How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
A product of two rings with always has zero divisors: in , so a product of integral domains is never an integral domain
Example
Let and be rings (Ring: an abelian group under addition and a monoid under multiplication, with multiplication distributing over addition on both sides) with and , and let be the product ring (The product ring with componentwise operations, its identity and its units ). Then:
- and are nonzero elements of whose product is ; each is therefore a zero divisor (Zero divisor, and integral domain: a commutative ring with and no zero divisors);
- consequently is never an integral domain, whatever and are; in particular a product of two integral domains is not one;
- the concrete instance is , where while itself is an integral domain ( is an integral domain of characteristic whose group of units is , so it is not a field: is nonzero and not invertible).
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Rings , with and , and the product ring with componentwise operations, zero and identity (The product ring with componentwise operations, its identity and its units ).
is a ring; its operations are componentwise, and two of its elements are equal exactly when both components agree (The product ring with componentwise operations, its identity and its units , Ring: an abelian group under addition and a monoid under multiplication, with multiplication distributing over addition on both sides).
in any ring (In any ring , , , and ).
is a zero divisor when and or for some ; an integral domain is a commutative ring with and no zero divisors (Zero divisor, and integral domain: a commutative ring with and no zero divisors, Commutative ring).
is a commutative ring with and is an integral domain ( is a commutative ring and an ordered ring, the published construction being an instance of the general definitions, is an integral domain of characteristic whose group of units is , so it is not a field: is nonzero and not invertible, The integers form a commutative ring, The integers as equivalence classes of pairs of naturals, Arithmetic on the integers).
Verification
, since the first components differ, ; and , since the second components differ, .
, the components being computed by [L2].
Claim 1: by steps 1.1 and 1.2 the element is nonzero, the element is nonzero, and their product is the zero of ; so each is a zero divisor.
Claim 2: an integral domain has no zero divisors, and has one by step 2.1; so is not an integral domain. Every integral domain satisfies , so a product of two integral domains falls under the hypothesis and is never one.
Claim 3: is a ring with by [L4], so steps 2.1 and 3.1 apply with , giving with both factors nonzero; and is an integral domain by [L4], so is a product of two integral domains that is not one.
Remarks
-
This is the cheapest source of zero divisors available. No arithmetic beyond is used, and the two witnesses are written down rather than found. The other standard source is a ring of functions from a set with at least two points to a coefficient ring with (The ring of all functions from a set into a ring, with pointwise operations), and the two constructions are the same phenomenon: a point where one factor vanishes and the other does not.
-
The hypothesis is on both factors. If is the one-element ring then is the zero of and the argument collapses; indeed is then essentially again, and may well be a domain. That is why both and are assumed.
-
The failure is not about commutativity. and need not be commutative for claim 1; commutativity enters only in claim 2, because Zero divisor, and integral domain: a commutative ring with and no zero divisors requires a domain to be commutative and the product of two commutative rings is commutative (The product ring with componentwise operations, its identity and its units ).
Depends on
- The product ring $R \times S$ with componentwise operations, its identity $(1_R, 1_S)$ and its units $R^{\times} \times S^{\times}$
- Zero divisor, and integral domain: a commutative ring with $1 \ne 0$ and no zero divisors
- Ring: an abelian group under addition and a monoid under multiplication, with multiplication distributing over addition on both sides
- Commutative ring
- In any ring $0 \cdot a = a \cdot 0 = 0$, $(-a)b = a(-b) = -(ab)$, $(-a)(-b) = ab$, $(-1)a = -a$ and $a(b - c) = ab - ac$
- $\mathbb{Z}$ is a commutative ring and an ordered ring, the published construction being an instance of the general definitions
- $\mathbb{Z}$ is an integral domain of characteristic $0$ whose group of units is $\{1,-1\}$, so it is not a field: $2$ is nonzero and not invertible
- The integers form a commutative ring
- The integers as equivalence classes of pairs of naturals
- Arithmetic on the integers
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 75 results over 21 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Product of rings (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Zero divisor (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)