Proof: Why a = axa When A is a Ring & Jac(A)=0

In summary: Since Ae=Aa, we know that a is in the right ideal generated by e, so there exists some x in A such that a=xe. We are essentially using the fact that e is idempotent to show that x can be chosen as the neutral element in A.
  • #1
peteryellow
47
0
Let A be a ring.

If every finitely generated right ideal is genreated by an idempotent then Jac(A) =0.

Here Jac(A) means jacobson radical.

Proof: Let a be in Jac(A) and pick an idempotent element e such that Ae = Aa, thus a = ae and e=xa for x in A. Hence a =axa so a(1-xa)=0. Since a is in Jac(A) also xa is in Jac(A)
and 1-xa is a unit , hence a=0.


My question is that why is a = ae and e=xa , please help me with this.

Because Ae = Aa, so I will say that ae = a'a. and we have that e=xa, is it because we can pick e in A so ee=e =xa, is it so, please help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Your reasoning about why e=xa is fine. And as to why we have a=ae, this is because A is unital.
 
  • #3
What does unital means?
 
  • #4
peteryellow said:
What does unital means?

That you have an element "1" such that 1x = x1 = x for all x in your A.
 
  • #5
Oh i see unital means that the ring has an identity element. Since Ae=Aa, we choose identity element in A say 1, so we have 1a=ae so a = ae. Is it correct?
 
  • #6
peteryellow said:
Oh i see unital means that the ring has an identity element. Since Ae=Aa, we choose identity element in A say 1, so we have 1a=ae so a = ae. Is it correct?
Not quite. We're not guaranteed immediately that the element we get from A is a, i.e. all we can say at this point is that a=a'e for some a' in A. But there is one more ingredient we haven't used: e is idempotent. Can you see how this factors in?
 
  • #7
No, I can't see that why s =ae and where we use that e is idempotent. Can you please explain. Thanks.
 
  • #8
Hint: a=a'e=(a'e)e.
 
  • #9
Thanks for your hint.

Let a = a'e =a'ee. by multiplying with e we have that ae =(a'e)e =a'e =a. Is it so but my question is we do we have that a =a'e, since Aa =Ae so it is natural for me to say that a'a =xe for x in A.
 
  • #10
I don't understand what it is you're asking exactly. Could you clarify?
 
  • #11
What I am asking is :

I think that Aa = {a_0a,a_1a,a_2a,...}
so every element in Aa has a form xa for x in A. Since Aa =Ae so we should have xa=be but it seems that we are choosing x to be the neutral element in A? Is it so? I hope you understand what I mean.
 
  • #12
peteryellow said:
but it seems that we are choosing x to be the neutral element in A? Is it so?
Yes, that's exactly what we're doing.
 

1. How does one prove that a = axa when A is a ring and Jac(A)=0?

The proof of this statement involves using the definition of a ring and the Jacobi identity, along with some algebraic manipulations. It is a common exercise in abstract algebra courses and can be found in many textbooks.

2. What is the significance of Jac(A)=0 in this proof?

The Jacobi identity, also known as the Jacobian condition, is a fundamental property of rings. It states that the sum of cyclic permutations of three elements in a ring must be equal to zero. In this proof, the fact that Jac(A)=0 allows us to simplify the equation and eventually prove that a = axa.

3. Can this proof be applied to any ring?

Yes, this proof applies to any ring that satisfies the Jacobi identity. The Jacobi identity is a necessary condition for a ring to be considered a Lie algebra, which is involved in this proof.

4. How does this proof relate to the properties of a ring?

This proof demonstrates the relationship between the Jacobi identity and the properties of a ring. It shows that if a ring satisfies the Jacobi identity, then a certain property (a = axa) must also hold true.

5. Is this proof used in any real-world applications?

While this specific proof may not have direct applications, the concepts and properties involved (rings, Jacobi identity, etc.) are used in many areas of mathematics, physics, and engineering. For example, the Jacobi identity is used in the study of Lie algebras, which have applications in quantum mechanics and differential geometry.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
939
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top