If a ring has no zero-divisors and it contains a nonzero element $b$ such that $b^2 = b$, then show that $b$...











up vote
1
down vote

favorite













This question already has an answer here:




  • Idempotents in a ring without unity (rng) and no zero divisors.

    1 answer





Suppose that $mathbb{R}$ is a ring with no zero-divisors and that $mathbb{R}$ contains a nonzero element $b$ such that $b^2 = b$. Show that $b$ is the unity for $mathbb{R}$.




I attempted to show that $ab=a$ as $b$ is the unity for that ring. Now, with that assumption, $$(ab)^2=a^2$$
$$implies abab=a^2$$



Multiplying both sides by $b$ and using $b^2=b$ we get:



$$abab=a^2b=a(ab)$$



Not only can we not take inverse on both sides (as it is not mentioned), but this kinda seems like a circular proof. I proved what I assumed so it is definitely incorrect.



I am unable to come up with any other method. What is the correct proof here?










share|cite|improve this question













marked as duplicate by rschwieb abstract-algebra
Users with the  abstract-algebra badge can single-handedly close abstract-algebra questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

StackExchange.ready(function() {
if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

$('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
$msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

$hover.hover(
function() {
$hover.showInfoMessage('', {
messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
transient: false,
position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
dismissable: false,
relativeToBody: true
});
},
function() {
StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
}
);
});
});
Nov 15 at 12:00


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.



















    up vote
    1
    down vote

    favorite













    This question already has an answer here:




    • Idempotents in a ring without unity (rng) and no zero divisors.

      1 answer





    Suppose that $mathbb{R}$ is a ring with no zero-divisors and that $mathbb{R}$ contains a nonzero element $b$ such that $b^2 = b$. Show that $b$ is the unity for $mathbb{R}$.




    I attempted to show that $ab=a$ as $b$ is the unity for that ring. Now, with that assumption, $$(ab)^2=a^2$$
    $$implies abab=a^2$$



    Multiplying both sides by $b$ and using $b^2=b$ we get:



    $$abab=a^2b=a(ab)$$



    Not only can we not take inverse on both sides (as it is not mentioned), but this kinda seems like a circular proof. I proved what I assumed so it is definitely incorrect.



    I am unable to come up with any other method. What is the correct proof here?










    share|cite|improve this question













    marked as duplicate by rschwieb abstract-algebra
    Users with the  abstract-algebra badge can single-handedly close abstract-algebra questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

    $('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
    var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
    $msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

    $hover.hover(
    function() {
    $hover.showInfoMessage('', {
    messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
    transient: false,
    position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
    dismissable: false,
    relativeToBody: true
    });
    },
    function() {
    StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
    }
    );
    });
    });
    Nov 15 at 12:00


    This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

















      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite












      This question already has an answer here:




      • Idempotents in a ring without unity (rng) and no zero divisors.

        1 answer





      Suppose that $mathbb{R}$ is a ring with no zero-divisors and that $mathbb{R}$ contains a nonzero element $b$ such that $b^2 = b$. Show that $b$ is the unity for $mathbb{R}$.




      I attempted to show that $ab=a$ as $b$ is the unity for that ring. Now, with that assumption, $$(ab)^2=a^2$$
      $$implies abab=a^2$$



      Multiplying both sides by $b$ and using $b^2=b$ we get:



      $$abab=a^2b=a(ab)$$



      Not only can we not take inverse on both sides (as it is not mentioned), but this kinda seems like a circular proof. I proved what I assumed so it is definitely incorrect.



      I am unable to come up with any other method. What is the correct proof here?










      share|cite|improve this question














      This question already has an answer here:




      • Idempotents in a ring without unity (rng) and no zero divisors.

        1 answer





      Suppose that $mathbb{R}$ is a ring with no zero-divisors and that $mathbb{R}$ contains a nonzero element $b$ such that $b^2 = b$. Show that $b$ is the unity for $mathbb{R}$.




