0
$\begingroup$

I was wondering if the subset of positive real numbers ${\mathbb{R}_{>0}}$ forms a subring of the real numbers $\mathbb{R}$ under the regular operations of addition and multiplication.

My thought so far is that since $1$ is clearly in ${\mathbb{R}_{>0}}$, we know ${\mathbb{R}_{>0}}$ has the multiplicative identity of $\mathbb{R}$.

However, since ${\mathbb{R}_{>0}}$ is not closed under subtraction (take $1, 2$ in ${\mathbb{R}_{>0}}$), this is not a subring.

I was wondering then the difference between addition and subtraction? Why can I not use close under addition, since isn't subtraction the same as addition? Is it because the additive inverse of $1$ and $2$ is not in the set ${\mathbb{R}_{>0}}$?

In other words, is closure under subtraction the same as requiring an abelian group under addition?

Thanks for your help, new to rings.

$\endgroup$
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Closure under subtraction means: Closure under addition AND under taking inverses. $\endgroup$ – Stefan Perko Jan 27 '15 at 21:18
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, you need additive inverses and don't have them, and that is it. $\endgroup$ – Jonas Meyer Jan 27 '15 at 21:19
  • $\begingroup$ Just wanted to confirm my thoughts were correct. Still new to this stuff, so wasn't sure if my reasoning was right. $\endgroup$ – jstnchng Jan 27 '15 at 21:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ $(\mathbb{R}^+,+)$ is not a subgroup of $(\mathbb{R},+)$. $\endgroup$ – MattAllegro Jan 27 '15 at 21:19
1
$\begingroup$

No it is not a subring, for it is not a subgroup (and every subring is a subgroup)!

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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