Simply presented inseparable \(V(RG)\) without \(R\) being weakly perfect or countable. (Q879672)

The author gives the following definition of a heightly-additive ring. Definition. The commutative ring \(R\) with \(1\) and of prime characteristic \(p\) is called heightly-additive if \(R=\bigcup_{n<\omega}R_n\), \(R_n\subseteq R_{n+1}\) and for every natural number \(n\), for any two elements \(r\in R_n\) and \(f\in R_n\) such that \(r\not\in R^{p^n}\) and \(f\not\in R^{p^n}\), we have \(r+f\not\in R^{p^n}\) or \(r+f\in R^{p^\omega}=\bigcap_{n<\omega}R^{p^n}\). Inductively, either \(r+f+\cdots+e\not\in R^{p^n}\) or \(r+f+\cdots+e\in R^{p^\omega}\) whenever \(r\in R_n\setminus R^{p^n}\), \(f\in R_n\setminus R^{p^n}\),\dots, \(e\in R_n\setminus R^{p^n}\). It is easily seen that this definition is contrary to the condition that the ring \(R\) is neither weakly perfect nor countable, as stated in the title of the paper. Besides, the author himself proves (p. 267, line 10-11): ``then the first ring is weakly perfect''. The author gives four ``classical'' examples of heightly-additive rings. However, the first two examples are only conditions and they do not show concrete rings which are heightly-additive. In example (3), \(R\) is a direct product of rings \(R_n\) such that for every \(r_n\in R_n\) one has \(r_n\in R^{p^n}\setminus R^{p^{n+1}}\), \(n<\omega\). This condition is not fulfilled for \(r_n\in Z_p\subseteq R_n\). In example (4) it is obvious that \(R\) does not contain unity. Finally, in our opinion the main theorem does not present interesting results since it is formulated for rings which do not exist. Besides, in its proof the author essentially uses the papers [Math. J. Okayama Univ. 45, 1-15 (2003; Zbl 1060.20007) and Kyungpook Math. J. 44, No. 1, 21-29 (2004; Zbl 1060.20006)], which have been given negative reviews by Todor Mollov.