Operations on Ideals - Hello Experts

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DukeSteve
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operations
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on operations on ideals within a ring R with unit, specifically examining the properties of the ideals I_n and I_m defined as I_n = {x in R: n*x = 0}. The participants confirm that the sum of two ideals, I_n + I_m, is indeed an ideal of the form I_k, leveraging Bezout's identity for proof. They establish that the intersection of the ideals, I_n ∩ I_m, is also an ideal of the form I_k, specifically represented as (l.c.m.)R. However, they conclude that the union of the ideals, I_n ∪ I_m, does not form an ideal of the form I_k, providing a counterexample with the integers.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of ring theory and ideals in abstract algebra
  • Familiarity with Bezout's identity and its applications
  • Knowledge of least common multiples (l.c.m.) and greatest common divisors (g.c.d.)
  • Basic operations on sets and their properties in algebraic structures
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of ideals in ring theory, focusing on operations like addition and intersection
  • Research Bezout's identity and its implications in abstract algebra
  • Learn about the least common multiple and greatest common divisor in the context of ideals
  • Explore counterexamples in algebra to understand the limitations of union operations on ideals
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in abstract algebra, particularly those studying ring theory and the properties of ideals, as well as educators looking for examples and counterexamples in teaching these concepts.

DukeSteve
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hello Experts,

I post this question here because in the homework topics there is no abstract algebra!
Please help me I want to understand it:

I have a ring R with unit. Also I am given n - natural number, I_n is the set {x in R: n*x = 0}

I have to prove or refute: Given n, m natural numbers:

A) Is I_n + I_m is an ideal of the form of I_k?
B) Is I_n intersection with I_m is an ideal of the form of I_k?
C) Is I_n union with I_m is an ideal of the form of I_k?

I just used the Bezout's identity that d = ax+by for any d is a common devisor of a,b, and x,y are integers.
And I get that A is a proof.
For B I don't know how to start...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
DukeSteve said:
Hello Experts,

I post this question here because in the homework topics there is no abstract algebra!
Please help me I want to understand it:

I have a ring R with unit. Also I am given n - natural number, I_n is the set {x in R: n*x = 0}

I have to prove or refute: Given n, m natural numbers:

A) Is I_n + I_m is an ideal of the form of I_k?
B) Is I_n intersection with I_m is an ideal of the form of I_k?
Let's write I_n=nR##.
##nR \cap mR = (l.c.m.)R## which is again an ideal of this form. Bezout in part A) gave you the greatest common divisor, now we need the least common multiple.
C) Is I_n union with I_m is an ideal of the form of I_k?
No. E.g. ##2\mathbb{Z} \cup 3\mathbb{Z} = \{\,\ldots,-6,-4,-3,-2,0,2,3,4,6,\ldots\,\}## but ##2+3=5 \notin 2\mathbb{Z} \cup 3\mathbb{Z}##.
I just used the Bezout's identity that d = ax+by for any d is a common devisor of a,b, and x,y are integers.
And I get that A is a proof.
Yes, right ideals to be exact: ##(nR+mR)\cdot R \subseteq nR+mR## and ##nR+mR = dR = kR## with Bezout's lemma, correct.
For B I don't know how to start...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K