Results 1 to 5 of 5

Math Help - Is is possible for two rings to be isomorphic as abelian groups but not.....

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    7

    Is is possible for two rings to be isomorphic as abelian groups but not.....

    The question is the following:

    A ring is actually an abelian group under addition, along with an extra operation called multiplication.
    Is is possible for two rings to be isomorphic as abelian groups but not isomorphic as rings??

    Thanks!
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Super Member Gamma's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2008
    From
    Iowa City, IA
    Posts
    517
    Sure, the integers form a ring under the standard operations of addition and multiplication.

    But you can also form a trivial ring by defining a*b=0 for all a,b. It is kind of lame, but it is still a ring. With these two types of multiplication imposed on the integers it is clear there is no ring isomorphism between the two.

    The standard integer operations have a multiplicative identity, 1. Unity. This other multiplication clearly has no unity because for any nonzero element a.
    ab=0 \not = a for all b, so there is no identity for the nonzero integers and the unity must give back the element for multiplication on everything in the ring.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Newbie
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    7
    sorry, i don't quite understand what u mean by "a trivial ring by defining a*b=0 for all a,b"
    what's this ring??
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Super Member Gamma's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2008
    From
    Iowa City, IA
    Posts
    517
    It is still a ring of the integers, I have just defined multiplication differently than the way you learned in school. I am telling you that for every pair of integers a and b, define multiplication a\circ b=0. Leave the addition alone.

    So the result of multiplying any two elements of this ring call it \mathbb{Z}^{\circ} is 0.

    These rings are better than isomorphic as abelian groups under addition, they are the same group! The integers.

    However, as rings they are not isomorphic because one has unity and one does not.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Newbie
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    7
    all right! got cha! Thanks!
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. isomorphic rings
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: November 5th 2011, 05:17 AM
  2. Abelian and isomorphic groups, homomorphisms
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: March 1st 2011, 04:52 AM
  3. Group Theory: Proof on abelian and isomorphic groups.
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 20th 2009, 06:46 PM
  4. Proof on abelian and isomorphic groups
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 20th 2009, 06:07 PM
  5. Order of groups involving conjugates and abelian groups
    Posted in the Advanced Algebra Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: February 5th 2009, 08:55 PM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum