Is the Set of Units in a Ring with Identity a Subring?

  • Thread starter Thread starter capsfan828
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
1 reply · 6K views
capsfan828
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove or Disprove: The set of units in a ring R with identiy is a subring of R.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



Let S be the the set of units in a ring R with identity. For S to be a subring of R, 0R would have to be an element of S. Since S is the set of units in R, it follows that S will not a multiplicative identity, namely 0R*0R-1 is not an element of S. Hence S is not a subring of R, disproving the original claim.


I feel that the fact 0R*0R-1 is not an element of S is the main part of the proof. I am just unsure if my argument and logic are correct.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the identity he is referring to is the additive one (1 is trivially a unit). So your counter proof isn't really valid.

If S was to be a subgroup then it must be closed under addition and multiplication. It is easy to check that its closed under multiplication. Look at addition, when you add two units, is it always a unit?