# Why can not the Polynomial Ring be a Field?

I'm presently researching Polynomial Rings, yet I can not identify why they are Rings, not Fields. In the definition of a Field, a Set constructs a Commutative Group with Addition and also Multiplication. This indicates an inverted numerous for every single Element in the Set.

Guide does not specify on this, nonetheless. I do not recognize why a Polynomial Ring could not have an inverted multiplicative for every single component (at the very least in the entire numbers, and also it's currently considered that it has a neutral component). Could someone please clarify why this can not be so?

Because necessarily, the only polynomial that can have an adverse level is $0$, which is specified to have a level of $-\infty$. Non - absolutely no constants have level $0$. You after that have the level formula : $\deg (fg) = \deg (f) + \deg (g)$ for any kind of polynomials $f,g$. By examination, any kind of polynomial of level $n \geq 1$ would certainly require as an inverted a polynomial of level $-n$, which does not exist (i.e. what Agusti Roig claimed!) The set you desire does exist, nonetheless : it is called the *area of sensible features *, and also is specifically the set of proportions of polynomials. It is created similarly that the area of sensible numbers is from the ring of integers.

**Hint ** $\rm\quad\rm x \, f(x) = 1 \,$ in $\,\rm R[x]\ \Rightarrow \ 0 = 1 \, $ in $\,\rm R, \, $ by reviewing at $\rm\ x = 0 $

**Remark ** $\ $ This has a really instructional **global ** analysis : if $\rm\, x\,$ is a device in $\rm\, R[x]\,$ after that so also is every $\rm\, R$ - algebra component $\rm\, r,\,$ as adheres to by reviewing $\ \rm x \ f(x) = 1 \ $ at $\rm\ x = r\,.\,$ Therefore to offer a counterexample it is adequate to show any kind of nonunit in any kind of $\rm R$ - algebra. $ $ An all-natural selection is the nonunit $\,\rm 0\in R,\,$ which generates the above evidence.

Related questions