Jmilne CA

A Primer of Commutative Algebra
James S. Milne
March 30, 2011, v2.22
Abstract
These notes prove the basic theorems in commutative algebra required for alge-
braic geometry and algebraic groups. They assume only a knowledge of the algebra
usually taught in advanced undergraduate or rst-year graduate courses.
Available at www.jmilne.org/math/.
Contents
1 Rings and algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2 Ideals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3 Noetherian rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4 Unique factorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5 Integrality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6 Rings of fractions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7 Direct limits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
8 Tensor Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
9 Flatness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
10 Finitely generated projective modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
11 The Hilbert Nullstellensatz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
12 The max spectrum of a ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
13 Dimension theory for nitely generated k-algebras . . . . . . . . . . . 52
14 Primary decompositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
15 Artinian rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
16 Dimension theory for noetherian rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
17 Regular local rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
18 Connections with geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
NOTATIONS AND CONVENTIONS
Our convention is that rings have identity elements,
1
and homomorphisms of rings respect
the identity elements. A unit of a ring is an element admitting an inverse. The units of a
c (2009, 2010, 2011 J.S. Milne. Single paper copies for noncommercial personal use may be made without
explicit permission from the copyright holder.
1
An element e of a ring A is an identity element if ea =a =ae for all elements a of the ring. It is usually
denoted 1
or just 1. Some authors call this a unit element, but then an element can be a unit without being a
unit element. Worse, a unit need not be the unit.
1
1 RINGS AND ALGEBRAS 2
ring A form a group, which we denote by
2
A
. Throughout ring means commutative

ring. Following Bourbaki, we let N ={0; 1; 2; : : :]. For a eld k, k
al
denotes an algebraic
closure of k.
X cY X is a subset of Y (not necessarily proper).
X
def
=Y X is dened to be Y , or equals Y by denition.
X ~Y X is isomorphic to Y .
X .Y X and Y are canonically isomorphic (or there is a given or unique isomorphism).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I thank the following for providing corrections and comments for earlier versions of these
notes: Florian Herzig, Keenan Kidwell, Andrew McLennan, Shu Otsuka.
1 Rings and algebras
Let A be a ring. A subring of A is a subset that contains 1
and is closed under addition,

multiplication, and the formation of negatives. An A-algebra is a ring B together with a
homomorphism i
B
: A B. A homomorphism of A-algebras B C is a homomorphism
of rings ': B C such that '.i
B
.a// =i
C
.a/ for all a A.
Elements x
1
; : : : ; x
n
of an A-algebra B are said to generate it if every element of B can
be expressed as a polynomial in the x
i
with coefcients in i
B
.A/, i.e., if the homomorphism
of A-algebras AX
1
; : : : ; X
n
B acting as i
B
on A and sending X
i
to x
i
is surjective. We
then write B =.i
B
A/x
1
; : : : ; x
n
.
A ring homomorphism AB is of nite type, and B is a nitely generated A-algebra,
if B is generated by a nite set of elements as an A-algebra.
A ring homomorphism A B is nite, and B is a nite
3
A-algebra, if B is nitely
generated as an A-module. If A B and B C are nite ring homomorphisms, then so
also is their composite A C.
Let k be a eld, and let A be a k-algebra. When 1
=0, the map k A is injective,

and we can identify k with its image, i.e., we can regard k as a subring of A. When 1
=0,
the ring A is the zero ring {0].
Let AX be the ring of polynomials in the symbol X with coefcients in A. If A is an
integral domain, then deg.fg/ =deg.f / deg.g/, and so AX is also an integral domain;
moreover, AX
=A
.
Let A be an algebra over a eld k. If A is an integral domain and nite as a k-algebra,
then it is a eld because, for each nonzero a A, the k-linear map x ax: A A is
injective, and hence is surjective, which shows that a has an inverse. If A is an integral
domain and each element of A is algebraic over k, then for each a A, ka is an integral
domain nite over k, and hence contains an inverse of a; again A is a eld.
PRODUCTS AND IDEMPOTENTS
An element e of a ring Ais idempotent if e
2
=e. For example, 0 and 1 are both idempotents
they are called the trivial idempotents. Idempotents e
1
; : : : ; e
n
are orthogonal if e
i
e
}
=0
2
This notation differs from that of Bourbaki, who writes A
for the multiplicative monoid A{0] and A

+
for the group of units. We shall rarely need the former, and
+
is overused.
3
This is Bourbakis terminology (AC V 1, 1). Finite homomorphisms of rings correspond to nite maps of
varieties and schemes. Some other authors say module-nite.
2 IDEALS 3
for i =j . Any sum of orthogonal idempotents is again idempotent. A set {e
1
; : : : ; e
n
] of
orthogonal idempotents is complete if e
1
e
n
= 1. Any set of orthogonal idempo-
tents {e
1
; : : : ; e
n
] can be made into a complete set of orthogonal idempotents by adding the
idempotent e =1.e
1
e
n
/.
If A =A
1
A
n
(direct product of rings), then the elements
e
i
=.0; : : : ;
i
1; : : : ; 0/; 1 _i _n;
form a complete set of orthogonal idempotents in A. Conversely, if {e
1
; : : : ; e
n
] is a com-
plete set of orthogonal idempotents in A, then Ae
i
becomes a ring
4
with the addition and
multiplication induced by that of A, and A .Ae
1
Ae
n
.
2 Ideals
Let A be a ring. An ideal a in A is a subset such that
a is a subgroup of A regarded as a group under addition;
a a, r A =ra a:
The ideal generated by a subset S of A is the intersection of all ideals a containing S
it is easy to verify that this is in fact an ideal, and that it consists of all nite sums of the
form
r
i
s
i
with r
i
A, s
i
S. The ideal generated by the empty set is the zero ideal {0].
When S ={a; b; : : :], we write .a; b; : : :/ for the ideal it generates.
An ideal is principal if it is generated by a single element. Such an ideal .a/ is proper
if and only a is not a unit. Thus a ring A is a eld if and only if 1
=0 and A contains no
nonzero proper ideals.
Let a and b be ideals in A. The set {a b [ a a; b b] is an ideal, denoted a b.
The ideal generated by {ab [ a a; b b] is denoted by ab. Clearly ab consists of all nite
sums

a
i
b
i
with a
i
a and b
i
b, and if a = .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ and b = .b
1
; : : : ; b
n
/, then
ab =.a
1
b
1
; : : : ; a
i
b
}
; : : : ; a
n
b
n
/. Note that ab caA =a and ab cAb =b, and so
ab cab: (1)
The kernel of a homomorphism A B is an ideal in A. Conversely, for any ideal a in
a ring A, the set of cosets of a in A forms a ring A=a, and a a a is a homomorphism
': A A=a whose kernel is a. There is a one-to-one correspondence
{ideals of A containing a]
b|-c(b)
c
1
(b)-b
{ideals of A=a]: (2)
For any ideal b of A, '
-1
'.b/ =ab.
The ideals of AB are all of the form a b with a and b ideals in A and B. To see
this, note that if c is an ideal in AB and .a; b/ c, then .a; 0/ = .1; 0/.a; b/ c and
.0; b/ =.0; 1/.a; b/ c. Therefore, c =ab with
a ={a [ .a; 0/ c]; b ={b [ .0; b/ c]:
An ideal p in A is prime if p =A and ab p =a p or b p. Thus p is prime if and
only if the quotient ring A=p is nonzero and has the property that
ab =0; b =0 =a =0;
4
But Ae
i
is not a subring of A if n = 1 because its identity element is e
i
= 1
: However, the map a

ae
i
: A Ae
i
realizes Ae
i
as a quotient of A.
2 IDEALS 4
i.e., A=p is an integral domain. Note that if p is prime and a
1
a
n
p, then at least one
of the a
i
p (because either a
1
p or a
2
a
n
p; if the latter, then either a
2
p or
a
3
a
n
p; etc.).
An ideal m in A is maximal if it is a maximal element of the set of proper ideals in A.
Therefore an ideal m is maximal if and only if the quotient ring A=m is nonzero and has no
proper nonzero ideals (by (2)), and so is a eld. Note that
m maximal == m prime.
A multiplicative subset of a ring A is a subset S with the property:
1 S; a; b S == ab S:
For example, the following are multiplicative subsets:
the multiplicative subset {1; f; : : : ; f
i
; : : :] generated by an element f of A;
the complement of a prime ideal (or of a union of prime ideals);
1a
def
={1a [ a a] for any ideal a of A.
PROPOSITION 2.1. Let S be a subset of a ring A, and let a be an ideal disjoint from S.
The set of ideals in A containing a and disjoint from S contains maximal elements (i.e., an
element not properly contained in any other ideal in the set). If S is multiplicative, then any
such maximal element is prime.
PROOF. The set of ideals containing a and disjoint from S is nonempty (it contains a).
If A is noetherian (see 3 below), automatically contains maximal elements. Otherwise,
we apply Zorns lemma. Let b
1
c b
2
c be a chain of ideals in , and let b =
b
i
.
Then b , because otherwise some element of S lies in b, and hence in some b
i
, which
contradicts the denition of . Therefore b is an upper bound for the chain. As every chain
in has an upper bound, Zorns lemma implies that has a maximal element.
Assume that S is a multiplicative subset of A, and let c be maximal in . Let bb
t
c. If
b is not in c, then c .b/ properly contains c, and so it is not in . Therefore there exist an
f S .c .b//, say, f =c ab with c c. Similarly, if b
t
is not in c, then there exists
an f
t
S such that f =c
t
a
t
b
t
with c
t
c. Now
ff
t
=cc
t
abc
t
a
t
b
t
c aa
t
bb
t
c;
which contradicts
ff
t
S:
2
COROLLARY 2.2. Every proper ideal in a ring is contained in a maximal ideal.
PROOF. For a proper ideal a of A, apply the proposition with S ={1].
2
ASIDE 2.3. The proof of (2.1) is one of many in commutative algebra in which an ideal, maximal
with respect to some property, is shown to be prime. For a general examination of this phenomenon,
see Lam, T. Y. and Reyes, Manuel L., A prime ideal principle in commutative algebra. J. Algebra
319 (2008), no. 7, 30063027.
2 IDEALS 5
The radical rad.a/ of an ideal a is
{f A [ f
i
a, some r N, r >0]:
An ideal a is said to be radical if it equals its radical. Thus a is radical if and only if the quo-
tient ring A=a is reduced, i.e., without nonzero nilpotent elements (elements some power of
which is zero). Since integral domains are reduced, prime ideals (a fortiori maximal ideals)
are radical. The radical of .0/ consists of the nilpotent elements of A it is called the
nilradical of A.
If b -b
t
under the one-to-one correspondence (2), then A=b ..A=a/=b
t
, and so b is
prime (resp. maximal, radical) if and only if b
t
is prime (resp. maximal, radical).
PROPOSITION 2.4. Let a be an ideal in a ring A.
(a) The radical of a is an ideal.
(b) rad.rad.a// =rad.a/.
PROOF. (a) If a rad.a/, then clearly fa rad.a/ for all f A. Suppose a; b rad.a/,
with say a
i
a and b
x
a. When we expand .a b/
ix
using the binomial theorem, we
nd that every term has a factor a
i
or b
x
, and so lies in a.
(b) If a
i
rad.a/, then a
ix
=.a
i
/
x
a for some s >0, and so a rad.a/.
2
Note that (b) of the proposition shows that rad.a/ is radical, and so is the smallest radical
ideal containing a.
If a and b are radical, then ab is radical, but ab need not be: consider, for example,
a =.X
2
Y / and b =.X
2
Y /; they are both prime ideals in kX; Y (by 4.7 below), but
ab =.X
2
; Y /, which contains X
2
but not X.
PROPOSITION 2.5. The radical of an ideal is equal to the intersection of the prime ideals
containing it. In particular, the nilradical of a ring A is equal to the intersection of the prime
ideals of A.
PROOF. If a =A, then the set of prime ideals containing it is empty, and so the intersection
is A. Thus we may suppose that a is a proper ideal of A. Then rad.a/ c
pa
p because
prime ideals are radical and rad.a/ is the smallest radical ideal containing a.
Conversely, suppose that f rad.a/. According to Proposition 2.1, there exists a prime
ideal containing a and disjoint from the multiplicative subset {1; f; : : :]. Therefore f
pa
p.
2
DEFINITION 2.6. The Jacobson radical J of a ring is the intersection of the maximal ideals
of the ring:
J.A/ =
{m[ m maximal in A]:

A ring A is local if it has exactly one maximal ideal. For such a ring, the Jacobson
radical is m.
PROPOSITION 2.7. An element c of A is in the Jacobson radical of A if and only if 1ac
is a unit for all a A.
2 IDEALS 6
PROOF. We prove the contrapositive: there exists a maximal ideal m such that c m if and
only if there exists an a A such that 1ac is not a unit.
=: As 1ac is not a unit, it lies in some maximal ideal m of A (by 2.2). Then c m,
because otherwise 1 =.1ac/ ac m.
=: Suppose that c is not in the maximal ideal m. Then m.c/ =A, and so 1 =mac
for some m m and a A. Now 1ac m, and so it is not a unit.
2
PROPOSITION 2.8. Let p
1
; : : : ; p
i
, r _1, be ideals in A with p
2
; : : : ; p
i
prime, and let a be
an ideal in A. Then
a c
1_i_i
p
i
== a cp
i
for some i:
PROOF. We prove the contrapositive:
if the ideal a in not contained in any of the ideals p
i
, then it is not contained in
their union.
For r =1, there is nothing to prove, and so we may assume that r >1 and (inductively) that
the statement is true for r 1. As a is not contained in any of the ideals p
1
; : : : ; p
i
, for each
i , there exists an a
i
in a not in the union of the ideals p
1
; : : : ; p
i-1
; p
i1
; : : : ; p
i
. If there
exists an i such that a
i
does not lie in p
i
, then that a
i
a p
1
L: : : Lp
i
, and the proof is
complete. Thus suppose that every a
i
p
i
, and consider
a =a
1
a
i-1
a
i
.
Because p
i
is prime and none of the elements a
1
; : : : ; a
i-1
lies in p
i
, their product does not
lie in p
i
; however, a
i
p
i
, and so a p
i
. Next consider a prime p
i
with i _ r 1. In this
case a
1
a
i-1
p
i
because the product involves a
i
, but a
i
p
i
, and so again a p
i
. Now
a ap
1
L: : : Lp
i
, and so a is not contained in the union of the p
i
.
2
EXTENSION AND CONTRACTION OF IDEALS
Let ': A B be a homomorphism of rings.
NOTATION 2.9. For an ideal b of B, '
-1
.b/ is an ideal in A, called the contraction of b to
A, which is often denoted b
c
. For an ideal a of A, the ideal in B generated by '.a/ is called
the extension of a to B, and is often denoted a
e
. When ' is surjective, '.a/ is already an
ideal, and when A is a subring of B, b
c
=bA.
2.10. There are the following equalities (a; a
t
ideals in A; b; b
t
ideals in B):
.aa
t
/
e
=a
e
a
te
; .aa
t
/
e
=a
e
a
te
; .bb
t
/
c
=b
c
b
tc
; rad.b/
c
=rad.b
c
/:
2.11. Obviously (i) a ca
ec
and (ii) b
ce
cb (a an ideal of A; b an ideal of B). On applying
e to (i), we nd that a
e
ca
ece
, and (ii) with b replaced by a
e
shows that a
ece
ca
e
; therefore
a
e
= a
ece
. Similarly, b
cec
= b
c
: It follows that extension and contraction dene inverse
bijections between the set of contracted ideals in A and the set of extended ideals in B:
{b
c
cA [ b an ideal in B]
e
*
)
c
{a
e
cB [ a an ideal in A]
Note that, for any ideal b in B, the map A=b
c
B=b is injective, and so b
c
is prime
(resp. radical) if b is prime (resp. radical).
2 IDEALS 7
THE CHINESE REMAINDER THEOREM
Recall the classical form of the theorem: let d
1
; :::; d
n
be integers, relatively prime in pairs;
then for any integers x
1
; :::; x
n
, the congruences
x x
i
mod d
i
have a simultaneous solution x Z; moreover, if x is one solution, then the other solutions
are the integers of the form x md with m Z and d =
d
i
:
We want to translate this in terms of ideals. Integers m and n are relatively prime if and
only if .m; n/ =Z, i.e., if and only if .m/ .n/ =Z. This suggests dening ideals a and b
in a ring A to be relatively prime (or coprime) if ab =A.
If m
1
; :::; m
k
are integers, then

