MHB Zero Divisor Help: Prove & Example

  • Thread starter Thread starter corkscrew062
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Zero
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding zero divisors in the context of ring isomorphisms. It emphasizes that if x is a zero divisor in a commutative ring R, then its image f(x) will also be a zero divisor in the isomorphic ring S. However, it is noted that this property does not hold if R is not isomorphic to S, illustrated by examples involving the ring Z_6 and its quotient. The conversation highlights the complexity and challenges of working with rings and zero divisors in abstract algebra. Overall, the topic underscores the importance of isomorphism in preserving the zero divisor property between rings.
corkscrew062
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Came across this problem while reading and I can't understand what it wants. I've tried solving for units to get zero divisors but that doesn't work. It's not the end of the world if I can't figure it out, it's just bothering me because I'm confused. Here's the problem: Let $R$ and $S$ be commutative rings, and let $f:R\longrightarrow S$ be a ring isomorphism. Prove if $x$ is a zero divisor in $R$, then $f(x)$ is a zero divisor in $S$. Give an example to show that it is not necessarily true if $R\not \simeq S$.

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What you lack, Sir Lion, is not courage, but a testimonial-so I will give you one.

Rings are terrible beasties-they positively give me fits of apoplexy. That said, one occasionally needs to employ one when one has some -unsavory- business to attend to. So, one must, of needs, descend to the algebraic gutters, and make their acquaintances.

The nicer mannered ones come from the integral school, however, even some of these have produced some rather badly-quotiented offspring, as if dividing by zero wasn't OH SO 20th century. Egads!

You might, for example, consider the modulated by 6 variety, and think of some choice...no prime! idealization it contains which would render the zero-dividing nonsense totally harmless.

(No, seriously-look at $\Bbb Z_6$ which has zero divisors, and consider the ring $\Bbb Z_6/(\overline{2})$).
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
7K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
783
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
873