Mixing
Ring Theory: Is the ring $S$ a prime ring? Ref. Page no. 8 (Section 2) Neal H. McCoy “The Theory of...
$begingroup$
Let $R$ be a non commutative prime ring without unity and let $S$ be the set of all ordered pair $(a,i)$, where $ain R$ and $iin I$, where $I$ is the ring of integers. On $S$ we define addition and multiplication as follows:
$(a,i)+(b,j)=(a+b,i+j)$,
$(a,i)(b,j)=(ab+ib+ja, ij)$.
Then $S$ is a ring with unity $(0,1)$.
My question-
Is the ring $S$ a prime ring?
In case $R$ is a commutative prime ring with unity, I have shown $S$ is not a prime ring.
But I am stuck in the case $R$ is non commutative prime ring without unity.
ring-theory
asked Jan 3 at 8:03
nazim khannazim khan
555
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $R$ be a non commutative prime ring without unity and let $S$ be the set of all ordered pair $(a,i)$, where $ain R$ and $iin I$, where $I$ is the ring of integers. On $S$ we define addition and multiplication as follows:
$(a,i)+(b,j)=(a+b,i+j)$,
$(a,i)(b,j)=(ab+ib+ja, ij)$.
Then $S$ is a ring with unity $(0,1)$.
My question-
Is the ring $S$ a prime ring?
In case $R$ is a commutative prime ring with unity, I have shown $S$ is not a prime ring.
But I am stuck in the case $R$ is non commutative prime ring without unity.
ring-theory
asked Jan 3 at 8:03
nazim khannazim khan
555
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
If you have already shown the statement to be false for commutative ring with identity, what is there left to do? You have not been asked to prove it is false for all categories of rings.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 3 at 14:49
$begingroup$
My question is that if R is non commutative prime ring without unity, then what we can say about S, whether S is a prime ring or not?
$endgroup$
– nazim khan
Jan 5 at 8:08
$begingroup$
Then I submit to you that you are making a mistake of logic. Subtracting hypotheses from a disproven statement cannot cause it to become true. And if you are simply asking for a new counterexample that isn't commutative and doesn't have an identity, you are effectively asking people to work harder to re-disprove the statement, because every hypothesis you forbid adds a requirement to the needed counterexample. My guess is that users will be more annoyed than compelled by this activity.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 5 at 13:46
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $R$ be a non commutative prime ring without unity and let $S$ be the set of all ordered pair $(a,i)$, where $ain R$ and $iin I$, where $I$ is the ring of integers. On $S$ we define addition and multiplication as follows:
$(a,i)+(b,j)=(a+b,i+j)$,
$(a,i)(b,j)=(ab+ib+ja, ij)$.
Then $S$ is a ring with unity $(0,1)$.
My question-
Is the ring $S$ a prime ring?
In case $R$ is a commutative prime ring with unity, I have shown $S$ is not a prime ring.
But I am stuck in the case $R$ is non commutative prime ring without unity.
ring-theory
asked Jan 3 at 8:03
nazim khannazim khan
555
$endgroup$
Let $R$ be a non commutative prime ring without unity and let $S$ be the set of all ordered pair $(a,i)$, where $ain R$ and $iin I$, where $I$ is the ring of integers. On $S$ we define addition and multiplication as follows:
$(a,i)+(b,j)=(a+b,i+j)$,
$(a,i)(b,j)=(ab+ib+ja, ij)$.
Then $S$ is a ring with unity $(0,1)$.
My question-
Is the ring $S$ a prime ring?
In case $R$ is a commutative prime ring with unity, I have shown $S$ is not a prime ring.
But I am stuck in the case $R$ is non commutative prime ring without unity.
ring-theory
ring-theory
asked Jan 3 at 8:03
nazim khannazim khan
555
asked Jan 3 at 8:03
nazim khannazim khan
555
asked Jan 3 at 8:03
nazim khannazim khan
555
asked Jan 3 at 8:03
nazim khannazim khan
555
asked Jan 3 at 8:03
nazim khannazim khan
555
555
1
$begingroup$
If you have already shown the statement to be false for commutative ring with identity, what is there left to do? You have not been asked to prove it is false for all categories of rings.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 3 at 14:49
$begingroup$
My question is that if R is non commutative prime ring without unity, then what we can say about S, whether S is a prime ring or not?
$endgroup$
– nazim khan
Jan 5 at 8:08
$begingroup$
Then I submit to you that you are making a mistake of logic. Subtracting hypotheses from a disproven statement cannot cause it to become true. And if you are simply asking for a new counterexample that isn't commutative and doesn't have an identity, you are effectively asking people to work harder to re-disprove the statement, because every hypothesis you forbid adds a requirement to the needed counterexample. My guess is that users will be more annoyed than compelled by this activity.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 5 at 13:46
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
If you have already shown the statement to be false for commutative ring with identity, what is there left to do? You have not been asked to prove it is false for all categories of rings.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 3 at 14:49
$begingroup$
My question is that if R is non commutative prime ring without unity, then what we can say about S, whether S is a prime ring or not?
$endgroup$
– nazim khan
Jan 5 at 8:08
$begingroup$
Then I submit to you that you are making a mistake of logic. Subtracting hypotheses from a disproven statement cannot cause it to become true. And if you are simply asking for a new counterexample that isn't commutative and doesn't have an identity, you are effectively asking people to work harder to re-disprove the statement, because every hypothesis you forbid adds a requirement to the needed counterexample. My guess is that users will be more annoyed than compelled by this activity.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 5 at 13:46
1
1
$begingroup$
If you have already shown the statement to be false for commutative ring with identity, what is there left to do? You have not been asked to prove it is false for all categories of rings.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 3 at 14:49
$begingroup$
If you have already shown the statement to be false for commutative ring with identity, what is there left to do? You have not been asked to prove it is false for all categories of rings.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 3 at 14:49
$begingroup$
My question is that if R is non commutative prime ring without unity, then what we can say about S, whether S is a prime ring or not?
$endgroup$
– nazim khan
Jan 5 at 8:08
$begingroup$
My question is that if R is non commutative prime ring without unity, then what we can say about S, whether S is a prime ring or not?
$endgroup$
– nazim khan
Jan 5 at 8:08
$begingroup$
Then I submit to you that you are making a mistake of logic. Subtracting hypotheses from a disproven statement cannot cause it to become true. And if you are simply asking for a new counterexample that isn't commutative and doesn't have an identity, you are effectively asking people to work harder to re-disprove the statement, because every hypothesis you forbid adds a requirement to the needed counterexample. My guess is that users will be more annoyed than compelled by this activity.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 5 at 13:46
$begingroup$
Then I submit to you that you are making a mistake of logic. Subtracting hypotheses from a disproven statement cannot cause it to become true. And if you are simply asking for a new counterexample that isn't commutative and doesn't have an identity, you are effectively asking people to work harder to re-disprove the statement, because every hypothesis you forbid adds a requirement to the needed counterexample. My guess is that users will be more annoyed than compelled by this activity.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 5 at 13:46
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
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%2f3060351%2fring-theory-is-the-ring-s-a-prime-ring-ref-page-no-8-section-2-neal-h-m%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
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%2f3060351%2fring-theory-is-the-ring-s-a-prime-ring-ref-page-no-8-section-2-neal-h-m%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
1
$begingroup$
If you have already shown the statement to be false for commutative ring with identity, what is there left to do? You have not been asked to prove it is false for all categories of rings.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 3 at 14:49
$begingroup$
My question is that if R is non commutative prime ring without unity, then what we can say about S, whether S is a prime ring or not?
$endgroup$
– nazim khan
Jan 5 at 8:08
$begingroup$
Then I submit to you that you are making a mistake of logic. Subtracting hypotheses from a disproven statement cannot cause it to become true. And if you are simply asking for a new counterexample that isn't commutative and doesn't have an identity, you are effectively asking people to work harder to re-disprove the statement, because every hypothesis you forbid adds a requirement to the needed counterexample. My guess is that users will be more annoyed than compelled by this activity.
$endgroup$
– rschwieb
Jan 5 at 13:46