∈ A∗ , such
that g −1 yg = y σ . Then x = y −1 y σ = y −1 (g −1 yg) = [y, g]. □
Proof of Theorem 7. We begin with the case where i(D) = p is prime. (See [20, pp. 329–330].)
Let d ∈ D∗ with RND (x) = 1, and let L be a maximal subfield of D that contains d. We may
assume L is separable over K. (Otherwise, L is of characteristic p and dp − 1 = 0, so d = 1.)
Let E the Galois closure of L over K, so Gal(E/L) is a subgroup of index p in Gal(E/K). Let
Gal(E/M ) be a Sylow p-subgroup of Gal(E/K). Then M /K is an extension whose degree m is not
divisible by p = |L : K|, so E = LM is a maximal subfield of the division algebra D ⊗ M . Choose
x, y ∈ Z, such that xm + yp = 1. Since Gal(E/M ) is of order p (hence, cyclic), Lemma 3 tells us
that dx is a commutator in D ⊗ M . So Theorem 4 (with r = 1) says dxm = 1 + 3(m2 − 1) . But,
by Theorem 5, we also know dyp = 2(p2 − 1) . Then

d = d1 = dx · dy = 1 + 3(m2 − 1) · 2(p2 − 1) = 2p2 + 3m2 − 4 .

Since m = |E : K|/p ≤ p!/p = Γ(p), this establishes the Addendum to Theorem 7.
It is well known that ker RND = [D∗ , D∗ ] whenever D is a division algebra of square-free degree
over its center. (For example, this came be deduced by combining the prime case, done in the
preceding paragraph, with [7, (6.2), p. 48].) So there is no need to consider ker RND separately
from [D∗ , D∗ ] in this proof. Therefore, the proof is completed by Theorem 6. □

Calculations for Table 1.

F (2) See (A).
F (3) ≤ 2(32 ) + 3 Γ(3)2 − 4 = 18 + 12 − 4 = 26.
F (5) ≤ 2(52 ) + 3 Γ(5)2 − 4 = 18 + 12 − 4 = 50 + 3(576) − 4 = 1,774.
F (6) ≤ F (2) + F (3) + 2(24 − 1) + 2(34 − 1) ≤ 1 + 26 + 2(15) + 2(80) = 217 (by Theorem 6).
(The original German manuscript erroneously has 457 for this value.)
 APPENDIX: MORE DETAILS FOR SECTION 3 Page A-3

F (7) ≤ 2(72 ) + 3 Γ(7)2 − 4 = 98 + 3(7202 ) − 4 = 98 + 3(518,400) − 4 = 1,555,294.

F (10) ≤ F (2) + F (5) + 2(24 − 1) + 2(54 − 1) = 1 + 1,774 + 30 + 2(624) = 3,053 (by Theorem 6). □

