To show a given set is a maximal ideal of Z+Z and generalisation of the result

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Problem
Show that $A=x,y in Z$ is a maximal ideal . Generalize the result.
Proof
$A$ is an ideal
For any$ (a,b) in Z+Z$ and $(3x,y) in A,
(a,b)(3x,y) in Z$. Also it is easy to see $A$ is a subring.
$A$ is a maximal ideal
Consider a maximal ideal $B$ which contains $A$. Now$ (c,d) in B$ such that $gcd(3,c)=1. 1=3alpha+cbeta$. Then
$(1,1)=(3alpha+cbeta,1-d+d)$ . Hence $(1,1) in B$. So $A$ is maximal.
Doubt
1.What is the generalization of the result?
$A$=$(nx,y)
2.Is my proof ok?
abstract-algebra proof-verification ring-theory
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Problem
Show that $A=x,y in Z$ is a maximal ideal . Generalize the result.
Proof
$A$ is an ideal
For any$ (a,b) in Z+Z$ and $(3x,y) in A,
(a,b)(3x,y) in Z$. Also it is easy to see $A$ is a subring.
$A$ is a maximal ideal
Consider a maximal ideal $B$ which contains $A$. Now$ (c,d) in B$ such that $gcd(3,c)=1. 1=3alpha+cbeta$. Then
$(1,1)=(3alpha+cbeta,1-d+d)$ . Hence $(1,1) in B$. So $A$ is maximal.
Doubt
1.What is the generalization of the result?
$A$=$(nx,y)
2.Is my proof ok?
abstract-algebra proof-verification ring-theory
1
About the generalization, think about the relationship between $A_2 = (2x, y) : x,y in mathbb Z $ and $A_4 = (4x, y) : x, y in mathbb Z$. You'll see that your generalization isn't that straightforward.
â ante.ceperic
Sep 8 at 10:05
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Problem
Show that $A=x,y in Z$ is a maximal ideal . Generalize the result.
Proof
$A$ is an ideal
For any$ (a,b) in Z+Z$ and $(3x,y) in A,
(a,b)(3x,y) in Z$. Also it is easy to see $A$ is a subring.
$A$ is a maximal ideal
Consider a maximal ideal $B$ which contains $A$. Now$ (c,d) in B$ such that $gcd(3,c)=1. 1=3alpha+cbeta$. Then
$(1,1)=(3alpha+cbeta,1-d+d)$ . Hence $(1,1) in B$. So $A$ is maximal.
Doubt
1.What is the generalization of the result?
$A$=$(nx,y)
2.Is my proof ok?
abstract-algebra proof-verification ring-theory
Problem
Show that $A=x,y in Z$ is a maximal ideal . Generalize the result.
Proof
$A$ is an ideal
For any$ (a,b) in Z+Z$ and $(3x,y) in A,
(a,b)(3x,y) in Z$. Also it is easy to see $A$ is a subring.
$A$ is a maximal ideal
Consider a maximal ideal $B$ which contains $A$. Now$ (c,d) in B$ such that $gcd(3,c)=1. 1=3alpha+cbeta$. Then
$(1,1)=(3alpha+cbeta,1-d+d)$ . Hence $(1,1) in B$. So $A$ is maximal.
Doubt
1.What is the generalization of the result?
$A$=$(nx,y)
2.Is my proof ok?
abstract-algebra proof-verification ring-theory
abstract-algebra proof-verification ring-theory
asked Sep 8 at 6:04
blue boy
1,117513
1,117513
1
About the generalization, think about the relationship between $A_2 = (2x, y) : x,y in mathbb Z $ and $A_4 = (4x, y) : x, y in mathbb Z$. You'll see that your generalization isn't that straightforward.
â ante.ceperic
Sep 8 at 10:05
add a comment |Â
1
About the generalization, think about the relationship between $A_2 = (2x, y) : x,y in mathbb Z $ and $A_4 = (4x, y) : x, y in mathbb Z$. You'll see that your generalization isn't that straightforward.
â ante.ceperic
Sep 8 at 10:05
1
1
About the generalization, think about the relationship between $A_2 = (2x, y) : x,y in mathbb Z $ and $A_4 = (4x, y) : x, y in mathbb Z$. You'll see that your generalization isn't that straightforward.
â ante.ceperic
Sep 8 at 10:05
About the generalization, think about the relationship between $A_2 = (2x, y) : x,y in mathbb Z $ and $A_4 = (4x, y) : x, y in mathbb Z$. You'll see that your generalization isn't that straightforward.
