Construct a ring containing $16$ element where EVERY element $rneq 0$,$1$ is a zero divisor
$begingroup$
This is a practice question to prepare me for my final exam in abstract algebra.
Construct a ring containing $16$ elements where EVERY element $rneq 0$,$1$ is a zero divisor
I'm having a hard time starting this out. Especially, how can I ensure a ring I create has 16 elements. My first thought it to create a quotient ring R/I.
Since we're restricting our ring to have exactly 16 elements, it, of course, has to be finite.
I'm not the best at abstract algebra so this may not be even close, but here is one I thought would work:
Let $R = {a in mathbb{Z}_{32} |$ a is even, $a > 0}$ and let $I = 2$.
So then $R = {2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26,28,30,32}$ which has 16 elements, and since we're modding out by 2, they're all zero divisors.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
abstract-algebra ring-theory
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a practice question to prepare me for my final exam in abstract algebra.
Construct a ring containing $16$ elements where EVERY element $rneq 0$,$1$ is a zero divisor
I'm having a hard time starting this out. Especially, how can I ensure a ring I create has 16 elements. My first thought it to create a quotient ring R/I.
Since we're restricting our ring to have exactly 16 elements, it, of course, has to be finite.
I'm not the best at abstract algebra so this may not be even close, but here is one I thought would work:
Let $R = {a in mathbb{Z}_{32} |$ a is even, $a > 0}$ and let $I = 2$.
So then $R = {2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26,28,30,32}$ which has 16 elements, and since we're modding out by 2, they're all zero divisors.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
abstract-algebra ring-theory
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Note that your example is not a ring because there’s no $1$.
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:14
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a practice question to prepare me for my final exam in abstract algebra.
Construct a ring containing $16$ elements where EVERY element $rneq 0$,$1$ is a zero divisor
I'm having a hard time starting this out. Especially, how can I ensure a ring I create has 16 elements. My first thought it to create a quotient ring R/I.
Since we're restricting our ring to have exactly 16 elements, it, of course, has to be finite.
I'm not the best at abstract algebra so this may not be even close, but here is one I thought would work:
Let $R = {a in mathbb{Z}_{32} |$ a is even, $a > 0}$ and let $I = 2$.
So then $R = {2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26,28,30,32}$ which has 16 elements, and since we're modding out by 2, they're all zero divisors.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
abstract-algebra ring-theory
$endgroup$
This is a practice question to prepare me for my final exam in abstract algebra.
Construct a ring containing $16$ elements where EVERY element $rneq 0$,$1$ is a zero divisor
I'm having a hard time starting this out. Especially, how can I ensure a ring I create has 16 elements. My first thought it to create a quotient ring R/I.
Since we're restricting our ring to have exactly 16 elements, it, of course, has to be finite.
I'm not the best at abstract algebra so this may not be even close, but here is one I thought would work:
Let $R = {a in mathbb{Z}_{32} |$ a is even, $a > 0}$ and let $I = 2$.
So then $R = {2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26,28,30,32}$ which has 16 elements, and since we're modding out by 2, they're all zero divisors.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
abstract-algebra ring-theory
abstract-algebra ring-theory
edited Dec 8 '18 at 6:35
Mari
asked Dec 8 '18 at 5:52
MariMari
264
264
$begingroup$
Note that your example is not a ring because there’s no $1$.
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:14
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Note that your example is not a ring because there’s no $1$.
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:14
$begingroup$
Note that your example is not a ring because there’s no $1$.
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:14
$begingroup$
Note that your example is not a ring because there’s no $1$.
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:14
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I suggest $(Bbb{Z}/2Bbb{Z})^4$. We can identify this ring with the collection of subsets of $X={1,2,3,4}$ by using indicator functions. Then addition is symmetric difference and multiplication is intersection. The null set is $0$, and $X$ is the identity. For any subset $Ssubseteq X$, we then have $Scdot S^C=0$. Thus either $S=varnothing=0$, $S=X=1$, or $S$ is a zero divisor.
Edit
The ring I suggest is the following. It is the set of 4-tuples of whose entries are either $0$ or $1$.
Some example elements of this ring are $(0,0,0,0)$, $(0,1,1,0)$, $(1,0,1,1)$, and $(1,1,1,1)$. Since there are two choices for each entry, there are 16 total elements.