Proof of Theorem 8. If we ignore ker RND , then Theorem 6 reduces the problem to the case
where i(D) = pe is a prime power. To deal with ker RND , use the fact that if D1 , D2 , and D are as
in Theorem 6, and ker RNDj = [Dj∗ , Dj∗ ] for j = 1, 2, then RND = [D∗ , D∗ ] (see [7, (6.5) on p. 49]).
To prove the case where i(D) = pe , we induct on e, using the argument of [10]. The base case
e = 1 is provided by Theorem 7, so assume e > 1. Let d ∈ ker RND , and let L be a maximal
subfield of D that contains d. Much as in the proof of Theorem 7, we may assume L is not purely
e
inseparable over K. (Otherwise, L is of characteristic p and dp − 1 = 0, so d = 1.) Let
• M /K be a maximal separable subextension of L/K,
• E/K be the Galois closure of M /K, and
• Gal(E/P ) be a Sylow p-subgroup of Gal(E/K).
Suppose, for the moment, that M /K contains a cyclic extension P1 /K of degree p, and let
C = CD (P1 ). Then C is a central skew field of index pe−1 over P1 . Let t = RNC (d), so NP1 /K (t) = 1.
By Hilbert’s Theorem 90, we have t = s−1 sσ , where s ∈ P1 , and σ is a generator of Gal(P1 /K).
The Skolem-Noether Theorem tells us that σ is the conjugation by some g ∈ D∗ , so σ extends to
an automorphism of D. Since P1 is σ-invariant, its centralizer C is also σ-invariant, so RNC (C ∗ )
is σ-invariant. Then Property (∆) tells us that we may assume there exists s0 ∈ C ∗ , such that
s = RNC (s0 ). We have
( )
RNC [s0 , g] = RNC (s−1
0 ) · RNC (s0 ) = RNC (s0 )
σ −1
· RNC (s0 )σ = s−1 · sσ = t.
Since, by definition, t = RNC (d), this implies d[s0 , g]−1 ∈ ker RNC . Therefore, by the induction
hypothesis, we have d[s0 , g]−1 = F (pe−1 ) , so d = F (pe−1 ) + 1 .
We now consider the general case. Since m := |P : K| is relatively prime to pe = i(D), we know
that D ⊗ P is a division algebra. Since Gal(E/M P ) is a proper subgroup of the p-group Gal(E/P )
(note that M ̸⊆ P , since L is not purely inseparable and |L : K| = pe is relatively prime to |P : K|),
we know that Gal(E/M P ) is contained in a normal subgroup of Gal(E/P ) that has index p (recall
that all maximal subgroups of a finite p-group are normal). This means that M P /P contains a
cyclic extension that has degree p. From the special case considered in the preceding paragraph,
we conclude that d ⊗ 1 is the product of F (pe−1 ) + 1 commutators in D ⊗ P . So Theorem 4 tells us
( )
dm = F (pe−1 ) + 1 + 3 + 4F (pe−1 ) (m2 − 1) .
e
Also, if we choose x, y ∈ Z with xm + ype = 1, then we know from Theorem 5 that dyp =
2(p2e − 1) . Therefore
e
d = d1 = dxm · dyp
( )
= F (pe−1 ) + 1 + 3 + 4F (pe−1 ) (m2 − 1) · 2(p2e − 1)
( )
= 2p2e + 3 + 4F (pe−1 ) m2 − (4 + 3F (pe−1 )) .
This completes the proof of the Addendum to Theorem 8, because the degree m of |P : K| is
≤ m(pe ). □

Calculations for Table 2.

F (4): We have
Γ(1 + 4) 4!
m(4) = = = 3,
2(4−1)/(2−1) 23
Page A-4 APPENDIX: MORE DETAILS FOR SECTION 3

so
( ) ( )
F (4) ≤ 2(42 ) + 3 + 4 F (2) (32 ) − 4 + 3 F (2)
( ) ( )
= 32 + 3 + 4(1) (9) − 4 + 3(1)
= 88.
F (8): We have
Γ(1 + 8) 8!
m(8) = = = 315,
2(8−1)/(2−1) 27
so
( ) ( )
F (8) ≤ 2(82 ) + 3 + 4 F (4) (3152 ) − 4 + 3 F (4)
( ) ( )
≤ 128 + 3 + 4(88) (3152 ) − 4 + 3(88)
= 35,224,735.
F (9): We have
Γ(1 + 9) 9!
m(9) = = = 4,480,
3(9−1)/(3−1) 34
so
( ) ( )
F (9) ≤ 2(92 ) + 3 + 4 F (3) (4,4802 ) − 4 + 3 F (3)
( ) ( )
≤ 162 + 3 + 4(26) (4,4802 ) − 4 + 3(26)
= 2,147,532,880.
(The original German manuscript erroneously has 2,147,532,720 for this value.) □
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 The Stove Takes the Place of an Electric Stove Where There is Only a Gas
Supply

A piece of sheet metal, B, is cut to fit the space between the wires,
allowing projections at the upper and lower outside edges for
bending around the upright twisted wires. The entire stove can be
nickelplated if desired. It can be used in the same manner as an
electric stove and for the same purposes where a home is supplied
only with gas.—Contributed by E. L. Douthett, Kansas City, Mo.
 Castings without Patterns
The sketch shows a method of making small castings that I have
used for several years and the castings so produced are strong and
very durable, almost equal to the ordinary casting. The idea may be
of considerable value to inventors and home mechanics.

