Subring: Prove or Disprove

by capsfan828
Tags: abstract algebra
capsfan828 is offline
Jan30-09, 05:41 PM
P: 4
1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

Prove or Disprove: The set of units in a ring R with identiy is a subring of R.

2. Relevant equations

3. The attempt at a solution

Let S be the the set of units in a ring R with identity. For S to be a subring of R, 0R would have to be an element of S. Since S is the set of units in R, it follows that S will not a multiplicative identity, namely 0R*0R-1 is not an element of S. Hence S is not a subring of R, disproving the original claim.

I feel that the fact 0R*0R-1 is not an element of S is the main part of the proof. I am just unsure if my argument and logic are correct.
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on
Better thermal-imaging lens from waste sulfur
Hackathon team's GoogolPlex gives Siri extra powers
Bright points in Sun's atmosphere mark patterns deep in its interior
Focus is offline
Jan30-09, 07:56 PM
P: 284
I think the identity he is referring to is the additive one (1 is trivially a unit). So your counter proof isn't really valid.

If S was to be a subgroup then it must be closed under addition and multiplication. It is easy to check that its closed under multiplication. Look at addition, when you add two units, is it always a unit?

Register to reply

Related Discussions
prove or disprove, induction Calculus & Beyond Homework 2
Prove or Disprove: if a | bc, then a|b or a|c Calculus & Beyond Homework 13
Prove or disprove spontaneity. General Discussion 28
Prove or Disprove Linear & Abstract Algebra 10