<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>ring theory Archives - Epsilonify</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.epsilonify.com/tag/ring-theory/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link></link>
	<description>Best solutions on internet!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Sep 2023 19:21:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.5</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Show that Q[sqrt(2)] is a field</title>
		<link>https://www.epsilonify.com/mathematics/field-theory/show-that-q-squareroot-2-is-a-field/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The Mathematician]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2022 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Field Theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mathematics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[field]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Q[sqrt(2)]]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ring theory]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.epsilonify.com/?p=568</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Show that is a field Proof. We have that . So we need to show that all elements in do have an inverse. Indeed, if we take arbitrary such that , then and since and , this implies that is an inverse of . So this implies that is a field. This completes the proof.</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com/mathematics/field-theory/show-that-q-squareroot-2-is-a-field/">Show that Q[sqrt(2)] is a field</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com">Epsilonify</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<b>Show that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">\mathbb{Q}[\sqrt{2}]</span> is a field</b>
<br>
<br>
<strong>Proof.</strong> We have that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">\mathbb{Q}[\sqrt{2}] = \{a + b\sqrt{2} \ | \ a,b \in \mathbb{Q} \}</span>. So we need to show that all elements in <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">\mathbb{Q}[\sqrt{2}]</span> do have an inverse. Indeed, if we take arbitrary <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">a,b \in \mathbb{Q}</span> such that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">a + b \sqrt{2} \in \mathbb{Q}[\sqrt{2}]</span>, then

 <div class="wp-block-katex-display-block katex-eq" data-katex-display="true"><pre>\begin{align*}
1 &= (a + b \sqrt{2}) \frac{a - b \sqrt{2}}{(a + b \sqrt{2})(a - b \sqrt{2})} \\ 
  &= (a + b \sqrt{2}) \frac{a - b \sqrt{2}}{(a^2 - ab\sqrt{2} + ab\sqrt{2} - 2b^2)} \\
  &= (a + b \sqrt{2}) \frac{a - b \sqrt{2}}{(a^2 - 2b^2)}
\end{align*}</pre></div>

and since <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">a^2 - 2b^2 \in \mathbb{Q}</span> and <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">a - b \sqrt{2} \in \mathbb{Q}[\sqrt{2}]</span>, this implies that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">\frac{a - b \sqrt{2}}{(a^2 - 2b^2)}</span> is an inverse of <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">a + b \sqrt{2}</span>. So this implies that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">\mathbb{Q}[\sqrt{2}]</span> is a field. This completes the proof.<p>The post <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com/mathematics/field-theory/show-that-q-squareroot-2-is-a-field/">Show that Q[sqrt(2)] is a field</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com">Epsilonify</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Boolean ring is commutative</title>
		<link>https://www.epsilonify.com/mathematics/ring-theory/boolean-ring-is-commutative/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The Mathematician]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2022 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Mathematics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ring Theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boolean ring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boolean ring is commutative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ring theory]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.epsilonify.com/?p=557</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Show that a Boolean ring is commutative By definition, a ring is Boolean if , . Proof. We need to show that for all . So first, we have: Now we have . We would like to prove that . We can check that by finding its inverse: which implies that . Now we get [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com/mathematics/ring-theory/boolean-ring-is-commutative/">Boolean ring is commutative</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com">Epsilonify</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<b>Show that a Boolean ring is commutative</b>
<br>
<br>
By definition, a ring <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">R</span> is <i>Boolean</i> if <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">x^2 = x</span>, <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">\forall x \in R</span>.
<br>
<br>
<strong>Proof.</strong> We need to show that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">xy = yx</span> for all <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">x,y \in R</span>. So first, we have:
 <div class="wp-block-katex-display-block katex-eq" data-katex-display="true"><pre>\begin{align*}
(x + y)^2 = (x + y) &amp;\iff x^2 + xy + yx + y^2 = x + y \\
&\iff  x + xy + yx + y = x + y \\
&\iff xy + yx = 0
\end{align*}</pre></div>

