4
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $R$ is a finite commutative ring with identity element, such that more than $\frac{2}{3}$ of elements are idempotent. Prove that all of elements are idempotent.

Please give me a hint. Thanks.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Note that this is the best possible as the field with three elements has two idempotents. $\endgroup$ – Mark Bennet May 1 '15 at 22:17
5
$\begingroup$

Let $A$ be the set of idempotent elements and $Z=A\cap (-1+A)$. Then $$\tag1|Z|\ge 2|A|-|R|>\frac13|R|.$$ For $a\in Z$ we have $a,a+1\in A$, hence $$\tag22a=(a+1)^2-a^2-1=a+1-a-1=0$$

Lemma 1. $A+Z\subseteq A$.

Proof. If $a\in Z$ and $b\in A$ then using $(2)$ $$(a+b)^2=a^2+2ab+b^2=a+0b+b=a+b $$ so $a+b\in A$. $_\square$

Lemma 2. $Z$ is an (additive) subgroup of $R$ of index $\le 2$.

Proof. If $a,b\in Z$, we have $b,b+1\in A$, hence by lemma 1 both $a+b\in A$ and $a+b+1\in A$, i.e., $a+b\in Z$. This shows that $Z$ is closed under addition. As $Z\ne\emptyset$ by $(1)$ and $R$ is finite, we have that $Z$ is a subgroup of $R$. The claim about the index is immediate from $(1)$. $_\square$

Remark: This is where we use the $>\frac23$. With any weaker estimate, even with $|A|\ge \frac23|R|$, we could not dismiss the case $[R:Z]=3$ so easily.

Lemma 3. $A$ is an additive subgroup of $R$.

Proof. If $a,b\in A$, we either have

  • $b\in Z$. Then $a+b\in A+Z\subseteq A$ by lemma 1.
  • $a\in Z$. Then $a+b\in Z+A\subseteq A$ as well
  • $a,b\notin Z$. Then $a+b\in Z$ because by lemma 2 we have $(a+Z)+(b+Z)=Z$ in the quotient group $R/Z$.

Since $A$ is not empty and $R$ still finite, this completes the proof. $_\square$

Finally, the index of $A$ in $R$ is $[R:A]=\frac{|R|}{|A|}<\frac32$, so must be $1$, i.e. $$ A=R.$$

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Mine actually did need the $2/3$ I realized. That's why I deleted the comment! $\endgroup$ – Matt Samuel May 1 '15 at 21:50
5
$\begingroup$

Finite commutative rings are artinian, so they are isomorphic to a finite direct product of artinian local rings. Thus $R\simeq R_1\times\cdots\times R_n$ with $R_i$ artinian local rings. But local rings have only trivial idempotents, so $|\operatorname{Idemp}(R_i)|=2$. This shows $|\operatorname{Idemp}(R)|=2^n$. On the other side, $|R|=|R_1|\cdots|R_n|$. We know that $|\operatorname{Idemp}(R)|>\dfrac 23|R|$, so $3\cdot 2^{n-1}>|R|$. Moreover, $|R_i|\ge2$ for all $i=1,\dots,n$, and whether $|R_i|\ge3$ for some $i$ we get $3\cdot 2^{n-1}>3\cdot 2^{n-1}$, a contradiction. Conclusion: $|R_i|=2$ for all $i=1,\dots,n$, and therefore $R\simeq\mathbb F_2^n$.

Edit. If we assume "only" $|\operatorname{Idemp}(R)|\ge\dfrac 23|R|$ then the claim is wrong: set $R=\mathbb F_3$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ A ring whose all elements are idempotent is called Boolean, and finite Boolean rings are isomorphic to $\mathbb F_2^n$ for some $n\ge1$, and this is actually what I've proved. $\endgroup$ – user26857 May 1 '15 at 20:51
  • $\begingroup$ great answer:-@user26857 $\endgroup$ – user185640 Apr 22 '16 at 21:58
4
$\begingroup$

For any idempotent $a$ we have that $(1+a)^2=(1+a)+2a$, hence $1+a$ is not idempotent unless $2a=0$.

I claim that $2=0$ in $R$. Suppose not. Let $A$ be the set of idempotent elements; then $1+A$ has the same number of elements as $A$. The intersection of $A$ and $1+A$ has at least $2|A|-|R|$ elements; thus there are at least $2|A|-|R|$ idempotents $a$ such that $1+a$ is idempotent, hence $2a=0$. Call the set of such elements $Z$. For $a\in Z$, since $2\neq 0$ and $2a=0$ we have that $2(1+a)=2\neq 0$. Thus $(1+Z)\cap Z=\emptyset$, and since $Z,1+Z\subseteq A$ we have that $|A|\geq 4|A|-2|R|=|A|+(3|A|-2|R|)>|A|$, which is a contradiction.

Since $2=0$, for any elements $a,b$ such that $a$ is idempotent and $b$ is not idempotent we have that $(a+b)^2=a+b^2\neq a+b$. Can you finish?

$\endgroup$

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.