MHB Polynomial Rings and UFDs - Dummit and Foote pages 303-304

  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Polynomial Rings
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Dummit and Foote Section 9.3 Polynomial Rings That are Unique Factorization Domains (see attachment Section 9.3 pages 303 -304)

I am working through (beginning, anyway) the proof of Theorem 7 which states the following:

"R is a Unique Factorization Domain if and only if R[x] is a Unique Factorization Domain"

The proof begins with the statement:

Proof: We have indicated above the R[x] a Unique Factorization Domain forces R to be a Unique Factorization Domain"

Question! Can anyone explain to me how and where D&F indicate or explain this first statement of the proof. Secondly, what is the explanation. I am so far unable to find anything that indicates to me that this is true.

I have provided Section 9.3 up to Theorem 7 as an attachment.

Would appreciate some help.

Peter

[This question is also posted on MHF]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello

I'm sorry if this is wrong. I haven't seen polynomial rings in at least 8 years. Anyway, I think that the answer is: If R[x] is a UFD, the polynomials that are constants, in particular, have unique factorization. Since the constants of R[x] are isomorphic to R, R is a UFD.

Does this make sense?
 

Thread 'Trouble understanding an online solution to an exercise in Dummit & Foote'

##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
View full post »

Thread 'Questions about non existence of GCDs vs (coimages, cokernels)'

The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
View full post »

Thread 'Decomposition into irreps of compact Lie group'

When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
View full post »

Similar threads

MHB Polynomials in n indeterminates and UFDs
Replies
1
Views
1K
MHB Zero divisor for polynomial rings
Replies
1
Views
2K
MHB Is Gauss' Lemma the Key to Non-UFDs in Polynomial Rings?
Replies
1
Views
2K
MHB How Does Proposition 7 Support Proposition 15 in Dummit and Foote?
Replies
1
Views
2K
MHB Polynomial Rings - Gauss's Lemma
Replies
4
Views
2K
MHB Are GCDs Always Defined in Integral Domains?
Replies
2
Views
2K
MHB Noetherian Rings - Dummit and Foote - Chapter 15
Replies
1
Views
3K
I Splitting ring of polynomials - why is this result unfindable?
Replies
9
Views
2K
I Separable Polynomials - Dummit and Foote - Proposition 37
Replies
5
Views
2K
MHB Factor Rings of Polynomials Over a Field
Replies
1
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top