A Mold Made in Plaster without a Special Pattern and Run with a Soft Metal

The mold is of plaster of Paris, held in a wood frame or box, and

all that is required in the way of a pattern is a plain block or anything
that will produce an impression of the general outline of the casting,
as shown in the sketch. After the impression is made the mold
should be dusted thoroughly with black lead. The journal bearings
are then located, holes drilled in the hardened plaster and wood pins
set as shown. These pins must be of hard wood and of a diameter to
suit the finished size of the bore. Brass tubing of a suitable size is cut
off to the length required and placed on the wood pins. These pieces
of tubing will be the brass bushings in the finished castings. Babbitt
metal is melted and poured into the mold. Before pouring the metal it
is well to be sure that the plaster is thoroughly dry.
The mold is as shown, and the upper side of the metal is at all
times exposed to the air. This makes it necessary to have all core
prints on the under side, as this side will be the one in view when the
casting is finished, and the upper side, as the casting lies in the
mold, will be the inside or unexposed side. In case of curved work,
reinforcing strips of sheet brass should be placed in the mold and
imbedded in the casting, as shown in the sketch by the dotted lines.
A little practice will enable anyone to produce very neat cored
castings. and when the brass bushings are fitted to size and faced
off, and the casting painted, a piece will be produced that will
compare in finish and general usefulness with anything of the nature
that could be bought. Do not treat the brass tubes with soldering flux
unless necessary, for they should be removable so that they can be
replaced when worn.—Contributed by J. B. Murphy, Plainfield, N. J.
 A Developing-Paper Printer
Having a rush order for a large quantity of post cards, I was
compelled to adopt some way of making the prints quickly. As I was
in a place where a printer could not be secured for several weeks, I
set about making one, with good results, as shown in the
illustrations.

Fig. 1 Fig. 2

Fig. 3 Fig. 4

Parts for Making the Switch So That It will Operate Automatically as the
Cover is Moved

I first secured an ordinary soap box and took it apart, being careful
to keep the boards whole, then rebuilt it to make a box with ends
measuring 12 in. square, and 14 in. in length. In one end I cut a large
hole to admit a 60-watt tungsten globe, then, taking another board, I
fitted a knob and hinges to it and used it for a door. The other end of
the box was centered and a hole bored large enough to admit an
ordinary socket. Another hole was bored, 4 in. to the right, for
another socket. A much heavier material was used for the lid than for
the box, being at least ⁷⁄₈ in. thick. A piece of double-strength, clear
glass, 8 by 10 in. in size, was procured and set in a hole cut in the
cover so that its upper surface would be flush.

The Printer may be Set in the Table Top or Used Separately, as Desired

An ordinary single-pole switch was secured, as shown in Fig. 1,

also a small mousetrap, as shown in Fig. 2. The front part of the trap
was sawed off so that only the spring was utilized. The base of the
trap was then cut out to fit snugly on the base of the switch, into
which two corresponding holes were bored for the screws. The next
thing was to secure several clips, which were cut from sheet brass,
to operate the switch, and a lever to control the switch, as shown in
Fig. 3. The lever is 1 in. wide and 4 in. long, having a slot at the
bottom, to slip easily over the lever handle in the switch, and a hole,
drilled 1 in. above the slot, to admit a nail to keep the spring from
throwing it out of position. The clips for holding the films, or plates,
are shown in Fig. 4.

Side View of the Printer, Showing Parts Assembled and the Main Line
Connections to the Globes

