Proving Maximal Ideal I in Noncommutative Ring R with Unity

  • Thread starter Fizz_Geek
  • Start date
In summary, I am having difficulty proving that I is not maximal. I'm stuck on proving that J=R. Any help is appreciated!
  • #1
Fizz_Geek
20
0
Question:

Find a noncommutative ring R with unity, with maximal ideal I such that R/I is not a field.

Attempt at a solution:

Let R = the set of all 2x2 matrices with integer entries.
Let I = the set of all 2x2 matrices with even integer entries.

I'm having trouble proving that I is maximal. The only way I know to do that is to assume I is not maximal, therefore it is contained within a maximal ideal J, then show that J = R. But I'm stuck. I haven't been able to prove that J = R.

Any help is appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Well, I don't know whether it is maximal either, but let's find out together. Denote [tex]M=M_2(2\mathbb{Z})[/tex]. Assume that there exists an ideal [tex]M\subset I\subseteq M_2(\mathbb{Z})[/tex]. Our goal is to show that [tex]I=M_2(\mathbb{Z})[/tex].

So, take an element [tex]A\in I\setminus M[/tex]. Then we can assume without loss of generalization that

[tex]A=\left(\begin{array}{cc} 2a+1 & b\\ c & d\end{array}\right)[/tex]

So, we assume that the first element is odd. We know nothing about b, c and d, they may be odd or even.

Now, the elementary matrix [tex]E_{i,j}[/tex] is such that there is a 1 on place (i,j) and a 0 on all other places. For example,

[tex]E_{2,1}=\left(\begin{array}{cc} 0 & 0\\ 1 & 0 \end{array}\right)[/tex].

Now the goal is to multiply A by suitable elementary matrices to simplify the form of A. For example, we might reduce A in the form

[tex]A=\left(\begin{array}{cc} 2a+1 & 0\\ 0 & 0\end{array}\right)[/tex]

and since we obtained this form by multiplying by elementary matrices, this means that this must be an element of I. So, try to reuce the form of A into a suitable form. Once you've done this, we'll try to see what our next step is...
 
  • #3
So I did what you asked, and I multipled on the right and left by E1,1. This gives the desired matrix. And I know this matrix is an element of I because I is an ideal and absorbs products.

The train of thought I was following started out the same, but I was trying to modify the given matrix so that I could prove that the identity matrix was contained in I. That's where I got stuck.

Can I ask where you're going with this?
 
  • #4
Fizz_Geek said:
So I did what you asked, and I multipled on the right and left by E1,1. This gives the desired matrix. And I know this matrix is an element of I because I is an ideal and absorbs products.

The train of thought I was following started out the same, but I was trying to modify the given matrix so that I could prove that the identity matrix was contained in I. That's where I got stuck.

Can I ask where you're going with this?

We're also trying to show that the identity matrix is in I. The method with elementary matrices is a standard method of proving such a thing...

Now, try to prove that

[tex]\left(\begin{array}{cc}1 & 0\\ 0 & 0\end{array}\right)[/tex]

is in I. Then try to multiply this matrix by a certain matrix to conclude that also

[tex]\left(\begin{array}{cc}0 & 0\\ 0 & 1\end{array}\right)[/tex]

is in I. Adding these matrices together will get you the identity matrix!
 
  • #5
Oh, I got it!

You wouldn't happen to know any good resources with examples on this elementary matrix method, would you?

I really appreciate your help, thank you very much!
 
  • #6
There is really nothing more that we can say about elementary matrices. It's just a trick that you know now. I think you know as much about elementary matrices as me right now...

But maybe you could read en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_matrix but it doesn't contain much more than you already know.
 

FAQ: Proving Maximal Ideal I in Noncommutative Ring R with Unity

What is a maximal ideal in a noncommutative ring with unity?

A maximal ideal in a noncommutative ring with unity is a proper ideal that is not contained in any other proper ideal. In other words, it is an ideal that cannot be enlarged while still remaining a proper ideal.

Why is it important to prove the existence of a maximal ideal in a noncommutative ring with unity?

Proving the existence of a maximal ideal in a noncommutative ring with unity is important because it is a key step in understanding the structure and properties of the ring. Maximal ideals are often used in the study of factor rings, which are important in various areas of mathematics and physics.

How do you prove the existence of a maximal ideal in a noncommutative ring with unity?

To prove the existence of a maximal ideal in a noncommutative ring with unity, one needs to show that the ring satisfies the necessary conditions for it to have a maximal ideal. This can be done by using various techniques such as Zorn's lemma, which states that every nonempty partially ordered set in which every chain has an upper bound contains a maximal element.

What are some common techniques used to prove the existence of a maximal ideal in a noncommutative ring with unity?

Some common techniques used to prove the existence of a maximal ideal in a noncommutative ring with unity include Zorn's lemma, the use of prime ideals, and the use of quotient rings. These techniques involve carefully constructing a maximal ideal by considering the properties of the ring and its ideals.

Are there any special cases in which the existence of a maximal ideal in a noncommutative ring with unity is guaranteed?

Yes, there are special cases in which the existence of a maximal ideal in a noncommutative ring with unity is guaranteed. For example, if the ring is a commutative ring with unity, then the ideal generated by any non-invertible element is a maximal ideal. Additionally, if the ring is a finite-dimensional algebra over a field, then every proper ideal is contained in a maximal ideal, guaranteeing the existence of a maximal ideal.

Back
Top