MHB F[x]: Congruence Solutions | Math Q&A

  • Thread starter Thread starter Joe20
  • Start date Start date
Joe20
Messages
53
Reaction score
1
Hi all, I have completed this question as attached. Hope someone could help to check if my solutions are correct. However, I am not sure what theorem is used for part (d). May need some advice. Thanks.
 

Attachments

  • Q2...png
    Q2...png
    16.4 KB · Views: 102
  • Q2i.jpg
    Q2i.jpg
    86.2 KB · Views: 105
  • Q2ii.jpg
    Q2ii.jpg
    62.9 KB · Views: 100
  • Q2iii.jpg
    Q2iii.jpg
    76.1 KB · Views: 107
Physics news on Phys.org
All your solutions look correct. (Yes)

Just a minor comment, but you might want to put the equivalence class brackets around the terms belonging to $R$.
 

Thread '##(A/\mathfrak{a})_{\mathfrak{p}/\mathfrak{a}}## and its isomorphism?'

I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
View full post »

Thread 'Questions about non existence of GCDs vs (coimages, cokernels)'

The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
View full post »

Thread 'Trouble understanding an online solution to an exercise in Dummit & Foote'

##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Congruence for Symmetric and non-Symmetric Matrices for Quadratic Form
Replies
7
Views
2K
MHB Why is \{ x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_{n-1}, x \} a basis for F in Proposition 4.3.14?
Replies
4
Views
2K
MHB Why Does d and 1 Being Associates Imply 1 is a GCD?
Replies
3
Views
2K
MHB Primitive Elements and Free Modules .... ....
Replies
2
Views
1K
MHB Dual Spaces .... Friedberg et al, Example 4, Section 2.6
Replies
2
Views
1K
MHB Understanding Bland's Proof of Proposition 4.3.14: Primitive Elements of Modules
Replies
1
Views
1K
MHB Congruences - Rotman - Proposition 1.58
Replies
2
Views
1K
MHB Field Theory _ Dummit and Foote - Theorem 3
Replies
3
Views
2K
MHB Noetherian Rings and Modules: Theorem 2.2 - Cohn - Section 2.2 Chain Conditions
Replies
3
Views
2K
MHB Help with $(iii)$ of Math Problem on MHB
Replies
3
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top