# I Rings of Fractions ... Lovett, Section 6.2 ...

1. Mar 11, 2017

### Math Amateur

I am reading Stephen Lovett's book, "Abstract Algebra: Structures and Applications" and am currently focused on Section 6.2: Rings of Fractions ...

I need some help with some remarks following Definition 6.2.4 ... ... ...

The remarks following Definition 6.2.4 reads as follows:

In the above text from Lovett we read the following:

" ... ... it is not hard to show that if we had taken $D = { \mathbb{Z} }^{ \gt 0 }$ we would get a ring of fractions that is that is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Q}$. ... ... "

Can someone please help me to understand this statement ... how is such an isomorphism possible ... in particular, how does one achieve a one-to-one and onto homomorphism from the positive integers to the negative elements of $\mathbb{Q}$ as well as the positive elements ...

Hope someone can help ... ...

Peter

==============================================================================

To enable readers to understand Lovett's approach to the rings of fraction construction, I am providing Lovett Section 6.2 up to an including the remarks following Definition 6.2.4 ... as follows:

#### Attached Files:

File size:
146.8 KB
Views:
88
File size:
77 KB
Views:
88
File size:
73.2 KB
Views:
80
• ###### Lovett - 3 - Rings of Fractions - Section 6.2.2 - Part 3 ... ... .png
File size:
86.2 KB
Views:
82
2. Mar 11, 2017

### willem2

There is no isomorphism between D and Q, but an isomorphism between a set of equivalence classes of pairs (r,d) (where r is in R and d is in D ) and Q.
The equivalence class containing all pairs (-n,2n) will map to -1/2, for example.

3. Mar 11, 2017

### Math Amateur

Hi willem2

Thanks for the help ...

Obviously I should have read the text more carefully ...

Thanks again ...

Peter

4. Mar 28, 2017

### WWGD

Should be Lovett and Leavitt or Lovett and Leavitt ;).