Received 21 March 2016; accepted 30 May 2016; published 2 June 2016

1. Introduction
The notion of G-ring was introduced as a generalized extension of the concept on classical ring. From its first appearance, the extensions and the generalizations of various important results in the theory of classical rings to the theory of G-rings have attracted a wider attention as an emerging field of research to enrich the world of algebra. A good number of prominent mathematicians have worked on this interesting area of research to develop many basic characterizations of G-rings. Nobusawa [1] first introduced the notion of a G-ring and showed that G-rings are more general than rings. Barnes [2] slightly weakened the conditions in the definition of G-ring in the sense of Nobusawa. Barnes [2] , Luh [3] , Kyuno [4] , Hoque and Pual [5] - [7] , Ceven [8] , Dey et al. [9] [10] , Vukman [11] and others obtained a large number of important basic properties of G-rings in various ways and developed more remarkable results of G-rings. We start with the following necessary introductory definitions.
Let M and G be additive abelian groups. If there exists an additive mapping
of
which satisfies the conditions:
1)
,
2)
,
3)
, then M is called a G-ring [2] . Every ring M is a G-ring with M = G. However a G- ring need not be a ring. Let M be a G-ring. Then M is said to be prime if
with
, implies
or
and semiprime if
with
implies
. Furthermore, M is said to be a commutative G-ring if
for all
and
. Moreover, the set
is called the center of the G-ring M. If M is a G-ring, then
is known as the commutator of x and y with respect to
, where
and
. We make the following basic commutator identities:
(1)
(2)
for all
and
. Now, we consider the following assumption:
A.......
, for all
and
.
According to assumption (A), the above commutator identities reduce to
and
, which we will extensively used.
During the past few decades, many authors have studied derivations in the context of prime and semiprime rings and G-rings with involution [11] - [14] . The notion of derivation and Jordan derivation on a G-ring were defined by [15] . Let M be G-ring. An additive mapping
is called a derivation if
for all
and
. An additive mapping
is called a Jordan derivation if
for all
and
.
Definition 1 [16] . An additive mapping
on a G-ring M is called an involution if
and
for all
and
. A G-ring M equipped with an involution is called a G-ring M with involution.
Definition 2. An element x in a G-ring M with involution is said to be hermitian if
and skew-hermi- tian if
. The sets of all hermitian and skew-hermitian elements of M will be denoted by
and
, respectively.
Example 1. Let F be a field, and
be a set of all diagonal matrices of order 2, with respect to the usual operation of addition and multiplication on matrices and the involution * on
be defined by
with
, then we get
and
.
Definition 3. An additive mapping
is called a
-derivation if
for all
and
.
To further clarify the idea of
-derivation, we give the following example.
Example 2. Let R be a commutative ring with characteristic of R equal 2. Define
and
, then M and
are abelian groups under addition of matrices and M is a G-ring under multiplication of matrices.
Define a mapping
by
.
To show that d is a
-derivation, let
,
, ![]()
then
![]()
Now,
![]()
since
, this implies that
then
. Hence, d is a
-derivation.
Definition 4. An additive mapping
is called Jordan
-derivation if
for all
and
.
Every
-derivation is a Jordan
-derivation, but the converse in general is not true as shown by the following example
Example 3. Let M be a G-ring with involution and let
such that
and
for all
and
, but
for some
such that
.
Define a mapping
by
for all
and
. To show that d is a Jordan
-derivation, we have on the one hand that
(3)
for all
and
. On the other hand,
(4)
for all
and
. If we compare Equations ((3), (4)), we get
![]()
then after reduction we get that d is a Jordan
-derivation. Now to show that d is not a
-derivation, we have on the one hand that
(5)
for all
and
. On the other hand
(6)
for all
and
. If we compare Equations ((5), (6)), we get
![]()
then after reduction we get that d is not a
-derivation.
In this paper we will prove that if a non-zero Jordan
-derivation d of a 2-torsion free semiprime G-ring M with involution satisfies
for all
and
, then
.
2. The Relation between Jordan G*-Derivation and
on Semiprime G-Ring M with Involution
To prove our main results we need the following lemmas.
Lemma 1. Let M be a 2-torsion free semiprime G-ring with involution and
be a Jordan
- derivation which satisfies
for all
and
, then
for all
and
.
Proof. We have
(7)
for all
and
. Putting
for x in (7), we get
(8)
for all
and
. Therefore,
![]()
for all
and
. Setting
in the above relation, we get
(9)
for all
and
, because of
(10)
for all
and
. According to (9) and (10), we get
(11)
for all
and
. Then from relation (11)
![]()
![]()
for all
and
. Since
, then
, and hence from the above relation
![]()
for all
and
. Therefore,
![]()
for all
and
. Then by using assumption (A), we obtain
(12)
for all
and
. And
(13)
for all
and
. Then from (13),
![]()
for all
and
. Since
, then from the above relation
![]()
hence by using assumption (A), we obtain
(14)
for all
and
. Therefore,
(15)
for all
and
. Then from relation (15),
![]()
for all
and
. By using relation (15) and assumption (A), we get
(16)
for all
and
. Since M is 2-torsion free, we get
(17)
for all
and
. Right multiplication of (17) by
and using assumption (A), we get
(18)
for all
and
. By semiprimeness of M, we have
(19)
for all
and
. Left multiplication of (19) by z yields
(20)
for all
and
. By semiprimeness of M again, we get
for all
and
. W
Lemma 2 Let M be a 2-torsion free semiprime G-ring with involution and
be a Jordan
- derivation which satisfies
for all
and
, then
for all
and
.
Proof. Putting
for x in (7),
![]()
for all
and
. By using Lemma (1), we get
(21)
for all
and
. Replacing x by
and y by
yields
(22)
for all
and
. Setting
, we get
(23)
for all
and
. But
(24)
for all
and
. So then from (23) and (24), we get
![]()
for all
and
. Hence,
![]()
for all
and
. Since
, then
, hence from the above relation,
(25)
for all
and
. Therefore,
(26)
for all
and
. Since
, we obtain
(27)
for all
and
. Then from relation (27),
![]()
for all
and
. By using relation (27) again,
(28)
for all
and
. Since M is 2-torsion free, we get
(29)
for all
and
. Right multiplication by z yields
(30)
for all
and
. By semiprimeness of M, we therefore get
for all
and
. W
Remark 1 [17] . A G-ring M is called a simple G-ring if
and its ideals are 0 and M.
Remark 2. Let M be a 2-torsion free simple G-ring with involution, then every
can be uniquely represented in the form
where
and
.
Proof. Define
,
, since 2M is an ideal of M and M is simple, it implies that
. So for every
,
makes sense and so we can write
![]()
Now
![]()
hence
![]()
and
![]()
hence
![]()
Therefore
![]()
hence
. Let
, then
and
, so
and
. Therefore
which implies that
, so
. Thus
. Hence
implies that
where
and
. W
Theorem 1. Let M be a 2-torsion free semiprime G-ring with involution and
be a Jordan
- derivation which satisfies
for all
and
and
or
for all
,
and
, then
for all
and
.
Proof. Assume that
for all
,
and
. By using Lemma (1), we have
(31)
for all
and
. For
, putting
for h in (31) yields
![]()
for all
and
. By using relation (31), we obtain
(32)
for all
and
. Since
for all
, then replace
by
in (32), to get
(33)
for all
,
and
. By using Lemma (2), we have
(34)
for all
and
. According to relations (33) and (34), we get
![]()
for all
and
. By using Lemma (2), we get
(35)
for all
and
. Then from relation (35),
![]()
for all
,
and
. Therefore since
, we obtain
(36)
for all
,
and
. Hence,
(37)
for all
,
and
. Therefore,
![]()
for all
,
and
. Then by using (37), we get
(38)
for all
,
and
. Since M is 2-torsion free, we get
(39)
for all
,
and
. Right multiplication of relation (39) by z yields
(40)
for all
,
and
. By semiprimeness of M, we get
(41)
for all
,
and
. Putting s for x and h for y in relation (21), we get
(42)
for all
,
and
. Comparing relations (41) and (42), we get
(43)
for all
,
and
. Since
for all
, then from relation (43), we obtain
(44)
for all
,
and
. Then
(45)
for all
,
and
. Since
for all
,
and
, then from relation (45), we get
(46)
for all
,
and
. Hence
(47)
for all
,
and
. Then from relation (47),
![]()
for all
,
and
. Then by using (47), we get
(48)
for all
,
and
. Since M is 2-torsion free, we get
(49)
for all
,
and
. Right multiplication of the relation (49) by z we get
(50)
for all
,
and
. By semiprimeness of M, we get
(51)
for all
,
and
. To prove
, since M is 2-torsion free, we only show
(52)
for all
and
. By using Remark 2, we have for all
and
that
for all
and
. Therefore
![]()
for all
,
and
. Hence
(53)
for all
,
and
. By using Lemma (1), Lemma (2) and relation (41), (51), we get
![]()
Now assume
for all
,
and
. Since
for all
, then we get
(54)
for all
,
and
. Then from relation (54), we obtain
(55)
for all
,
and
. Since
for all
,
and
, then from relation (55), we get
(56)
for all
,
and
. Hence
(57)
for all
,
and
. Then from relation (57),
![]()
for all
,
and
. Then by using relation (57) we get
(58)
for all
,
and
. Since M is 2-torsion free, we get
(59)
for all
,
and
. Right multiplication of relation (59) by z yields
(60)
for all
,
and
. By semiprimeness of M, we get
(61)
for all
,
and
. Comparing relations (42) and (61), we get
(62)
for all
,
and
. Since
for all
, then from (62), we obtain
(63)
for all
,
and
. Then,
(64)
for all
,
and
. Since
for all
,
and
, then from relation (64), we get
(65)
for all
,
and
. Hence
(66)
for all
,
and
. Then from relation (66)
![]()
for all
,
and
. Then by using (66) we get
(67)
for all
,
and
. Since M is 2-torsion free, we get
(68)
for all
,
and
. Right multiplication of relation (68) by z yields
(69)
for all
,
and
. By semiprimeness of M, we get
(70)
for all
,
and
. Therefore, by using Lemma (1), Lemma (2) and relation (61), (70), we get a similar result as the first assumption
for all
and
, and hence the proof of the theorem is complete. W
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the School of Mathematical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia under the Short-term Grant 304/PMATHS/6313171.