Sum of fields is never a field

In summary, to prove that a direct sum of two or more fields is never a field, you need to show that the direct sum is not an Abelian group under multiplication. This can be done by disproving any of the necessary conditions, such as the existence of multiplicative inverses, which can be shown by choosing specific elements that do not have multiplicative inverses in the direct sum.
  • #1
rainiscoming
1
0

Homework Statement


Prove that a direct sum of two or more field is never a field


Homework Equations



F X G = {(f,g): f in F, g in G}

The Attempt at a Solution



I know that I need to prove FXG is Abelian group under addition, and FXG - {0,0} is an Abelian group under mult.
And for mult,
I know I need to check 1) mult identity, 2) closure, 3) commutative, 4) mult inverse, 5) associativity

I have problem proving mult inverse,

let a1, a2, b1, b2 be elements in F XG - {0,0}, such that (a1,b1)*(a2,b2) = (a1a2, b1b2)
so (a1a2, b1b2) ^-1 = (1/(a1a2), 1/(b1b2)) which is not in FXG - (0,0)

Is this right?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
How do you know a1a2 is invertible?
 
  • #3
Remember you're trying to prove that [itex]F\times G[/itex] is not a field.

So you're not actually trying to prove any of the things you say you're trying to prove. You're trying to disprove at least one of them. So if you've had a problem proving one of them, that might give you a clue.
 

1. What does it mean for the sum of fields to never be a field?

When we talk about a field, we are referring to a mathematical structure that follows certain properties, such as closure under addition and multiplication, existence of additive and multiplicative inverses, and distributivity. The sum of fields not being a field means that when we add two fields together, the resulting structure does not follow all of these properties and therefore cannot be considered a field.

2. Why is it important to understand that the sum of fields is never a field?

Understanding this concept is important because it allows us to identify when certain mathematical structures do not conform to the properties of a field. This can help us avoid making incorrect assumptions or using incorrect mathematical techniques when working with these structures.

3. Can you provide an example of when the sum of fields is not a field?

One example is when we add the set of integers (Z) and the set of rational numbers (Q) together. Individually, both Z and Q are fields, but when we add them together, the resulting structure does not have closure under multiplication, as certain rational numbers cannot be expressed as a ratio of integers.

4. Are there any exceptions to the rule that the sum of fields is never a field?

No, there are no exceptions. The properties of a field are well-defined and must be satisfied in order for a structure to be considered a field. If any of these properties are not met, then the resulting structure cannot be a field.

5. How does the concept of the sum of fields relate to other mathematical concepts?

The concept of the sum of fields is closely related to the concept of a ring, which is a mathematical structure that follows some, but not all, of the properties of a field. The sum of fields also relates to the idea of closure under operations, which is a fundamental property in abstract algebra.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
14K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top