Proving Injectivity of a Ring Homomorphism over a Field

  • Thread starter Thread starter annoymage
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Homework Ring
annoymage
Messages
360
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Let R be a field and f : R->R be a ring homomorphism

prove that f(r)=0, for all r in R, or f is injective

Homework Equations



n/a

The Attempt at a Solution



or alternative ways i have to prove (Kernel of f)=R or (kernel of f)={0}

i've tried but stuck somewhere, hmm and also seems i can't make any connection with "field" like unit or zero divisor or something like that T_T, help clue pls
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Suppose for some a,b,c where a and b are distinct in R f(a) =c = f(b). I.e. f is not injective.

With this assumption, can you show that f(1) = 0? (which is equivlent to f(r)=0, for all r in R)

hint: f(ab^-1 - ba^-1) = 0 and ab^-1 - ba^-1 is non zero (you will have to argue this).
 
Last edited:


annoymage said:
(Kernel of f)=R or (kernel of f)={0}
This is actually way easier than my other idea.

Suppose any non zero element r satisfies f(r) = 0 what would f(r*r^-1) look like.
 


sorry a bit late, i think i get the point,

check me please,

Suppose it is not injective, so exist x in R\{0} such that f(x)=0,

then f(x)=f(xe)=f(x)f(e)=0, since R is field, inverse of f(x) exist, then imply, f(e)=0

so, for any y in R f(e)=f(yy^-1)=f(y)f(y^-1)=0, then inverse of f(y^-1) exist, so, f(y)=0 for any y in R,

is my argument correct? and also, is it ok if i not state which R belongs to?

and also this hint, "hint: f(ab^-1 - ba^-1) = 0 and ab^-1 - ba^-1 is non zero (you will have to argue this)."

hmmmm, i can show how f(ab^-1 - ba^-1) = 0, and to show f(e)=0

is this correct?

ab^-1 - ba^-1 non zero, so inverse exist, let D be it's inverse, so f(ab^-1 - ba^-1)f(D)=0,

f((ab^-1 - ba^-1)D)=f(e)=0, hmm it's correct right?
 
Last edited:
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