.m
i
/ = .m/ where m is the least common multiple
of the m
i
. Thus
.m
i
/ .
m
i
/, which equals
.m
i
/. If the m
i
are relatively prime in
pairs, then m=
m
i
, and so we have
.m
i
/ =
.m
i
/. Note that in general,
a
1
a
2
a
n
ca
1
a
2
::: a
n
;
but the two ideals need not be equal.
These remarks suggest the following statement.
THEOREM 2.12 (CHINESE REMAINDER THEOREM). Let a
1
; : : : ; a
n
be ideals in a ring A.
If a
i
is relatively prime to a
}
whenever i =j , then the map
a .: : : ; aa
i
; : : :/: A A=a
1
A=a
n
(3)
is surjective with kernel
a
i
=
a
i
.
PROOF. Suppose rst that n =2. As a
1
a
2
=A, there exist a
i
a
i
such that a
1
a
2
=1.
Then a
1
x
2
a
2
x
1
maps to .x
1
moda
1
; x
2
moda
2
/, which shows that (3) is surjective.
For each i , there exist elements a
i
a
1
and b
i
a
i
such that
a
i
b
i
=1, all i _2:
The product
i_2
.a
i
b
i
/ =1, and lies in a
1
i_2
a
i
, and so
a
1
i_2
a
i
=A:
We can now apply the theorem in the case n =2 to obtain an element y
1
of A such that
y
1
1 mod a
1
; y
1
0 mod
i_2
a
i
:
These conditions imply
y
1
1 mod a
1
; y
1
0 mod a
}
, all j >1:
Similarly, there exist elements y
2
; :::; y
n
such that
y
i
1 mod a
i
; y
i
0 mod a
}
for j =i:
The element x =
x
i
y
i
maps to .x
1
moda
1
; : : : ; x
n
moda
n
/, which shows that (3) is sur-
jective.
3 NOETHERIAN RINGS 8
It remains to prove that
a
i
=
a
i
. Obviously
a
i
c
a
i
. Suppose rst that n =2,
and let a
1
a
2
=1, as before. For c a
1
a
2
, we have
c =a
1
c a
2
c a
1
a
2
which proves that a
1
a
2
= a
1
a
2
. We complete the proof by induction. This allows us
to assume that

i_2
a
i
=
i_2
a
i
. We showed above that a
1
and

i_2
a
i
are relatively
prime, and so
a
1
.
i_2
a
i
/ =a
1
.
i_2
a
i
/
by the n =2 case. Now a
1
.
i_2
a
i
/ =
i_1
a
i
and a
1
.
i_2
a
i
/ =a
1
.
i_2
a
i
/ =
i_1
a
i
, which completes the proof.
2
3 Noetherian rings
PROPOSITION 3.1. The following three conditions on a ring A are equivalent:
(a) every ideal in A is nitely generated;
(b) every ascending chain of ideals a
1
c a
2
c eventually becomes constant, i.e., for
some m, a
n
=a
n1
= :
(c) every nonempty set of ideals in A has a maximal element.
PROOF. (a) =(b): If a
1
c a
2
c is an ascending chain, then a =
a
i
is an ideal, and
hence has a nite set {a
1
; : : : ; a
n
] of generators. For some m, all the a
i
belong a
n
, and then
a
n
=a
n1
= =a:
(b) =(c): Let be a nonempty set of ideals in A. Then (b) certainly implies that every
ascending chain of ideals in has an upper bound in , and so (a mild form of) Zorns
lemma shows that has a maximal element.
(c) =(a): Let a be an ideal, and let be the set of nitely generated ideals contained
in a. Then S is nonempty because it contains the zero ideal, and so it contains a maximal
element c =.a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/. If c =a, then there exists an element a ac, and .a
1
; : : : ; a
i
; a/
will be a nitely generated ideal in a properly containing c. This contradicts the denition
of c.
2
A ring A is noetherian if it satises the equivalent conditions of the proposition. For
example, elds and principal ideal domains are noetherian. On applying (c) to the set of all
proper ideals containing a xed proper ideal, we see that every proper ideal in a noetherian
ring is contained in a maximal ideal. We saw in (2.3) that this is, in fact, true for any ring,
but the proof for non-noetherian rings requires Zorns lemma.
A quotient A=a of a noetherian ring A is noetherian, because the ideals in A=a are all
of the form b=a with b an ideal in A, and any set of generators for b generates b=a.
PROPOSITION 3.2. Let A be a ring. The following conditions on an A-module M are
equivalent:
(a) every submodule of M is nitely generated (in particular, M is nitely generated);
(b) every ascending chain of submodules M
1
cM
2
c eventually becomes constant.
(c) every nonempty set of submodules of M has a maximal element.
PROOF. Essentially the same as that of (3.1).
2
An A-module M is noetherian if it satises the equivalent conditions of the proposition.
Let

A denote A regarded as a left A-module. Then the submodules of

A are exactly the
ideals in A, and so

A is noetherian (as an A-module) if and only if A is noetherian (as a
ring).
PROPOSITION 3.3. Let M be an A-module, and let N be a submodule of M. The module
M is noetherian if and only both N and M=N are noetherian.
PROOF. =: An ascending chain of submodules in N or in M=N gives rise to an ascending
chain in M, and therefore becomes constant.
=: I claim that if M
t
c M
tt
are submodules of M such that M
t
N =M
tt
N and
M
t
and M
tt
have the same image in M=N, then M
t
=M
tt
. To see this, let x M
tt
; the
second condition implies that there exists a y M
t
with the same image as x in M=N, i.e.,
such that x y N. Then x y M
tt
N cM
t
, and so x M
t
.
Now consider an ascending chain of submodules of M. If M=N is Noetherian, the
image of the chain in M=N becomes stationary, and if N is Noetherian, the intersection of
the chain with N becomes stationary. Now the claim shows that the chain itself becomes
stationary.
2
More generally, consider an exact sequence
0 M
t
M M
tt
0
of A-modules. The module M is noetherian if and only if M
t
and M
tt
are both noetherian.
For example, a direct sum
M =M
1
M
2
of A-modules is noetherian if and only if M
1
and M
2
are both noetherian (because 0
M
1
M M
2
0 is exact).
PROPOSITION 3.4. Let A be a noetherian ring. Then every nitely generated A-module is
noetherian.
PROOF. If M is generated by a single element, then M ~A=a for some ideal a in A, and
the statement is obvious. We argue by induction on the minimum number n of generators
of M. Since M contains a submodule N generated by n1 elements such that the quotient
M=N is generated by a single element, the statement follows from (3.3).
2
PROPOSITION 3.5. Every nitely generated module M over a noetherian ring A contains
a nite chain of submodules M M
i
M
1
0 such that each quotient M
i
=M
i-1
is
isomorphic to A=p
i
for some prime ideal p
i
.
PROOF. The annihilator ann.x/ of an element x of M is {a A[ ax =0]. It is an ideal in A,
which is proper if x =0. I claim that any ideal a that is maximal among the annihilators of
nonzero elements of A is prime. Suppose that a =ann.x/, and let ab a, so that abx =0.
Then a c .a/ a c ann.bx/. If b a, then bx = 0, and so a = ann.bx/ by maximality,
which implies that a a.
We now prove the proposition. Note that, for any x M, the submodule Ax of M is
isomorphic to A=ann.x/. Therefore, if M is nonzero, then it contains a submodule M
1
isomorphic to A=p
1
1
. Similarly, M=M
1
contains a submodule
M
2
=M
1
isomorphic A=p
2
2
, and so on. The chain 0 cM
1
cM
2
c
terminates because M is noetherian (by 3.4).
2
THEOREM 3.6 (HILBERT BASIS THEOREM). Every nitely generated algebra over a noethe-
rian ring is noetherian.
PROOF. Let A be noetherian. Since every nitely generated A-algebra is a quotient of a
polynomial algebra, it sufces to prove the theorem for AX
1
; : : : ; X
n
. Note that
AX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=AX
1
; : : : ; X
n-1
X
n
: (4)
This simply says that every polynomial f in n symbols X
1
; : : : ; X
n
can be expressed
uniquely as a polynomial in X
n
with coefcients in kX
1
; : : : ; X
n-1
,
f.X
1
; : : : ; X
n
/ =a
0
.X
1
; : : : ; X
n-1
/X
i
n
a
i
.X
1
; : : : ; X
n-1
/:
Thus an induction argument shows that it sufces to prove the theorem for AX.
Recall that for a polynomial
f.X/ =c
0
X
i
c
1
X
i-1
c
i
; c
i
A; c
0
=0;
c
0
is the leading coefcient of f .
Let a be an ideal in AX, and let c
i
be the set of elements of A that occur as the leading
coefcient of a polynomial in a of degree i (we also include 0). Then c
i
is obviously an
ideal in A, and c
i-1
cc
i
because, if cX
i-1
a, then so also does X.cX
i-1
/ =
cX
i
. As A is noetherian, the sequence of ideals
c
1
cc
2
c cc
i
c
eventually becomes constant, say, c
d
=c
d1
=: : : (and then c
d
contains the leading coef-
cients of all polynomials in a).
For each i _ d, choose a nite generating set {c
i1
; c
i2
; : : :] for c
i
, and for each .i; j /,
choose a polynomial f
i}
a of degree i with leading coefcient c
i}
. We shall show that the
f
i}
s generate a.
Let f a; we have to show that f .f
i}
/. Suppose rst that f has degree s _d. Then
f =cX
x
with c c
d
, and so
c =
}
a
}
c
d}
; some a
}
A.
Now
f
}
a
}
f
d}
X
x-d
is either zero and f .f
i}
/, or it has degree < deg.f /. In the second case, we repeat the
argument, until we obtain a polynomial f of degree s < d that differs from the original
polynomial by an element of .f
i}
/. By a similar argument, we then construct elements
a
}
A such that
f
}
a
}
f
x}
is either zero or has degree <deg.f /. In the second case, we repeat the argument, until we
obtain zero.
2
NAKAYAMAS LEMMA 3.7. Let a be an ideal in a ring A contained in all maximal ideals
of A, and let M be a nitely generated A-module.
(a) If M =aM, then M =0:
(b) If N is a submodule of M such that M =N aM, then M =N.
PROOF. (a) Suppose M =0. Choose a minimal set of generators {e
1
; : : : ; e
n
] for M, n _1,
and write
e
1
=a
1
e
1
a
n
e
n
, a
i
a:
Then
.1a
1
/e
1
=a
2
e
2
a
n
e
n
and, as 1a
1
lies in no maximal ideal, it is a unit. Therefore e
2
; : : : ; e
n
generate M, which
contradicts the minimality of the original set.
(b) The hypothesis implies that M=N =a.M=N/, and so M=N =0.
2
Recall (2.6) that the Jacobson radical J of A is the intersection of the maximal ideals of
A, and so the condition on a is that a c J. In particular, the lemma holds with a =J; for
example, when A is a local ring, it holds with a the maximal ideal in A.
COROLLARY 3.8. Let A be a local ring with maximal ideal m and residue eld k
def
=A=m,
and let M be a nitely generated module over A. The action of A on M=mM factors
through k, and elements a
1
; : : : ; a
n
of M generate it as an A-module if and only if
a
1
mM; : : : ; a
n
mM
span M=mM as k-vector space.
PROOF. If a
1
; : : : ; a
n
generate M, then it is obvious that their images generate the vector
space M=mM. Conversely, suppose that a
1
mM; : : : ; a
n
mM span M=mM, and let N
be the submodule of M generated by a
1
; : : : ; a
n
. The composite N M M=mM is
surjective, and so M =N mM. Now Nakayamas lemma shows that M =N.
2
COROLLARY 3.9. Let Abe a noetherian local ring with maximal ideal m. Elements a
1
; : : : ; a
n
of m generate m as an ideal if and only if a
1
m
2
; : : : ; a
n
m
2
span m=m
2
as a vector space
over k
def
=A=m. In particular, the minimum number of generators for the maximal ideal is
equal to the dimension of the vector space m=m
2
.
PROOF. Because A is noetherian, m is nitely generated, and we can apply the preceding
corollary with M =m.
2
EXAMPLE 3.10. Nakayamas lemma may fail if M is not nitely generated. For example,
let Z
(;)
={
n
n
[ p does not divide n] and let M =Q. Then Z
(;)
is a local ring with maximal
ideal .p/ (see 6 below) and M =pM but M =0.
DEFINITION 3.11. An algebra A over a ring R is nitely presented if it is isomorphic to
the quotient of a polynomial ring kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
by a nitely generated ideal.
The Hilbert basis theorem says that, when R is noetherian, every nitely generated
R-algebra is nitely presented.
DEFINITION 3.12. Let A be a noetherian ring.
(a) The height ht.p/ of a prime ideal p in A is the greatest length d of a chain of distinct
prime ideals
p =p
d
p
d-1
p
0
: (5)
(b) The (Krull) dimension of A is sup{ht.p/ [ p cA; p prime].
Thus, the Krull dimension of a ring A is the supremum of the lengths of chains of
prime ideals in A (the length of a chain is the number of gaps, so the length of (5) is d).
For example, a eld has Krull dimension 0, and conversely an integral domain of Krull
dimension 0 is a eld. The height of every nonzero prime ideal in a principal ideal domain
is 1, and so such a ring has Krull dimension 1 (provided it is not a eld). It is sometimes
convenient to dene the Krull dimension of the zero ring to be 1.
We shall see in 16 that the height of any prime ideal in a noetherian ring is nite.
However, the Krull dimension of the ring may be innite, because it may contain a sequence
p
1
, p
2
, p
3
, . . . of prime ideals such that ht.p
i
/ tends to innity (see Krull 1938 or Nagata
1962, p.203,
5
for examples).
LEMMA 3.13. In a noetherian ring, every set of generators for an ideal contains a nite
generating set.
PROOF. Let S be a set of generators for an ideal a in a noetherian ring A. An ideal max-
imal in the set of ideals generated by nite subsets of S must contain every element of S
(otherwise it wouldnt be maximal), and so equals a.
2
THEOREM 3.14 (KRULL INTERSECTION THEOREM). Let a be an ideal in a noetherian
ring A. If a is contained in all maximal ideals of A, then
n_1
a
n
={0]:
PROOF. We shall show that, for any ideal a in a noetherian ring,
n_1
a
n
=a
n_1
a
n
: (6)
When a is contained in all maximal ideals of A, Nakayamas lemma shows that
n_1
a
n
is
zero.
Let a
1
; : : : ; a
i
generate a. Then a
n
consists of nite sums
i
1
i
r
=n
c
i
1
i
r
a
i
1
1
a
i
r
i
; c
i
1
i
r
A:
In other words, a
n
consists of the elements of A of the form g.a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/ for some ho-
mogeneous polynomial g.X
1
; : : : ; X
i
/ AX
1
; : : : ; X
i
of degree n. Let S
n
be the set of
homogeneous polynomials f of degree m such that f.a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/
n_1
a
n
, and let c be
the ideal in AX
1
; : : : ; X
i
generated by all the S
n
. According to the lemma, there exists
a nite set {f
1
; : : : ; f
x
] of elements of

n
S
n
that generates c. Let d
i
= degf
i
, and let
d =maxd
i
.
Let b
n_1
a
n
; then b a
d1
, and so b = f.a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/ for some homogeneous
polynomial f of degree d 1. By denition, f S
d1
ca, and so
f =g
1
f
1
g
x
f
x
5
Let N = I
1
LI
2
L: : : be a partition of N into nite sets with strictly increasing cardinality. Let A =
kX
0
; X
1
; : : :, and let p
i
be the prime ideal in A generated by the X
}
s with j in I
i
. Let S be the multiplicative
set A
p
i
. Then S
-1
A is noetherian and regular, and the prime ideal S
-1
p
i
has height [I
i
[.
4 UNIQUE FACTORIZATION 13
for some g
i
AX
1
; : : : ; X
n
. As f and the f
i
are homogeneous, we can omit from each g
i
all terms not of degree degf degf
i
, since these terms cancel out. In other words, we may
choose the g
i
to be homogeneous of degree degf degf
i
=d 1d
i
>0. In particular,
the constant term of g
i
is zero, and so g
i
.a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/ a. Now
b =f.a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/ =
i
g
i
.a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/ f
i
.a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/ a
n
a
n
;
which completes the proof of (6).
2
The equality (6) can also be proved using primary decompositions see (14.15).
PROPOSITION 3.15. In a noetherian ring, every ideal contains a power of its radical; in
particular, some power of the nilradical of the ring is zero.
PROOF. Let a
1
; : : : ; a
n
generate rad.a/. For each i , some power of a
i
, say a
i
i
i
, lies in a.
Then every term of the expansion of
.c
1
a
1
c
n
a
n
/
i
1
i
n
; c
i
A;
has a factor of the form a
i
i
i
for some i , and so lies in a.
2
4 Unique factorization
Let A be an integral domain, and let a be an element of A that is neither zero nor a unit.
Then a is said to be irreducible if it admits only trivial factorizations, i.e.,
a =bc == b or c is a unit.
The element a is said to be prime if .a/ is a prime ideal, i.e.,
a[bc == a[b or a[c:
An integral domain A is called a unique factorization domain if every nonzero nonunit
a in A can be written as a nite product of irreducible elements in exactly one way up
to units and the order of the factors, i.e., a =
iJ
a
i
with each a
i
irreducible, and if
a =
}J
b
}
with each b
}
irreducible, then there exists a bijection i j.i /: I J such
that b
}(i)
= a
i
unit for each i . Every principal ideal domain is a unique factorization
domain (proved in most algebra courses).
PROPOSITION 4.1. Let A be an integral domain, and let a be an element of A that is
neither zero nor a unit. If a is prime, then a is irreducible, and the converse holds when A
is a unique factorization domain.
PROOF. Assume that a is prime. If a = bc, then a divides bc and so a divides b or c.
Suppose the rst, and write b =aq. Nowa =bc =aqc, which implies that qc =1 because
A is an integral domain, and so c is a unit. Therefore a is irreducible.
For the converse, assume that a is irreducible and that A is a unique factorization do-
main. If a[bc, then
bc =aq, some q A:
On writing each of b, c, and q as a product of irreducible elements, and using the uniqueness
of factorizations, we see that a differs from one of the irreducible factors of b or c by a unit.
Therefore a divides b or c.
2
GAUSSS LEMMA 4.2. Let A be a unique factorization domain with eld of fractions F.
If f.X/ AX factors into the product of two nonconstant polynomials in FX, then it
factors into the product of two nonconstant polynomials in AX.
PROOF. Let f =gh in FX. For suitable c; d A, the polynomials g
1
=cg and h
1
=dh
have coefcients in A, and so we have a factorization
cdf =g
1
h
1
in AX.
If an irreducible element p of A divides cd, then, looking modulo .p/, we see that
0 =g
1
h
1
in .A=.p//X.
According to Proposition 4.1, the ideal .p/ is prime, and so .A=.p//X is an integral
domain. Therefore, p divides all the coefcients of at least one of the polynomials g
1
; h
1
,
say g
1
, so that g
1
=pg
2
for some g
2
AX. Thus, we have a factorization
.cd=p/f =g
2
h
1
in AX.
Continuing in this fashion, we can remove all the irreducible factors of cd, and so obtain a
factorization of f in AX.
2
The proof shows that every factorization f = gh in FX of an element f of AX
gives a factorization f =.cg/.c
-1
h/ in AX for a suitable c F.
Let A be a unique factorization domain. A nonzero polynomial
f =a
0
a
1
X a
n
X
n
in AX is said to be primitive if the coefcients a
i
have no common factor other than units.
Every polynomial f in AX can be written f =c.f / f
1
with c.f / A and f
1
primitive.
The element c.f /, well-dened up to multiplication by a unit, is called the content of f .
LEMMA 4.3. The product of two primitive polynomials is primitive.
PROOF. Let
f =a
0
a
1
X a
n
X
n
g =b
0
b
1
X b
n
X
n
;
be primitive polynomials, and let p be an irreducible element of A. Let a
i
0
be the rst
coefcient of f not divisible by p and b
}
0
the rst coefcient of g not divisible by p. Then
all the terms in
i}=i
0
}
0
a
i
b
}
are divisible by p, except a
i
0
b
}
0
, which is not divisible
by p. Therefore, p doesnt divide the .i
0
j
0
/th-coefcient of fg. We have shown that
no irreducible element of A divides all the coefcients of fg, which must therefore be
primitive.
2
LEMMA 4.4. For polynomials f; g AX, c.fg/ = c.f / c.g/; hence every factor in
AX of a primitive polynomial is primitive.
PROOF. Let f =c.f /f
1
and g =c.g/g
1
with f
1
and g
1
primitive. Then
fg =c.f /c.g/f
1
g
1
with f
1
g
1
primitive, and so c.fg/ =c.f /c.g/.
2
PROPOSITION 4.5. If A is a unique factorization domain, then so also is AX.
PROOF. From the factorization f =c.f /f
1
, we see that the irreducible elements of AX
are to be found among the constant polynomials and the primitive polynomials, but a con-
stant polynomial a is irreducible if and only if a is an irreducible element of A (obvious)
and a primitive polynomial is irreducible if and only if it has no primitive factor of lower
degree (by 4.4). From this it is clear that every nonzero nonunit f in AX is a product of
irreducible elements.
Let
f =c
1
c
n
f
1
f
n
=d
1
d
i
g
1
g
x
be two factorizations of an element f of AX into irreducible elements with the c
i
; d
}
constants and the f
i
; g
}
primitive polynomials. Then
c.f / =c
1
c
n
=d
1
d
i
(up to units in A).
From this it follows that:
(a) m=r and the c
i
s differ from the d
i
s only by units and ordering, and
(b) f
1
f
n
= g
1
g
x
(up to units in A). Gausss lemma shows that the f
i
; g
}
are
irreducible polynomials in FX and, on using that FX is a unique factorization
domain, we see that n = s and that the f
i
s differ from the g
i
s only by units in F
and by their ordering. But if f
i
=
o
b
g
}
with a and b nonzero elements of A, then
bf
i
= ag
}
. As f
i
and g
}
are primitive, this implies that b = a (up to a unit in A),
and hence that
o
b
is a unit in A.
2
Let k be a eld. A monomial in X
1
; : : : ; X
n
is an expression of the form
X
o
1
1
X
o
n
n
; a
}
N:
The total degree of the monomial is
a
i
. The degree, deg.f /, of a nonzero polynomial
f.X
1
; : : : ; X
n
/ is the largest total degree of a monomial occurring in f with nonzero coef-
cient. Since
deg.fg/ =deg.f / deg.g/;
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
is an integral domain and kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=k
. Therefore, an element f of
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
is irreducible if it is nonconstant and f =gh == g or h is constant.
THEOREM 4.6. The ring kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
is a unique factorization domain.
PROOF. This is trivially true when n =0, and an induction argument using (4), p.10, proves
it for all n.
2
COROLLARY 4.7. A nonzero proper principal ideal .f / in kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
is prime if and
only f is irreducible.
PROOF. Special case of (4.1).
2
5 INTEGRALITY 16
5 Integrality
Let A be a subring of a ring B. An element of B is said to be integral over A if it is a root
of a monic
6
polynomial with coefcients in A, i.e., if it satises an equation
n
a
1
n-1
a
n
=0; a
i
A:
If every element of B is integral over A, then B is said to be integral over A.
In the next proof, we shall need to apply Cramers formula. As usually stated in linear
algebra courses, this says that, if x
1
; : : : ; x
n
is a solution to the system of linear equations
n
}=1
c
i}
x
}
=d
i
; i =1; : : : ; m;
then
x
}
=
det.C
}
/
det.C/
; where C =.c
i}
/ and
C
}
=
c
11
c
1,}-1
d
1
c
1,}1
c
1n
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
c
n1
c
n,}-1
d
n
c
n,}1
c
nn
:
When one restates the formula as
det.C/ x
}
=det.C
}
/
it becomes true over any ring (whether or not det.C/ is a unit). The proof is elementary
expand out the right hand side of
det C
}
=det
c
11
: : : c
1}-1
c
1}
x
}
c
1}1
: : : c
1n
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
c
n1
: : : c
n}-1
c
n}
x
}
c
n}1
: : : c
nn
using standard properties of determinants.

PROPOSITION 5.1. Let A be a subring of a ring B. An element of B is integral over A if
and only if there exists a faithful
7
A-submodule M of B that is nitely generated as an
A-module.
PROOF. =: Suppose
n
a
1
n-1
a
n
=0; a
i
A:
Then the A-submodule M of B generated by 1, , ...,
n-1
has the property that M cM,
and it is faithful because it contains 1.
=: Let M be an A-module in B with a nite set {e
1
; : : : ; e
n
] of generators such that
M cM and M is faithful as an A-module. Then, for each i ,
e
i
=
a
i}
e
}
, some a
i}
A:
6
A polynomial is monic if its leading coefcient is 1, i.e., f.X/ =X
n
terms of degree less than n.
7
An A-module M is faithful if aM =0, a A, implies a =0.
5 INTEGRALITY 17
We can rewrite this system of equations as
. a
11
/e
1
a
12
e
2
a
13
e
3
=0
a
21
e
1
. a
22
/e
2
a
23
e
3
=0
=0:
Let C be the matrix of coefcients on the left-hand side. Then Cramers formula tells us
that det.C/ e
i
= 0 for all i . As M is faithful and the e
i
generate M, this implies that
det.C/ =0. On expanding out the determinant, we obtain an equation
n
c
1
n-1
c
2
n-2
c
n
=0; c
i
A:
2
PROPOSITION 5.2. An A-algebra B is nite if and only if it is nitely generated and inte-
gral over A.
PROOF. =: Suppose B =A
1
; : : : ;
n
and that
n
i
i
a
i1
n
i
-1
i
a
i n
i
=0; a
i}
A; i =1; : : : ; m.
Any monomial in the
i
s divisible by some
n
i
i
is equal (in B) to a linear combination of
monomials of lower degree. Therefore, B is generated as an A-module by the monomials
i
1
1

