Results 1 to 5 of 5

Math Help - Sum of ideals is an ideal

  1. #1
    Member
    Joined
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    83

    Sum of ideals is an ideal

    Let R be a ring
    Suppose that I_a is an ideal of R, 1=< a=< n.
    Show that: I_1 + I_2+....+ I_n = {i_1 + i_2+...+ i_n: a in I, 1=< a=< n} is an ideal of R.

    This is my attempt

    Since 1 belongs to R then 1 is also belongs to I_a implies I_a is non empty set
    For any i_1, i_2 in I_a, then i_1 + i_2 also belongs to I_a
    So, for 1=< a=< n, i_1 +.....+ i_n belongs to I_a

    Hence, (I_1 + I_2+...+ I_n) is an ideal of R
    Is that correct?

    Thank you
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Behold, the power of SARDINES!
    TheEmptySet's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2008
    From
    Yuma, AZ, USA
    Posts
    3,764
    Thanks
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by knguyen2005 View Post
    Let R be a ring
    Suppose that I_a is an ideal of R, 1=< a=< n.
    Show that: I_1 + I_2+....+ I_n = {i_1 + i_2+...+ i_n: a in I, 1=< a=< n} is an ideal of R.

    This is my attempt

    Since 1 belongs to R then 1 is also belongs to I_a implies I_a is non empty set
    For any i_1, i_2 in I_a, then i_1 + i_2 also belongs to I_a
    So, for 1=< a=< n, i_1 +.....+ i_n belongs to I_a

    Hence, (I_1 + I_2+...+ I_n) is an ideal of R
    Is that correct?

    Thank you

    First I think you mean 0 is in each I_a

    If 1 is in your ideal your ideal is the whole ring!!

    So what you need to show is that is it is closed uder subtraction and that it absorbs ring elements

    i.e

    let x =\sum_{k=1}^{a}i_k and y =\sum_{k=1}^{a}j_k where i_k,j_k \in I_k

    What you need to show is that

    x-y is in the ideal and rx is in the ideal for every r in the Ring

    I hope this helps
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    From
    Paris
    Posts
    354
    Show that: I_1 + I_2+....+ I_n = {i_1 + i_2+...+ i_n: a in I, 1=< a=< n} is an ideal of R.
    I guess it is i_a\in I_a.

    Since 1 belongs to R then 1 is also belongs to I_a
    If you want to prove the sum of ideals I_1+...+I_n is non empty, try to prove that 0 is one of its elements, using that 0 belongs to any ideal of R.

    Then what you have to do is: given two elements of I_1+...+I_n, let's say i=i_1+...+i_n and j=j_1+...+j_n, prove that i-j belongs to I_1+...+I_n. It can be done using that (R,+) and (I_a,+) for a\in\{1,...,n\} are abelian group.

    Finally, show that for any element i_1+...+i_n of I_1+...+I_n and for any r in R, then r(i_1+...+i_n) is in I_1+...+I_n.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Member
    Joined
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    83
    Thanks you guys alot
    Sorry to bother you again.

    I know the definition of an ideal of a ring But I don't know exactly what it means, can you explain what the ideal means in the ring theory please

    I am really appreciated
    Cheers
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Nov 2008
    From
    Paris
    Posts
    354
    Take an additive subgroup (B,+) of a ring (A,+,\times). Since (A,+) is commutative, (A/B,+) is an abelian group.

    Let us write \overline{x} for x+B the class of some element of A in A/B

    We want A/B to be a ring when we define naturally the multiplication: i.e. \overline{a}\times \overline{b}=\overline{ab}.

    But given two elements of \overline{a} and \overline{b}, let's say a+c and b+d (i.e. c,d\in B), observe that (a+c)(b+d)=ab+ad+cb+cd \in \overline{ab} iff ad+cb+cd\in B.

    In general, the last condition is wrong; but if we ask B to be stable under multiplication by any element of A, then it becomes true. And that's precisely the definition of an ideal.

    Ideals can be seen as a sort of "normal subgroups" for rings, when you consider the quotient of a ring by one of its ideals, then it is ring (of course you have to verify that the multiplication as defined higher has the required properties, but it is true). The difference with normal subgroups is that an ideal is not a subring: the only case when this is true is when the ideal is the whole ring, indeed a subring contains 1.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. ideal,nil,nilpotent ideal in prime ring
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 24th 2011, 07:57 AM
  2. Product ideals vs. products of ideals
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 17th 2011, 05:24 AM
  3. prove N is a maximal ideal iff N is a prime ideal
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 20th 2011, 09:02 AM
  4. Prime Ideals, Maximal Ideals
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: March 7th 2011, 07:02 AM
  5. When are principal ideals prime ideals?
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 5th 2008, 12:18 PM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum