I'm asking this because I could only think of infinite rings where this is true. This must include rings.
Asked
Active
Viewed 77 times
3
-
Are you saying you want a ring that does not have any of those elements, or a ring that might have some of them and also has others that do not match those descriptions? A ring is closed under both of its operations, and while it is not guaranteed to have a multiplicative identity, it must have an additive identity... – abiessu Dec 10 '13 at 20:43
1 Answers
2
There's a reason why you can't find one! If by "ring" you mean a ring with unity, then every non-zero element of a finite ring $R$ is either a unit or a zero divisor. See this link for a proof.
-
-
I would be interested in seeing a proof where there isn't a unity element in the ring... – abiessu Dec 10 '13 at 20:58
-
-
@abiessu Such a ring is necessarily made up entirely of zero divisors, like $2\Bbb Z/8\Bbb Z$. If you can use chat I could sketch the proof there. – rschwieb Dec 10 '13 at 23:52
-
I thought about it and found a partial proof myself... Thank you for the example :-) – abiessu Dec 11 '13 at 05:01