i
m
n
, 1 _r
i
<n
i
.
=: As an A-module, B is faithful (because a 1
B
=a), and so (5.1) show that every
element of B is integral over A. As B is nitely generated as an A-module, it is certainly
nitely generated as an A-algebra.
2
The proof shows that, if an A-algebra B is generated by a nite number of elements
each of which is integral over A, then it is nitely generated as an A-module.
THEOREM 5.3. Let A be a subring of a ring B. The elements of B integral over A form a
subring of B.
PROOF. Let and be two elements of B integral over A. As just noted, A; is nitely
generated as an A-module. It is stable under multiplication by and and it is faithful
as an A -module and as an A-module (because it contains 1
). Therefore (5.1)
shows that and are integral over A.
2
DEFINITION 5.4. Let A be a subring of the ring B. The integral closure of A in B is the
subring of B consisting of the elements integral over A.
PROPOSITION 5.5. Let A be an integral domain with eld of fractions F, and let L be a
eld containing F. If L is algebraic over F, then there exists a d A such that d is
integral over A.
PROOF. By assumption, satises an equation
n
a
1
n-1
a
n
=0; a
i
F:
Let d be a common denominator for the a
i
, so that da
i
A for all i , and multiply through
the equation by d
n
:
d
n
n
a
1
d
n
n-1
a
n
d
n
=0:
5 INTEGRALITY 18
We can rewrite this as
.d/
n
a
1
d.d/
n-1
a
n
d
n
=0:
As a
1
d; : : : ; a
n
d
n
A, this shows that d is integral over A.
2
COROLLARY 5.6. Let A be an integral domain and let L be an algebraic extension of the
eld of fractions of A. Then L is the eld of fractions of the integral closure of A in L.
PROOF. In fact, the proposition shows that every element of L is a quotient =d with
integral over A and d A.
2
DEFINITION 5.7. An integral domain A is integrally closed if it is equal to its integral
closure in its eld of fractions F, i.e., if
F; integral over A == A:
PROPOSITION 5.8. Every unique factorization domain is integrally closed.
PROOF. An element of the eld of fractions of A not in A can be written a=b with a; b A
and b divisible by some irreducible element p not dividing a. If a=b is integral over A, then
it satises an equation
.a=b/
n
a
1
.a=b/
n-1
a
n
=0; a
i
A:
On multiplying through by b
n
, we obtain the equation
a
n
a
1
a
n-1
b a
n
b
n
=0:
The element p then divides every term on the left except a
n
, and hence must divide a
n
.
Since it doesnt divide a, this is a contradiction.
2
PROPOSITION 5.9. Let A be an integrally closed integral domain, and let L be a nite
extension of the eld of fractions F of A. An element of L is integral over A if and only if
its minimum polynomial
8
over F has coefcients in A.
PROOF. Let be integral over A, so that
n
a
1
n-1
a
n
=0; some a
i
A; m> 0.
Let
t
be a conjugate of , i.e., a root of the minimum polynomial f.X/ of over F in
some eld containing L. Then there is an F-isomorphism
9
: F F
t
; ./ =
t
On applying to the above equation we obtain the equation
tn
a
1
tn-1
a
n
=0;
which shows that
t
is integral over A. Hence all the conjugates of are integral over
A, and it follows from (5.3) that the coefcients of f.X/ are integral over A. They lie in
F, and A is integrally closed, and so they lie in A. This proves the only if part of the
statement, and the if part is obvious.
2
8
Most authors write minimal polynomial but the polynomial in question is in fact minimum (smallest
element in the set of monic polynomials having as a root).
9
Recall that the homomorphism X : FX F denes an isomorphism FX=.f / F.
5 INTEGRALITY 19
COROLLARY 5.10. Let Abe an integrally closed integral domain with eld of fractions F,
and let f.X/ be a monic polynomial in AX. Then every monic factor of f.X/ in FX
has coefcients in A.
PROOF. It sufces to prove this for an irreducible monic factor g of f in FX. Let be a
root of g in some extension eld of F. Then g is the minimum polynomial , which, being
also a root of f , is integral. Therefore g has coefcients in A.
2
THEOREM 5.11 (NOETHER NORMALIZATION THEOREM). Every nitely generated alge-
bra A over a eld k contains a polynomial algebra R such that A is a nite R-algebra.
In other words, there exist elements y
1
; : : : ; y
i
of A such that A is a nitely generated
ky
1
; : : : ; y
i
-module and y
1
; : : : ; y
i
are algebraically independent
10
over k.
PROOF. We use induction on the minimum number n of generators of A as a k-algebra. If
n =0, there is nothing to prove, and so we may suppose that n _ 1 and that the statement
is true for k-algebras generated by n1 (or fewer) elements.
Let A = kx
1
; : : : ; x
n
. If the x
i
are algebraically independent, then there is nothing
to prove, and so we may suppose that there exists a nonconstant polynomial f.T
1
; : : : ; T
n
/
such that f.x
1
; : : : ; x
n
/ =0. Some T
i
occurs in f , say T
1
, and we can write
f =c
0
T
1
1
c
1
T
1-1
1
c
1
; c
i
kT
2
; : : : ; T
n
; c
0
=0:
If c
0
k, then the equation
0 =f.x
1
; : : : ; x
n
/ =c
0
x
1
1
c
1
.x
2
; : : : ; x
n
/x
1-1
1
c
1
.x
2
; : : : ; x
n
/
shows that x
1
is integral over kx
2
; : : : ; x
n
. By induction, there exist algebraically indepen-
dent elements y
1
; : : : ; y
i
such that kx
2
; : : : ; x
n
is nite over ky
1
; : : : ; y
i
. It follows that
A is nite over ky
1
; : : : ; y
i
(a composite of nite ring homorphisms is nite).
If c
0
k, then we choose different generators for A. Fix an integer m>0, and let
y
1
=x
1
; y
2
=x
2
x
n
2
1
; : : : ; y
i
=x
i
x
n
r
1
:
Then
ky
1
; : : : ; y
n
=kx
1
; : : : ; x
n
=A
because each y
i
kx
1
; : : : ; x
n
and, conversely, each x
i
kx
1
; y
2
; : : : ; y
n
=ky
1
; : : : ; y
n
.
Moreover,
f.y
1
; y
2
y
n
2
1
; : : : ; y
i
y
n
r
1
/ =0:
In other words, when we let
g.T
1
; : : : ; T
n
/ =f.T
1
; T
2
T
n
2
1
; : : : ; T
i
T
n
r
1
/ kT
1
; : : : ; T
n
;
g.y
1
; : : : ; y
n
/ =0. I claim that, if m is chosen sufciently large, then
g.T
1
; : : : ; T
n
/ =c
t
0
T
1
1
c
t
1
T
1-1
1
c
t
1
; c
t
i
kT
2
; : : : ; T
i
; c
t
0
=0
10
Recall that this means that the homomorphism of k-algebras kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
ky
1
; : : : ; y
n
sending X
i
to
y
i
is an isomorphism, or, equivalently, that if
P.y
1
; : : : ; y
n
/ =0; P.X
1
; : : : ; X
n
/ kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
;
then P =0.
6 RINGS OF FRACTIONS 20
with c
t
0
k, and so the previous argument applies:
To prove the claim, let
f.T
1
; : : : ; T
i
/ =
c
}
1
}
r
T
}
1
1
T
}
r
i
:
Choose m so large that the numbers
j
1
m
2
j
2
m
i
j
i
; (7)
are distinct when .j
1
; : : : ; j
i
/ runs over the r-tuples with c
}
1
,...,}
r
=0. Then
f.T
1
; T
2
T
n
2
1
; : : : ; T
i
T
n
r
1
/ =cT
1
1
c
1
T
1-1
1

with c k {0] and N equal to the largest value of (7).
2
REMARK 5.12. When k is innite, there is a simpler proof of a somewhat stronger result:
let A = kx
1
; : : : ; x
n
; then there exist algebraically independent elements f
1
; : : : ; f
i
that
are linear combinations of the x
i
such that A is nite over kf
1
; : : : ; f
i
(see 8.13 of my
algebraic geometry notes).
6 Rings of fractions
Recall that a multiplicative subset of a ring is a nonempty subset closed under the formation
of nite products.
Let S be a multiplicative subset of A, and dene an equivalence relation on AS by
.a; s/ ~.b; t / u.at bs/ =0 for some u S:
Write
o
x
for the equivalence class containing .a; s/, and dene addition and multiplication
of equivalence classes according to the rules:
o
x

b
t
=
otbx
xt
;
o
x
b
t
=
ob
xt
:
It is easily checked these do not depend on the choices of representatives for the equivalence
classes, and that we obtain in this way a ring
S
-1
A ={
o
x
[ a A; s S]
and a ring homomorphism a
o
1
: A
i
S
S
-1
A whose kernel is
{a A [ sa =0 for some s S]:
If S contains no zero-divisors, for example, if A is an integral domain and 0 S, then
i
S
: A S
-1
A is injective. At the opposite extreme, if 0 S, then S
-1
A is the zero ring.
PROPOSITION 6.1. The pair .S
-1
A; i
S
/ has the following universal property:
every element of S maps to a unit in S
-1
A, and
any other ring homomorphism A B with this
property factors uniquely through i
S
A S
-1
A
B:
i
S
3
PROOF. Let : A B be a homomorphism, and let : S
-1
A B be a homomorphism
such that i
S
=. Then
x
1
o
x
=
o
1
== .
x
1
/.
o
x
/ =.
o
1
/;
and so
.
o
x
/ =.a/.s/
-1
: (8)
This shows that there can be at most one such that i
S
=. When maps the elements
of S to units in B, we dene by the formula (8). Then
o
x
=
b
t
== u.at bs/ =0 some u S
(u)B
== .a/.t / .b/.s/ =0;

which shows that is well-dened, and it is easy to check that it is a homomorphism.
2
As usual, this universal property determines the pair .S
-1
A; i
S
/ uniquely up to a unique
isomorphism.
11
When A is an integral domain and S =A{0], the ring S
-1
A is the eld of fractions
F of A. In this case, for any other multiplicative subset T of A not containing 0, the ring
T
-1
A can be identied with the subring of F consisting of the fractions
o
t
with a A and
t T .
EXAMPLE 6.2. Let h A. Then S
h
={1; h; h
2
; : : :] is a multiplicative subset of A, and we
let A
h
=S
-1
h
A. Thus every element of A
h
can be written in the form a=h
n
, a A, and
o
h
m
=
b
h
n
h
1
.ah
n
bh
n
/ =0; some N:
If h is nilpotent, then A
h
=0, and if A is an integral domain with eld of fractions F and
h =0, then A
h
is the subring of F of elements of the form a=h
n
, a A, m N:
PROPOSITION 6.3. For any ring A and h A, the map

a
i
X
i
o
i
h
i
denes an iso-
morphism
AX=.1hX/ A
h
:
PROOF. If h = 0, both rings are zero, and so we may assume h = 0. In the ring Ax =
AX=.1hX/, 1 =hx, and so h is a unit. Let : AB be a homomorphism of rings such
that .h/ is a unit in B. The homomorphism
a
i
X
i
.a
i
/.h/
-i
: AX B factors
through Ax because 1hX 1.h/.h/
-1
=0, and this is the unique extension of
to Ax. Therefore Ax has the same universal property as A
h
, and so the two are (uniquely)
isomorphic by an A-algebra isomorphism that makes h
-1
correspond to x.
2
Let S be a multiplicative subset of a ring A, and let S
-1
A be the corresponding ring of
fractions. For any ideal a in A, the ideal generated by the image of a in S
-1
A is
S
-1
a ={
o
x
[ a a; s S]:
11
Recall the proof: let .A
1
; i
1
/ and .A
2
; i
2
/ have the universal property in the proposition; because every
element of S maps to a unit in A
2
, there exists a unique homomorphism : A
1
A
2
such that i
1
= i
2
(universal property of A
1
; i
1
/; similarly, there exists a unique homomorphism
t
: A
2
A
1
such that
t
i
2
=
i
1
; now
t
i
1
=
t
i
2
=i
1
=id
1
i
1
;
and so
t
= id
1
(universal property of A
1
; i
1
); similarly,
t
= id
2
, and so and
t
are inverse
isomorphisms (and they are uniquely determined by the conditions i
1
=i
2
and
t
i
2
=i
1
).
If a contains an element of S, then S
-1
a contains 1, and so is the whole ring. Thus some of
the ideal structure of A is lost in the passage to S
-1
A, but, as the next lemma shows, some
is retained.
PROPOSITION 6.4. Let S be a multiplicative subset of the ring A, and consider extension
a a
e
= S
-1
a and contraction a a
c
= {a A [
o
1
a] of ideals with respect to the
homomorphism A S
-1
A. Then
a
ce
=a for all ideals of S
-1
A
a
ec
=a if a is a prime ideal of A disjoint from S:
Moreover, the p p
e
is a bijection from the set of prime ideals of A disjoint from S onto
the set of all prime ideals of S
-1
A; the inverse map is p p
c
.
PROOF. Let a be an ideal in S
-1
A. Certainly a
ce
ca. For the reverse inclusion, let b a.
We can write b =
o
x
with a A, s S. Then
o
1
=s.
o
x
/ a, and so a a
c
. Thus b =
o
x
a
ce
,
and so a ca
ce
.
Let p be a prime ideal of A disjoint from S. Clearly p
ec
p. For the reverse inclusion,
let a p
ec
so that
o
1
=
o
0
x
for some a
t
p, s S. Then t .as a
t
/ =0 for some t S, and
so ast p. Because st p and p is prime, this implies that a p, and so p
ec
cp.
Let p be a prime ideal of A disjoint from S, and let

S be the image of S in A=p.
Then .S
-1
A/=p
e
.

S
-1
.A=p/ because S
-1
A=p
e
has the correct universal property, and
S
-1
.A=p/ is an integral domain because A=p is an integral domain and

S doesnt contain
0. Therefore p
e
is prime. From 2 we know that p
c
is prime if p is, and so p p
e
and
p p
c
are inverse bijections on the two sets.
2
COROLLARY 6.5. If A is noetherian, then so also is S
-1
A for any multiplicative set S:
PROOF. As b
c
is nitely generated, so also is .b
c
/
e
=b.
2
EXAMPLE 6.6. Let p be a prime ideal in A. Then S
p
=Ap is a multiplicative subset of
A, and we let A
p
=S
-1
p
A. Thus each element of A
p
can be written in the form
o
c
, c p,
and
o
c
=
b
d
s.ad bc/ =0, some s p:
According to (6.4), the prime ideals of A
p
correspond to the prime ideals of A disjoint from
Ap, i.e., contained in p. Therefore, A
p
is a local ring with maximal ideal m=p
e
={
o
x
[
a p; s p].
PROPOSITION 6.7. Let m be a maximal ideal of a noetherian ring A, and let n =mA
m
be
the maximal ideal of A
m
: For all n, the map
am
n
an
n
: A=m
n
A
m
=n
n
is an isomorphism. Moreover, it induces isomorphisms
m
i
=m
n
n
i
=n
n
for all pairs .r; n/ with r _n.
PROOF. The second statement follows from the rst, because of the exact commutative
diagram .r <n/:
0 m
i
=m
n
A=m
n
A=m
i
0
:
0 n
i
=n
n
A
m
=n
n
A
m
=n
i
0:
We consider extension and contraction with respect to a
o
1
: A A
m
. In order to
show that the map A=m
n
A
m
=n
n
is injective, we have to show that .m
n
/
ec
= m
n
. If
a .m
n
/
ec
, then
o
1
=
b
x
with b m
n
and s S. Then s
t
sa m
n
for some s
t
S, and so
s
t
sa =0 in A=m
n
. The only maximal ideal containing m
n
is m, and so the only maximal
ideal in A=m
n
is m=m
n
. As s
t
s is not in m=m
n
, it must be a unit in A=m
n
, and so a =0 in
A=m
n
, i.e., a m
n
. We have shown that .m
n
/
ec
c m, and the reverse inclusion is always
true.
We now prove that A=m
n
A
m
=n
n
is surjective. Let
o
x
A
m
, a A, s Am. The
only maximal ideal of A containing m
n
is m, and so no maximal ideal contains both s
and m
n
; it follows that .s/ m
n
= A. Therefore, there exist b A and q m
n
such that
sb q =1. Because s is invertible in A
m
=n
n
,
o
x
is the unique element of this ring such that
s
o
x
=a. As s.ba/ =a.1 q/, the image of ba in A
m
also has this property and therefore
equals
o
x
.
2
PROPOSITION 6.8. In a noetherian ring, only 0 lies in all powers of all maximal ideals.
PROOF. Let a be an element of a noetherian ring A. If a =0, then its annihilator {b [ ba =
0] is a proper ideal, and so it is contained in some maximal ideal m. Then
o
1
is nonzero in
A
m
, and so
o
1
.mA
m
/
n
for some n (by the Krull intersection theorem 3.14), which implies
that a m
n
(by 6.7).
2
MODULES OF FRACTIONS
Let S be a multiplicative subset of the ring A, and let M be an A-module. Dene an
equivalence relation on MS by
.m; s/ ~.n; t / u.t msn/ =0 for some u S:
Write
n
x
for the equivalence class containing .m; s/, and dene addition and scalar multi-
plication by the rules:
n
x

