How can I prove this:

Finite rings without zero divisors are division rings.

I know how to prove it when the ring has $1$, but I have no idea if my ring needs to have an unity.

  • $\begingroup$ Let $r$ be an arbitrary element and consider the sequence $\{r,r^2,r^3,\dots\}$ $\endgroup$ – Max Dec 16 '16 at 18:55

Since this statement of the question clearly goes haywire if we allow $\{0\}$ to be admitted, I'll be working under the assumption that the ring has at least one element other than zero. I guess also that "without zero divisors" is meant to eliminate both left and right zero divisors. (Update: it occurred to me later how to show a ring with no nonzero zero divisors has no nonzero one sided zero divisors. If $ab=0$ for nonzero $a,b$, then $ba\neq 0$ and $(ba)^2=0$, a contradiction. So, no one sided zero divisors exist. )

Notice multiplication by nonzero elements must permute the finite set of nonzero elements of the ring. Let $a$ be any nonzero element. There exists a $b$ such that $ab=a$. Automatically, $aba=a^2$ implies $ba=a$ as well. $b$ is our candidate for identity.

Now let $c$ be arbitrary and nonzero. There exists a $d$ such that $da=c$. But then $c=da=dab=cb$ implies $c=cb$ and again this leads to $c^2=cbc$and $bc=c$.

Thus $b$ acts as an identity for arbitrary nonzero elements. It trivially acts as an identity for $0$. Thus $b$ is the identity for the ring.

Here's another amusing proof. Call this ring $R$ and look at the Dorroh extension $\Bbb Z\times R=\{(z,r)\mid z\in \Bbb Z, r\in R\}$. In case you're not familiar with it, addition is $(z,r)+(z',r')=(z+z',r+r')$ and multiplication is $(z,r)(z',r')=(zz',zr'+z'r+rr')$. It creates a new ring $R_1$ which has $R$ as an ideal.

Since $R^2=R$ and $R$ is finitely generated, we can apply Nakayama's lemma to $R$ to get the existence of an element $x\in R$ such that $(1-x)R=\{0\}$. Unpacking that, we see that $x$ is a left identity element of $R$. Doing the same thing on the right, there is a right identity (necessarily also $x$.)

  • $\begingroup$ Why there is such $b$ that $ab = a$? $\endgroup$ – Yola Sep 15 '17 at 8:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Yola Notice multiplication by nonzero elements must permute the finite set of nonzero elements of the ring. The permutation caused by $a$ must map something to $a$. $\endgroup$ – rschwieb Sep 15 '17 at 10:36

Consider, for $a\in R$, the map $r_a\colon R\to R$ defined by $r_a(x)=xa$; this map is injective if $a\ne0$, hence surjective. So there's an element $b$ such that $ba=a$. Of course $b\ne0$; therefore there exists $c\in R$ such that $bc=b$. Then, for each $x\in R$, $$ bx=bcx $$ and so $x=cx$. Therefore there is a left identity. Similarly there's a right identity.

  • $\begingroup$ @rschwieb I fixed the argument $\endgroup$ – egreg Dec 4 '13 at 7:28
  • $\begingroup$ Excellent! All ok now. $\endgroup$ – rschwieb Dec 4 '13 at 10:58

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.