Prove the set of integers is a commutative ring with identity

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The integers form a commutative ring with identity, as they satisfy the necessary properties defined in ring theory. Specifically, the set of integers exhibits the commutative property of multiplication, which is an established arithmetic fact. Additionally, the identity element for multiplication, which is 1, is also inherent to the integers. Therefore, one can cite these properties as established theorems without needing to provide extensive algebraic proofs, although it is advisable to confirm this approach with an instructor.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of ring theory and its definitions
  • Familiarity with properties of integers, specifically commutativity and identity
  • Basic knowledge of mathematical proofs and citation of theorems
  • Awareness of arithmetic facts related to integers
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the formal definition of a commutative ring in abstract algebra
  • Review the properties of integers, focusing on commutativity and identity elements
  • Explore examples of other commutative rings, such as polynomial rings
  • Learn how to properly cite mathematical theorems in academic writing
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, educators, and anyone studying abstract algebra who seeks to understand the foundational properties of rings and their applications.

Square1
Messages
143
Reaction score
1
How should one prove that the integers form a commutative ring? I am not sure exactly where to go with this and how much should be explicitly shown.

A ring is meant to be a system that shares properties of Z and Zn. A commutative ring is a ring, with the commutative multiplication property. Only need to prove then that that the integers have a commutative multiplication property in that case?? But commutativity of multiplication is a known property of the set of integers, "an arithmetical fact" as my book says. So do I just cite this fact/theorem without having to show much algebra bingo bango its a com. ring? Same argument witht the identity elemnt. It is part of the list of arithmetic facts given to us, which themselves are not proven, so just cite it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We can't answer this. You need to ask your professor whether you can just cite these facts without explicitly showing them.
 
I had that feeling haha. Thanks.
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K