n
t
=
ntnx
xt
;
o
x
n
t
=
on
xt
; m; n M; s; t S; a A:
It is easily checked these do not depend on the choices of representatives for the equivalence
classes, and that we obtain in this way an S
-1
A-module
S
-1
M ={
n
x
[ m M; s S]
and a homomorphism m
n
1
: M
i
S
S
-1
M of A-modules whose kernel is
{a M [ sa =0 for some s S]:
EXAMPLE 6.9. Let M be an A-module. For h A, let M
h
=S
-1
h
M where S
h
={1; h; h
2
; : : :].
Then every element of M
h
can be written in the form
n
h
r
, m M, r N, and
n
h
r
=
n
0
h
r
0
if
and only if h
1
.h
i
0
mh
i
m
t
/ =0 for some N N.
PROPOSITION 6.10. The pair .S
-1
M; i
S
/ has the following universal property:
every element of S acts invertibly on S
-1
M, and
any other homomorphism M N of A-modules
such that every element of S acts invertibly on N
factors uniquely through i
S
M S
-1
M
N:
i
S
3
PROOF. Similar to that of Proposition 6.1.
2
In particular, for any homomorphism : M N of A-modules, there is a unique ho-
momorphism S
-1
: S
-1
M S
-1
N such that S
-1
i
S
=i
S
:
M
i
S
S
-1
M
S
1
N
i
S
S
-1
N:
In this way, M S
-1
M becomes a functor.
PROPOSITION 6.11. The functor M S
-1
M is exact. In other words, if the sequence of
A-modules
M
t

M
M
tt
is exact, then so also is the sequence of S
-1
A-modules
S
-1
M
t
S
1
S
-1
M
S
1
S
-1
M
tt
:
PROOF. Because =0, we have 0 =S
-1
./ =S
-1
S
-1
. Therefore Im.S
-1
/ c
Ker.S
-1
/. For the reverse inclusion, let
n
x
Ker.S
-1
/ where m M and s S. Then
(n)
x
=0 and so, for some t S, we have t.m/ =0. Then .t m/ =0, and so t m=.m
t
/
for some m
t
M
t
. Now
n
x
=
tn
tx
=
(n
0
)
tx
Im.S
-1
/:
2
EXERCISE 6.12. A multiplicative subset S of a ring A is said to be saturated if
ab S =a and b S:
(a) Show that the saturated multiplicative subsets of Aare exactly the subsets S such that
AS is a union of prime ideals.
(b) Let S be a multiplicative subset of A, and let

S be the set of a A such that ab S
for some b A. Show that

S is a saturated multiplicative subset of A (hence it is the
smallest such subset containing S), and that A

S is the union of the prime ideals
of A not meeting S. Show that for any A-module M, the canonical homomorphism
S
-1
M

S
-1
M is bijective. (Cf. Bourbaki AC, II 2, Exercises 1,2.)
7 DIRECT LIMITS 25
7 Direct limits
DEFINITION 7.1. A partial ordering _ on a set I is said to be directed, and the pair .I; _/
is called a directed set, if for all i; j I there exists a k I such that i; j _k.
DEFINITION 7.2. Let .I; _/ be a directed set, and let A be a ring.
A direct system of A-modules indexed by .I; _/
is a family .M
i
/
iJ
of A-modules together with a
family .
i
}
: M
i
M
}
/
i_}
of A-linear maps such
that
i
i
=id
i
and
}
k
i
}
=
i
k
all i _j _k.
M
k
M
i
M
}
i
k
i
j
j
k
An A-module M together with a family
.
i
: M
i
M/
iJ
of A-linear maps satisfying
i
=
}

i
}
all i _ j is said to be a direct limit
of the system ..M
i
/; .
i
}
// if it has the following
universal property: for any other A-module N and
family .
i
: M
i
N/ of A-linear maps such that
i
=
}
i
}
all i _j , there exists a unique mor-
phism : M N such that
i
=
i
for all i .
M
M
i
M
}
N
i
j
As usual, the universal property determines the direct limit (if it exists) uniquely up to a
unique isomorphism. We denote it lim
.M
i
;
}
i
/, or just lim
M
i
.
CRITERION
An A-module M together with A-linear maps
i
: M
i
M is the direct limit of a system
.M
i
;
}
i
/ if and only if
(a) M =
iJ

i
.M
i
/, and
(b) m
i
M
i
maps to zero in M if and only if it maps to zero in M
}
for some j _i .
CONSTRUCTION
Let
M =
iJ
M
i
=M
t
where M
t
is the A-submodule generated by the elements
m
i
i
}
.m
i
/ all i <j , m
i
M
i
:
Let
i
.m
i
/ =m
i
M
t
. Then certainly
i
=
}

i
}
for all i _ j . For any A-module N
and A-linear maps
}
: M
}
N, there is a unique map
iJ
M
i
N;
namely,
m
i

i
.m
i
/, sending m
i
to
i
.m
i
/, and this map factors through M and is
the unique A-linear map with the required properties.
Direct limits of A-algebras, etc., are dened similarly.
8 TENSOR PRODUCTS 26
AN EXAMPLE
PROPOSITION 7.3. For any multiplicative subset S of a ring A, S
-1
A .lim
A
h
, where h
runs over the elements of S (partially ordered by division).
PROOF. When h[h
t
, say, h
t
=hg, there is a unique homomorphism A
h
A
h
0 respecting
the maps AA
h
and AA
h
0 , namely,
o
h

ov
h
0
, and so the rings A
h
form a direct system
indexed by the set S. When h S, the homomorphism A S
-1
A extends uniquely to a
homomorphism
o
h

o
h
: A
h
S
-1
A (see 6.1), and these homomorphisms are compatible
with the maps in the direct system. Now apply the criterion p. 25 to see that S
-1
A is the
direct limit of the A
h
.
2
8 Tensor Products
TENSOR PRODUCTS OF MODULES
Let A be a ring, and let M, N, and P be A-modules. A map : MN P of A-modules
is said to be A-bilinear if
.x x
t
; y/ =.x; y/ .x
t
; y/; x; x
t
M; y N
.x; y y
t
/ =.x; y/ .x; y
t
/; x M; y; y
t
N
.ax; y/ =a.x; y/; a A; x M; y N
.x; ay/ =a.x; y/; a A; x M; y N;
i.e., if is A-linear in each variable.
MN T
T
t
:
0
3 linear
An A-module T together with an A-bilinear map
: MN T
is called the tensor product of M and N over A if it has the
following universal property: every A-bilinear map
t
: MN T
t
factors uniquely through .
As usual, the universal property determines the tensor product uniquely up to a unique
isomorphism. We write it M
N. Note that
Hom
-bilinear
.MN; T / .Hom
-linear
.M
N; T /:
Construction
Let M and N be A-modules, and let A
(1)
be the free A-module with basis M N.
Thus each element A
(1)
can be expressed uniquely as a nite sum
a
i
.x
i
; y
i
/; a
i
A; x
i
M; y
i
N:
Let P be the submodule of A
(1)
generated by the following elements
.x x
t
; y/ .x; y/ .x
t
; y/; x; x
t
M; y N
.x; y y
t
/ .x; y/ .x; y
t
/; x M; y; y
t
N
.ax; y/ a.x; y/; a A; x M; y N
.x; ay/ a.x; y/; a A; x M; y N;
and dene
M
N =A
(1)
=P:
Write x y for the class of .x; y/ in M
N. Then
.x; y/ x y: MN M
N
is A-bilinear we have imposed the fewest relations necessary to ensure this. Every
element of M
N can be written as a nite sum

12
a
i
.x
i
y
i
/; a
i
A; x
i
M; y
i
N;
and all relations among these symbols are generated by the following relations
.x x
t
/ y =x y x
t
y
x .y y
t
/ =x y x y
t
a.x y/ =.ax/ y =x ay:
The pair .M
N; .x; y/ x y/ has the correct universal property because any bilin-

ear map
t
: M N T
t
denes an A-linear map A
(1)
T
t
, which factors through
A
(1)
=K, and gives a commutative triangle.
Extension of scalars
Let A be a commutative ring and let B be an A-algebra (not necessarily commutative) such
that the image of AB lies in the centre of B. Then M B
M is a functor from left

A-modules to left B-modules, which has the following universal property:
Hom
-linear
.M; N/ .Hom
B-linear
.B
M; N/; N a B-module. (9)

If .e
/
J
is a family of generators (resp. basis) for M as an A-module, then .1e
/
J
is a family of generators (resp. basis) for B
M as a B-module.
Behaviour with respect to direct limits
PROPOSITION 8.1. Direct limits commute with tensor products:
lim
iJ
M
i
lim
}J
N
}
. lim
(i,})JJ
M
i
N
}
:
PROOF. Using the universal properties of direct limits and tensor products, one sees eas-
ily that lim
.M
i
N
}
/ has the universal property to be the tensor product of lim
M
i
and
lim
N
}
.
2
12
An element of the tensor product of two vector spaces is not necessarily a tensor product of two vectors,
but sometimes a sum of such. This might be considered a mathematical shenanigan but if you start with the
state vectors of two quantum systems it exactly corresponds to the notorious notion of entanglement which so
displeased Einstein. Georges Elencwajg on mathoverow.net.
TENSOR PRODUCTS OF ALGEBRAS
Let k be a ring, and let A and B be k-algebras. A k-algebra C together with homomor-
phisms i : A C and j : B C is called the tensor product of A and B if it has the
following universal property:
for every pair of homomorphisms (of k-algebras)
: A R and : B R, there exists a unique
homomorphism: C R such that i = and
j =,
A C B
R
i
}
3
,
If it exists, the tensor product, is uniquely determined up to a unique isomorphism by this
property. We write it A
k
B. Note that the universal property says that
Hom
k-algebra
.A
k
B; R/ .Hom
k-algebra
.A; R/ Hom
k-algebra
.B; R/. (10)
Construction
Regard A and B as k-modules, and form the tensor product A
k
B. There is a multiplica-
tion map A
k
B A
k
B A
k
B for which
.ab/.a
t
b
t
/ =aa
t
bb
t
; all a; a
t
A; b; b
t
B:
This makes A
k
B into a ring, and the homomorphism
c c.11/ =c 1 =1c
makes it into a k-algebra. The maps
a a1: A A
k
B and b 1b: B A
k
B
are homomorphisms, and they make A
k
B into the tensor product of Aand B in the above
sense.
EXAMPLE 8.2. The algebra A, together with the maps
k A
id
A
A,
is k
k
A (because it has the correct universal property). In terms of the constructive de-
nition of tensor products, the map c a ca: k
k
A A is an isomorphism.
EXAMPLE 8.3. The ring kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
; X
n1
; : : : ; X
nn
, together with the obvious in-
clusions
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
, kX
1
; : : : ; X
nn
- kX
n1
; : : : ; X
nn
is the tensor product of the k-algebras kX

1
; : : : ; X
n
and kX
n1
; : : : ; X
nn
. To verify
this we only have to check that, for every k-algebra R, the map
Hom
k-alg
.kX
1
; : : : ; X
nn
; R/ Hom
k-alg
.kX
1
; : : :; R/ Hom
k-alg
.kX
n1
; : : :; R/
induced by the inclusions is a bijection. But this map can be identied with the bijection
R
nn
R
n
R
n
:
In terms of the constructive denition of tensor products, the map
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n

k
kX
n1
; : : : ; X
nn
kX
1
; : : : ; X
nn
sending f g to fg is an isomorphism.
REMARK 8.4. (a) Let k ,k
t
be a homomorphism of rings. Then
k
t
k
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
.k
t
1X
1
; : : : ; 1X
n
.k
t
X
1
; : : : ; X
n
:
If A =kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=.g
1
; : : : ; g
n
/, then
k
t
k
A .k
t
X
1
; : : : ; X
n
=.g
1
; : : : ; g
n
/:
(b) If A and B are algebras of k-valued functions on sets S and T respectively, then the
denition
.f g/.x; y/ =f.x/g.y/; f A, g B, x S, y T;
realizes A
k
B as an algebra of k-valued functions on S T .
THE TENSOR ALGEBRA OF A MODULE
Let M be a module over a ring A. For each A _0, set
T
i
M =M
M (r factors),
so that T
0
M =A and T
1
M =M, and dene
TM =
i_0
T
i
M:
This can be made into a noncommutative A-algebra, called the tensor algebra of M, by
requiring that the multiplication map
T
i
MT
x
M T
ix
M
send .m
1
m
i
; m
i1
m
ix
/ to m
1
m
ix
.
M TM
R
-linear 3-algebra
The pair .TM; M TM/ has the following universal prop-
erty: any A-linear map from M to an A-algebra R (not nec-
essarily commutative) extends uniquely to an A-algebra homo-
morphism TM R.
If M is a free A-module with basis x
1
; : : : ; x
n
, then TM is
the (noncommutative) polynomial ring over A in the noncom-
muting symbols x
i
(because this A-algebra has the same univer-
sal property as TM).
THE SYMMETRIC ALGEBRA OF A MODULE
The symmetric algebra Sym.M/ of an A-module M is the quotient of TM by the ideal
generated by all elements of T
2
M of the form
mnnm; m; n M:
It is a graded algebra Sym.M/ =
i_0
Sym
i
.M/ with Sym
i
.M/ equal to the quotient of
M
i
by the A-submodule generated by all elements of the form
m
1
m
i
m
c(1)
m
c(i)
; m
i
M; B
i
(symmetric group).
9 FLATNESS 30
M Sym.M/
R
-linear
3-algebra
The pair .Sym.M/; M Sym.M// has the following
universal property: any A-linear map M R from
M to a commutative A-algebra R extends uniquely to
an A-algebra homomorphism Sym.M/ R (because
it extends to an A-algebra homomorphism TM R,
which factors through Sym.M/ because R is commuta-
tive).
If M is a free A-module with basis x
1
; : : : ; x
n
, then Sym.M/ is the polynomial ring over
A in the (commuting) symbols x
i
(because this A-algebra has the same universal property
as TM).
9 Flatness
Let M be an A-module. If the sequence of A-modules
0 N
t
N N
tt
0 (11)
is exact, then the sequence
M
N
t
M
N M
N
tt
0
is exact, but M
N
t
M
N need not be injective. For example, when we tensor the

exact sequence of Z-modules
0 Z
n
Z Z=mZ 0
with Z=mZ, we get the sequence
Z=mZ
n=0
Z=mZ Z=mZ 0:
Moreover, M
N may be zero even when neither M nor N is nonzero. For example,

