Re: Irreducibles (Ring theory )
- From: magidin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Arturo Magidin)
- Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 23:16:12 +0000 (UTC)
In article <d5bhpc$ecr$2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, po <po@xxxxxx> wrote:
>Im trying to understand what an irreducible element is.
>i have my definition
>an element (r) is irreducible if
>it is not equal to 0
>r is not invertible r=ab a or b is invertible
These are THREE conditions. r is irreducible if and only if:
(i) r is not equal to 0; and
(ii) r is not invertible; and
(iii) For ALL a and b, if r=ab, then either a is invertible or b is invertible.
>then in a text book i have the irreducibles of the integers are all the
>prime numbers and their negatives...
>but what about the other numbers? whats the inverse of 4? (in the integers,
>it doesnt exist, so why is this not an irreducible?)
Because it fails to satisfy the third condition: 4 = 2*2, but 2 is not
invertible.
--
======================================================================
"It's not denial. I'm just very selective about
what I accept as reality."
--- Calvin ("Calvin and Hobbes")
======================================================================
Arturo Magidin
magidin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- References:
- Irreducibles (Ring theory )
- From: po
- Irreducibles (Ring theory )
- Prev by Date: Re: abundance of irrationals!)
- Next by Date: Re: Irreducibles (Ring theory )
- Previous by thread: Re: Irreducibles (Ring theory )
- Next by thread: Request for online calculus book/notes
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading