What Determines Equality of Principal Ideals in an Integral Domain?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmajor2013
  • Start date Start date
mathmajor2013
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Let R be an integral domain with elements a,b in R and <a>,<b> the corresponding principal ideals. Prove that <a>=<b> if, and only if, a=bu for some unit u in U(R).

proof

if a=bu, then ar=bur. Since ur in R, call it s. So ar=bs for some s in R. Therefore a times some elements in r is equal to b times a different element in R. Therefore {ra: r in R}={rb: r in R}.

if <a>=<b>, then {ra: r in R}={rb: r in R}. That means ra=r'b for some r,r' in R. However, r'=ru for some unit u in U(R). So ra=rub. Hence, a=ub=bu *commutative ring*.

Therefore <a>=<b> if, and only if, a=bu for some unit u in U(R).

PLEASE HELP I KNOW THIS PROOF HAS SOMETHING WRONG WITH IT.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathmajor2013 said:
if a=bu, then ar=bur. Since ur in R, call it s. So ar=bs for some s in R. Therefore a times some elements in r is equal to b times a different element in R. Therefore {ra: r in R}={rb: r in R}.

You don't use the fact that u is a unit here. Try this: Let u^-1 be an inverse of u, and show that a is in (b) and b is in (a).

mathmajor2013 said:
if <a>=<b>, then {ra: r in R}={rb: r in R}. That means ra=r'b for some r,r' in R. However, r'=ru for some unit u in U(R). So ra=rub. Hence, a=ub=bu *commutative ring*.

Why does ra = r'b imply that r' = ru for some unit u? Try this: ar = b for some r in R, and a = bs for some s in R since (a) = (b). Substitute, and see what you can say about rs.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
Back
Top