The ring operations are pointwise addition and multiplication where $1+1=0$ and otherwise addition and multiplication behave normally (i.e. $0cdot 1=0$, $1cdot 1=1$, $0cdot 0=0$, and $0+0=0$, and $1+0=1$). As examples,
$$(0,1,1,0)+(1,0,1,1)=(0+1,1+0,1+1,0+1)=(1,1,0,1),$$
and
$$(0,1,1,0)cdot (1,0,1,1)=(0cdot 1,1cdot 0, 1cdot 1,0cdot 1)=(0,0,1,0).$$
You can check that $(0,0,0,0)$ is the additive identity and $(1,1,1,1)$ is the multiplicative identity.
Then if $(a,b,c,d)$ is a tuple that is not one of these, if we define a new tuple
$(bar{a},bar{b},bar{c},bar{d})$ by making $bar{0}=1$ and $bar{1}=0$, then
$0cdot bar{0}=0cdot 1=0$ and $1cdot bar{1}=1cdot 0=0$, so
$$(a,b,c,d)cdot (bar{a},bar{b},bar{c},bar{d})=
(abar{a},bbar{b},cbar{c},dbar{d})
=(0,0,0,0).$$
Thus all nonzero elements are zero divisors in this ring.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This coincides with coordinate-wise addition and multiplication, right? This might be easier to see
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:11
$begingroup$
@platty, yes that's what I started with. I just think it simplifies the argument that every nonzero nonone element is a zero divisor to identify it subsets.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:13
$begingroup$
To be honest, we have not seen rings with exponents, nor have I heard of an indicator function. This looks very foreign. Perhaps I'm not well versed enough to get an answer I'll understand on StackExchange. Thank you very much though.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:18
$begingroup$
@Mari Sorry, I'll try to explain it a bit more clearly.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:20
$begingroup$
Oh, I see. Of course, we've seen rings raised to powers... Really the only one I have seen is $R^2$, so that's the reason the exponent of 4 threw me off. That makes a lot more sense. Thank you very much. We definitely haven't done a proof quite like this, but I understand where everything is coming from... Do you have any advice on thinking through these kinds of problems? I have other problems asking me to construct rings containing 16 elements that I can try.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:33
|
show 5 more comments
$begingroup$
In a finite commutative ring $R$, every noninvertible element is a zero divisor.
Indeed, if $r$ is not invertible, the map $xmapsto rx$ is not surjective (because $1$ is missed), so it is not injective. Being a group homomorphism with respect to addition, its kernel is nonzero, which proves the claim.
Your ring must have a single invertible element, hence its characteristic needs to be $2$: indeed, $-1$ is invertible, so we need $-1=1$.
Thus $R$ has to be a four dimensional vector space over $mathbb{F}_2=mathbb{Z}/2mathbb{Z}$ and it's quite natural to look for a ring structure on $mathbb{F}_2^4$.
One possibility is the product ring, which indeed satisfies the requirement, because an element of the form $a=(a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4)$ where one of the entries is zero is surely a zero divisor: if $e_i$ denotes the $4$-tuple with $1$ at the $i$-th place an zero elsewhere, then $a_i=0$ implies $ae_i=0$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3030739%2fconstruct-a-ring-containing-16-element-where-every-element-r-neq-0-1-is-a%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I suggest $(Bbb{Z}/2Bbb{Z})^4$. We can identify this ring with the collection of subsets of $X={1,2,3,4}$ by using indicator functions. Then addition is symmetric difference and multiplication is intersection. The null set is $0$, and $X$ is the identity. For any subset $Ssubseteq X$, we then have $Scdot S^C=0$. Thus either $S=varnothing=0$, $S=X=1$, or $S$ is a zero divisor.
Edit
The ring I suggest is the following. It is the set of 4-tuples of whose entries are either $0$ or $1$.
Some example elements of this ring are $(0,0,0,0)$, $(0,1,1,0)$, $(1,0,1,1)$, and $(1,1,1,1)$. Since there are two choices for each entry, there are 16 total elements.
