- #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
- 3,998
- 48
I am reading Stephen Lovett's book, "Abstract Algebra: Structures and Applications" and am currently focused on Chapter 5 ...
I need some help with Example 5.2.1 in Section 5.2: Rings Generated by Elements ...
In the Introduction to Section 5.2.1 (see text above) Lovett writes:
" ... ... R[S] denotes the smallest (by inclusion) subring of ##A## that contains both ##R## and ##S## ... ... "Then, a bit later, in Example 5.2.1 concerning the ring ##\mathbb{Z} [ \frac{1}{2} ]## Lovett writes:" ... ... It is not hard to show that the set##\{ \frac{k}{ 2^n} \ | \ k.n \in \mathbb{Z} \}##is a subring of ##\mathbb{Q}##. Hence, this set is precisely the ring ##\mathbb{Z} [ \frac{1}{2} ]## ... ... ... "BUT ...
How has Lovett actually shown that the set ##\{ \frac{k}{ 2^n} \ | \ k.n \in \mathbb{Z} \}## as a subring of \mathbb{Q} is actually (precisely in Lovett's words) the ring ##\mathbb{Z} [ \frac{1}{2} ]## ... ...
... ... according to his introduction which I quoted Lovett says that the ring ##\mathbb{Z} [ \frac{1}{2} ]## is the smallest (by inclusion) subring of ##\mathbb{Q}## that contains ##\mathbb{Z}## and ##\frac{1}{2}## ... ...Can someone please explain to me exactly how Lovett has demonstrated this ... ...
... and ... if Lovett has not clearly proved this can someone please demonstrate a proof ...Just one further clarification ... is Lovett here dealing with ring extensions ... ... ?
Hope someone can help ...
Peter
I need some help with Example 5.2.1 in Section 5.2: Rings Generated by Elements ...
In the Introduction to Section 5.2.1 (see text above) Lovett writes:
" ... ... R[S] denotes the smallest (by inclusion) subring of ##A## that contains both ##R## and ##S## ... ... "Then, a bit later, in Example 5.2.1 concerning the ring ##\mathbb{Z} [ \frac{1}{2} ]## Lovett writes:" ... ... It is not hard to show that the set##\{ \frac{k}{ 2^n} \ | \ k.n \in \mathbb{Z} \}##is a subring of ##\mathbb{Q}##. Hence, this set is precisely the ring ##\mathbb{Z} [ \frac{1}{2} ]## ... ... ... "BUT ...
How has Lovett actually shown that the set ##\{ \frac{k}{ 2^n} \ | \ k.n \in \mathbb{Z} \}## as a subring of \mathbb{Q} is actually (precisely in Lovett's words) the ring ##\mathbb{Z} [ \frac{1}{2} ]## ... ...
... ... according to his introduction which I quoted Lovett says that the ring ##\mathbb{Z} [ \frac{1}{2} ]## is the smallest (by inclusion) subring of ##\mathbb{Q}## that contains ##\mathbb{Z}## and ##\frac{1}{2}## ... ...Can someone please explain to me exactly how Lovett has demonstrated this ... ...
... and ... if Lovett has not clearly proved this can someone please demonstrate a proof ...Just one further clarification ... is Lovett here dealing with ring extensions ... ... ?
Hope someone can help ...
Peter
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator: