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

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash 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?










share|cite|improve this question

















  • 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.
    – ante.ceperic
    Sep 8 at 10:05















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?










share|cite|improve this question

















  • 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.
    – ante.ceperic
    Sep 8 at 10:05













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?










share|cite|improve this question













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






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










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.
    – ante.ceperic
    Sep 8 at 10:05













  • 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.
    – 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.
– 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.
– ante.ceperic
Sep 8 at 10:05











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 $n=3$.






share|cite|improve this answer




















    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',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: false,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    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






























    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 $n=3$.






    share|cite|improve this answer
























      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 $n=3$.






      share|cite|improve this answer






















        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 $n=3$.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        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 $n=3$.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Sep 8 at 16:41









        Don

        1813




        1813



























             

            draft saved


            draft discarded















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            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













































































            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            tkz-euclide: tkzDrawCircle[R] not working

            How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

            1st Magritte Awards