Z=2Z
Z
Z=3Z =0
because it is killed by both 2 and 3.
13
DEFINITION 9.1. An A-module M is at if
N
t
N injective == M
N
t
M
N injective.
It is faithfully at if, in addition,
M
N =0 == N =0:
A homomorphism of rings AB is said to be (faithfully) at when B is (faithfully) at as
an A-module.
13
It was once customary to require a ring to have an identity element 1 =0 (see, for example, Northcott 1953,
p.3). However, the example shows that tensor products do not always exist in the category of such objects.
9 FLATNESS 31
Thus, an A-module M is at if and only if M
is an exact functor, i.e.,

0 M
N
t
M
N M
N
tt
0 (12)
is exact whenever (11) is exact.
The functor Mtakes direct sums to direct sums, and therefore split-exact sequences
to split-exact sequences. Therefore, all vector spaces over a eld are at, and nonzero vector
spaces are faithfully at.
PROPOSITION 9.2. Let AB be a faithfully at homomorphism of rings. A sequence of
A-modules
0 N
t
N N
tt
0 (13)
is exact if
0 B
N
t
B
N B
N
tt
0 (14)
is exact.
PROOF. Let N
0
be the kernel of N
t
N. Because AB is at, B
N
0
is the kernel of
B
N
t
B
N, which is zero by assumption; because A B is faithfully at, this

implies that N
0
= 0. We have proved the exactness at N
t
, and the proof of the exactness
elsewhere is similar.
2
REMARK 9.3. There is a converse to the proposition: suppose that
(13) is exact =(14) is exact;
then A B is faithfully at. The implication = shows that A B is at. Now let N
be an A-module, and consider the sequence
0 0 N 0 0.
If B
N = 0, then this sequence becomes exact when tensored with B, and so is itself
exact, which implies that N =0. This shows that A B is faithfully at.
COROLLARY 9.4. Let A B be faithfully at. An A-module M is at (resp. faithfully
at) if B
M is at (resp. faithfully at) as a B-module.

PROOF. Assume that M
B
def
= B
N is at, and let N

t
N be an injective map of A-
modules. We have that
B
.M
N
t
M
N/ .M
B
B
.N
t
B
N
B
/,
and the map at right is injective because A B is at and M
B
is at. Now (9.2) shows
that M
N
t
M
N is injective. Thus M is at.

Assume that M
B
is faithfully at, and let N be an A-module. If M
N = 0, then
M
B
B
N
B
is zero because it is isomorphic to .M
N/
B
. Now N
B
=0 because M
B
is
faithfully at, and so N =0 because A B is faithfully at.
2
9 FLATNESS 32
PROPOSITION 9.5. Let i : A B be a faithfully at homomorphism. For any A-module
M, the sequence
0 M
d
0
B
M
d
1
B
M (15)
with

d
0
.m/ = 1m;
d
1
.b m/ = 1b mb 1m
is exact.
PROOF. Assume rst that there exists an A-linear section to A B, i.e., an A-linear map
f : B A such that f i =id
, and dene
k
0
: B
M M; k
0
.b m/ =f.b/m
k
1
: B
M B
M; k
1
.b b
t
m/ =f.b/b
t
m:
Then k
0
d
0
=id
, which shows that d

0
is injective. Moreover,
k
1
d
1
d
0
k
0
=id
B
A
which shows that, if d

1
.x/ =0, then x =d
0
.k
0
.x//, as required.
We now consider the general case. Because AB is faithfully at, it sufces to prove
that the sequence (15) becomes exact after tensoring in B. But the sequence obtained from
(15) by tensoring with B is isomorphic to the sequence (15) for the homomorphism of rings
b 1b: B B
B and the B-module B
M, because, for example,

B
.B
M/ ..B
B/
B
.B
M/:
Now B B
B has an B-linear section, namely, f.b b

t
/ =bb
t
, and so we can apply
the rst part.
2
COROLLARY 9.6. If A B is faithfully at, then it is injective with image the set of
elements on which the maps
b 1b
b b 1
: B B
B
agree.
PROOF. This is the special case M =A of the Proposition.
2
PROPOSITION 9.7. Let AA
t
be a homomorphismof rings. If AB is at (or faithfully
at), then so also is A
t
B
A
t
.
PROOF. For any A
t
-module M,
.B
A
t
/
0 M .B
.A
t
0 M/ .B
M;
from which the statement follows.
2
PROPOSITION 9.8. For any multiplicative subset S of a ring A and A-module M,
S
-1
A
M .S
-1
M:
The homomorphism a
o
1
: A S
-1
A is at.
9 FLATNESS 33
PROOF. To give an S
-1
A-module is the same as giving an A-module on which the elements
of S act invertibly. Therefore S
-1
A
M and S
-1
M satisfy the same universal property
(see 8, especially (9)), which proves the rst statement. As M S
-1
M is exact (6.11),
so also is M S
-1
A
M, which proves the second statement.

2
PROPOSITION 9.9. A homomorphism of rings ': AB is at if A
c
1
(n)
B
n
is at for
all maximal ideals n in B.
PROOF. Let N
t
N be an injective homomorphism of A-modules, and let n be a maximal
ideal of B. Then p ='
-1
.n/ is a prime ideal in A, and A
p
.N
t
N/ is injective (9.8).
Therefore, the map
B
n
.N
t
N/ .B
n
p
.A
p
.N
t
N//
is injective, and so the kernel M of B
.N
t
N/ has the property that M
n
= 0. Let
x M, and let a ={b B [ bx =0]. For each maximal ideal n of B, x maps to zero in
M
n
, and so a contains an element not in n. Hence a =B, and so x =0.
2
PROPOSITION 9.10. The following conditions on a at homomorphism ': A B are
equivalent:
(a) ' is faithfully at;
(b) for every maximal ideal m of A, the ideal '.m/B =B;
(c) every maximal ideal m of A is of the form '
-1
.n/ for some maximal ideal n of B.
PROOF. (a) =(b): Let m be a maximal ideal of A, and let M =A=m; then
B
M .B='.m/B:
As B
M =0, we see that '.m/B =B.

(b) = (c): If '.m/B = B, then '.m/ is contained in a maximal ideal n of B. Now
'
-1
.n/ is a proper ideal in A containing m, and hence equals m.
(c) =(a): Let M be a nonzero A-module. Let x be a nonzero element of M, and let
a =ann.x/
def
={a A [ ax =0]. Then a is an ideal in A, and M
t
def
=Ax .A=a. Moreover,
B
M
t
.B='.a/ B and, because AB is at, B
M
t
is a submodule of B
M.
Because a is proper, it is contained in a maximal ideal m of A, and therefore
'.a/ c'.m/ cn
for some maximal ideal n of A. Hence '.a/ B cn =B, and so B
M B
M
t
=0.
2
THEOREM 9.11 (GENERIC FLATNESS). Let A an integral domain with eld of fractions
F, and let B be a nitely generated A-algebra contained in F
B. Then for some nonzero

elements a of A and b of B, the homomorphism A
o
B
b
is faithfully at.
PROOF. As F
B is a nitely generated F-algebra, the Noether normalization theorem

(5.11) shows that there exist elements x
1
; : : : ; x
n
of F
B such that Fx
1
; : : : ; x
n
is a
polynomial ring over F and F
B is a nite Fx
1
; : : : ; x
n
-algebra. After multiplying
each x
i
by an element of A, we may suppose that it lies in B. Let b
1
; : : : ; b
n
generate
B as an A-algebra. Each b
i
satises a monic polynomial equation with coefcients in
Fx
1
; : : : ; x
n
. Let a A be a common denominator for the coefcients of these polynomi-
als. Then each b
i
is integral over A
o
. As the b
i
generate B
o
as an A
o
-algebra, this shows
9 FLATNESS 34
that B
o
is a nite A
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
-algebra (by 5.2). Therefore, after replacing A with A
o
and B with B
o
, we may suppose that B is a nite Ax
1
; : : : ; x
n
-algebra.
B
injective
F
B E
x
1
,...,x
m
]
B
nite
nite
nite
Ax
1
; : : : ; x
n
Fx
1
; : : : ; x
n
E
def
=F.x
1
; : : : ; x
n
/
A F
Let E =F.x
1
; : : : ; x
n
/ be the eld of fractions of Ax
1
; : : : ; x
n
, and let b
1
; : : : ; b
i
be
elements of B that form a basis for E
x
1
,...,x
m
]
B as an E-vector space. Each element
of B can be expressed a linear combination of the b
i
with coefcients in E. Let q be
a common denominator for the coefcients arising from a set of generators for B as an
Ax
1
; : : : ; x
n
-module. Then b
1
; : : : ; b
i
generate B
q
as an Ax
1
; : : : ; x
n
q
-module. In other
words, the map
.c
1
; : : : ; c
i
/
c
i
b
i
: Ax
1
; : : : ; x
n
i
q
B
q
(16)
is surjective. This map becomes an isomorphismwhen tensored with E over Ax
1
; : : : ; x
n
q
,
which implies that each element of its kernel is killed by a nonzero element of Ax
1
; : : : ; x
n
q
and so is zero (because Ax
1
; : : : ; x
n
q
is an integral domain). Hence the map (16) is an iso-
morphism, and so B
q
is free of nite rank over Ax
1
; : : : ; x
n
q
. Let a be some nonzero
coefcient of the polynomial q, and consider the maps
A
o
A
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
A
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
q
B
oq
:
The rst and third arrows realize their targets as nonzero free modules over their sources,
and so are faithfully at. The middle arrow is at by (9.8). Let m be a maximal ideal in A
o
.
Then mA
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
does not contain the polynomial q because the coefcient a of q is
invertible in A
o
. Hence mA
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
q
is a proper ideal of A
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
q
, and so the
map A
o
A
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
q
is faithfully at (apply 9.10). This completes the proof.
2
REMARK 9.12. The theorem holds for any nitely generated B-algebra, i.e., without the
requirement that B c F
B. To see this, note that F
B is the ring of fractions of B

with respect to the multiplicative subset A{0] (see 9.8), and so the kernel of B F
B
is the ideal
n ={b B [ ab =0 for some nonzero a A]:
This is nitely generated (Hilbert basis theorem 3.6), and so there exists a nonzero c A
such that cb =0 for all b n. I claim that the homomorphism B
c
F
c
B
c
is injective.
If
b
c
r
lies in its kernel, then
o
c
s
b
c
r
=0 in B
c
for some nonzero
o
c
s
A
c
, and so c
1
ab =0
in B for some N; therefore b n, and so cb =0, which implies that
b
c
r
=0 already in B
c
.
Therefore, after replacing A, B, and M with A
c
, B
c
, and M
c
, we may suppose that the
map B F
B is injective. On identifying B with its image, we arrive at the situation

of the theorem.
EXERCISE 9.13. Let .A
i
;
i
}
/ be a direct system of rings, and let .M
i
;
i
}
/ be a direct
system of abelian groups with the same indexing set. Suppose that each M
i
has the structure
10 FINITELY GENERATED PROJECTIVE MODULES 35
of an A
i
-module, and that the diagrams
A
i
M
i
M
i
i
j
i
j
i
j
A
}
M
}
M
}
commute for all i _j . Let A =lim
A
i
and M =lim
M
i
.
(a) Show that M has a unique structure of an A-module for which the diagrams
A
i
M
i
M
i
i
AM M
commute for all i .
(b) Show that M is at as an A-module if each M
i
is at as an A
i
-module.
(Bourbaki AC, I, 2, Prop. 9.)
10 Finitely generated projective modules
In many situations, the correct generalization of nite-dimensional vector space is not
nitely generated module but nitely generated projective module. From a different
perspective, they are the algebraists analogue of the differential geometers vector bundle.
Throughout this section, A is a commutative ring.
PROJECTIVE MODULES
DEFINITION 10.1. An A-module P is projective if, for each surjective A-linear map f : M
N and A-linear map g: P N, there exists an A-linear map h: P M (not necessarily
unique) such that f h =g:
P
M N 0:
(
v
3h
In other words, P is projective if every map from P onto a quotient of a module M lifts to
a map to M. Equivalently, P is projective if the functor M Hom
-lin
.P; M/ is exact.
As
Hom.
i
P
i
; M/ .
i
Hom.P
i
; M/
we see that a direct sum of A-modules is projective if and only if each direct summand
is projective. As A itself is projective, this shows that every free A-module is projective
and every direct summand of a free module is projective. Conversely, let P be a projective
module, and write it as a quotient of a free module,
F
(
P 0:
because P is projective, there exists an A-linear map h: P F such that f h =id
1
; then
F ~Im.h/ Ker.f / ~P Ker.f /;
and so P is a direct summand of F. We conclude: the projective A-modules are exactly the
direct summands of free A-modules.
FINITELY PRESENTED MODULES
DEFINITION 10.2. An A-module M is nitely presented if there exists an exact sequence
A
n
A
n
M 0, some m; n N.
A nite family .e
i
/
iJ
of generators for an A-module M denes a homomorphism
.a
i
/
iJ
a
i
e
i
: A
J
M. The elements of the kernel of this homomorphism are called
the relations between the generators. Thus, M is nitely presented if it admits a nite
family of generators whose module of relations is nitely generated. Obviously
nitely presented =nitely generated,
and the converse is true when A is noetherian (by 3.4).
PROPOSITION 10.3. If M is nitely presented, then the kernel of every surjective homo-
morphism A
n
M, m N, is nitely generated.
In other words, if M is nitely presented, then the module of relations for every nite
generating set is nitely generated.
PROOF. We are given that there exists a surjective homomorphism A
n
M with nitely
generated kernel R, and we wish to show that the kernel R
t
of A
n
M is nitely gener-
ated. Consider the diagram:
0 R A
n
M 0
0 R
t
A
n
M 0
id
M
(
v
The map g exists because A
n
is projective, and it induces the map f . From the diagram,
we get an exact sequence
R
v
R
t
A
n
=gA
n
0,
either from the snake lemma or by a direct diagram chase. As R and A
n
=gA
n
are both
nitely generated, so also is R
t
.
2
If M is nitely generated and projective, then the kernel of A
n
M is a direct sum-
mand (hence quotient) of A
n
, and so is nitely generated. Therefore M is nitely presented.
FINITELY GENERATED PROJECTIVE MODULES
According to the above discussion, the nitely generated projective modules are exactly the
direct summands of free A-modules of nite rank.
THEOREM 10.4. The following conditions on an A-module are equivalent:
(a) M is nitely generated and projective;
(b) M is nitely presented and M
m
is a free A
m
-module for all maximal ideals m of A;
(c) there exists a nite family .f
i
/
iJ
of elements of A generating the ideal A and such
that, for all i I, the A
(
i
-module M
(
i
is free of nite rank;
(d) M is nitely presented and at.
Moreover, when A is an integral domain and M is nitely presented, they are equivalent to:
(e) dim
k(p)
.M
k.p// is the same for all prime ideals p of A (here k.p/ denotes the
eld of fractions of A=p).
PROOF. (a)=(d). As tensor products commute with direct sums, every free module is at
and every direct summand of a at module is at. Therefore, every projective module M is
at, and we saw above that such a module is nitely presented if it is nitely generated.
(b)=(c). Let m be a maximal ideal of A, and let x
1
; : : : ; x
i
be elements of M whose
images in M
m
form a basis for M
m
over A
m
. The kernel N
t
and cokernel N of the homo-
morphism
: A
i
M; g.a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/ =
a
i
x
i
;
are both nitely generated, and N
t
m
=0 =N
m
. Therefore, there exists
14
an f Am such
that N
t
(
=0 =N
(
. Now becomes an isomorphism when tensored with A
(
.
The set T of elements f arising in this way is contained in no maximal ideal, and so
generates the ideal A. Therefore, 1 =
iJ
a
i
f
i
for certain a
i
A and f
i
T .
(c)=(d). Let B =
iJ
A
(
i
. Then B is faithfully at over A, and B
M =
M
(
i
,
which is clearly a at B-module. It follows that M is a at A-module (apply 9.4).
(c)=(e). This is obvious.
(e)=(c): Fix a prime ideal p of A. For some f p, there exist elements x
1
; : : : ; x
i
of
M
(
whose images in M
k.p/ form a basis. Then the map

