##R[x,y]## and ##R[y,x]## are Ring Isomorphic

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bashyboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ring
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves showing that the polynomial rings ##R[x,y]## and ##R[y,x]## are isomorphic, where ##R## is a commutative ring. The discussion centers around the definition of a function that maps elements from one ring to the other and the verification of its properties, particularly additivity and multiplicativity.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the definition of a mapping function and explore its additivity and multiplicativity. There is a focus on the expansion of polynomial sums and the implications of multiplying double sums. Some participants question the handling of indices and constant terms in the product.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights and suggestions on how to approach the verification of the mapping function's properties. There is an exploration of different methods to express the product of polynomials, and while some concerns about indices and terms are raised, no consensus has been reached on the best approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the multiplication of double sums has not been formally introduced in their study materials, which may affect their ability to proceed with the problem. There is also mention of the tedious nature of the calculations involved in verifying the mapping function.

Bashyboy
Messages
1,419
Reaction score
5

Homework Statement


Let ##R## be a commutative ring,. Show that ##R[x,y]## is isomorphic to ##R[y,x]##.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



Let ##f : R[x,y] \to R[y,x]## be defined by ##\sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} a_{ij} x^i y^j \mapsto \sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} a_{ij} y^i x^j##. Verifying that ##f## is additive is rather trivial, however I am having a little trouble verifying that ##f## is multiplicative. Given ##\sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} a_{ij} x^i y^j## and ##\sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} b_{ij} x^i y^j##, what is the general form of the product? Multiplying double sums hasn't been introduced yet in my book, as far as I can tell.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It can probably be done by the formula, which you can easily find out by a simple multiplication. It would be boring in any case. But given additivity, why not use if for polynomials ##ax^ny^m##?
 
Okay. Let me see if I follow you. Since ##\sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} a_{ij} x^i y^j## can be expanded as
$$(a_{11} xy + ... + a_{1m} xy^m) + (a_{21} x^2 y + ... + a_{2m} x^2 y^m) + ... + (a_{n1} x^n y + ... + a_{nm} x^n y^m),$$

we see that the product of it with ##\sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} b_{ij} x^i y^j## is

$$\sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} a_{ij} x^i y^j \cdot \sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} b_{ij} x^i y^j$$

$$= \bigg[(a_{11} xy + ... + a_{1m} xy^m) + (a_{21} x^2 y + ... + a_{2m} x^2 y^m) + ... + (a_{n1} x^n y + ... + a_{nm} x^n y^m) \bigg] \cdot \sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} b_{ij} x^i y^j$$

$$= (a_{11} xy \cdot \sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} b_{ij} x^i y^j+ ... + a_{1m} xy^m \cdot \sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} b_{ij} x^i y^j) + (a_{21} x^2 y \cdot \sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} b_{ij} x^i y^j+ ... + a_{2m} x^2 y^m \cdot \sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} b_{ij} x^i y^j) + ... + (a_{n1} x^n y \cdot \sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} b_{ij} x^i y^j + ... + a_{nm} x^n y^m \cdot \sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} b_{ij} x^i y^j )$$

From there I can break down each ##a_{pq} x^p y^q \cdot \sum_{i,j=1}^{n,m} b_{ij} x^i y^j## down in a similar manner, which is extraordinarily tedious, and then it suffices to show that ##f(a x^p y^q \cdot b x^n y^m) = f(a x^p y^q) f(b x^n y^m)? Does that sound right?
 
I'm not sure whether your indices are all correct, especially why you omit the constant terms. However, it isn't needed. We can simply write
$$
\left( \sum_{i,j} a_{ij} x^iy^j \right) \left( \sum_{k,l} b_{kl}x^ky^l \right) = \sum_{p,q} \left( \sum_{i+k=p}\sum_{j+l=q}a_{ij}b_{k,l}\right) x^p y^q
$$
This form has the advantage that we don't need to bother constant terms or degrees. The only question is, what does this mean, if we swap ##x## and ##y## on the left and on the right? Here you need additivity and a result for products ##c_{pq}x^py^q##.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K