Proving Algebraic Proofs: Cancellation & Exponents

  • Thread starter Thread starter chaotixmonjuish
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exponents Proofs
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving algebraic properties within a commutative ring with identity, specifically the conditions under which a ring is classified as an integral domain based on the cancellation property. It establishes that if cancellation holds in a ring R, then R is an integral domain, and conversely, if R is an integral domain, cancellation must hold. Additionally, the discussion addresses proving exponentiation rules, specifically (a^m)(a^n)=a^(m+n) and (a^m)^n=a^(mn), suggesting the use of mathematical induction for the proof.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of commutative rings with identity
  • Knowledge of integral domains and their properties
  • Familiarity with algebraic proofs and cancellation laws
  • Basic principles of mathematical induction
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of integral domains in abstract algebra
  • Learn about cancellation laws in commutative rings
  • Research mathematical induction techniques for proving algebraic identities
  • Explore advanced topics in ring theory and their applications
USEFUL FOR

Mathematics students, algebra enthusiasts, and educators seeking to deepen their understanding of algebraic proofs and properties of rings.

chaotixmonjuish
Messages
284
Reaction score
0
Algebra Proofs!

I have two questions just to help verify what I'm doing:

Let R be a commutative ring with identity. Prove that R is an integral domain if and only if cancellation holds in R (that is, a no equal to 0 and ab=ac in R imply b=c)

=> Suppose cancellation holds: ab=0 -> ab=0a -> a isn't 0 so b=0

<= Since a doesn't equal 0
ab=ac -> ab-ac=0 -> a(b-c)=0 -> b-c=0 -> b=c cancellation holds

alternatively, could the second part be proven as such:

ab=ac
a^-1ab=aca^-1
b=c
cancellation holds

My second question is: How do I go about proving the following

(a^m)(a^n)=a^m+n and (a^m)^n=a^mn
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Your "alternative" cannot be used because a-1 does not necessarily exist!

For your second question, I would suggest fixing m and using induction on n.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K