# Thread:

1. ## finiteness of a non-commutative ring

Let $R$ be a non-commutative ring . Suppose that the number of non-units of $R$ is finite . Can we say that $R$ is a finite ring?

2. I think that we can say $R$ is a finite ring. The only way it could be infinite is if the group of units, call it $U$, were infinite. But then $rU$ for any $r\notin U$ with $r\neq 0$ would be an infinite number of non-unital elements, which is a contradiction.

So I guess we must assume that there is at least one non-zero, non-unital element, otherwise an infinite ring of nothing but units with an additive identity thrown in (such as $\mathbb{R}$) would destroy the argument.

In short: yes, unless $R$ is a field!

3. nimon's proof works only for commutative domains because $rU$ is not necessarily infinite even if $U$ is infinite. the answer to xixi's question is also negative for non-commutative rings.

for example $\mathbb{H},$ the ring of quaternions over $\mathbb{R},$ has this property because every non-zero element of $\mathbb{H}$ is a unit. in general, every (infinite) division ring has the property because every

non-zero element of a division ring is a unit. here's a less trivial version of xixi's problem:

let $R$ be an infinite commutative (resp. non-commutative) ring. suppose that the number of non-unit elements of $R$ is finite. is $R$ necessarily a field (resp. division ring)?

4. Originally Posted by NonCommAlg
nimon's proof works only for commutative domains because $rU$ is not necessarily infinite even if $U$ is infinite. the answer to xixi's question is also negative for non-commutative rings.

for example $\mathbb{H},$ the ring of quaternions over $\mathbb{R},$ has this property because every non-zero element of $\mathbb{H}$ is a unit. in general, every (infinite) division ring has the property because every

non-zero element of a division ring is a unit. here's a less trivial version of xixi's problem:

let $R$ be an infinite commutative (resp. non-commutative) ring. suppose that the number of non-unit elements of $R$ is finite. is $R$ necessarily a field (resp. division ring)?
for my question , I meant there are non-units other than zero and the set of these elements is finite , now by this assumption ,can't we still say that $R$ is finite?
{"extraction_info": {"found_math": true, "script_math_tex": 0, "script_math_asciimath": 0, "math_annotations": 0, "math_alttext": 0, "mathml": 0, "mathjax_tag": 0, "mathjax_inline_tex": 0, "mathjax_display_tex": 0, "mathjax_asciimath": 0, "img_math": 0, "codecogs_latex": 27, "wp_latex": 0, "mimetex.cgi": 0, "/images/math/codecogs": 0, "mathtex.cgi": 0}, "config": {"markdown_headings": true, "markdown_code": true, "boilerplate_config": {"ratio_threshold": 0.18, "absolute_threshold": 10, "end_threshold": 15, "enable": true}, "remove_buttons": true, "remove_image_figures": true, "remove_link_clusters": true, "table_config": {"min_rows": 2, "min_cols": 3, "format": "github"}, "remove_chinese": true, "remove_edit_buttons": true, "extract_latex": true}, "english_confidence": 0.9289101362228394, "perplexity_flag": "head"}