I have a statement that says that if $R$ is a simple ring, then $Z(R)$ must be a field.

Since $R$ is a ring we get most of the field axioms (associativity and commutativity of addition, multiplication$\text{--}$since it's the center$\text{--}$, presence of the identities) immediately without need for explanation.

But I don't see how we can get the invertibility of multiplication.


Every central element is invertible. Suppose $a \in Z(R)$ is not. Then image of multiplication by $a$ does not contain $1$; but then it's a nontrivial two-sided ideal, because for all $r, r'$ $r'ar = ar'r$ and $arr'$ bot lie in $aR$.

If central element is invertible, then it's inverse also central. Take central $a$ and it's inverse $a^{-1}$. Then $a^{-1}r = a^{-1}(ra)a^{-1} = a^{-1}(ar)a^{-1} = ra^{-1}$.

  • $\begingroup$ Wait, so if an ideal contains 1 it must be a trivial ideal? $\endgroup$ – Makogan Apr 1 '18 at 20:16
  • $\begingroup$ Of course, because if $1$ is an element of ideal, then for any $r \in R$ $r \cdot 1 = r$ is also in that ideal. $\endgroup$ – xsnl Apr 1 '18 at 20:17
  • $\begingroup$ Because ideals must be closed under product? $\endgroup$ – Makogan Apr 1 '18 at 20:18
  • $\begingroup$ Yes. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_(ring_theory) $\endgroup$ – trollkotze Apr 2 '18 at 3:54

Let $z\ne 0$ be an element of $Z(R)$. We know such a $z$ exists because $1\in Z(R)$.

Consider the ideal $I$ generated by $z$. Since $z\ne 0$ and $R$ is simple $I = R$. Therefore, there exists $s\in R$ such that $zs = 1$. Since $z\in Z(R)$ $zs = sz$ so $s=z^{-1}$.

It remains to show that $z^{-1}\in Z(R)$.

For any $r\in R$, $z^{-1}r = z^{-1}r(zz^{-1})=(z^{-1}z)rz^{-1} = rz^{-1}$.


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.