Below is a proposition about rings, and a short proof in which the use of the axioms and other properties of rings is not made explicit. Proposition. Let R be a ring. For any two elements a and b of R, it holds that -(ab) = (-a) b. Proof. We have -(ab) + ab= 0 and (-a) b + ab= 0. Therefore -(ab) = (-a)b. Which property is used to prove -(ab) + ab=0? This property and two more are used to prove (-a) b + ab=0. What are the other two? Put them in the order you would use them when simplifying (-a) b + ab to 0. First then Which property is used to finish the proof? Please look at the lecture notes to remind yourself e.g. what "Proposition 3.13" is. commutative law for + associative law for • definition of inverse for + identity law for + identity law for. definition of inverse for. > associative law for + Proposition 3.13 cancellation property distributive law
Below is a proposition about rings, and a short proof in which the use of the axioms and other properties of rings is not made explicit. Proposition. Let R be a ring. For any two elements a and b of R, it holds that -(ab) = (-a) b. Proof. We have -(ab) + ab= 0 and (-a) b + ab= 0. Therefore -(ab) = (-a)b. Which property is used to prove -(ab) + ab=0? This property and two more are used to prove (-a) b + ab=0. What are the other two? Put them in the order you would use them when simplifying (-a) b + ab to 0. First then Which property is used to finish the proof? Please look at the lecture notes to remind yourself e.g. what "Proposition 3.13" is. commutative law for + associative law for • definition of inverse for + identity law for + identity law for. definition of inverse for. > associative law for + Proposition 3.13 cancellation property distributive law
Advanced Engineering Mathematics
10th Edition
ISBN:9780470458365
Author:Erwin Kreyszig
Publisher:Erwin Kreyszig
Chapter2: Second-order Linear Odes
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1RQ
Related questions
Question
Transcribed Image Text:Below is a proposition about rings, and a short proof in which the use of the axioms and other properties of rings is not made
explicit.
Proposition. Let R be a ring. For any two elements a and b of R, it holds that -(ab) = (-a) b.
Proof. We have -(ab) + ab= 0 and (-a) b + ab= 0. Therefore -(ab) = (-a)b.
Which property is used to prove -(ab) + ab=0?
This property and two more are used to prove (-a) b + ab=0. What are the other two? Put them in the order you would use them
when simplifying (-a) b + ab to 0. First
then
Which property is used to finish the proof?
Please look at the lecture notes to remind yourself e.g. what "Proposition 3.13" is.
commutative law for +
associative law for •
definition of inverse for +
identity law for +
identity law for.
definition of inverse for.
>
associative law for +
Proposition 3.13
cancellation property
distributive law
Expert Solution
This question has been solved!
Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.
Step by step
Solved in 3 steps
Recommended textbooks for you
Advanced Engineering Mathematics
Advanced Math
ISBN:
9780470458365
Author:
Erwin Kreyszig
Publisher:
Wiley, John & Sons, Incorporated
Numerical Methods for Engineers
Advanced Math
ISBN:
9780073397924
Author:
Steven C. Chapra Dr., Raymond P. Canale
Publisher:
McGraw-Hill Education
Introductory Mathematics for Engineering Applicat…
Advanced Math
ISBN:
9781118141809
Author:
Nathan Klingbeil
Publisher:
WILEY
Advanced Engineering Mathematics
Advanced Math
ISBN:
9780470458365
Author:
Erwin Kreyszig
Publisher:
Wiley, John & Sons, Incorporated
Numerical Methods for Engineers
Advanced Math
ISBN:
9780073397924
Author:
Steven C. Chapra Dr., Raymond P. Canale
Publisher:
McGraw-Hill Education
Introductory Mathematics for Engineering Applicat…
Advanced Math
ISBN:
9781118141809
Author:
Nathan Klingbeil
Publisher:
WILEY
Mathematics For Machine Technology
Advanced Math
ISBN:
9781337798310
Author:
Peterson, John.
Publisher:
Cengage Learning,
