# Derivations Acting as Homomorphisms and as Anti homomorphisms in σ Lie Ideals of σ Prime Gamma Rings

(1)

## Gamma Rings

1

### S. Chakraborty

2,∗

1Department of Mathematics, Rajshahi University, Rajshahi-6205, Bangladesh

2Department of Mathematics, Shahjalal University of Science and Technology, Sylhet-3114, Bangladesh

### Abstract

LetU be a non-zero σ-square closed Lie ideal of a 2-torsion freeσ-primeΓ-ringM satisfying the condition aαbβc=aβbαcfor alla, b, c∈ M andα, β Γ, and letdbe a derivation ofM such that = σd. We prove here that (i) ifdacts as a homomorphism onU, thend= 0orU ⊆Z(M), whereZ(M)is the centre ofM; and (ii) ifdacts as an anti-homomorphism onU, thend= 0orU ⊆Z(M).

### Keywords

σ-Prime Gamma Ring, Lie Ideal, Derivation, Involution

### Mathematics Subject Classification 2010

16W10, 16W25, 16U80

### Introduction

SupposeM andΓare additive abelian groups. If there exists a mapping(a, α, b)7→aαbofΓ×M →M satisfying (a)

(a+b)αc=aαc+bαc,a(α+β)b=aαb+aβb,aα(b+c) =aαb+aαc, and (b)(aαb)βc=(bβc)for alla, b, c∈M andα, β∈Γ, thenM is said to be aΓ-ring in the sense of Barnes . The setZ(M)={a∈M :aαm=mαafor allα∈Γ

andm∈M}is called the center of theΓ-ringM.In this article,M will represent aΓ-ring with centreZ(M).

Recall thatM is said to be 2-torsion free if2a= 0witha ∈M, thena= 0. M is called prime if, for anya, b ∈M, aΓMΓb= 0impliesa= 0orb= 0. A mappingσ:M →Mis called an involution ifσ2(a) =a,σ(a+b) =σ(a) +σ(b) andσ(aαb) =σ(b)ασ(a)for alla, b∈M andα∈Γ.

AΓ-ringM equipped with an involutionσis said to be aσ-primeΓ-ring if for alla, b∈M,aΓMΓb= 0 =aΓMΓσ(b)

impliesa= 0orb= 0. It is noted that every primeΓ-ring having an involutionσisσ-prime, but the converse is in general not true. LetSaσ(M) ={a∈M :σ(a) =±a}, which represents the set of symmetric and skew-symmetric elements ofM. For anya, b∈M andα∈Γ, the symbol[a, b]αstands for the commutatoraαb−bαa. The basic commutator identities are

[aβb, c]α=[b, c]α+a[β, α]cb+ [a, c]αβband

(2)

where[α, β]a=αaβ−βaα, for alla, b, c∈M andα, β∈Γ.Throughout the article, we shall consider the condition (*)aαbβc=aβbαc

for alla, b, c∈M andα, β∈Γ. Using this condition (*), the above identities reduce to

[aβb, c]α=[b, c]α+ [a, c]αβband[a, bβc]α=[a, c]α+ [a, b]αβc, which are extensively used in our results.

An additive subgroupU ofM is called a left (or, right) ideal ofM ifMΓU ⊂U (or,UΓM ⊂U), whereas U is called a (two-sided) ideal ofM ifU is a left as well as a right ideal ofM.

An additive subgroupU ofM is called a Lie ideal if[U, M⊂U. IfU is a Lie ideal ofM, thenU is called aσ-Lie ideal ifσ(U) =U, andU is called a square closed Lie ideal ifuαu∈U for allu∈U andα∈Γ. A Lie idealU ofM is said to be aσ-square closed Lie ideal if it is square closed andσ(U) =U.

An additive mappingd:M →M is called a derivation ifd(aαb) =d(a)αb+aαd(b)for alla, b∈M andα∈Γ. An additive mappingϕ:M →M is said to be a homomorphism ifϕ(aαb) =ϕ(a)αϕ(b)for alla, b∈M andα∈Γ. And, an additive mappingψ:M →M is called an anti-homomorphism ifψ(aαb) =ψ(b)αψ(a)for alla, b∈M andα∈Γ.

A derivationdofM is said to act as a homomorphism [resp. as an anti-homomorphism] on a subsetSofM ifd(aαb) =

d(a)αd(b)[resp.d(aαb) =d(b)αd(a)] for alla, b∈Sandα∈Γ.

In , Bell and Kappe proved that ifdis a derivation of a semiprime ringR which is either an endomorphism or an anti-endomorphism onR, thend = 0; whereas, the behavior ofdis somewhat restricted in case of prime rings in the way that ifdis a derivation of a prime ringRacting as a homomorphism or an anti-homomorphism on a non-zero right idealU ofR, thend= 0. Asma et. al.  extended this result of prime rings on square closed Lie ideals. Afterwards, the said result was extended toσ-prime rings by Oukhtite et. al. in .

InΓ-rings, Dey and Paul  proved that ifDis a generalized derivation of a primeΓ-ringM with an associated derivation d of M which acts as a homomorphism and an anti-homomorphism on a non-zero idealI of M, thend = 0or M is commutative. Afterwards, Chakraborty and Paul  worked onk-derivation of a semiprimeΓ-ring in the sense of Nobusawa  and proved thatd= 0wheredis ak-derivation acting as ak-endomorphism and as an anti-k-endomorphism.

In this article, the above mentioned results following  in classical rings are extended to those in gamma rings with derivation acting as a homomorphism and as an anti-homomorphism onσ-primeΓ-rings. Our objective is to prove that

(i) ifdis a derivation of a 2-torsion freeσ-primeΓ-ringM such that = σdand ifdacts as a homomorphism on a non-zeroσ-square closed Lie idealU ofM, thend= 0orU ⊆Z(M); and

(ii) ifdis a derivation of a 2-torsion freeσ-primeΓ-ringM satisfying the condition (*) such that =σdand ifdacts as an anti-homomorphism on a non-zeroσ-square closed Lie idealUofM, thend= 0orU ⊆Z(M).

### -rings

We start this section with an example which ensures the existence of an involution in aΓ-ring. We also give an example of a σ-primeΓ-ring which is not a primeΓ-ring along with an example of a Lie ideal in aΓ-ring.

Example 2.1LetM be aΓ-ring. DefineM1={(a, b) :a, b∈M}andΓ1={(α, α) :α∈Γ}. Addition and multiplication on M1 are defined as: (a, b) + (c, d) = (a+c, b+d) and(a, b)(α, α)(c, d) = (aαc, dαb). Under these addition and multiplication,M1is aΓ1-ring. Define a mappingσ:M1→M1byσ((a, b)) = (b, a). Thenσis an involution onM1(, Example 3.2).

(3)

of the primeness ofM, these yield:a= 0orc= 0;d= 0orb= 0;a= 0ord= 0andc= 0orb= 0. In all the cases, we obtain(a, b) = 0or(c, d) = 0, which establishes our claim.

But,M1is not a primeΓ-ring. For,(a,0)(α, α)(x, y)(β, β)(0, b) = (0,0)but(a,0)or(0, b)are not zero.

Example 2.2LetR be a commutative ring of characteristic 2 having unity element 1. ConsiderM = M1,2(R)andΓ = {

(

n.1

n.1

)

: n Z, 2 - n}. ThenM is aΓ-ring. SupposeN = {(x, x) : x R} ⊆ M. Then for each (x, x) N,

(a, b)∈Mand

(

n

n

)

Γ, we have

(x, x)

(

n

n

)

(a, b)(a, b)

(

n

n

)

(x, x)

= (xna−bnx, xnb−anx)

= (xna−2bnx+bnx, bnx−2anx+xna)

= (xna+bnx, bnx+xna)∈N. Therefore,N is a Lie ideal ofM.