The ring operations are pointwise addition and multiplication where $1+1=0$ and otherwise addition and multiplication behave normally (i.e. $0cdot 1=0$, $1cdot 1=1$, $0cdot 0=0$, and $0+0=0$, and $1+0=1$). As examples,
$$(0,1,1,0)+(1,0,1,1)=(0+1,1+0,1+1,0+1)=(1,1,0,1),$$
and
$$(0,1,1,0)cdot (1,0,1,1)=(0cdot 1,1cdot 0, 1cdot 1,0cdot 1)=(0,0,1,0).$$
You can check that $(0,0,0,0)$ is the additive identity and $(1,1,1,1)$ is the multiplicative identity.
Then if $(a,b,c,d)$ is a tuple that is not one of these, if we define a new tuple
$(bar{a},bar{b},bar{c},bar{d})$ by making $bar{0}=1$ and $bar{1}=0$, then
$0cdot bar{0}=0cdot 1=0$ and $1cdot bar{1}=1cdot 0=0$, so
$$(a,b,c,d)cdot (bar{a},bar{b},bar{c},bar{d})=
(abar{a},bbar{b},cbar{c},dbar{d})
=(0,0,0,0).$$
Thus all nonzero elements are zero divisors in this ring.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This coincides with coordinate-wise addition and multiplication, right? This might be easier to see
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:11
$begingroup$
@platty, yes that's what I started with. I just think it simplifies the argument that every nonzero nonone element is a zero divisor to identify it subsets.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:13
$begingroup$
To be honest, we have not seen rings with exponents, nor have I heard of an indicator function. This looks very foreign. Perhaps I'm not well versed enough to get an answer I'll understand on StackExchange. Thank you very much though.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:18
$begingroup$
@Mari Sorry, I'll try to explain it a bit more clearly.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:20
$begingroup$
Oh, I see. Of course, we've seen rings raised to powers... Really the only one I have seen is $R^2$, so that's the reason the exponent of 4 threw me off. That makes a lot more sense. Thank you very much. We definitely haven't done a proof quite like this, but I understand where everything is coming from... Do you have any advice on thinking through these kinds of problems? I have other problems asking me to construct rings containing 16 elements that I can try.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:33
|
show 5 more comments
$begingroup$
I suggest $(Bbb{Z}/2Bbb{Z})^4$. We can identify this ring with the collection of subsets of $X={1,2,3,4}$ by using indicator functions. Then addition is symmetric difference and multiplication is intersection. The null set is $0$, and $X$ is the identity. For any subset $Ssubseteq X$, we then have $Scdot S^C=0$. Thus either $S=varnothing=0$, $S=X=1$, or $S$ is a zero divisor.
Edit
The ring I suggest is the following. It is the set of 4-tuples of whose entries are either $0$ or $1$.
Some example elements of this ring are $(0,0,0,0)$, $(0,1,1,0)$, $(1,0,1,1)$, and $(1,1,1,1)$. Since there are two choices for each entry, there are 16 total elements.
The ring operations are pointwise addition and multiplication where $1+1=0$ and otherwise addition and multiplication behave normally (i.e. $0cdot 1=0$, $1cdot 1=1$, $0cdot 0=0$, and $0+0=0$, and $1+0=1$). As examples,
$$(0,1,1,0)+(1,0,1,1)=(0+1,1+0,1+1,0+1)=(1,1,0,1),$$
and
$$(0,1,1,0)cdot (1,0,1,1)=(0cdot 1,1cdot 0, 1cdot 1,0cdot 1)=(0,0,1,0).$$
You can check that $(0,0,0,0)$ is the additive identity and $(1,1,1,1)$ is the multiplicative identity.
