Finite integral domains are fields (Adkins & Weintraub 1.5)

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
3 replies · 2K views
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 Proposition 1.5 ... ...

Proposition 1.5 and its proof read as follows:
A&W - Proposition 1.5 ... .png
At the end of the above proof from Adkins and Weintraub we read the following:

" ... ... and hence ##\phi_a (R) = R##. In particular, the equation ##ax = 1## is solvable for every ##a \neq 0## and ##R## is a field. ... ... "
Can someone please explain to me how the conclusion that "the equation ##ax = 1## is solvable for every ##a \neq 0## and ##R## is a field" follows from the arguments preceding it ...

Basically I do not understand how the arguments before this statement lead to the conclusion ...Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • A&W - Proposition 1.5 ... .png
    A&W - Proposition 1.5 ... .png
    20.2 KB · Views: 623
Physics news on Phys.org
The author showed, that ##\phi_a## is bijective, because it is injective and surjective: ##\phi_a(R)=R##.
That means ##a \cdot x = \phi_a(x) = 1## has exactly one solution ##x \in \phi_a^{-1}(\{1\})##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
fresh_42 said:
The author showed, that ##\phi_a## is bijective, because it is injective and surjective: ##\phi_a(R)=R##.
That means ##a \cdot x = \phi_a(x) = 1## has exactly one solution ##x \in \phi_a^{-1}(\{1\})##.
Thanks fresh_42 ...

Reflecting on what you have said ...

But ... hmm ... yes ... seems right ...

Thanks again ...

Peter
 
Integral domains and Fields has a nice proof that every finite integral domain is a field. It is much like the proof that every element of a finite group has a finite order. One takes some nonzero element a and multiplies it by itself until one comes with two exponents m and n such that am = an. Then,

am - an = an * (am-n - 1) = 0

From the definition of integral domain, either an = 0 or am-n - 1 = 0. In the first case, an = a * an-1, and if it equals 0, then either a or a an-1 equals 0. Continuing for an-1, we find that a = 0, contrary to our condition for a.

But if am-n - 1 = 0, then a * am-n-1 = 1. Thus, a has a multiplicative inverse, and thus every finite integral domain is a field.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur