Talk:Relative Prime Modulo Tensor is Zero

It is common in books and more that rings can and are denoted as modules because a ring is a module. Abelian group is satesfied and the $R$-action is the multiplication itself so it is a module. Would a page perhaps proving this to be the case help clearify things? EmperorZelos (talk) 07:34, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

"It is common in books" which is why books are completely incomprehensible on the subject and are of better use as sanitary paper in the room used for ablutions.

It is important when defining the structure of complicated objects like this to explain in full detail by using the filly detailed definition of the internal operations of the objects in question.

The page proving a ring is a module already exists. As I have said before, you may find it helps to study this website, particularly in the categories relevant to the areas of mathematics that are directly relevant to the work you are attempting.

And again: if you can't explain it to someone who does not already understand it, it means you don't understand it yourself. --prime mover (talk) 08:16, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Is it your direct intent to be so passive agressive and borderline insulting when someone wants and tries to help to the point where you make them unwilling to continue contributing at all? Or are there other factors that makes it appear that way that should be taken into consideration? As it seems here you put yourself quite high on a pedestal yet, well I leave that unstated. Don't get me wrong I do love rigour and all, which is why I don't complain about wanting it to be rigorous or even the housestyle, however I find the attitude displayed by you increadibly off putting and unprofessional. EmperorZelos (talk) 08:23, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I suppose I do come across as sounding a bit cross sometimes. I held back my true feelings. --prime mover (talk) 18:27, 27 November 2015 (UTC)