Then if $(a,b,c,d)$ is a tuple that is not one of these, if we define a new tuple
$(bar{a},bar{b},bar{c},bar{d})$ by making $bar{0}=1$ and $bar{1}=0$, then
$0cdot bar{0}=0cdot 1=0$ and $1cdot bar{1}=1cdot 0=0$, so
$$(a,b,c,d)cdot (bar{a},bar{b},bar{c},bar{d})=
(abar{a},bbar{b},cbar{c},dbar{d})
=(0,0,0,0).$$
Thus all nonzero elements are zero divisors in this ring.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This coincides with coordinate-wise addition and multiplication, right? This might be easier to see
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:11
$begingroup$
@platty, yes that's what I started with. I just think it simplifies the argument that every nonzero nonone element is a zero divisor to identify it subsets.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:13
$begingroup$
To be honest, we have not seen rings with exponents, nor have I heard of an indicator function. This looks very foreign. Perhaps I'm not well versed enough to get an answer I'll understand on StackExchange. Thank you very much though.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:18
$begingroup$
@Mari Sorry, I'll try to explain it a bit more clearly.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:20
$begingroup$
Oh, I see. Of course, we've seen rings raised to powers... Really the only one I have seen is $R^2$, so that's the reason the exponent of 4 threw me off. That makes a lot more sense. Thank you very much. We definitely haven't done a proof quite like this, but I understand where everything is coming from... Do you have any advice on thinking through these kinds of problems? I have other problems asking me to construct rings containing 16 elements that I can try.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:33
|
show 5 more comments
$begingroup$
I suggest $(Bbb{Z}/2Bbb{Z})^4$. We can identify this ring with the collection of subsets of $X={1,2,3,4}$ by using indicator functions. Then addition is symmetric difference and multiplication is intersection. The null set is $0$, and $X$ is the identity. For any subset $Ssubseteq X$, we then have $Scdot S^C=0$. Thus either $S=varnothing=0$, $S=X=1$, or $S$ is a zero divisor.
Edit
The ring I suggest is the following. It is the set of 4-tuples of whose entries are either $0$ or $1$.
Some example elements of this ring are $(0,0,0,0)$, $(0,1,1,0)$, $(1,0,1,1)$, and $(1,1,1,1)$. Since there are two choices for each entry, there are 16 total elements.
The ring operations are pointwise addition and multiplication where $1+1=0$ and otherwise addition and multiplication behave normally (i.e. $0cdot 1=0$, $1cdot 1=1$, $0cdot 0=0$, and $0+0=0$, and $1+0=1$). As examples,
$$(0,1,1,0)+(1,0,1,1)=(0+1,1+0,1+1,0+1)=(1,1,0,1),$$
and
$$(0,1,1,0)cdot (1,0,1,1)=(0cdot 1,1cdot 0, 1cdot 1,0cdot 1)=(0,0,1,0).$$
You can check that $(0,0,0,0)$ is the additive identity and $(1,1,1,1)$ is the multiplicative identity.
Then if $(a,b,c,d)$ is a tuple that is not one of these, if we define a new tuple
$(bar{a},bar{b},bar{c},bar{d})$ by making $bar{0}=1$ and $bar{1}=0$, then
$0cdot bar{0}=0cdot 1=0$ and $1cdot bar{1}=1cdot 0=0$, so
$$(a,b,c,d)cdot (bar{a},bar{b},bar{c},bar{d})=
(abar{a},bbar{b},cbar{c},dbar{d})
=(0,0,0,0).$$
Thus all nonzero elements are zero divisors in this ring.
$endgroup$
I suggest $(Bbb{Z}/2Bbb{Z})^4$. We can identify this ring with the collection of subsets of $X={1,2,3,4}$ by using indicator functions. Then addition is symmetric difference and multiplication is intersection. The null set is $0$, and $X$ is the identity. For any subset $Ssubseteq X$, we then have $Scdot S^C=0$. Thus either $S=varnothing=0$, $S=X=1$, or $S$ is a zero divisor.
Edit
The ring I suggest is the following. It is the set of 4-tuples of whose entries are either $0$ or $1$.
Some example elements of this ring are $(0,0,0,0)$, $(0,1,1,0)$, $(1,0,1,1)$, and $(1,1,1,1)$. Since there are two choices for each entry, there are 16 total elements.
The ring operations are pointwise addition and multiplication where $1+1=0$ and otherwise addition and multiplication behave normally (i.e. $0cdot 1=0$, $1cdot 1=1$, $0cdot 0=0$, and $0+0=0$, and $1+0=1$). As examples,
$$(0,1,1,0)+(1,0,1,1)=(0+1,1+0,1+1,0+1)=(1,1,0,1),$$
and
$$(0,1,1,0)cdot (1,0,1,1)=(0cdot 1,1cdot 0, 1cdot 1,0cdot 1)=(0,0,1,0).$$
You can check that $(0,0,0,0)$ is the additive identity and $(1,1,1,1)$ is the multiplicative identity.