IfU is a square closed Lie ideal (i.e. for allu∈U andα∈Γ), then for eachv∈U,uαv+vαu=(u+v)α(u+v)

uαu−vαv. Therefore,uαv+vαu∈U. On the other hand,uαv−vαu∈Ufor allu, v ∈Uandα∈Γ. Hence,2uαv∈U for allu, v∈Uandα∈Γ. We need to use this result frequently.

We proceed with the following lemmas.

Lemma 2.1 (, Lemma 3.1)LetU ̸= 0be aσ-ideal of a 2-torsion freeσ-primeΓ-ringM satisfying the condition (*). If

[U, U]Γ= 0, thenU ⊆Z(M).

Lemma 2.2 (, Lemma 2.2)LetU *Z(M)be aσ-ideal of a 2-torsion freeσ-primeΓ-ringM satisfying the condition (*) anda, b∈M such thataαU βb=aαU βσ(b) = 0for allα, β∈Γ. Thena= 0orb= 0.

Lemma 2.3 LetU ̸= 0be aσ-ideal of a 2-torsion freeσ-primeΓ-ringM satisfying the condition (*) andda derivation of

M such that=σdandd(U) = 0. Thend= 0orU ⊆Z(M).

Proof. For all u U, m M andα Γ, we have[u, m]α U. So, we get0 = d([u, m]α) = [d(u), m]α+

[u, d(m)]α= [u, d(m)]α. That is, for allu∈U,m∈M andα∈Γ,

[u, d(m)]α= 0. (1)

Puttingmβtformin (1), wheret∈M andβ∈Γ, we have

0 = [u, d(mβt)]α= [u, d(m)βt+mβd(t)]α

=d(m)β[u, t]α+ [u, d(m)]αβt+ [u, m]αβd(t) +[u, d(t)]α

=d(m)β[u, t]α+ [u, m]αβd(t), by using (1). Thus, for allu∈U,m, t∈Mandα, β∈Γ, we have

d(m)β[u, t]α+ [u, m]αβd(t) = 0. (2) Takingt=min (2), we find that

d(m)β[u, m]α+ [u, m]αβd(m) = 0 . Sinced(m)β[u, m]α= [u, m]αβd(m)[by (1)], therefore, we have

2d(m)β[u, m]α= 0 .

By the 2-torsion freeness ofM, for allu∈U,m∈M andα, β∈Γ, we obtain

d(m)β[u, m]α= 0. (3)

Replacinguby2uγvin (3), withv∈Uandγ∈Γ, we have

(4)

= 2d(m)βuγ[v, m]α+ 2d(m)β[u, m]αγv

= 2d(m)βuγ[v, m]α, by using (3). SinceM is 2-torsion free, for allv∈U,m∈Mandα, β, γ∈Γ, we obtain

d(m)βU γ[v, m]α= 0. (4)

Letm∈Saσ(M). Then the fact thatσ(U) =U leads to

d(m)βU γ[v, m]α= 0 =d(m)βU γσ([v, m]α). (5) In view of Lemma 2.2, it gives thatd(m) = 0or[v, m]α= 0for allv∈U. Asm+σ(m)∈Saσ(M), thend(m+σ(m)) = 0 or[U, m+σ(m)]α = 0. If[U, m+σ(m)]α= 0, then[U, m]α=[U, σ(m)]α. If[U, m−σ(m)]α= 0, then[U, m]α =

[U, σ(m)]α. Adding these two relations, we obtain that2[U, m]α= 0, and hence[U, m]α= 0for allm∈M andα∈Γ, by 2-torsion freeness ofM.

Now we assume thatd(m+σ(m)) = 0. It givesd(m) +σd(m)) = 0(since=σd), and we obtaind(m)∈Saσ(M). Applying this in (4), we conclude thatd(m) = 0or[U, m]α = 0. Ifd(m−σ(m)) = 0, thend(m) ∈Saσ(M), and once again by using (4), we obtain thatd(m) = 0or[U, m]α= 0.