      I attempted to show that $ab=a$ as $b$ is the unity for that ring. Now, with that assumption, $$(ab)^2=a^2$$
      $$implies abab=a^2$$



      Multiplying both sides by $b$ and using $b^2=b$ we get:



      $$abab=a^2b=a(ab)$$



      Not only can we not take inverse on both sides (as it is not mentioned), but this kinda seems like a circular proof. I proved what I assumed so it is definitely incorrect.



      I am unable to come up with any other method. What is the correct proof here?





      This question already has an answer here:




      • Idempotents in a ring without unity (rng) and no zero divisors.

        1 answer








      abstract-algebra ring-theory






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 15 at 4:24









      Gaurang Tandon

      3,48522147




      3,48522147




      marked as duplicate by rschwieb abstract-algebra
      Users with the  abstract-algebra badge can single-handedly close abstract-algebra questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

      $('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
      var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
      $msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

      $hover.hover(
      function() {
      $hover.showInfoMessage('', {
      messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
      transient: false,
      position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
      dismissable: false,
      relativeToBody: true
      });
      },
      function() {
      StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
      }
      );
      });
      });
      Nov 15 at 12:00


      This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.






      marked as duplicate by rschwieb abstract-algebra
      Users with the  abstract-algebra badge can single-handedly close abstract-algebra questions as duplicates and reopen them as needed.

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      if (StackExchange.options.isMobile) return;

      $('.dupe-hammer-message-hover:not(.hover-bound)').each(function() {
      var $hover = $(this).addClass('hover-bound'),
      $msg = $hover.siblings('.dupe-hammer-message');

      $hover.hover(
      function() {
      $hover.showInfoMessage('', {
      messageElement: $msg.clone().show(),
      transient: false,
      position: { my: 'bottom left', at: 'top center', offsetTop: -7 },
      dismissable: false,
      relativeToBody: true
      });
      },
      function() {
      StackExchange.helpers.removeMessages();
      }
      );
      });
      });
      Nov 15 at 12:00


      This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
























          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          6
          down vote



          accepted










          Let $ain R$ an arbitrary, nonzero element. Then $ba = b^2a implies (b^2-b)a =0 implies b^2-b=0implies b(b-1)=0 implies b=0 text{ or } b=1$, but since we have assumed $bneq 0$ we have $b=1$ (unity in the ring)



          Edit:



          There actually isn't really any need for the arbitrary element $a$ -- we could just have easily have said $b^2=b implies b^2-b=0$ and worked from there. Sorry for the extraneous detail.






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • I was taught in a ring if $ab=0$ we cannot assume $a=0$ or $b=0$
            – Gaurang Tandon
            Nov 15 at 4:30






          • 3




            Correct! But, in your problem statement you assume that the ring has no zero divisors. So since we have $(b^2-b)a =0$ and we assume $aneq0$, we must have that $b^2-b=0$
            – Theo C.
            Nov 15 at 4:31










          • @GaurangTandon when someone teaches something you should make sure they teach you why
            – Prince M
            Nov 15 at 6:43


















          up vote
          2
          down vote













          One has to show that $ab=a$ for all $a$. Consider the product $x:=(ab-a)b$. By distributivity $x=ab^2-ab=ab-ab=0$. Since $bnot=0$ we get $ab-a=0$ as desired.



          Note that it is not necessary to assume that the ring has a multiplicative unit. This follows from the assumptions.






          share|cite|improve this answer




























            up vote
            0
            down vote













            Let $e$ be the unit element of $R$. Then $e^2=e$ and $ae=a=ea$ for all $ain R$. Thus $b(e-b) = be-b^2= b-b=0$ and so $e-b = 0$ since $R$ has no zero divisors and $bne 0$ by hypothesis. Hence, $b=e$.






            share|cite|improve this answer




























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes








              up vote
              6
              down vote



              accepted










              Let $ain R$ an arbitrary, nonzero element. Then $ba = b^2a implies (b^2-b)a =0 implies b^2-b=0implies b(b-1)=0 implies b=0 text{ or } b=1$, but since we have assumed $bneq 0$ we have $b=1$ (unity in the ring)



              Edit:



