Tag Archives: algebra

A prime ideal that is not a maximal ideal

Every maximal ideal is a prime ideal. The converse is true in a principal ideal domain – PID, i.e. every nonzero prime ideal is maximal in a PID, but this is not true in general. Let’s produce a counterexample.

R=Z[x] is a ring. R is not a PID as can be shown considering the ideal I generated by the set {2,x}. I cannot be generated by a single element p. If it was, p would divide 2, i.e. p=1 or p=2. We can’t have p=1 as it means R=I but 3I. We can’t have either p=2 as it implies the contradiction xI. The ideal J=(x) is a prime ideal as R/JZ is an integral domain. Since Z is not a field, J is not a maximal ideal.

Four elements rings

A group with four elements is isomorphic to either the cyclic group Z4 or to the Klein four-group Z2×Z2. Those groups are commutative. Endowed with the usual additive and multiplicative operations, Z4 and Z2×Z2 are commutative rings.

Are all four elements rings also isomorphic to either Z4 or Z2×Z2? The answer is negative. Let’s provide two additional examples of commutative rings with four elements not isomorphic to Z4 or Z2×Z2.

The first one is the field F4. F4 is a commutative ring with four elements. It is not isomorphic to Z4 or Z2×Z2 as both of those rings have zero divisor. Indeed we have 22=0 in Z4 and (1,0)(0,1)=(0,0) in Z2×Z2.

A second one is the ring R of the matrices (x0yx) where x,yZ2. One can easily verify that R is a commutative subring of the ring M2(Z2). It is not isomorphic to Z4 as its characteristic is 2. This is not isomorphic to Z2×Z2 either as (0010) is a non-zero matrix solution of the equation X2=0. (0,0) is the only solution of that equation in Z2×Z2.

One can prove that the four rings mentioned above are the only commutative rings with four elements up to isomorphism.

Group homomorphism versus ring homomorphism

A ring homomorphism is a function between two rings which respects the structure. Let’s provide examples of functions between rings which respect the addition or the multiplication but not both.

An additive group homomorphism that is not a ring homomorphism

We consider the ring R[x] of real polynomials and the derivation D:R[x]R[x]PP D is an additive homomorphism as for all P,QR[x] we have D(P+Q)=D(P)+D(Q). However, D does not respect the multiplication as D(x2)=2x1=D(x)D(x). More generally, D satisfies the Leibniz rule D(PQ)=PD(Q)+QD(P).

A multiplication group homomorphism that is not a ring homomorphism

The function f:RRxx2 is a multiplicative group homomorphism of the group (R,). However f does not respect the addition.

A group G isomorph to the product group G x G

Let’s provide an example of a nontrivial group G such that GG×G. For a finite group G of order |G|=n>1, the order of G×G is equal to n2. Hence we have to look at infinite groups in order to get the example we’re seeking for.

We take for G the infinite direct product G=nNZ2=Z2×Z2×Z2, where Z2 is endowed with the addition. Now let’s consider the map ϕ:GG×G(g1,g2,g3,)((g1,g3,),(g2,g4,))

From the definition of the addition in G it follows that ϕ is a group homomorphism. ϕ is onto as for any element ¯g=((g1,g2,g3,),(g1,g2,g3,)) in G×G, g=(g1,g1,g2,g2,) is an inverse image of ¯g under ϕ. Also the identity element e=(¯0,¯0,) of G is the only element of the kernel of G. Hence ϕ is also one-to-one. Finally ϕ is a group isomorphism between G and G×G.

A Commutative Ring with Infinitely Many Units

In a ring R a unit is any element u that has a multiplicative inverse v, i.e. an element v such that uv=vu=1, where 1 is the multiplicative identity.

The only units of the commutative ring Z are 1 and 1. For a field F the units of the ring Mn(F) of the square matrices of dimension n×n is the general linear group GLn(F) of the invertible matrices. The group GLn(F) is infinite if F is infinite, but the ring Mn(F) is not commutative for n2.

The commutative ring Z[2]={a+b2 ; (a,b)Z2} is not a field. However it has infinitely many units.

a+b2 is a unit if and only if a22b2=±1

For u=a+b2Z[2] we denote N(u)=a22b2Z. For any u,vZ[2] we have N(uv)=N(u)N(v). Therefore for a unit uZ[2] with v as multiplicative inverse, we have N(u)N(v)=1 and N(u)=a22b2{1,1}.

The elements (1+2)n for nN are unit elements

The proof is simple as for nN (1+2)n(1+2)n=((1+2)(1+2))n=1

One can prove (by induction on b) that the elements (1+2)n are the only units uZ[2] for u>1.

A normal extension of a normal extension may not be normal

An algebraic field extension KL is said to be normal if every irreducible polynomial, either has no root in L or splits into linear factors in L.

One can prove that if L is a normal extension of K and if E is an intermediate extension (i.e., KEL), then L is a normal extension of E.

However a normal extension of a normal extension may not be normal and the extensions QQ(2)Q(42) provide a counterexample. Let’s prove it.

As a short lemma, we prove that a quadratic extension kK , i.e. an extension of degree two is normal. Suppose that P is an irreducible polynomial of k[x] with a root aK. If ak then the degree of P is equal to 1 and we’re done. Otherwise (1,a) is a basis of K over k and there exist λ,μk such that a2=λa+μ. As ak, Q(x)=x2λxμ is the minimal polynomial of a over k. As P is supposed to be irreducible, we get Q=P. And we can conclude as Q(x)=(xa)(xλ+a).

