MHB Division Rings and RIng Homomorphisms .... A&W Corollary 2.4 ....

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading "Algebra: An Approach via Module Theory" by William A. Adkins and Steven H. Weintraub ...

I am currently focused on Chapter 2: Rings ...

I need help with an aspect of the proof of Corollary 2.4 ... ...

Corollary 2.4 and its proof read as follows:View attachment 7933
In the above proof of Corollary 2.4 we read the following:

" ... ... If $$\text{Ker} (f) = \{ 0 \}$$ then $$f$$ is injective ... ... "
Can someone please explain exactly how/why $$\text{Ker} (f) = \{ 0 \}$$ implies that $$f$$ is injective ... ?
Help will be appreciated ...

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Peter,

If $f$ is not injective, there are distinct elements $a$ and $b$ such that $f(a)=f(b)$. Because $f$ is a homomorphism, this implies $f(a-b)=0$, and, by definition, $a-b\in\ker f$. If $a\ne b$, this gives you a non-zero element of $\ker f$.

Note that this is more generally true for any group homomorphism $f$: $\ker f$ is trivial if and only if $f$ is injective.
 
castor28 said:
Hi Peter,

If $f$ is not injective, there are distinct elements $a$ and $b$ such that $f(a)=f(b)$. Because $f$ is a homomorphism, this implies $f(a-b)=0$, and, by definition, $a-b\in\ker f$. If $a\ne b$, this gives you a non-zero element of $\ker f$.

Note that this is more generally true for any group homomorphism $f$: $\ker f$ is trivial if and only if $f$ is injective.
Thanks castor28 ...

You seem to have proved the contrapositive ... but then that proves it!

Appreciate your help ...

Peter
 
Peter said:
Thanks castor28 ...

You seem to have proved the contrapositive ... but then that proves it!

Appreciate your help ...

Peter
Hi Peter,

In fact, the converse is also true. If $f$ is injective, the equation $f(x)=0$ has no other solution than $0$, and the solution set is $\ker f$ by definition.
 
Back
Top