â ante.ceperic
Sep 8 at 10:05
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
With respect to your proof, the idea is correct (in fact I find it quite original), but to be honest, it is terribly written. Let me rewrite it appropriately:
As you have said, it is easy to check that $A$ is indeed an ideal (another way to argue is to observe that $A=3mathbbZ times mathbbZ$ is a product of two ideals of $mathbbZ$). Let $B subset mathbbZ times mathbbZ$ a maximal ideal containing $A$. Arguing by contradiction, we suppose that the inclusion is strict; that is, there exists $(c,d) in B$ such that $textgcd(3,c)=1$. By Bézout's Identity, there exist $alpha, beta in mathbbZ$ such that
$$3alpha+cbeta=1.$$
Hence,
$$(1,1)=(3alpha,1-d)+(beta,1)(c,d) in B,$$
against $B$ being proper. Therefore, $A=B$ and $A$ is indeed a maximal ideal.
We now come to consider the question of the generalization. For every $n geq 0$ we denote
$$A_n:=(nx,y) / x,y in mathbbZ,$$
and observe that in fact
$$A_n=nmathbbZ times mathbbZ.$$
Therefore, $A_n$ is a product of ideals of $mathbbZ$ and hence, an ideal of $mathbbZ times mathbbZ$. Then:
$$fracmathbbZ times mathbbZA_n=fracmathbbZ times mathbbZnmathbbZ times mathbbZ simeq fracmathbbZnmathbbZ times fracmathbbZmathbbZ = fracmathbbZnmathbbZ times 0+mathbbZ simeq fracmathbbZnmathbbZ.$$
Thus,
$$A_n text is a maximal ideal iff mathbbZ times mathbbZ/A_n text is a field iff mathbbZ/nmathbbZ text is a field iff n text is a prime number.$$
This also solves the original problem for $n=3$.
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
With respect to your proof, the idea is correct (in fact I find it quite original), but to be honest, it is terribly written. Let me rewrite it appropriately:
As you have said, it is easy to check that $A$ is indeed an ideal (another way to argue is to observe that $A=3mathbbZ times mathbbZ$ is a product of two ideals of $mathbbZ$). Let $B subset mathbbZ times mathbbZ$ a maximal ideal containing $A$. Arguing by contradiction, we suppose that the inclusion is strict; that is, there exists $(c,d) in B$ such that $textgcd(3,c)=1$. By Bézout's Identity, there exist $alpha, beta in mathbbZ$ such that
$$3alpha+cbeta=1.$$
Hence,
$$(1,1)=(3alpha,1-d)+(beta,1)(c,d) in B,$$
against $B$ being proper. Therefore, $A=B$ and $A$ is indeed a maximal ideal.
We now come to consider the question of the generalization. For every $n geq 0$ we denote
$$A_n:=(nx,y) / x,y in mathbbZ,$$
and observe that in fact
$$A_n=nmathbbZ times mathbbZ.$$
Therefore, $A_n$ is a product of ideals of $mathbbZ$ and hence, an ideal of $mathbbZ times mathbbZ$. Then:
$$fracmathbbZ times mathbbZA_n=fracmathbbZ times mathbbZnmathbbZ times mathbbZ simeq fracmathbbZnmathbbZ times fracmathbbZmathbbZ = fracmathbbZnmathbbZ times 0+mathbbZ simeq fracmathbbZnmathbbZ.$$
Thus,
$$A_n text is a maximal ideal iff mathbbZ times mathbbZ/A_n text is a field iff mathbbZ/nmathbbZ text is a field iff n text is a prime number.$$
This also solves the original problem for $n=3$.
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
With respect to your proof, the idea is correct (in fact I find it quite original), but to be honest, it is terribly written. Let me rewrite it appropriately:
As you have said, it is easy to check that $A$ is indeed an ideal (another way to argue is to observe that $A=3mathbbZ times mathbbZ$ is a product of two ideals of $mathbbZ$). Let $B subset mathbbZ times mathbbZ$ a maximal ideal containing $A$. Arguing by contradiction, we suppose that the inclusion is strict; that is, there exists $(c,d) in B$ such that $textgcd(3,c)=1$. By Bézout's Identity, there exist $alpha, beta in mathbbZ$ such that
$$3alpha+cbeta=1.$$
Hence,
$$(1,1)=(3alpha,1-d)+(beta,1)(c,d) in B,$$
against $B$ being proper. Therefore, $A=B$ and $A$ is indeed a maximal ideal.
