You're reading the public-facing archive of the Category Theory Zulip server.
To join the server you need an invite. Anybody can get an invite by contacting Matteo Capucci at name dot surname at gmail dot com.
For all things related to this archive refer to the same person.
The following is driving me absolutely crazy. I'm misunderstanding something but I don't find what it is.
Let be a ring. In these notes (corrected the link), they say that:
(1) if is a proper ideal of , and if has the invariant basis number (IBN), then also has the IBN,
(2) every division ring has the IBN.
With my understanding, it would follow that every nonzero ring has the IBN (which is false).
Here is my reasoning: Let be a nonzero ring. Let be a maximal ideal of , which exists by Krull's theorem. Then is a division ring, therefore has the IBN. Hence has the IBN.
Where is the mistake??
It's probably in assuming that a ring modulo a maximal two-sided ideal is a division ring, as opposed to a simple ring.
For example, the maximal two-sided ideal of an matrix algebra is the zero ideal.
Oh thanks, it should be that. They say here that the quotient of a ring by a two-sided ideal is a division ring iff is maximal as a left ideal or as a right ideal.