Given an integral domain $R$ and a subset $S$ of $R$, does there exist a smallest subring $T$ of $R$ such that $T$ is a field and $S \subseteq T$ ? ($S$ need not be a subring of $R$.)

I proved that this is true if there exists at least one subring $F$ of $R$ such that $F$ is a field and $S \subseteq F$. In that case, the smallest subfield $T$ is $\cap_{F \in \mathcal{F}} F$, where $\mathcal{F} = \{F | F$ is a subring of $R$, $F$ is a field, and $S \subseteq F$$\}$. But I don't know if this is true even when there is no subring $F$ of $R$ such that $F$ is a field and $S \subseteq F$.

I need the answer to this question because of the following reason: Let $R$ be an integral domain and let $F$ and $S$ be a subfield and a subset of $R$, respectively. I learned that $F(S)$ means the smallest subfield of $R$ that contains $F$ and $S$. But I want to know if $F(S)$ always exists.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Tried the integers? $\endgroup$ – Pedro Tamaroff Jul 25 '18 at 3:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @PedroTamaroff Oh, I got it. If R is Z and S is {2}, then there is no such subfield. Thank you! $\endgroup$ – zxcv Jul 25 '18 at 3:19

From the comments above.

There does not always exist such a subring $T$. For example, take $R = \mathbb{Z}$ and $S$ to be any subset, say $S = \{ 2 \}$. There is clearly no subring of $\mathbb{Z}$ that is a field, and in particular no subring of $\mathbb{Z}$ that is a field and contains $2$.


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.