MHB Interesting problem with ideals and function

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around proving that the image of an ideal J of a ring A under the function f, defined as f(a) = (a,0) for all a in A, forms an ideal in the product ring A × Z. The function f is established as an injective ring homomorphism, and its image corresponds to A × {0}, which is isomorphic to A. The proof demonstrates that (J × {0}, +) is a subgroup of (A × Z, +) and satisfies the absorption properties required for ideals. The participants clarify the trivial nature of the subgroup property and confirm that both right and left absorption conditions hold true. The discussion concludes with a successful verification of the ideal properties in the context of the defined ring structure.
Krizalid1
Messages
106
Reaction score
0
Hi guys, it's been a while! Here's an interesting problem.

Let $A$ be a ring and $Z$ be the ring of $\mathbb Z.$ Consider the cartesian product $A\times Z.$
Define $A\times Z$ the product $(a,n)\cdot(b,m)=(ma+nb+ab,nm).$
Let $f:A\longmapsto A\times Z$ be defined by $f(a)=(a,0)$ for all $a$ in the ring $A.$ Prove that if $J$ is an ideal of $A,$ its image below the function $f$ is an ideal of the ring $A\times Z.$
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
f is clearly an injective ring homomorphism since if f(a) = f(b), (a,0) = (b,0), and by the definition of equality in the cartesian set product, a = b. It is trivial to check that the image of f is A x {0}, which is ring-isomorphic to A.

In other words, the 0 in the 2nd coordinate in Z x A is "just along for the ride", it doesn't contribute any structure to f(A):

(a,0) + (b,0) = (a+b,0+0) = (a+b,0)

(a,0)*(b,0) = (ab,0*0) = (ab,0).
 
Checking the axioms of an ideal:

1. $(J \times \{0\}, +)$ is a sub group of $(A \times \mathbb Z, +)$.
2. $\forall (j,0) \in J \times \{0\}, \forall (r,z) \in A \times \mathbb Z: (j,0) \cdot(r,z) \in J \times \{0\}$.
3. $\forall (j,0) \in J \times \{0\}, \forall (r,z) \in A \times \mathbb Z: (r,z) \cdot(j,0) \in J \times \{0\}$.

These are all trivially true.

Erm... how is it interesting?
 
Last edited:
I've corrected the problem and added things I should've posted before.
Sorry for the inconvenients.
 
Krizalid said:
I've corrected the problem and added things I should've posted before.
Sorry for the inconvenients.

Okay... the subgroup property with respect to + is still trivial.
For right absorption we get:

$$\forall (j,0) \in J \times \{0\}, \forall (a,z) \in J \times \mathbb Z: \\
\qquad (j,0) \cdot (a,z) = (zj+0a+ja, 0z) = (j',0) \in J \times \{0\}$$
This is true, because:
  • $zj$ is a summation of elements in $J$, which is also an element of $J$,
  • $0a=0$,
  • $ja \in J$ because $J$ is an ideal of $A$.

Left absorption is similar.$\qquad \blacksquare$
 
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
915
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
846
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
7K