|
|
![[parent]](http://images.planetmath.org:8080/images/uparrow.png) Viewing Correction to 'division ring'
|
Nonzero have inverse by Henry
Correction id: 909
Filed on: 2002-07-23 15:17:58
Status: Rejected on 2002-07-23 15:26:18
Type: Erratum
Correction text:
I don't think z has to have an inverse to qualify as a division ring (at least in the definitions I've seen). |
Comment from object owner djao:
> I don't think z has to have an inverse to qualify as a division ring
> (at least in the definitions I've seen).
The letter z does not appear anywhere in my text. Do you mean a?
The existence of inverses for a, far from being unnecessary, is actually the critical requirement that distinguishes a division ring from an ordinary ring. So it seems unreasonable to remove this requirement which forms the very essence of the entry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
