Can't understand this statement about factor rings

  • Thread starter Silversonic
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Rings
In summary: But once you have those, you can see that ##(R[x]/I, +, \ast) \cong (R/\langle p\rangle)[x]##, where ##\ast## is the product in the respective rings.In summary, the claim is that if p is irreducible and non-zero in R, then p is also irreducible and prime in R[x]. This is proven by showing that the ideal generated by p in R[x] is the same as the factor ring (R/<p>)[x]. While these rings are not exactly the same, they are isomorphic via a well-defined, bijective, and homomorphic map. This proves the claim.
  • #1
Silversonic
130
1
Claim: If [itex] p \in R [/itex] is irreducible and non-zero, then p is irreducible and prime in R[X]

Proof: Let I be the ideal generated by p in R[X]. Clearly I consists of polynomials where all the coefficients are divisible by p. Therefore the factor ring R[X]/I is the same as (R/<p>)[X].

The proof goes on and I'm able to understand the rest. But I cannot make physical sense of how these last two rings could be the same or how I would even go about understanding why.

R[X]/I is just a factor ring, whose elements of the cosets of I in R[X].

(R/<p>)[X] is the ring of polynomials whose coefficients are cosets of <p> in I.

So even in the definition I'm confused, R[X]/I is a set of sets of polynomials with coefficients in R. (R/<p>)[X] is just a set of polynomials with coefficients in (R/<p>). How could the two possibly be the same if this last statement is the case?

My lecturer has put "Sketch of proof" to begin with (instead of just "proof") and, since I'm completely able to understand the rest, this leads me to believe the bolded statement is actually much more in depth than he's gone in to. There's no justifaction for "these are the same". Is there an isomorphism between the rings and thus they are classified as the same up to isomorphism?

Any help appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You are correct that the rings are not the same. However, they are isomorphic via the map ##\phi : R[x]/I \rightarrow (R/\langle p\rangle)[x]## defined by
$$\phi((a_n x^n + \ldots + a_0) + I) = (a_n + \langle p\rangle)x^n + \ldots + (a_0 + \langle p\rangle)$$
Of course you have to show that this is well defined, a bijection, and a homomorphism. To show that it is well defined, suppose that
$$(a_n x^n + \ldots + a_0) + I = (b_n x^n + \ldots + b_0) + I$$
Therefore,
$$(a_n x^n + \ldots + a_0) - (b_n x^n + \ldots + b_0) = (a_n - b_n)x^n + \ldots + (a_0 - b_0) \in I$$
which means that ##a_n - b_n, \ldots, a_0 - b_0## are all divisible by ##p##. So ##a_i - b_i \in \langle p \rangle## for each ##i##, whence ##a_i + \langle p \rangle = b_i + \langle p \rangle##.

I will leave the proof that ##\phi## is a bijection and a homomorphism to you.
 

1. What is a factor ring?

A factor ring is a mathematical structure that is created by dividing a ring by one of its subrings. It is also known as a quotient ring.

2. How is a factor ring different from a regular ring?

A factor ring is different from a regular ring in that it is created by "factoring out" a subring from a larger ring. This subring becomes the "zero element" in the factor ring, and all other elements are related to it in some way.

3. What is the significance of factor rings in mathematics?

Factor rings are important in mathematics because they allow us to study the structure of a larger ring by breaking it down into smaller, more manageable parts. They also have applications in algebraic geometry and number theory.

4. Can you give an example of a factor ring?

Yes, an example of a factor ring is the ring of integers modulo 5, denoted by Z/5Z or simply Z5. This is created by factoring out the subring of multiples of 5 from the ring of integers.

5. How is the concept of factor rings related to the concept of cosets?

Factor rings and cosets are related in that a factor ring can be seen as a set of cosets. In fact, a factor ring is the set of all cosets of a subring in a larger ring, with the operation of addition defined between cosets. So, cosets can be thought of as the building blocks of a factor ring.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
695
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
748
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
12
Views
3K
Back
Top