# On some characterization of Smarandache-boolean near-ring with sub-direct sum structure.

[section]1. Preliminaries

Definition 1.1. A (Left) near ring A is a system with two Binary operations, addition and multiplication, such that

(i) the elements of A form a group (A, +) under addition,

(ii) the elements of A form a multiplicative semi-group,

(iii) x(y + z) = xy + xz, for all x, y and z [member of] A. In particular, if A contains a multiplicative semi-group S whose elements generates (A, +) and satisfy,

(iv) (x + y)s = xs + ys, for all x, y [member of] A and s [member of] S, then we say that A is a distributively generated near-ring.

Definition 1.2. A near-ring (B, +, *) is Boolean-near-ring if there exists a Boolean-ring (A, +, [and], 1) with identity such that is defined in terms of +, [and] and 1, and for any b [member of] B, b * b = b.

Definition 1.3. A near-ring (B, +, *) is said to be idempotent if [x.sup.2] = x, for all x [member of] B. i.e. If (B, +, *) is an idempotent ring, then for all a, b [member of] B, a + a = 0 and a * b = b * a.

Definition 1.4. Compatibility a [member of] b i.e. "a is compatibility to b" if a[b.sup.2] = [a.sup.2]b.

Definition 1.5. Let A = (..., a, b, c, ...) be a set of pairwise compatible elements of an associate ring R. Let A be maximal in the sense that each element of A is compatible with every other element of A and no other such elements may be found in R. Then A is said to be a maximal compatible set or a maximal set.

Definition 1.6. If a sub-direct sum R of domains has an identity, and if R has the property that with each element a, it contains also the associated idempotent [a.sup.0] of a, then R is called an associate subdirect sum or an associate ring.

Definition 1.7. If the maximal set A contains an element u which has the property that a < u, for all a [member of] A, then u is called the uni-element of A.

Definition 1.8. Left zero divisors are right zero divisors, if ab = 0 implies ba = 0.

Now we have introduced a new definition by .

Definition 1.9. A Boolean-near-ring (B, [disjunction], [and]) is said to be Samarandache-Boolean-near-ring whose proper subset A is a Boolean-ring with respect to same induced operation of B.

Theorem 1.1. A Boolean-near-ring (B, [disjunction], [and]) is having the proper subset A, is a maximal set with uni-element in an associate ring R, with identity under suitable definitions for (B, +,) with corresponding lattices (A, [less than or equal to])(A, <) and

a [disjunction] b = a + b - 2[a.sup.0] b = (a [union] b) - (a [intersection] b),

a [and] b = a [intersection] b = [a.sup.0]b = a[b.sup.0].

Then B is a Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring.

Proof. Given (B, [disjunction], [and]) is a Boolean-near-ring whose proper subset (A, [disjunction], [and]) is a maximal set with uni-element in an associate ring R, and if the maximal set A is also a subset of B.

Now to prove that B is Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring. It is enough to prove that the proper subset A of B is a Boolean-ring. Let a and b be two constants of A, if a is compatible to b, we define a [and] b as follows:

If [a.sub.i] = [b.sub.i] in the i-component, let [(a [and] b).sub.i] = [0.sub.i];

if [a.sub.i] [not equal to] [b.sub.i], then since a ~ b precisely one of these is zero;

if [a.sub.i] = 0, let [(a [and] b).sub.i] = [b.sub.i] [not equal to] 0;

if [b.sub.i] = 0, let [(a [and] b).sub.i] = [a.sub.i] [not equal to] 0.

It is seen that if a [and] b belongs to the associate ring R, then a [and] b < u, where u is the uni-element of A, and therefore, a [and] b [member of] A.

Consider a [and] b = a + b - 2[a.sup.0]b:

If in the i-component, 0 [not equal to] [a.sub.i]-[b.sub.i], then since [([a.sup.0]).sub.i] = [1.sub.i] = [([b.sup.0]).sub.i], we have [(a + b - 2[a.sup.0]b).sub.i] = [0.sub.i];

if [0.sub.i] = [a.sub.i] = [b.sub.i], then [([a.sup.0]).sub.i] = 0 and [([b.sup.0]).sub.i] = 1, whence, [(a + b- 2[a.sup.0]b).sub.i] = [b.sub.i];

if [a.sub.i] [not equal to] 0 and [b.sub.i] = 0 then (a + b - 2[a.sup.0]b) = [0.sub.i].

Therefore a [and] b [member of] A, the maximal set.

Similarly, the element a [and] b = a [intersection] b = [a.sup.0]b = a[b.sup.0] = glb(a, b) has defined and shown to belongs to A as the glb(a, b). Now let us show that (A, [disjunction], [and]) is a Boolean-ring. Firstly, a [disjunction] a = 0, since [a.sub.i] = [a.sub.i] in every i-component, whence [(a[disjunction]a).sub.i] vanishes, by our definition of '[and]'. Secondly a [and] a = a [intersection] a = [a.sup.0]a = a, and so a is idempotent under [and]. We have shown that A is closed under [and] is [disjunction], and associativity is a direct verification, and each element is itself inverse under [and].

To prove associativity under [and]:

For [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII].

For distributivity of [and] over [and], let c be an arbitrary element in A.

Now [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Hence (A, [disjunction], [and]) is a Boolean-ring.

It follows that the proper subset A, a maximal set of B forms a Boolean ring. B is a Boolean-near-ring, whose proper subset is a Boolean-ring, then by definition, B is a SmarandacheBoolean-near-ring.

Theorem 1.2. A Boolean-near-ring (B, [disjunction], [and]) is having the proper subset (A, +, [and], 1) is an associate ring in which the relation of compatibility is transitive for non-zero elements with identity under suitable definitions for (B, +, *) with corresponding lattices (A, [less than or equal to])(A, <) and

a [disjunction] b = a + b - 2[a.sup.0]b = (a [union] b) - (a [intersection] b),

a [and] b = a [intersection] b = [a.sup.0]b = a[b.sup.0].

Then B is a Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring.

Proof. Assume that (B, +, *) be Boolean- near-ring having a proper subset A is an associate ring in which the relation of compatibility is transitive for non-zero elements.

Now to prove that B is a Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring, i.e., to prove that if the proper subset of B is a Boolean-ring, then by definition B is Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring. We have 0 is compatible with all elements, whence all elements are compatible with A and therefore, are idempotent.

Then assume that transitivity holds for compatibility of non-zero elements. It follows that non-zero elements from two maximal sets cannot be compatible (much less equal), and hence, except for the element 0, the maximal sets are disjoint.

Let a be a arbitrary, non-zero element of R. If a is a zero-divisor of R, then the idempotent element A - [a.sup.0] [not equal to] 0. Further A - [a.sup.0] belongs to the maximal set generated by the non-zero divisor a' = a + A - [a.sup.0], since it is (A-[a.sup.0])a' = (A - [a.sup.0])(a + A-[a.sup.0]) = (A - [a.sup.0]) = [(A - [a.sup.0]).sup.2] i.e. A - [a.sup.0] < a'. Since also a < a' and a ~ A - [a.sup.0], therefore, a is idempotent. i.e. All the zero-divisors of R are idempotent which is a maximal set then by theorem 1 and by definition A is a Boolean-ring. Then by definition, B is Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring.

Theorem 1.3. A Boolean-near-ring (B, [disjunction], [and]) is having the proper subset A, the set A of idempotent elements of a ring R, with suitable definitions for [disjunction] and [and],

a [disjunction] b = a + b - 2[a.sup.0]b = (a [union] b) - (a [intersection] b),

a [and] b = a [intersection] b = [a.sup.0]b = a[b.sup.0].

Then B is a Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring.

Proof.

Assume that the set A of idempotent elements of a ring R, which is also a subset of B. Now to prove that B is a Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring. It is sufficient to prove that the set A of idempotent elements of a ring R with identity forms a maximal set in R with uni-element. By the definition of compatible, then we have every element of R is compatible with every other idempotent element. If a [member of] R is not idempotent then, [a.sup.2] * 1 [not equal to] a * [1.sup.2], since the definition of compatible. Hence no non-idempotent can belong to this maximal set. Thus the set A is idempotent element of R with identity forms a maximal set in R whose uni-element is the identity of R, by theorem 1 and by definition. A, a maximal set of B forms a Boolean ring

Then by definition, it concludes that B is Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring.

Theorem 1.4. A Boolean-near-ring (B, [disjunction], [and]) is having the proper subset, having a nonzero divisor of A, as an associate ring, with suitable definitions for [disjunction] and [and],

a [disjunction] b = a + b - 2[a.sup.0]b = (a [union] b) - (a [intersection] b)

a [and] b = a [intersection] b = [a.sup.0]b = a[b.sup.0].