: A
i
(
M
(
; .a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/ =
a
i
x
i
;
denes a surjection A
i
p
M
p
(Nakayamas lemma; note that k.p/ . A
p
=pA
p
). Because
the cokernel of is nitely generated, the map itself will be surjective once f has been
replaced by a multiple. For any prime ideal q of A
(
, the map k.q/
i
M
k.q/ de-
ned by is surjective, and hence is an isomorphism because dim.M
k.q// =r. Thus

Ker./ cqA
i
(
for every q, which implies that it is zero as A
(
is reduced. Therefore M
(
is
free. As in the proof of (b), a nite set of such f s will generate A.
2
To prove the remaining implications, (d)=(a);(b) we shall need the following lemma.
LEMMA 10.5. Let
0 N F M 0 (17)
be an exact sequence of A-modules with N a submodule of F.
14
To say that S
-1
N =0 means that, for each x N, there exists an s
x
S such that s
x
x =0. If x
1
; : : : ; x
n
generate N, then s
def
=s
x
1
s
x
n
lies in S and has the property that sN =0. Therefore, N
x
=0.
(a) lf M and F are at over A, then N aF =aN (inside F) for all ideals a of A.
(b) Assume that F is free with basis .y
i
/
iJ
and that M is at. If the element n =
iJ
a
i
y
i
of F lies in N, then there exist n
i
N such that n =
iJ
a
i
n
i
:
(c) Assume that M is at and F is free. For any nite set {n
1
; : : : ; n
i
] of elements of
N, there exists an A-linear map f : F N with f.n
}
/ =n
}
; j =1; : : : , r.
PROOF. (a) Consider
aN aF aM
:
0 N aF aF aM
The rst row is obtained from (17) by tensoring with a, and the second row is a subsequence
of (17). Both rows are exact. On tensoring a Awith F we get a map aF F, which is
injective because F is at. Therefore aF aF is an isomorphism. Similarly, aM
aM is an isomorphism. From the diagram we get a surjective map aN N aF, and
so the image of aN in aF is N aF. But this image is aN.
(b) Let a be the ideal generated by the a
i
. Then n N aF = aN, and so there are
n
i
N such that n =
a
i
n
i
:
(c) We use induction on r. Assume rst that r =1, and write
n
1
=
iJ
0
a
i
y
i
where .y
i
/
iJ
is a basis for F and I
0
is a nite subset of I. Then
n
1
=
iJ
0
a
i
n
t
i
for some n
t
i
N (by (b)), and f may be taken to be the map such that f.y
i
/ =n
t
i
for i I
0
and f.y
i
/ =0 otherwise. Now suppose that r >1, and that there are maps f
1
; f
2
: F N
such that f
1
.n
1
/ =n
1
and
f
2
.n
i
f
1
.n
i
// =n
i
f
1
.n
i
/; i =2; : : : r:
Then
f : F N; f =f
1
f
2
f
2
f
1
has the required property.
2
We now complete the proof of the theorem.
(d)=(a). Because M is nitely presented, there is an exact sequence
0 N F M 0
in which F is free and N and F are both nitely generated. Because M is at, (c) of the
lemma shows that this sequence splits, and so M is projective.
(d)=(b): We may suppose that Aitself is local, with maximal ideal m. Let x
1
; : : : ; x
i
M be such that their images in M=mM form a basis for this over the eld A=m. Then the
x
i
generate M (by Nakayamas lemma), and so there exists an exact
0 N F
v
M 0
in which F is free with basis {y
1
; : : : ; y
i
] and g.y
i
/ =x
i
. According to (a) of the lemma,
mN =N .mF/, which equals N because N cmF . Therefore N is zero by Nakayamas
lemma.
EXAMPLE 10.6. (a) When regarded as a Z-module, Q is at but not projective (it is not
nitely generated, much less nitely presented, and so this doesnt contradict the theorem).
(b) Let R be a product of copies of F
2
indexed by N, and let a be the ideal in R
consisting of the elements .a
n
/
nN
such that a
n
is nonzero for only nitely many values of n
(so a is a direct sum of copies of F
2
indexed by N). The R-module R=I is nitely generated
and at, but not projective (it is not nitely presented, and so this doesnt contradict the
theorem).
ASIDE 10.7. Nonfree projective nitely generated modules are common: for example, the ideals
in a Dedekind domain are projective and nitely generated, but they are free only if principal. The
situation with modules that are not nitely generated is quite different: if A is a noetherian ring
with no nontrivial idempotents, then every nonnitely generated projective A-module is free (Bass,
Hyman. Big projective modules are free. Illinois J. Math. 7 1963, 2431, Corollary 4.5). The
condition on the idempotents is necessary because, for a ring AB, the module A
(J)
B
(J)
is not
free when the sets I and J have different cardinalities.
DUALS
The dual Hom
-lin
.M; A/ of an A-module M is denoted M
.
PROPOSITION 10.8. For any A-modules M, S, T with M nitely generated and projec-
tive, the canonical maps
Hom
-lin
.S; T
M/ Hom
-lin
.S
; T / (18)
T
M Hom
-lin
.M
; T / (19)
M
.MT /
(20)
M M
(21)
are isomorphisms.
PROOF. The canonical map (18) sends f : S T
M to the map f
t
: S
T
such that f
t
.s g/ =.T g/.f.s//. It becomes the canonical isomorphism
Hom
-lin
.S; T
n
/ Hom
-lin
.S
n
; T /
when M =A
n
. It follows that (18) is an isomorphism whenever M is a direct summand of
a nitely generated free module, i.e., whenever M is nitely generated and projective.
The canonical map (19) sends t m to the map f f.m/t . It is the special case of
(18) in which S =A.
The canonical map (20) sends f g M
to the map mt f.m/g.t /: M

T A, and the canonical map (21) sends m to the map f f.m/: M
A. Again, it is
obviously an isomorphism if one of M or T is free of nite rank, and hence also if one is a
direct summand of such a module.
2
We let ev: M
M A denote the evaluation map f mf.m/.

LEMMA 10.9. Let M and N be modules over commutative ring A, and let e: N
M
A be an A-linear map. There exists at most one A-linear map : A M
N such that
the composites
M

MN M
e
M
N
1
N MN
e1
N
(22)
are the identity maps on M and N respectively. When such a map exists,
T
N .Hom
-lin
.M; T / (23)
for all A-modules T . In particular,
.N; e/ ..M
; ev/. (24)
PROOF. From e we get an A-linear map
T e: T
M T;
which allows us to dene an A-linear map
x f
x
: T
N Hom
-lin
.M; T / (25)
by setting
f
x
.m/ =.T e/.x m/; x T
N, m M.
An A-linear map f : M T denes a map f N: M
N T
N, and so a map
: A M
N denes an A-linear map

f .f N/..1//: Hom
-lin
.M; T / T
N: (26)
When the rst (resp. the second) composite in (22) is the identity, then (26) is a right
(resp. a left) inverse to (25).
15
Therefore, when a map exists with the required properties,
the map (25) dened by e is an isomorphism. In particular, e denes an isomorphism
x f
x
: M
N Hom
-lin
.M; M/;
which one checks sends .a/ to the endomorphism x ax of M. This proves that is
unique.
To get (24), take T =M in (23).
2
PROPOSITION 10.10. An A-module M is nitely generated and projective if and only if
there exists an A-linear map : A MM
such that
.Mev/ . M/ =id
and
.M
/ .evM
/ =id
_ :
15
Assume satises the condition in the statement of the lemma.
Let x T
N; by denition, .f
x
N/..1// =.T e N/.x.1//. On tensoring the second sequence
in (22) with T , we obtain maps
T
N .T
A
T1
T
N
Te1
T
N
whose composite is the identity map on T
N. As x =x 1 maps to x .1/ under T N , this shows

that .f
x
N/..1// =x.
Let f Hom
-lin
.M; T /, and consider the commutative diagram
T
M
Te
T
( 1
(
M

M
M
e
M;
For m M, the two images of .1/ m in T are f.m/ and f
(( 1)((1))
.m/, and so f =f
(( 1)((1))
.
PROOF. ==: Suppose rst that M is free with nite basis .e
i
/
iJ
, and let .e
t
i
/
iJ
be the
dual basis of M
. The linear map : AMM
, 1 e
i
e
t
i
, satises the conditions.
Let .f
i
/
iJ
be as in (10.4c). Then is dened for each module M
(
i
, and the uniqueness
assertion in Lemma 10.9 implies that the s for the different M
(
i
s patch together to give
a for M.
==: On taking T =M in (23), we see that M
M .End
-lin
.M/. If
iJ
f
i
m
i
corresponds to id
, so that
iJ
f
i
.m/m
i
=m for all m M, then
M
n|-((
i
(n))
A
J
(o
i
)|-
o
i
n
i
M
is a factorization of id
. Therefore M is a direct summand of a free module of nite rank.

2
ASIDE 10.11. A module M over a ring A is said to be reexive if the canonical map M M
is
an isomorphism. We have seen that for nitely generated modules projective implies reexive,
but the converse is false. In fact, for a nite generated module M over an integrally closed noetherian
integral domain A, the following are equivalent (Bourbaki AC, VII 4, 2):
(a) M is reexive;
(b) M is torsion-free and equals the intersection of its localizations at the prime ideals of A of
height 1;
(c) M is the dual of a nitely generated module.
For noetherian rings of global dimension _ 2, for example, for regular local rings of Krull
dimension _ 2, every nitely generated reexive module is projective: for any nitely generated
module M over a noetherian ring A, there exists an exact sequence
A
n
A
n
M 0
with m; n N; on taking duals and forming the cokernel, we get an exact sequence
0 M
A
n
A
n
N 0:
if A has global dimension _2, then M
is projective, and if M is reexive, then M ..M
.
16
ASIDE 10.12. For a nitely generated torsion-free module M over an integrally closed noetherian
integral domain A, there exists a free submodule L of M such that M=L is isomorphic an ideal a in
A(Bourbaki AC, VII, 4, Thm 6). When Ais Dedekind, every ideal is projective, and so M .La.
In particular, M is projective. Therefore, the nitely generated projective modules over a Dedekind
domain are exactly the nitely generated torsion-free modules.
16
For those interested in general statements, here is a summary of the assumptions under which the canonical
morphisms of A-modules below are isomorphisms:
If P is nitely generated projective:
P
:
P
A module P is nitely generated projective if and only if the following canonical map is an isomorphism
P
P
:
End.P/:
If P or P
t
is nitely generated projective:
P
P
t
:
Hom.P; P
t
/:
If both P and P
t
or both P and M or both P
t
and M
t
are nitely generated projective
Hom.P; M/ Hom.P
t
; M
t
/
:
Hom.P P
t
; MM
t
/:
In particular, for P or P
t
nitely generated projective
P
P
t
:
.P P
t
/
:
(Georges Elencwajg on mathoverow.net).
11 THE HILBERT NULLSTELLENSATZ 42
11 The Hilbert Nullstellensatz
ZARISKIS LEMMA
In proving Zariskis lemma, we shall need to use that the ring kX contains innitely
many distinct monic irreducible polynomials. When k is innite, this obvious, because
the polynomials X a, a k, are distinct and irreducible. When k is nite, we can adapt
Euclids argument: if p
1
; : : : ; p
i
are monic irreducible polynomials in kX, then p
1
p
i
1 is divisible by a monic irreducible polynomial distinct from p

