Scribd
Upload
49 views2 pages

Proof. We May Assume That S Contains Only One Element S, Since The

(1) The document presents a simple proof of a theorem by Andrunakievic and Rjabuhin which states that a reduced ring is a subdirect product of entire rings. (2) It introduces a proposition that the left or right annihilator of a subset in a reduced ideal is also a reduced ideal. (3) Using this proposition and Zorn's lemma, it gives a proof that if a ring R is reduced, then R is a subdirect product of entire rings.

Uploaded by

saroj gurung
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
49 views2 pages

Proof. We May Assume That S Contains Only One Element S, Since The

(1) The document presents a simple proof of a theorem by Andrunakievic and Rjabuhin which states that a reduced ring is a subdirect product of entire rings. (2) It introduces a proposition that the left or right annihilator of a subset in a reduced ideal is also a reduced ideal. (3) Using this proposition and Zorn's lemma, it gives a proof that if a ring R is reduced, then R is a subdirect product of entire rings.

Uploaded by

saroj gurung
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Canad. Math. Bull. Vol.

23 (4), 1980

A SIMPLE P R O O F OF A T H E O R E M
ON REDUCED RINGS

BY
ABRAHAM A. KLEIN

We give a simple proof of a theorem by Andrunakievic and Rjabuhin which


states that a reduced ring is a subdirect product of entire rings. Our proof
makes no use of m-systems and is in some sense similar to the proof of the
corresponding theorem in the commutative case due to Krull.
A reduced ring is a ring without non-zero nilpotent elements. It is well-
known that if a reduced ring is commutative, then it is a subdirect product of
integral domains [2]. This result has been generalized to arbitrary reduced rings
[1]. The proof in the general case is somewhat complicated. We present a
simple proposition which leads to a simple proof of the general case.
If Q is an ideal of a ring R and R/Q is reduced, we say that Q is a reduced
ideal. Observe that if Q is a reduced ideal of JR and a, beR satisfy abe Q,
then ba e Q. Indeed, abeQ implies (ba)2e Q, so baeQ since Q is reduced.

PROPOSITION. Let Q be a reduced ideal of a ring R. If A is the left (or right)


annihilator mod Q of any subset S^R, then A is a reduced ideal
Proof. We may assume that S contains only one element s, since the
intersection of reduced ideals is reduced. So let A = {reR \ rs e 0 } and we
prove that A is a reduced ideal.
A is clearly a left ideal, so to prove that A is an ideal let r e A, x e R and we
show that rxeA. Q is reduced and rs e Q, so sr e Q and srx e Q. This implies
rxs e Q, hence rx e A.
To prove that A is reduced, it suffices to show that if r2 e A then r e A. So let
r seQ. It follows that rsre Q and (rs)2e Q. This implies rseQ, hence re A.
2

THEOREM (Andrunakievic and Rjabuhin). If R is a reduced ring, then R is a


subdirect product of entire rings (= rings without non-zero zero divisors).
Proof. It suffices to prove that given O^xeR, there exists and ideal Q
excluding x, such that R/Q is entire. Since the zero ideal is reduced, we can
apply Zorn's lemma on the set of reduced ideals excluding x, and we obtain a
maximal reduced ideal Q excluding x. We claim that R/Q is entire. Assume on
the contrary that abeQ and a£Q, b£Q. Let A be the left annihilator mod 0
of b and let B be the right annihilator mod Q of A. By the proposition, A and
B are reduced ideals. It is clear that A^Q, B^Q and AB c Q. Moreover
Received by the editors November 14, 1978.
495

https://doi.org/10.4153/CMB-1980-075-7 Published online by Cambridge University Press


496 A. A. KLEIN

A 7e O since aeA, and BjtQ since beB. It follows that x e A and x e B, so


x2G AJBç Q. Hence x € Q since Q is reduced, a contradiction.

REFERENCES

1. Andrunakievic V. A. and Rjabuhin Ju. M., Rings without nilpotent elements and completely
simple rings, Soviet Math. Dokl. 9 (1968), 565-567, MR 37 #6320.
2. Krull W., Idealtheorie in Ringen ohne Endlichkeitsbedingung, Math. Ann. 101 (1929),
729-744.

DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES


TEL-AVIV UNIVERSITY
TEL-AVIV, ISRAEL

https://doi.org/10.4153/CMB-1980-075-7 Published online by Cambridge University Press

You might also like