• Support PF! Buy your school textbooks, materials and every day products Here!

Boolean rings with identity can only take 2 elements?

  • Thread starter pivoxa15
  • Start date
  • #1
2,255
1
Using the theorem that in any boolean ring a+a=0 for all a in boolean ring R.

Then 0 is in R. Make the multiplicative identity 1 is also in it. Therefore R can only take 0 and 1 and no more because 1+1=0. 0+0=0. 1+0=1 always. So 2 or other elements can never occur.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
matt grime
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
9,395
3
What? That makes no sense. Mainly because you do not ask a question at all.
 
  • #3
Dick
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
26,258
618
Ok, so '2' isn't in the ring. Why does that mean there is nothing else in the ring? There's no rule that says you can generate everything in a ring by adding 1's.
 
  • #4
2,255
1
I was looking for a confirmation that my claim is correct.

So far we know 0 and 1 is in R. Take all 4 combinations of these two elements with respect to the 2 operations. So 8 additions and multiplications all together, all of which gives 0 or 1 so R contains only two elements 0 and 1. The only non trivial one is 1+1 which has to be 0 as by the theorem in the OP.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Dick
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
26,258
618
Your 'claim' is not only incorrect. It's ridiculous. So all rings are generated by 0 and 1? You had better add that to the axiom list, because its not there yet, last I heard.
 
  • #6
matt grime
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
9,395
3
Here is a meta-answer that shows the claim to be silly. If there is a unique boolean ring, why did you ask about boolean ringS?
 
  • #7
2,255
1
Remember I am talking about a boolean wring with multiplicative identity.

I am claiming there is only one unique boolean ring with multiplicative identity.

Or with even this consideration taken into account, it is not correct? If so why?

If the boolean ring dosen't have multiplicative identity than other combinations may be possible.
 
Last edited:
  • #8
HallsofIvy
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
41,808
933
Using the theorem that in any boolean ring a+a=0 for all a in boolean ring R.

Then 0 is in R. Make the multiplicative identity 1 is also in it. Therefore R can only take 0 and 1 and no more because 1+1=0. 0+0=0. 1+0=1 always. So 2 or other elements can never occur.
I don't see why those prevent other elements. What about a set {0, 1, a, b} with operation tables:
addition:
0 1 a b
0 0 1 a b
1 1 0 b a
a a b 0 1
b b a 1 0

multiplication
0 1 a b
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 a b
a 0 a b 1
b 0 b 1 a
 
  • #9
matt grime
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
9,395
3
Remember I am talking about a boolean wring with multiplicative identity.
and?

I am claiming there is only one unique boolean ring with multiplicative identity.
but that is patently silly.

Just write down something to produce a counter example. It is trivial to produce such example. Hell, diagonal matrices with 0s and 1s on the diagonals gives infinitely many counter examples without having to think at all.
 

Related Threads on Boolean rings with identity can only take 2 elements?

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
417
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
538
  • Last Post
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Top