hint: what does the homomorphism used in another post suggest?
I presume you mean use the following ring homomorphism:
(Z/4Z) [x] ---> (Z/2Z)[x] [then Z/2Z is a field and the units of Z/2Z[x] are simply the units of Z/2Z ... but zero divisors???)
Then .... ??/
If a(x) is a zero divisor in (Z/4Z)[x] then a(x)b(x) = 0 for some b(x) with a(x) and b(x)
Then with a(x) and b(x) ...
But ... where to now??
What can one do with a(x) and b(x) ... how to progress ... that is what does this imply about and
Maybe we could proceed by arguing that implies that
But this would mean that
which means or or both
This seems to imply that Z/2Z[x] has no zero divisors .... but where to from here ... need some further clarification and help.
Peter
Are you referring to Z/4Z which certainly has zero divisors of that form?
I was referring to Z/2Z[x] which (I think) has no zero divisors [2Z is a prime ideal so Z/2Z has no zero divisors and thus Z/2Z[x] has no zero divisors.
Is that correct?
I would like your guidance on the use of the homomorphism Z/4Z[x] ---> Z/2Z[x]
It seems that the kernel of the transformation is those polynomials of the form 2(f(x)) which are the zero divisors of Z/4Z. Can we use this somehow?
Peter