Now we have <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">xy = -yx</span>. We would like to prove that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">-yx = yx</span>. We can check that by finding its inverse:

 <div class="wp-block-katex-display-block katex-eq" data-katex-display="true"><pre>\begin{align*}
(y + y) &amp;= (y + y)^2 \\ 
&amp;= y^2 + 2y + y^2 \\ 
&amp;= y + y + y + y \\
&amp;= 0 
\end{align*}</pre></div>

which implies that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">y + y = 0</span>. Now we get <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">-y = y</span> and therefore we have that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">xy = -yx = yx</span>, which implies that Boolean ring <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">R</span> is indeed a commutative ring. <p>The post <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com/mathematics/ring-theory/boolean-ring-is-commutative/">Boolean ring is commutative</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com">Epsilonify</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prove that (2,x) is not a principal ideal of Z[x]</title>
		<link>https://www.epsilonify.com/mathematics/ring-theory/proof-that-2x-is-not-a-principal-ideal-of-zx/</link>
					<comments>https://www.epsilonify.com/mathematics/ring-theory/proof-that-2x-is-not-a-principal-ideal-of-zx/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The Mathematician]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2022 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Mathematics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ring Theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ring theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Z[x] not pid]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.epsilonify.com/?p=575</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Prove that is not a principal ideal of Proof. Assume by contradiction that is a principal ideal. Then , where . Say we have . Then by the definition of an ideal, we have that for some . By some basic calculus and that is an integral domain, we have that . So we know [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com/mathematics/ring-theory/proof-that-2x-is-not-a-principal-ideal-of-zx/">Prove that (2,x) is not a principal ideal of Z[x]</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com">Epsilonify</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>Prove that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">(2,x)</span> is not a principal ideal of <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">\mathbb{Z}[x]</span></b></p>
<p><strong>Proof.</strong> Assume by contradiction that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">(2,x)</span> is a principal ideal. Then <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">(2,x) = (f(x))</span>, where <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">f(x) \in \mathbb{Z}[x]</span>. Say we have <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">2 \in (f(x))</span>. Then by the definition of an ideal, we have that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">2 = f(x)g(x)</span> for some <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">g(x) \in \mathbb{Z}[x]</span>. By some basic calculus and that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">\mathbb{Z}[x]</span> is an integral domain, we have that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">deg(f(x)g(x)) = deg(f(x)) + deg(g(x))</span>. So we know <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">2 = f(x)g(x)</span> possible if both <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">f(x)</span> and <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">g(x)</span> are constants. This implies that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">f(x),g(x) \in \{\pm 1, \pm 2\}</span>. We see the two different situations:</p>
<ol>
<li> Assume that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">f(x) = \pm 1</span>. Then this implies that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">(f(x)) = \mathbb{Z}[x]</span>, which is not a proper ideal.</li>
<li> Assume that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">f(x) = \pm 2</span>. Then we have that if <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">x \in (f(x))</span>, then <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">x = 2\cdot g(x)</span>. This implies that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">g(x) = \frac{1}{2}x</span>, which is impossible since <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">g(x) \in \{\pm 1, \pm 2\}</span> and secondly <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">\frac{1}{2} \not \in \mathbb{Z}</span>.</li>
</ol>
<p>So <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">(2,x)</span> is not a principal ideal of <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">\mathbb{Z}[x]</span>, which completes the proof.</p>
<p>Note that with the proof above, we also proved that <span class="katex-eq" data-katex-display="false">\mathbb{Z}[x]</span> is not a PID. </p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com/mathematics/ring-theory/proof-that-2x-is-not-a-principal-ideal-of-zx/">Prove that (2,x) is not a principal ideal of Z[x]</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.epsilonify.com">Epsilonify</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://www.epsilonify.com/mathematics/ring-theory/proof-that-2x-is-not-a-principal-ideal-of-zx/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
