Prove 0=Elements in Field w/ 0-1 Axiom for 1≠0

  • Thread starter Thread starter Syrus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field Proof
Syrus
Messages
213
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Suppose the field axioms include 0-1. Prove that, in this case, every element is equal to 0. Thus the existence of 0-1 would contradict the field axiom that 1≠0.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



My question regarding the proof is, why bother to show that every element in the field is 0 in order to show that 1≠0. In other words, isn't it easier to say:

Previously proven lemma: For all x in F, 0*x = 0.

Suppose there exists 0-1 in F such that 0*0-1=1. Then by the lemma above, the left side of the previous equation simply reduces to 0, and hence we are left with 1 = 0, a contradiction.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Syrus said:

Homework Statement



Suppose the field axioms include 0-1. Prove that, in this case, every element is equal to 0. Thus the existence of 0-1 would contradict the field axiom that 1≠0.



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



My question regarding the proof is, why bother to show that every element in the field is 0 in order to show that 1≠0. In other words, isn't it easier to say:

Previously proven lemma: For all x in F, 0*x = 0.

Suppose there exists 0-1 in F such that 0*0-1=1. Then by the lemma above, the left side of the previous equation simply reduces to 0, and hence we are left with 1 = 0, a contradiction.
I agree, your way is simpler. Not sure why they want you to do this. Maybe because 1≠0 isn't always included in the field axioms. If you're working with a definition that doesn't include that, it looks like you can only conclude that the field is trivial (i.e. that it has only one element).
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top