MHB Can the Kernel of a Ring Homomorphism Equal 12Z or 13Z?

  • Thread starter Thread starter AkilMAI
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Kernel
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on whether the kernel of a ring homomorphism f from Z to C can be equal to 12Z or 13Z. It concludes that both 12Z and 13Z cannot be the kernel because if ker f were 12Z, it would imply f(1) = 0, contradicting the property of homomorphisms where f(1) must equal 1. Similarly, the same reasoning applies to 13Z, leading to the conclusion that the kernel must be {0}. The First Isomorphism Theorem reinforces that the quotient Z/ker f must be an integral domain, which is not the case for either 12Z or 13Z. Ultimately, the kernel of the homomorphism f must be {0}.
AkilMAI
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
Let f : Z ->C be a homomorphism of rings. Can the kernel of f be equal to 12Z or 13Z?
Ok,the way I'm thinking about it is using a proof by contradiction:asuming ker f=12Z...then by the First Isomorphism Theorem for rings Z/ker f ~im f where I am f is by definition a subring of C.But since I am f=12Z is not an integral domain and every subring in C is an integral domain the I am f will not be a subring oc C which is a contradiction.
The same thing with 13Z,is not equal with the kernel.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Re: Kernerl and homomorphism

think about what happens to f(1).

if f(12) = 0, then f(12) = f(1 + 1 +...+ 1) = f(1) + f(1) +...+ f(1) = 12f(1) = 0.

since C is an integral domain, and 12 ≠ 0, f(1) = 0. but f(1) = 1, since f is a ring homomorphism.
 
Re: Kernerl and homomorphism

ok either ker f=12Z or ker f= {0}
f(n)=0>n*f(1)=0 but f(1)=1since f is a ring homomorphism.So ker f={0} or

Z/ker f is an integral domain since it is a subring of C =>ker f/=12Z. or ker f=/13
I'm I doing this wrong?
 
Re: Kernerl and homomorphism

f is ring homomorphism which means f(1) =1 must be
but if 12Z is the kernel this will drive us to f(1) =0 which contradict with the ring homomorphism
so 12Z,13Z can't be the kernel, ker(f) = {0}
 
Re: Kernerl and homomorphism

Thank you for the confirmation
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
919
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
583
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K