The entensions QQ(2) and Q(2)Q(42) are quadratic, hence normal according to previous lemma and 42 is a root of the polynomial P(x)=x42 of Q[x]. According to Eisenstein’s criterion P is irreducible over Q. However Q(42)R while the roots of P are ±42,±i42 and therefore not all real. We can conclude that QQ(42) is not normal.

The image of an ideal may not be an ideal

If ϕ:AB is a ring homomorphism then the image of a subring SA is a subring ϕ(A)B. Is the image of an ideal under a ring homomorphism also an ideal? The answer is negative. Let’s provide a simple counterexample.

Let’s take A=Z the ring of the integers and for B the ring of the polynomials with integer coefficients Z[x]. The inclusion ϕ:ZZ[x] is a ring homorphism. The subset 2ZZ of even integers is an ideal. However 2Z is not an ideal of Z[x] as for example 2x2Z.

A group that is not a semi-direct product

Given a group G with identity element e, a subgroup H, and a normal subgroup NG; then we say that G is the semi-direct product of N and H (written G=NH) if G is the product of subgroups, G=NH where the subgroups have trivial intersection NH={e}.

Semi-direct products of groups provide examples of non abelian groups. For example the dihedral group D2n with 2n elements is isomorphic to a semidirect product of the cyclic groups Zn and Z2. D2n is the group of isometries preserving a regular polygon X with n edges.

Let’see that the converse is not true and present a group that is not a semi-direct product.

The Hamilton’s quaternions group is not a semi-direct product

The Hamilton’s quaternions group H8 is the group consisting of the symbols ±1,±i,±j,±k where1=i2=j2=k2 and ij=k=ji,jk=i=kj,ki=j=ik. One can prove that H8 endowed with the product operation above is indeed a group having 8 elements where 1 is the identity element.

H8 is not abelian as ij=kk=ji.

Let’s prove that H8 is not the semi-direct product of two subgroups. If that was the case, there would exist a normal subgroup N and a subgroup H such that G=NH.

  • If |N|=4 then H={1,h} where h is an element of order 2 in H8. Therefore h=1 which is the only element of order 2. But 1N as 1 is the square of all elements in H8{±1}. We get the contradiction NH{1}.
  • If |N|=2 then |H|=4 and H is also normal in G. Noting N={1,n} we have for hH h1nh=n and therefore nh=hn. This proves that the product G=NH is direct. Also N is abelian as a cyclic group of order 2. H is also cyclic as all groups of order p2 with p prime are abelian. Finally G would be abelian, again a contradiction.

We can conclude that G is not a semi-direct product.

A normal subgroup that is not a characteristic

Let’s G be a group. A characteristic subgroup is a subgroup HG that is mapped to itself by every automorphism of G.

An inner automorphism is an automorphism φAut(G) defined by a formula φ:xa1xa where a is an element of G. An automorphism of a group which is not inner is called an outer automorphism. And a subgroup HG that is mapped to itself by every inner automorphism of G is called a normal subgroup.

Obviously a characteristic subgroup is a normal subgroup. The converse is not true as we’ll see below.

Example of a direct product

Let K be a nontrivial group. Then consider the group G=K×K. The subgroups K1={e}×K and K2=K×{e} are both normal in G as for (e,k)K1 and (a,b)G we have
(a,b)1(e,x)(a,b)=(a1,b1)(e,x)(a,b)=(e,b1xb)K1 and b1K1b=K1. Similar relations hold for K2. As K is supposed to be nontrivial, we have K1K2.

The exchange automorphism ψ:(x,y)(y,x) exchanges the subgroup K1 and K2. Thus, neither K1 nor K2 is invariant under all the automorphisms, so neither is characteristic. Therefore, K1 and K2 are both normal subgroups of G that are not characteristic.

When K=Z2 is the cyclic group of order two, G=Z2×Z2 is the Klein four-group. In particular, this gives a counterexample where the ambient group is an abelian group.

Example on the additive group Q

Consider the additive group (Q,+) of rational numbers. The map φ:xx/2 is an automorphism. As (Q,+) is abelian, all subgroups are normal. However, the subgroup Z is not sent into itself by φ as φ(1)=1/2Z. Hence Z is not a characteristic subgroup.

A nonabelian p-group

Consider a prime number p and a finite p-group G, i.e. a group of order pn with n1.

If n=1 the group G is cyclic hence abelian.

For n=2, G is also abelian. This is a consequence of the fact that the center Z(G) of a p-group is non-trivial. Indeed if |Z(G)|=p2 then G=Z(G) is abelian. We can’t have |Z(G)|=p. If that would be the case, the order of H=G/Z(G) would be equal to p and H would be cyclic, generated by an element h. For any two elements g1,g2G, we would be able to write g1=hn1z1 and g2=hn1z1 with z1,z2Z(G). Hence g1g2=hn1z1hn2z2=hn1+n2z1z2=hn2z2hn1z1=g2g1, proving that g1,g2 commutes in contradiction with |Z(G)|<|G|. However, all p-groups are not abelian. For example the unitriangular matrix group U(3,Zp)={(1ab01c001) | a,b,cZp} is a p-group of order p3. Its center Z(U(3,Zp)) is Z(U(3,Zp))={(10b010001) | bZp}, which is of order p. Therefore U(3,Zp) is not abelian.