After securing a double socket, of which there are many types, a

few yards of lamp cord, a piece of felt, 6 by 8 in. in size, and two
ordinary lamp sockets, I was ready to assemble the printer. The
switch was then placed on a board of the same width, the spring of
the trap placed on top of it and then fastened with screws. This
board was then cut off the length of the inside of the box and
fastened in place, with the switch and trap spring on top.
The ruby light A burns all the time, acting as a pilot in placing the
negative. When the cover B is lowered, after placing the paper, the
felt pad on the under side holding it secure, the projecting arm C
comes in contact with the switch lever D and makes the connection
to the tungsten light E. After the proper time for the exposure has
been given the cover is raised and by this action the tungsten light is
automatically shut off, leaving only the red light burning. With a 60-
watt lamp I secure a print in about 3 seconds, which is fast enough.
Of course, by using a larger lamp, the time could be reduced to a
second or more, according to the size. The time given was obtained
by experience in using ordinary brands of papers.—Contributed by
Harry Marcelle, Honolulu, H. I.
Transposing Temperature Readings
 The Readings can be Transposed from Fahrenheit to
Centigrade or Vice Versa Instantly by the Use of This Scale
 It is often necessary for the amateur scientist to transpose a
temperature reading from the Fahrenheit to the centigrade scale, or
vice versa. This is easily accomplished by means of the diagram
without the use of a formula. The centigrade readings are given on
the horizontal axis and the Fahrenheit readings on the vertical axis.
The temperature readings are the same at minus 40 deg. and from
that point on the Fahrenheit readings equal nine-fifths of the
centigrade plus 32. This reading is instantly seen by the scale.—
Contributed by James F. Boyd, Ann Arbor, Mich.
 Protecting Plans in a Shop
The magazines I used in the shop, for making a few things from
plans, became so soiled that they were unfit for the library. I now
keep them clean by using a covering made of an old picture frame
from which the back was removed and a plain glass inserted in its
place. This is placed over the magazine or other plans on the bench
and keeps them clean, dustless, open and flat.—Contributed by H. J.
Blacklidge, San Rafael, Cal.
 Homemade Eyebolts

Many times one has use for an eyebolt when there is none at
hand. Eyebolts of almost any size can be quickly made of a spring
cotter. Simply thread the end, as shown, and use a nut and washer.
—Contributed by Chas. G. England, Washington, Pa.
 To Keep Tan Shoes from Turning Dark
Tan-shoe polishes seem to rub the dirt into the leather and to
darken it in a short time. Tan shoes can be kept clean and well
polished without losing their original bright tan color if treated in the
following simple manner. Instead of using tan polish on a new pair of
shoes, dampen the end of a soft clean cloth, and rub a small portion
of the leather at a time with the moist end and then rub briskly with
the dry end. In this way tan shoes can be kept clean and nicely
polished like new.—Contributed by John V. Voorhis, Ocean Grove,
N. J.
 A Finger-Trap Trick
It is easy to fool one’s friends with the little joker made to trap a
finger. It consists of a piece of paper, about 6 in. wide and 12 in. or
more long. To prepare the paper, cut two slots in one end, as shown,
and then roll it up to tube form, beginning at the end with the cuts,
then fasten the end with glue. The inside diameter should be about
¹⁄₂ inch.
 It is Easy to Insert a Finger in the Tube, but to Get It Out is Almost
Impossible

When the glue is dry, ask some one to push a finger into either
end. This will be easy enough to do, but to remove the finger is a
different matter. The end coils tend to pull out and hold the finger. If
the tube is made of tough paper, it will stand considerable pull.—
Contributed by Abner B. Shaw, N. Dartmouth, Mass.

¶When mercury is spilled it can be picked up with a medicine

dropper.
 Homemade Roller Skates

Wheels Fitted into the Ends of a Long Board, to Make a Roller Skate

The long wheel base of the roller skate illustrated makes it quite
safe and will prevent falls. The construction of these skates is
simple, the frame being made of a board, 2 ft. long, 3 in. wide and 1
in. thick. Holes are mortised through the ends to admit the wheels. A
small block, cut out on one side to fit the heel of the shoe, is securely
fastened centrally, for width, and just in front of the rear wheel on the
board. Two leather straps are fastened to one side of each board, to
fasten the skate onto the shoe. The wheels can be turned from hard
wood, or small metal wheels may be purchased, as desired. The
axle for the wheels consists of a bolt run through a hole bored in the
edge of the board centrally with the mortise.—Contributed by Walter
Veene, San Diego, Cal.
¶The screw collar of a vise should be oiled at least once a month.
 How to Make a High Stool

The cast-off handles of four old brooms, three pieces of board, cut
as shown, and a few screws will make a substantial high stool. The
legs should be placed in the holes, as shown at A, and secured with
screws turned through the edge of the board into the legs in the
holes. The seat B should be fastened over this and the legs braced