Then B is a Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring.

Proof. Let B is Boolean-near-ring whose proper subset having a non-zero divisor of associate ring A.

Now to prove that B Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring. It is enough to prove that every non-divisor of A determines uniquely a maximal set of A with uni-element.

Let a be the uni-element of a maximal set A then we have b < a, for b [member of] A.

Consider all the elements of A in whose sub-direct display one or more component [a.sub.i] duplicate the corresponding component [u.sub.i] of u, the other components of a being zeros, i.e., all the element a such that a < u, becomes u is uni-element. Clearly, these elements are compatible with each other and together with u form a maximal set in A, for which u is the uni-element. Hence A is a maximal set with uni-element and by theorem 1 and definition A, a maximal set of B forms a Boolean ring.

Then by definition, B is Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring.

Theorem 1.5. A Boolean-near-ring (B, [disjunction], [and]) is having the proper subset A, associate ring is of the form A = [u.sub.J], where u is a non-zero of A and J is the set of idempotent elements of A, with suitable definitions for [disjunction] and [and],

a [disjunction] b = a + b - 2[a.sup.0]b = (a [union] b) - (a [intersection] b),

a [and] b = a [intersection] b = [a.sup.0]b = a[b.sup.0].

Then B is a Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring.

Proof. Assume that the proper subset A of a Boolean-near-ring B is of the form A = [u.sub.J], where u is non-zero divisor of A and J is the set of idempotent elements of A. Now to prove B is Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring. It is enough to prove that A is a maximal set with uni-element.

(i) It is sufficient to show that the set [u.sub.J] is a maximal set having u as its uni-element.

(ii) If b belongs to the maximal set determined by u, then b has the required form b = [u.sub.e], for some e [member of] J.

Proof of (i). It is seen that [u.sub.e] ~ [u.sub.f] i.e. [u.sub.e] is compatible to [u.sub.f] with uni-element u, for all e, f [member of] J, since idempotent belongs to the center of A. Also, [u.sub.e] < u, since [u.sub.e] * u = [u.sup.2.sub.e] = [([u.sub.e]).sup.2].

Proof of (ii). We know that A is an associate ring, the associated idempotent [a.sup.0] of a has the property: if a ~ b then [a.sup.0]b = a[b.sup.0] = [b.sup.0]a = b[a.sup.0]; if a [member of] [A.sub.u], then since a < u and [u.sup.0] = 1, we have A = [u.sup.0]a = a[u.sup.0] = [a.sup.0]u, for all [a.sup.0] [member of] J.

Hence A is a maximal set with uni-element of of B by suitable definition and by theorem 1 then we have A is a Boolean-ring. Then by definition, B is Smarandache-Boolean-near-ring.

References

 G. Bermann and R. J. Silverman, Near Rings, Amer. Math., 66(1954).

 Birkhoff, Garrett, Lattice Theory, American. Math. Soc, Colloquium Publication, 1939.

 Florentin Smarandache, Special algebraic structures, University of Maxico, Craiova, 1973.

 A. L. Foster, Generalized boolean theory of universal algebras, Math. Z., 1958.

 A. L. Foster, The idempotent elements of a commutative ring form a Boolean Algebra, Duke math. J., 1946.

 James R. Clay and Donald A. Lawver, Boolean-near-rings, Canad. Math. Bull., 1968.

 N. H. McCoy and D. Montgomery, A representation of generalized Boolean rings, Duke Math. J., 1937.

 N. H. McCoy, Subdirect sums of rings, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc, 1947.

 Padilla Raul, Smarandache Algebraic Structures, Delhi, India, 1998.

 Padilla Raul, Smarandache Algebraic Structures, USA, 9(1998).

 G. Pilz, Near rings, North Holland Press, Amsterdam, 1977.

 T. Ramaraj and N. Kannappa, On finite Smarandache-near-rings, Scientia Magna, 1(2005), No. 2, 49-51.

Dr. N. Kannappa ([dagger]) and Mrs. P. Tamilvani ([double dagger])

([dagger]) TBML College, Porayar-609307, Tamilnadu, India

E-mails: sivaguru91@yahoo.com
Author: Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback Kannappa, N.; Tamilvani, P. Scientia Magna Technical report Sep 1, 2013 2294 Amenable partial orders on locally inverse semigroup. Some indefinite integrals involving certain polynomial. Algebra, Boolean Boolean algebra Mathematical analysis