Injective ring homomorphisms between Z_2, Z_4, and Z_6

  • Thread starter Thread starter sutupidmath
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
2 replies · 2K views
sutupidmath
Messages
1,629
Reaction score
4
Urgent!-Hmomorphism @:Z_2-->Z_4 &Z_2-->Z_6

Homework Statement


THis is probbably very easy, just i am kinda bogged down:

(a) Show that the mapping [tex]\theta:Z_2-->Z_6[/tex] with [tex]\theta(\bar 0)=\bar 0, \theta(\bar 1)=\bar 3[/tex]

Is an injective ring homomorphism?
(b) Show that there is no injective ring homomorphism [tex]\theta:Z_2-->Z_4[/tex]
Proof:

(a) Well, i said since [tex]\bar 0 =/=\bar 3[/tex] in Z_6 then such theta is injective.
Now to establish homomorphism, i proceded

[tex]\theta(\bar 0 \bar 1)=\theta(\bar 0)=\bar 0[/tex]
[tex]\theta(\bar 0)\theta(\bar 1)=\bar 0[/tex] so they are equal

[tex]\theta(\bar 0+\bar 1)=\thta(\bar 1)=\bar 3[/tex]
[tex]\thetea(\bar 0)+\theta(\bar 1)=\bar 3[/tex]

So, i concluded that we have a homomorphism

Well, this didn't cause me any problems, as far as my understanding goes. However, i am having trouble on the second part:

(b) I started like this:

In order for [tex]\theta:Z_2-->Z_4[/tex] to be a homomorphism, if [tex]\theta(\bar a)=\bar b, \bar a \in Z_2, \bar b \in Z_4[/tex] then we should have the following [tex]o(\bar b)|o(\bar a)[/tex] ( i think there is a theorem that says this)

So, looking at the orders of the elements in both rings, we notice that the only such possibility is:

[tex]\theta(\bar 0)=\bar 0, \theta(\bar 1)=\bar 2[/tex]

Now, i am failing to show that this is not an injective homomorphism.

Here is what i am doing:

[tex]\theta(\bar 0 \bar 1)=\theta(\bar 0)=\bar 0[/tex]

[tex]\theta(\bar 0)\theta(\bar 1)=\bar 0[/tex]

[tex]\theta(\bar 0 +\bar 1)=\theta(\bar 1)=\bar 2[/tex]

[tex]\theta(\bar 0)+\theta(\bar 1)=\bar 2[/tex]

So, by this reasoning it looks to me that such a mapping is a homomorphism.

However, now everything that i am trying is also 'showing' that such a theta is also injective.

SO, how to show that theta is not injective/?



Many thanks in return!
 
Physics news on Phys.org


[tex]\theta(1) = 2[/tex] gives us

[tex]\theta(1^2) = \theta(1)^2 = 2^2 = 4 = 0[/tex]

Whoops
 


Office_Shredder said:
[tex]\theta(1) = 2[/tex] gives us

[tex]\theta(1^2) = \theta(1)^2 = 2^2 = 4 = 0[/tex]

Whoops

Well since [tex]\theta:\bar 1->\bar 0, and \bar 1-> \bar 2[/tex] this, from my point of view, would mean that theta is not a mapping at all right, since it is violating the definition of a mapping, right? To show that a mapping is not injective wouldn't we need something like this:

[tex]If, x_1=/=x_2=/>\theta(x_1)=/=\theta(x_2)[/tex]

Or, if [tex]\theta(a)=\theta(b)=/>a=b[/tex] ??

[tex]=/>[/tex] stands for "Does not follow"

So, how would that tell us that theta is not injective? Pardone my ignorance!