              There actually isn't really any need for the arbitrary element $a$ -- we could just have easily have said $b^2=b implies b^2-b=0$ and worked from there. Sorry for the extraneous detail.






              share|cite|improve this answer























              • I was taught in a ring if $ab=0$ we cannot assume $a=0$ or $b=0$
                – Gaurang Tandon
                Nov 15 at 4:30






              • 3




                Correct! But, in your problem statement you assume that the ring has no zero divisors. So since we have $(b^2-b)a =0$ and we assume $aneq0$, we must have that $b^2-b=0$
                – Theo C.
                Nov 15 at 4:31










              • @GaurangTandon when someone teaches something you should make sure they teach you why
                – Prince M
                Nov 15 at 6:43















              up vote
              6
              down vote



              accepted










              Let $ain R$ an arbitrary, nonzero element. Then $ba = b^2a implies (b^2-b)a =0 implies b^2-b=0implies b(b-1)=0 implies b=0 text{ or } b=1$, but since we have assumed $bneq 0$ we have $b=1$ (unity in the ring)



              Edit:



              There actually isn't really any need for the arbitrary element $a$ -- we could just have easily have said $b^2=b implies b^2-b=0$ and worked from there. Sorry for the extraneous detail.






              share|cite|improve this answer























              • I was taught in a ring if $ab=0$ we cannot assume $a=0$ or $b=0$
                – Gaurang Tandon
                Nov 15 at 4:30






              • 3




                Correct! But, in your problem statement you assume that the ring has no zero divisors. So since we have $(b^2-b)a =0$ and we assume $aneq0$, we must have that $b^2-b=0$
                – Theo C.
                Nov 15 at 4:31










              • @GaurangTandon when someone teaches something you should make sure they teach you why
                – Prince M
                Nov 15 at 6:43













              up vote
              6
              down vote



              accepted







              up vote
              6
              down vote



              accepted






              Let $ain R$ an arbitrary, nonzero element. Then $ba = b^2a implies (b^2-b)a =0 implies b^2-b=0implies b(b-1)=0 implies b=0 text{ or } b=1$, but since we have assumed $bneq 0$ we have $b=1$ (unity in the ring)



              Edit:



              There actually isn't really any need for the arbitrary element $a$ -- we could just have easily have said $b^2=b implies b^2-b=0$ and worked from there. Sorry for the extraneous detail.






              share|cite|improve this answer














              Let $ain R$ an arbitrary, nonzero element. Then $ba = b^2a implies (b^2-b)a =0 implies b^2-b=0implies b(b-1)=0 implies b=0 text{ or } b=1$, but since we have assumed $bneq 0$ we have $b=1$ (unity in the ring)



              Edit:



              There actually isn't really any need for the arbitrary element $a$ -- we could just have easily have said $b^2=b implies b^2-b=0$ and worked from there. Sorry for the extraneous detail.







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited Nov 15 at 4:35

























              answered Nov 15 at 4:29









              Theo C.

              20928




              20928












              • I was taught in a ring if $ab=0$ we cannot assume $a=0$ or $b=0$
                – Gaurang Tandon
                Nov 15 at 4:30






              • 3




                Correct! But, in your problem statement you assume that the ring has no zero divisors. So since we have $(b^2-b)a =0$ and we assume $aneq0$, we must have that $b^2-b=0$
                – Theo C.
                Nov 15 at 4:31










              • @GaurangTandon when someone teaches something you should make sure they teach you why
                – Prince M
                Nov 15 at 6:43


















              • I was taught in a ring if $ab=0$ we cannot assume $a=0$ or $b=0$
                – Gaurang Tandon
                Nov 15 at 4:30






              • 3




                Correct! But, in your problem statement you assume that the ring has no zero divisors. So since we have $(b^2-b)a =0$ and we assume $aneq0$, we must have that $b^2-b=0$
                – Theo C.
                Nov 15 at 4:31










              • @GaurangTandon when someone teaches something you should make sure they teach you why
                – Prince M
                Nov 15 at 6:43
















              I was taught in a ring if $ab=0$ we cannot assume $a=0$ or $b=0$
              – Gaurang Tandon
              Nov 15 at 4:30




              I was taught in a ring if $ab=0$ we cannot assume $a=0$ or $b=0$
              – Gaurang Tandon
              Nov 15 at 4:30




              3




              3




              Correct! But, in your problem statement you assume that the ring has no zero divisors. So since we have $(b^2-b)a =0$ and we assume $aneq0$, we must have that $b^2-b=0$
              – Theo C.
              Nov 15 at 4:31




              Correct! But, in your problem statement you assume that the ring has no zero divisors. So since we have $(b^2-b)a =0$ and we assume $aneq0$, we must have that $b^2-b=0$
              – Theo C.
              Nov 15 at 4:31












              @GaurangTandon when someone teaches something you should make sure they teach you why
              – Prince M
              Nov 15 at 6:43




              @GaurangTandon when someone teaches something you should make sure they teach you why
              – Prince M
              Nov 15 at 6:43










              up vote
              2
              down vote













              One has to show that $ab=a$ for all $a$. Consider the product $x:=(ab-a)b$. By distributivity $x=ab^2-ab=ab-ab=0$. Since $bnot=0$ we get $ab-a=0$ as desired.



              Note that it is not necessary to assume that the ring has a multiplicative unit. This follows from the assumptions.






              share|cite|improve this answer

























                up vote
                2
                down vote













                One has to show that $ab=a$ for all $a$. Consider the product $x:=(ab-a)b$. By distributivity $x=ab^2-ab=ab-ab=0$. Since $bnot=0$ we get $ab-a=0$ as desired.



                Note that it is not necessary to assume that the ring has a multiplicative unit. This follows from the assumptions.






                share|cite|improve this answer























                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote









                  One has to show that $ab=a$ for all $a$. Consider the product $x:=(ab-a)b$. By distributivity $x=ab^2-ab=ab-ab=0$. Since $bnot=0$ we get $ab-a=0$ as desired.



                  Note that it is not necessary to assume that the ring has a multiplicative unit. This follows from the assumptions.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  One has to show that $ab=a$ for all $a$. Consider the product $x:=(ab-a)b$. By distributivity $x=ab^2-ab=ab-ab=0$. Since $bnot=0$ we get $ab-a=0$ as desired.



                  Note that it is not necessary to assume that the ring has a multiplicative unit. This follows from the assumptions.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Nov 15 at 4:57









                  Jens Schwaiger

                  1,404127




                  1,404127






















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote













                      Let $e$ be the unit element of $R$. Then $e^2=e$ and $ae=a=ea$ for all $ain R$. Thus $b(e-b) = be-b^2= b-b=0$ and so $e-b = 0$ since $R$ has no zero divisors and $bne 0$ by hypothesis. Hence, $b=e$.






                      share|cite|improve this answer

























                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        Let $e$ be the unit element of $R$. Then $e^2=e$ and $ae=a=ea$ for all $ain R$. Thus $b(e-b) = be-b^2= b-b=0$ and so $e-b = 0$ since $R$ has no zero divisors and $bne 0$ by hypothesis. Hence, $b=e$.






                        share|cite|improve this answer























                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote









                          Let $e$ be the unit element of $R$. Then $e^2=e$ and $ae=a=ea$ for all $ain R$. Thus $b(e-b) = be-b^2= b-b=0$ and so $e-b = 0$ since $R$ has no zero divisors and $bne 0$ by hypothesis. Hence, $b=e$.






                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          Let $e$ be the unit element of $R$. Then $e^2=e$ and $ae=a=ea$ for all $ain R$. Thus $b(e-b) = be-b^2= b-b=0$ and so $e-b = 0$ since $R$ has no zero divisors and $bne 0$ by hypothesis. Hence, $b=e$.







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Nov 15 at 6:37









                          Wuestenfux

                          2,4991410




                          2,4991410















                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Plaza Victoria

                              How to extract passwords from Mobaxterm Free Version

                              IC on Digikey is 5x more expensive than board containing same IC on Alibaba: How? [on hold]