Then if $(a,b,c,d)$ is a tuple that is not one of these, if we define a new tuple
$(bar{a},bar{b},bar{c},bar{d})$ by making $bar{0}=1$ and $bar{1}=0$, then
$0cdot bar{0}=0cdot 1=0$ and $1cdot bar{1}=1cdot 0=0$, so
$$(a,b,c,d)cdot (bar{a},bar{b},bar{c},bar{d})=
(abar{a},bbar{b},cbar{c},dbar{d})
=(0,0,0,0).$$
Thus all nonzero elements are zero divisors in this ring.
edited Dec 8 '18 at 6:26
answered Dec 8 '18 at 6:07
jgonjgon
15.3k32042
15.3k32042
$begingroup$
This coincides with coordinate-wise addition and multiplication, right? This might be easier to see
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:11
$begingroup$
@platty, yes that's what I started with. I just think it simplifies the argument that every nonzero nonone element is a zero divisor to identify it subsets.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:13
$begingroup$
To be honest, we have not seen rings with exponents, nor have I heard of an indicator function. This looks very foreign. Perhaps I'm not well versed enough to get an answer I'll understand on StackExchange. Thank you very much though.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:18
$begingroup$
@Mari Sorry, I'll try to explain it a bit more clearly.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:20
$begingroup$
Oh, I see. Of course, we've seen rings raised to powers... Really the only one I have seen is $R^2$, so that's the reason the exponent of 4 threw me off. That makes a lot more sense. Thank you very much. We definitely haven't done a proof quite like this, but I understand where everything is coming from... Do you have any advice on thinking through these kinds of problems? I have other problems asking me to construct rings containing 16 elements that I can try.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:33
|
show 5 more comments
$begingroup$
This coincides with coordinate-wise addition and multiplication, right? This might be easier to see
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:11
$begingroup$
@platty, yes that's what I started with. I just think it simplifies the argument that every nonzero nonone element is a zero divisor to identify it subsets.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:13
$begingroup$
To be honest, we have not seen rings with exponents, nor have I heard of an indicator function. This looks very foreign. Perhaps I'm not well versed enough to get an answer I'll understand on StackExchange. Thank you very much though.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:18
$begingroup$
@Mari Sorry, I'll try to explain it a bit more clearly.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:20
$begingroup$
Oh, I see. Of course, we've seen rings raised to powers... Really the only one I have seen is $R^2$, so that's the reason the exponent of 4 threw me off. That makes a lot more sense. Thank you very much. We definitely haven't done a proof quite like this, but I understand where everything is coming from... Do you have any advice on thinking through these kinds of problems? I have other problems asking me to construct rings containing 16 elements that I can try.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:33
$begingroup$
This coincides with coordinate-wise addition and multiplication, right? This might be easier to see
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:11
$begingroup$
This coincides with coordinate-wise addition and multiplication, right? This might be easier to see
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:11
$begingroup$
@platty, yes that's what I started with. I just think it simplifies the argument that every nonzero nonone element is a zero divisor to identify it subsets.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:13
$begingroup$
@platty, yes that's what I started with. I just think it simplifies the argument that every nonzero nonone element is a zero divisor to identify it subsets.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:13
$begingroup$
To be honest, we have not seen rings with exponents, nor have I heard of an indicator function. This looks very foreign. Perhaps I'm not well versed enough to get an answer I'll understand on StackExchange. Thank you very much though.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:18
$begingroup$
To be honest, we have not seen rings with exponents, nor have I heard of an indicator function. This looks very foreign. Perhaps I'm not well versed enough to get an answer I'll understand on StackExchange. Thank you very much though.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:18
$begingroup$
@Mari Sorry, I'll try to explain it a bit more clearly.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:20
$begingroup$
@Mari Sorry, I'll try to explain it a bit more clearly.
$endgroup$
– jgon
Dec 8 '18 at 6:20
$begingroup$
Oh, I see. Of course, we've seen rings raised to powers... Really the only one I have seen is $R^2$, so that's the reason the exponent of 4 threw me off. That makes a lot more sense. Thank you very much. We definitely haven't done a proof quite like this, but I understand where everything is coming from... Do you have any advice on thinking through these kinds of problems? I have other problems asking me to construct rings containing 16 elements that I can try.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:33
$begingroup$
Oh, I see. Of course, we've seen rings raised to powers... Really the only one I have seen is $R^2$, so that's the reason the exponent of 4 threw me off. That makes a lot more sense. Thank you very much. We definitely haven't done a proof quite like this, but I understand where everything is coming from... Do you have any advice on thinking through these kinds of problems? I have other problems asking me to construct rings containing 16 elements that I can try.