We now come to consider the question of the generalization. For every $n geq 0$ we denote
$$A_n:=(nx,y) / x,y in mathbbZ,$$
and observe that in fact
$$A_n=nmathbbZ times mathbbZ.$$
Therefore, $A_n$ is a product of ideals of $mathbbZ$ and hence, an ideal of $mathbbZ times mathbbZ$. Then:
$$fracmathbbZ times mathbbZA_n=fracmathbbZ times mathbbZnmathbbZ times mathbbZ simeq fracmathbbZnmathbbZ times fracmathbbZmathbbZ = fracmathbbZnmathbbZ times 0+mathbbZ simeq fracmathbbZnmathbbZ.$$
Thus,
$$A_n text is a maximal ideal iff mathbbZ times mathbbZ/A_n text is a field iff mathbbZ/nmathbbZ text is a field iff n text is a prime number.$$
This also solves the original problem for $n=3$.
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
With respect to your proof, the idea is correct (in fact I find it quite original), but to be honest, it is terribly written. Let me rewrite it appropriately:
As you have said, it is easy to check that $A$ is indeed an ideal (another way to argue is to observe that $A=3mathbbZ times mathbbZ$ is a product of two ideals of $mathbbZ$). Let $B subset mathbbZ times mathbbZ$ a maximal ideal containing $A$. Arguing by contradiction, we suppose that the inclusion is strict; that is, there exists $(c,d) in B$ such that $textgcd(3,c)=1$. By Bézout's Identity, there exist $alpha, beta in mathbbZ$ such that
$$3alpha+cbeta=1.$$
Hence,
$$(1,1)=(3alpha,1-d)+(beta,1)(c,d) in B,$$
against $B$ being proper. Therefore, $A=B$ and $A$ is indeed a maximal ideal.
We now come to consider the question of the generalization. For every $n geq 0$ we denote
$$A_n:=(nx,y) / x,y in mathbbZ,$$
and observe that in fact
$$A_n=nmathbbZ times mathbbZ.$$
Therefore, $A_n$ is a product of ideals of $mathbbZ$ and hence, an ideal of $mathbbZ times mathbbZ$. Then:
$$fracmathbbZ times mathbbZA_n=fracmathbbZ times mathbbZnmathbbZ times mathbbZ simeq fracmathbbZnmathbbZ times fracmathbbZmathbbZ = fracmathbbZnmathbbZ times 0+mathbbZ simeq fracmathbbZnmathbbZ.$$
Thus,
$$A_n text is a maximal ideal iff mathbbZ times mathbbZ/A_n text is a field iff mathbbZ/nmathbbZ text is a field iff n text is a prime number.$$
This also solves the original problem for $n=3$.
With respect to your proof, the idea is correct (in fact I find it quite original), but to be honest, it is terribly written. Let me rewrite it appropriately:
As you have said, it is easy to check that $A$ is indeed an ideal (another way to argue is to observe that $A=3mathbbZ times mathbbZ$ is a product of two ideals of $mathbbZ$). Let $B subset mathbbZ times mathbbZ$ a maximal ideal containing $A$. Arguing by contradiction, we suppose that the inclusion is strict; that is, there exists $(c,d) in B$ such that $textgcd(3,c)=1$. By Bézout's Identity, there exist $alpha, beta in mathbbZ$ such that
$$3alpha+cbeta=1.$$
Hence,
$$(1,1)=(3alpha,1-d)+(beta,1)(c,d) in B,$$
against $B$ being proper. Therefore, $A=B$ and $A$ is indeed a maximal ideal.
We now come to consider the question of the generalization. For every $n geq 0$ we denote
$$A_n:=(nx,y) / x,y in mathbbZ,$$
and observe that in fact
$$A_n=nmathbbZ times mathbbZ.$$
Therefore, $A_n$ is a product of ideals of $mathbbZ$ and hence, an ideal of $mathbbZ times mathbbZ$. Then:
$$fracmathbbZ times mathbbZA_n=fracmathbbZ times mathbbZnmathbbZ times mathbbZ simeq fracmathbbZnmathbbZ times fracmathbbZmathbbZ = fracmathbbZnmathbbZ times 0+mathbbZ simeq fracmathbbZnmathbbZ.$$
Thus,
$$A_n text is a maximal ideal iff mathbbZ times mathbbZ/A_n text is a field iff mathbbZ/nmathbbZ text is a field iff n text is a prime number.$$
This also solves the original problem for $n=3$.
answered Sep 8 at 16:41
Don
1813
1813
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
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
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2909324%2fto-show-a-given-set-is-a-maximal-ideal-of-zz-and-generalisation-of-the-result%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
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
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
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
1
About the generalization, think about the relationship between $A_2 = (2x, y) : x,y in mathbb Z $ and $A_4 = (4x, y) : x, y in mathbb Z$. You'll see that your generalization isn't that straightforward.
â ante.ceperic
Sep 8 at 10:05