Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have proved that $\mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2-1) \simeq \mathbb{R} \oplus \mathbb{R}$. This fact is a corollary of the generalized C.R.T.

I have proved also that $\mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2+1) \simeq \mathbb{C}$. The isomorphism is given by a map $ax+b \mapsto b + ia$.

I can see why $\mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2+1) \not\simeq \mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2-1)$. This is because a homomorphism always maps $0$ to $0$, and $x^2-1=(x+1)(x-1)$ but $x^2+1$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{R}$.

For the same reason $\mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2) \not\simeq \mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2+1)$. But I still need to prove that $\mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2) \not\simeq \mathbb{R}[x]/(x^2-1)$. I would appreciate any help.

share|improve this question
9  
There is a nilpotent element in $\mathbb R[x]/(x^2)$, not in $\mathbb R[x]/(x^2-1)$. Do you see it ? –  Lierre Feb 7 '12 at 12:19
    
@Lierre that is $x$. I think I got it. $\mathbb{R}/(x^2)$ has nilpotent, but $\mathbb{R}/(x^2-1)$ has no, thus there is no map with zero kernel between them. Am I right? –  Sergey Filkin Feb 7 '12 at 12:25
    
Yes you are ! More generally, isomorphic rings share all property expressible with the ring operations. And the property $$\exists x : x^2 = 0$$ is such a property. And by the way, you should right $\mathbb R[x]/(x^2)$ instead of $\mathbb R/(x^2)$, which, as is, is meaning less. –  Lierre Feb 7 '12 at 12:33
    
Also: the "maps $0$ to $0$" argument seems like it could use some filling out. Another way to talk about the difference between these two rings is to note that $\mathbb R[x]/(x^2 - 1)$ has non-zero zerodivisors, which is obvious from your use of the Chinese remainder theorem. –  Dylan Moreland Feb 7 '12 at 12:34
    
@DylanMoreland thank you for your comments and for your edits to my post. I had $\mathbb{R}[x]$ in mind of course. –  Sergey Filkin Feb 7 '12 at 12:41
show 1 more comment

1 Answer 1

Hint: $\ $ If $ char(F) \ne 2\ $ then $\:F[x]/(x^2-1)\ \cong\ F[x]/(x-1) \oplus F[x]/(x+1)\ \cong\ F^2\:$ has nontrivial idempotents, e.g. $\rm\:(0,1)\:,\:$ but $\rm\:F[x]/(x^2)\:$ does not (as one easily verifies).

share|improve this answer
    
I don't see why $(0,1)$ is idempotent in $F[x]/(x-1) \oplus F[x]/(x+1)$ –  Sergey Filkin Feb 7 '12 at 16:34
    
@Sergey $(0,1)^2 = (0,1)$ since $(a,b)(a',b') = (aa',bb')$ –  Math Gems Feb 7 '12 at 16:45
    
thank you. It's my stupid. $(0,1)$ is not trivial. –  Sergey Filkin Feb 7 '12 at 17:28
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.