LetA={m ∈M : d(m) = 0}andB ={m ∈M : [U, m]α = 0}. ThenAandBare two additive subgroups ofM such thatA⊂MandB⊂M. We also haveA∪B=M. But, a group cannot be a union of two of its proper subgroups, and thusM =AorM =B. IfM =A, thend(m) = 0for allm∈M, i.e.d= 0. IfM =B, thenU ⊆Z(M). Consequently, we haved= 0orU ⊆Z(M).

Now we have the position to prove our main results.

Theorem 2.1 LetU ̸= 0be aσ-square closed Lie ideal of a 2-torsion freeσ-primeΓ-ringM satisfying the condition (*) andda derivation ofM which acts as a homomorphism onU. If=σd, thend= 0orU ⊆Z(M).

Proof. Let us suppose thatd(aαb) =d(a)αd(b)for alla, b∈U andα∈Γ. Assume thata, b, c∈Uandα, β∈Γ. As

4aαbβc= 2(2aαb)βc, it follows that4aαbβc∈U. SinceM is 2-torsion free, we obtain

d(aαbβc) =d(aαb)βc+aαbβd(c) =d(a)αd(b)βc+aαbβd(c). (6) On the other hand,

d(aαbβc) =d(a)αd(bβc) =d(a)αd(b)βc+d(a)αbβd(c). (7) Comparing (6) and (7), we obtain(d(a)−a)αbβd(c) = 0for alla, b, c∈U andα, β∈Γ. Therefore, for alla, c∈U and α, β∈Γ, we get

(d(a)−a)αU βd(c) = 0. (8)

As=σdandσ(U) =U, we conclude thatd(c) = 0for allc∈U or,d(a) =afor alla∈U. Ifd(c) = 0for allc∈U, then in view of Lemma 2.3, we conclude thatd = 0orU ⊆Z(M). Now considerd(a) =afor alla∈ U. Letm ∈M, u∈U andα∈Γ. Usingd(u) =uandd([u, m]α) = [u, m]α, we have seen that[u, d(m)]α= 0for allu∈U,m∈M and α∈Γ. By the similar argument as in the proof of Lemma 2.3, we are forced to conclude thatd= 0orU ⊆Z(M).

Theorem 2.2 LetM be a 2-torsion freeσ-primeΓ-ring satisfying the condition (*), and letU ̸= 0be aσ-square closed Lie ideal ofM. Letdbe a derivation ofM which acts as an anti-homomorphism onU. If=σd, thend= 0orU ⊆Z(M).

Proof. Suppose thatdacts as an anti-homomorphism onU. For alla, b∈Uandα∈Γ, we then get

d(aαb) =d(a)αb+aαd(b) =d(b)αd(a). (9) Substituting2aβbforain (9) withβ Γ, and using the 2-torsion freeness ofM, we get

(5)

=⇒d(b)βd(a)αb+aβbαd(b) =d(b)αd(a)βb+d(b)αaβd(b). By using (*), for alla, b∈U andα, β∈Γ, we then obtain

aαbβd(b) =d(b)βaαd(b). (10) Replacingaby2cγain (10), wherec∈U andγ∈Γ, and using the 2-torsion freeness ofM, we find that

cγaαbβd(b) =d(b)βcγaαd(b) (11) for alla, b, c∈U andα, β, γ∈Γ. But, from (10), we get

cγaαbβd(b) =cγd(b)βaαd(b). Comparing this with (11), we obtain

cγd(b)βaαd(b) =d(b)βcγaαd(b). By using (*), we find that

[c, d(b)]γβaαd(b) = 0, and hence, for allb, c∈U andα, β, γ∈Γ, we get

[c, d(b)]γβU αd(b) = 0. (12)

Forb∈U∩Saσ(M), asσ(U) =U, we have

[c, d(b)]γβU αd(b) = 0 = [c, d(b)]γβU ασ(d(b)).