$endgroup$
– Mari
Dec 8 '18 at 6:33
|
show 5 more comments
$begingroup$
In a finite commutative ring $R$, every noninvertible element is a zero divisor.
Indeed, if $r$ is not invertible, the map $xmapsto rx$ is not surjective (because $1$ is missed), so it is not injective. Being a group homomorphism with respect to addition, its kernel is nonzero, which proves the claim.
Your ring must have a single invertible element, hence its characteristic needs to be $2$: indeed, $-1$ is invertible, so we need $-1=1$.
Thus $R$ has to be a four dimensional vector space over $mathbb{F}_2=mathbb{Z}/2mathbb{Z}$ and it's quite natural to look for a ring structure on $mathbb{F}_2^4$.
One possibility is the product ring, which indeed satisfies the requirement, because an element of the form $a=(a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4)$ where one of the entries is zero is surely a zero divisor: if $e_i$ denotes the $4$-tuple with $1$ at the $i$-th place an zero elsewhere, then $a_i=0$ implies $ae_i=0$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In a finite commutative ring $R$, every noninvertible element is a zero divisor.
Indeed, if $r$ is not invertible, the map $xmapsto rx$ is not surjective (because $1$ is missed), so it is not injective. Being a group homomorphism with respect to addition, its kernel is nonzero, which proves the claim.
Your ring must have a single invertible element, hence its characteristic needs to be $2$: indeed, $-1$ is invertible, so we need $-1=1$.
Thus $R$ has to be a four dimensional vector space over $mathbb{F}_2=mathbb{Z}/2mathbb{Z}$ and it's quite natural to look for a ring structure on $mathbb{F}_2^4$.
One possibility is the product ring, which indeed satisfies the requirement, because an element of the form $a=(a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4)$ where one of the entries is zero is surely a zero divisor: if $e_i$ denotes the $4$-tuple with $1$ at the $i$-th place an zero elsewhere, then $a_i=0$ implies $ae_i=0$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In a finite commutative ring $R$, every noninvertible element is a zero divisor.
Indeed, if $r$ is not invertible, the map $xmapsto rx$ is not surjective (because $1$ is missed), so it is not injective. Being a group homomorphism with respect to addition, its kernel is nonzero, which proves the claim.
Your ring must have a single invertible element, hence its characteristic needs to be $2$: indeed, $-1$ is invertible, so we need $-1=1$.
Thus $R$ has to be a four dimensional vector space over $mathbb{F}_2=mathbb{Z}/2mathbb{Z}$ and it's quite natural to look for a ring structure on $mathbb{F}_2^4$.
One possibility is the product ring, which indeed satisfies the requirement, because an element of the form $a=(a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4)$ where one of the entries is zero is surely a zero divisor: if $e_i$ denotes the $4$-tuple with $1$ at the $i$-th place an zero elsewhere, then $a_i=0$ implies $ae_i=0$.
$endgroup$
In a finite commutative ring $R$, every noninvertible element is a zero divisor.
Indeed, if $r$ is not invertible, the map $xmapsto rx$ is not surjective (because $1$ is missed), so it is not injective. Being a group homomorphism with respect to addition, its kernel is nonzero, which proves the claim.
Your ring must have a single invertible element, hence its characteristic needs to be $2$: indeed, $-1$ is invertible, so we need $-1=1$.
Thus $R$ has to be a four dimensional vector space over $mathbb{F}_2=mathbb{Z}/2mathbb{Z}$ and it's quite natural to look for a ring structure on $mathbb{F}_2^4$.
One possibility is the product ring, which indeed satisfies the requirement, because an element of the form $a=(a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4)$ where one of the entries is zero is surely a zero divisor: if $e_i$ denotes the $4$-tuple with $1$ at the $i$-th place an zero elsewhere, then $a_i=0$ implies $ae_i=0$.
answered Dec 8 '18 at 10:52
egregegreg
184k1486205
184k1486205
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3030739%2fconstruct-a-ring-containing-16-element-where-every-element-r-neq-0-1-is-a%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Note that your example is not a ring because there’s no $1$.
$endgroup$
– platty
Dec 8 '18 at 6:14