I know that if $R$ is a commutative unitary ring, $f(x), g(x) \in R[x]$, and the leading coefficient of $g$ is a unit in $R$, it is possible to divide $f$ by $g$. My question is: is commutativity of $R$ necessary? I have this doubt, because everywhere the theorem is stated with commutativity as hypothesis, but I'm not able to see where it is used in the proof. Thank you
2026-04-02 02:50:56.1775098256
euclidean division for polynomials with coefficients in noncommutative rings
540 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in ABSTRACT-ALGEBRA
- Feel lost in the scheme of the reducibility of polynomials over $\Bbb Z$ or $\Bbb Q$
- Integral Domain and Degree of Polynomials in $R[X]$
- Fixed points of automorphisms of $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta)$
- Group with order $pq$ has subgroups of order $p$ and $q$
- A commutative ring is prime if and only if it is a domain.
- Conjugacy class formula
- Find gcd and invertible elements of a ring.
- Extending a linear action to monomials of higher degree
- polynomial remainder theorem proof, is it legit?
- $(2,1+\sqrt{-5}) \not \cong \mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-5}]$ as $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-5}]$-module
Related Questions in POLYNOMIALS
- Alternate basis for a subspace of $\mathcal P_3(\mathbb R)$?
- Integral Domain and Degree of Polynomials in $R[X]$
- Can $P^3 - Q^2$ have degree 1?
- System of equations with different exponents
- Can we find integers $x$ and $y$ such that $f,g,h$ are strictely positive integers
- Dividing a polynomial
- polynomial remainder theorem proof, is it legit?
- Polyomial function over ring GF(3)
- If $P$ is a prime ideal of $R[x;\delta]$ such as $P\cap R=\{0\}$, is $P(Q[x;\delta])$ also prime?
- $x^{2}(x−1)^{2}(x^2+1)+y^2$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{C}[x,y].$
Related Questions in NONCOMMUTATIVE-ALGEBRA
- If $P$ is a prime ideal of $R[x;\delta]$ such as $P\cap R=\{0\}$, is $P(Q[x;\delta])$ also prime?
- In a left noetherian ring, does having a left inverse for an element guarantee the existence of right inverse for that element?
- Are there rational coefficients that hold such properties?
- A characterization for minimal left ideals of semisimple rings
- $A \subseteq B \subseteq C$, with $A$ and $C$ simple rings, but $B$ is not a simple ring
- Simplicity of Noetherian $B$, $A \subseteq B\subseteq C$, where $A$ and $C$ are simple Noetherian domains
- Completion of localization equals the completion
- Representations of an algebra
- A characterization of semisimple module related to anihilators
- Counterexample request: a surjective endomorphism of a finite module which is not injective
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
No, it is not necessary. As you correctly observed, the usual proof goes through. You have a choice of whether to do left or right division though, i.e., whether you want $f=gq + r$ or $f=q'g +r'$.
More generally, it also works in (right) skew polynomial rings of the type $R[x;\sigma,\delta]$ where $\sigma$ is an endomorphism of $R$, $\delta$ is a $\sigma$-derivation, and multiplication is defined by $ax= x\sigma(a) + \delta(a)$ for $a \in R$. However, now you need to be somewhat careful with regards to left/right division: If you write coefficients on the right (like I do here), the right division (of the type $f=gq+r$) will work. But if $\sigma$ is not surjective, the left division may not work.
I believe most texts, unless they are explicitly concerned with noncommutive rings, simply do not treat polynomial rings over noncommutative rings at all.