In view of Lemma 2.2, we obtain[c, d(b)]γ = 0ord(b) = 0for allc∈U. Sincedσ=σdandσ(U) =U, using the fact thatc+σ(c), c−σ(c)∈U ∩Saσ(M), by virtue of (12), we clearly find thatd(b) = 0or[U, d(b)]γ = 0for allb ∈U and γ∈Γ.

SetF ={b∈U :d(b) = 0}andG={b∈U : [U, d(b)]γ = 0}. Clearly,FandGare additive subgroups ofUsuch that U =F∪G, and henceU =F orU =G. IfU =F, thend(U) = 0, and by virtue of Lemma 2.3, we find thatd= 0or U ⊆Z(M). Now assume thatU =G. Then, for allu∈U, we obtain

[u, d(b)]γ = 0. (13)

Puttingbαbforbin (13), we get

0 = [u, d(bαb)]γ = [u, d(b)αb+bαd(b)]γ

=d(b)α[u, b]γ+ [u, d(b)]γαb+[u, d(b)]γ+ [u, b]γαd(b). By using (13) in the above relation, we obtain

d(b)α[u, b]γ+ [u, b]γαd(b) = 0. (14) From (13), we getuγd(b) = d(b)γu, which forces tod(b)α[u, b]γ = [u, b]γαd(b), since[u, b]γ ∈U. Using this in (14), by the 2-torsion freeness ofM, for allu, b∈Uandα, γ∈Γ, we find

d(b)α[u, b]γ = 0. (15)

Putting2uβvin place ofu, wherev∈Uandβ Γ, and using (15) and 2-torsion freeness ofM, we getd(b)αuβ[v, b]γ = 0 so thatd(b)αU β[v, b]γ= 0for allb, v∈U andα, β, γ∈Γ.

(6)

### Acknowledgements

We are thankful to the reviewers for their useful suggestions and valuable comments to improve this article significantly.

### REFERENCES

 A. Asma, N. Rehman and A. Shakir, On Lie ideals with derivations as homomorphisms and anti-homomorphisms, Acta Math. Hungar., 101(1–2) (2003), 79–82.

 A. Ali and D. Kumar, Derivation which acts as a homomorphism or as an anti-homomorphism in a prime ring, Internat. Math. Forum, 2(23) (2007), 1105–1110.

 W. E. Barnes, On theΓ-Rings of Nobusawa, Pacific J. Math., 18 (1966), 411–422.

 H. E. Bell and L. C. Kappe, Rings in which derivations satisfy certain algebraic conditions, Acta Math. Hungar., 53(3–4) (1989), 339–346.

 S. Chakraborty and A. C. Paul, On Jordank-isomorphisms of certainΓN-rings, Indian J. Math., 53(1) (2011), 99–111.

 S. Chakraborty and A. C. Paul, Thek-derivation acting as ak-endomorphism and as an anti-k-endomorphism on semiprime Nobu-sawa gamma ring, GANIT J. Bangladesh Math. Soc., 33 (2013), 93–101.

 K. K. Dey, A. C. Paul and B. Davvaz, On commutativity ofσ-primeΓ-rings, Kyungpook Math. J. (to appear).

 K. K. Dey, A. C. Paul and B. Davvaz, On centralizing automorphisms and Jordan left derivations onσ-prime gamma rings, Hacettepe J. Math. Stat. (to appear).

 K. K. Dey and A. C. Paul, Generalized derivations acting as homomorphisms and anti-homomorphisms of gamma rings, J. Sci. Res., 4(1) (2012), 33–37.

 N. Nobusawa, On a Generalization of the Ring Theory, Osaka J. Math., 1 (1964), 81–89.

 L. Oukhtite, S. Salhi and L. Taoufiq,σ-Lie ideals with derivations as homomorphisms and anti-homomorphisms, Internat. J. Algebra, 1(5) (2007), 235–239.

 L. Oukhtite, S. Salhi and L. Taoufiq, Derivations and commutativity ofσ-prime rings, Glasnik Mathematicki, 41(1) (2006), 57–64.

Updating...

Updating...