1
; : : : ; p
i
.
THEOREM 11.1 (ZARISKIS LEMMA). Let k cK be elds. If K is nitely generated as a
k-algebra, then it is algebraic over k (hence nite over k, and K equals k if k is algebraically
closed).
PROOF. We shall prove this by induction on r, the smallest number of elements required to
generate K as a k-algebra. The case r =0 being trivial, we may suppose that
K =kx
1
; : : : ; x
i
with r _1:
If K is not algebraic over k, then at least one x
i
, say x
1
, is not algebraic over k. Then, kx
1
is a polynomial ring in one symbol over k, and its eld of fractions k.x
1
/ is a subeld of K.
Clearly K is generated as a k.x
1
/-algebra by x
2
; : : : ; x
i
, and so the induction hypothesis
implies that x
2
; : : : ; x
i
are algebraic over k.x
1
/. Proposition 5.5 shows that there exists
a c kx
1
such that cx
2
; : : : ; cx
i
are integral over kx
1
. Let f K. For a sufciently
large N, c
1
f kx
1
; cx
2
; : : : ; cx
i
, and so c
1
f is integral over kx
1
by 5.3. When
we apply this statement to an element f of k.x
1
/, it shows that c
1
f kx
1
because
kx
1
is integrally closed. Therefore, k.x
1
/ =
1
c
-1
kx
1
, but this is absurd, because
kx
1
(. kX) has innitely many distinct monic irreducible polynomials that can occur
as denominators of elements of k.x
1
/.
2
ALTERNATIVE PROOF OF ZARISKIS LEMMA
17
LEMMA 11.2. For an integral domain A, there does not exist an f AX such that AX
(
is a eld.
PROOF. Suppose, on the contrary, that AX
(
is a eld. Then degf >0, and so f 1 A.
Write .f 1/
-1
=g=f
n
with g AX and n _1. Then
.f 1/g =f
n
=.1.f 1//
n
=1.f 1/h
with h AX, and so .f 1/.g h/ =1. Hence f 1 is a unit, which is absurd.
2
LEMMA 11.3. Consider rings A c B. If B is integral over A, then AB
= A
. In
particular, if B is a eld, then so also is A.
PROOF. Let a be an element of A that becomes a unit in B, say, ab =1 with b B. There
exist a
1
; : : : ; a
n
Asuch that b
n
a
1
b
n-1
a
n
=0. On multiplying through by a
n-1
,
we nd that b =a
1
a
n
a
n-1
A, and so a A
.
2
17
A simplication of Swans simplication of a proof of Munshi see www.math.uchicago.edu/
~
swan/.
PROPOSITION 11.4. Let A be an integral domain, and suppose that there exists a maximal
ideal m in AX
1
; : : : ; X
n
such that Am =.0/. Then there exists a nonzero element a in
A such that A
o
is a eld and AX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=m is a nite extension of A
o
.
PROOF. Note that the condition Am=.0/ implies that A (hence also A
o
) is a subring of
the eld K =AX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=m, and so the statement makes sense.
We argue by induction on n. When n = 0, A is a eld, and the statement is trivial.
Therefore, suppose that n _ 1, and regard AX
1
; : : : ; X
n
as a polynomial ring in n 1
symbols over AX
i
. Then mAX
i
= .0/ because otherwise the induction hypothesis
would contradict Lemma 11.2. Let a
i
X
n
i
i
be a nonzero element of mAX
i
. The
image x
i
of X
i
in K satises the equation
a
i
x
n
i
=0;
and so K is integral over its subring A
o
1
o
n
. By Lemma 11.3, A
o
1
o
n
is a eld, and K is
nite over it because it is integral (algebraic) and nitely generated.
2
We now prove Zariskis lemma. Write K =kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=m. According to the propo-
sition, K is a nite extension of k
o
for some nonzero a k, but because k is a eld k
o
=k.
THE NULLSTELLENSATZ
Recall that k
al
denotes an algebraic closure of the eld k.
THEOREM 11.5 (NULLSTELLENSATZ). Every proper ideal a in kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
has a zero
in .k
al
/
n
def
=k
al
k
al
, i.e., there exists a point .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ .k
al
/
n
such that f.a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ =
0 for all f a.
PROOF. We have to show that there exists a k-algebra homomorphismkX
1
; : : : ; X
n
k
al
containing a in its kernel. Let m be a maximal ideal containing a. Then kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=m
is a eld, which is algebraic over k by Zariskis lemma, and so there exists a k-algebra
homomorphism kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=m k
al
. The composite of this with the quotient map
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=m contains a in its kernel.
2
COROLLARY 11.6. When k is algebraically closed, the maximal ideals in kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
are exactly the ideals .X

1
a
1
; : : : ; X
n
a
n
/, .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ k
n
.
PROOF. Clearly, kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=.X
1
a
1
; : : : ; X
n
a
n
/ .k, and so .X
1
a
1
; : : : ; X
n
a
n
/
is maximal. Conversely, because k is algebraically closed, a proper ideal a has a zero
.a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ in k
n
. Let f kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
; when we write f as a polynomial in X
1
a
1
; : : : ; X
n
a
n
, its constant term is f.a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/. Therefore, if f a, then f .X
1
a
1
; : : : ; X a
n
/.
2
THEOREM 11.7 (STRONG NULLSTELLENSATZ). For an ideal a in kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
, let Z.a/
be the set of zeros of a in .k
al
/
n
. If a polynomial h kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
is zero on Z.a/, then
some power of h lies in a.
PROOF. We may assume h = 0. Let g
1
; : : : ; g
n
generate a, and consider the system of
m1 equations in n1 variables, X
1
; : : : ; X
n
; Y;
g
i
.X
1
; : : : ; X
n
/ = 0; i =1; : : : ; m
1Yh.X
1
; : : : ; X
n
/ = 0:
If .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
; b/ satises the rst m equations, then .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ Z.a/; consequently,
h.a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ =0, and .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
; b/ doesnt satisfy the last equation. Therefore, the equa-
tions are inconsistent, and so, according to the Nullstellensatz (11.5), the ideal
.g
1
; : : : ; g
n
; 1Yh/ =kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
; Y
and there exist f
i
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
; Y such that
1 =
n
i=1
f
i
g
i
f
n1
.1Yh/.
On applying the homomorphism
X
i
X
i
Y h
-1
: kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
; Y k.X
1
; : : : ; X
n
/
to the above equality, we obtain the identity
1 =
i
f
i
.X
1
; : : : ; X
n
; h
-1
/ g
i
.X
1
; : : : ; X
n
/ (27)
in k.X
1
; : : : ; X
n
/. Clearly
f
i
.X
1
; : : : ; X
n
; h
-1
/ =
polynomial in X
1
; : : : ; X
n
h
1
i
for some N
i
. Let N be the largest of the N
i
. On multiplying (27) by h
1
we obtain an
identity
h
1
=
i
(polynomial in X
1
; : : : ; X
n
/ g
i
.X
1
; : : : ; X
n
/;
which shows that h
1
a.
2
PROPOSITION 11.8. The radical of an ideal a in a nitely generated k-algebra A is equal
to the intersection of the maximal ideals containing it: rad.a/ =
ma
m. In particular, if
A is reduced, then
m maximal
m=0.
PROOF. Because of the correspondence (2), p. 3, it sufces to prove this for A=kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
.
Let a be an ideal in kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
. Because rad.a/ is the smallest radical ideal contain-
ing a and maximal ideals are radical rad.a/ c
ma
m. Conversely, suppose h is contained
in all maximal ideals containing a, and let .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ Z.a/. The evaluation map
f f.a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/: kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
k
al
has image a subring of k
al
which is algebraic over k, and hence is a eld (see 1). Therefore,
the kernel of the map is a maximal ideal, which contains a, and therefore also contains h.
This shows that h.a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ = 0, and we conclude from the strong Nullstellensatz that
h rad.a/.
2
12 THE MAX SPECTRUM OF A RING 45
12 The max spectrum of a ring
Let A be a ring, and let V be the set of maximal ideals in A. For an ideal a in A, let
V.a/ ={m V [ ma]:
PROPOSITION 12.1. There are the following relations:
(a) a cb == V.a/ V.b/:
(b) V.0/ =V ; V.A/ =0:
(c) V.ab/ =V.ab/ =V.a/ LV.b/:
(d) V.
iJ
a
i
/ =
iJ
V.a
i
/ for any family of ideals .a
i
/
iJ
.
PROOF. The rst two statements are obvious. For (c), note that
ab cab ca; b == V.ab/ V.ab/ V.a/ LV.b/:
For the reverse inclusions, observe that if m V.a/ LV.b/, then there exist an f a m
and a g bm; but then fg abm, and so m V.ab/. For (d) recall that, by denition,
a
i
consists of all nite sums of the form
f
i
, f
i
a
i
. Thus (d) is obvious.
2
Statements (b), (c), and (d) show that the sets V.a/ satisfy the axioms to be the closed
subsets for a topology on V : both the whole space and the empty set are closed; a nite
union of closed sets is closed; an arbitrary intersection of closed sets is closed. This topol-
ogy is called the Zariski topology on V . We let spm.A/ denote the set of maximal ideals in
A endowed with its Zariski topology.
For h A, let
D.h/ ={m V [ h m].
Then D.h/ is open in V , being the complement of V..h//. If S is a set of generators for an
ideal a, then
V V.a/ =
hS
D.h/;
and so the sets D.h/ form a base for the topology on V . Note that, because maximal ideals
are prime,
D.h
1
h
n
/ =D.h
1
/ D.h
n
/:
For any element h of A, spm.A
h
/ .D.h/ (see 6.4), and for any ideal a in A, spm.A/=a .
V.a/ (isomorphisms of topological spaces).
The ideals in a nite product of rings A=A
1
A
n
are all of the form a
1
a
n
with a
i
an ideal in A
i
(cf. p.7). The prime (resp. maximal) ideals are those of the form
A
1
A
i-1
a
i
A
i1
A
n
with a
i
prime (resp. maximal). It follows that spm.A/ =
i
spm.A
i
/ (disjoint union of
open subsets).
THE MAX SPECTRUM OF A FINITELY GENERATED k-ALGEBRA
Let k be a eld, and let A be a nitely generated k-algebra. For any maximal ideal m of
A, the eld k.m/
def
= A=m is a nitely generated k-algebra, and so k.m/ is nite over k
(Zariskis lemma, 11.1). In particular, it equals k.m/ =k when k is algebraically closed.
Now x an algebraic closure k
al
. The image of any k-algebra homomorphism A k
al
is a subring of k
al
which is an integral domain algebraic over k and therefore a eld (see
1). Hence the kernel of the homomorphism is a maximal ideal in A. In this way, we get a
surjective map
Hom
k-alg
.A; k
al
/ spm.A/: (28)
Two homomorphisms A k
al
with the same kernel m factor as
A k.m/ k
al
;
and so differ by an automorphism
18
of k
al
. Therefore, the bres of (28) are exactly the
orbits of Gal.k
al
=k/. When k is perfect, each extension k.m/=k is separable, and so each
orbit has k.m/: k elements, and when k is algebraically closed, the map (28) is a bijection.
Set A=kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=a. Then to give a homomorphism Ak
al
is the same as giving
an n-tuple .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ of elements of k
al
(the images of the X
i
) such that f.a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ =0
for all f a, i.e., an element of the zero-set Z.a/ of a. The homomorphism corresponding
to .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ maps k.m/ isomorphically onto the subeld of k
al
generated by the a
i
s.
Therefore, we have a canonical surjection
Z.a/ spm.A/ (29)
whose bres are the orbits of Gal.k
al
=k/. When the eld k is perfect, each orbit has
ka
1
; : : : ; a
n
: k-elements, and when k is algebraically closed, Z.a/ .spm.A/.
ASIDE 12.2. Let k = R or C. Let X be a set and let A be a k-algebra of k-valued functions on
X. In analysis, X is called the spectrum of A if, for each k-algebra homomorphism ': Ak, there
exists a unique x X such that '.f / =f.x/ for all f A, and every x arises from a ' (cf. Cartier
2007, 3.3.1, footnote).
Let A be a nitely generated algebra over an arbitrary algebraically closed eld k, and let
X =spm.A/. An element f of A denes a k-valued function
mf modm
on X. When Ais reduced, Proposition 11.8 shows that this realizes Aas a ring of k-valued functions
on X. Moreover, because (29) is an isomorphism in this case, for each k-algebra homomorphism
': A k, there exists a unique x X such that '.f / = f.x/ for all f A. In particular, when
k =C and A is reduced, spm.A/ is the spectrum of A in the sense of analysis.
JACOBSON RINGS
DEFINITION 12.3. A ring A is Jacobson if every prime ideal in A is an intersection of
maximal ideals.
A eld is Jacobson. The ring Z is Jacobson because every nonzero prime ideal is max-
imal and .0/ =
;=2,3,5,...
.p/. A principal ideal domain (more generally, a Dedekind
domain) is Jacobson if it has innitely many maximal ideals.
19
A local ring is Jacobson
18
Let f and g be two k-homomorphisms from a nite eld extension k
t
of k into k
al
. We consider the
set of pairs .K; / in which is a k-homomorphism from a subeld K of k
al
containing f.k
t
/ into k
al
such
that f =g. The set is nonempty, and Zorns lemma can be applied to show that it has a maximal element
.K
t
;
t
/. For such an element K
t
will be algebraically closed, and hence equal to k
al
.
19
In a principal ideal domain, a nonzero element a factors as a =up
i
1
1
p
i
s
x
with u a unit and the p
i
prime.
The only prime divisors of a are p
1
; : : : ; p
x
, and so a is contained in only nitely many prime ideals. Similarly,
in a Dedekind domain, a nonzero ideal a factors as a =p
i
1
1
p
i
s
x
with the p
i
prime ideals (cf. 14.17 below),
and p
1
; : : : ; p
i
are the only prime ideals containing a. On taking a =.a/, we see that again a is contained in
only nitely many prime ideals.
if and only if its maximal ideal is its only prime ideal. Proposition 11.8 shows that every
nitely generated algebra over a eld is Jacobson.
PROPOSITION 12.4. The radical of an ideal in a Jacobson ring is equal to the intersec-
tion of the maximal ideals containing it. (Therefore, the radical ideals are precisely the
intersections of maximal ideals.)
PROOF. Proposition 2.5 says that the radical of an ideal is an intersection of prime ideals,
and so this follows from the denition of a Jacobson ring.
2
ASIDE 12.5. Any ring of nite type over a Jacobson ring is a Jacobson ring (EGA IV 10.4.6).
Moreover, if B is of nite type over A and A is Jacobson, then the map AB denes a continuous
map spm.B/ spm.A/.
THE TOPOLOGICAL SPACE spm.A/
We study more closely the Zariski topology on spm.A/. For each subset S of A, let V.S/
denote the set of maximal ideals containing S, and for each subset W of spm.A/, let I.W/
denote the intersection of the maximal ideals in W:
S cA; V.S/ ={m spm.A/ [ S cm];
W cspm.A/; I.W/ =
mW
m:
Thus V.S/ is a closed subset of spm.A/ and I.W/ is a radical ideal in A. If V.a/ W,
then a c I.W/, and so V.a/ VI.W/. Therefore VI.W/ is the closure of W (smallest
closed subset of spm.A/ containing W); in particular, VI.W/ =W if W is closed.
PROPOSITION 12.6. Let V be a closed subset of spm.A/.
(a) The points of V are closed for the Zariski topology.
(b) If A is noetherien, then every ascending chain of open subsets U
1
c U
2
c of V
eventually becomes constant; equivalently, every descending chain of closed subsets of V
eventually becomes constant.
(c) If A is noetherian, every open covering of V has a nite subcovering.
PROOF. (a) Clearly {m] =V.m/, and so it is closed.
(b) We prove the second statement. A sequence V
1
V
2
of closed subsets of V
gives rise to a sequence of ideals I.V
1
/ cI.V
2
/ c: : :, which eventually becomes constant.
If I.V
n
/ =I.V
n1
/, then VI.V
n
/ =VI.V
n1
/, i.e., V
n
=V
n1
.
(c) Let V =
iJ
U
i
with each U
i
open. Choose an i
0
I; if U
i
0
= V , then there
exists an i
1
I such that U
i
0
U
i
0
LU
i
1
. If U
i
0
LU
i
1
=V , then there exists an i
2
I etc..
Because of (b), this process must eventually stop.
2
A topological space V having the property (b) is said to be noetherian. This condition
is equivalent to the following: every nonempty set of closed subsets of V has a minimal
element. Atopological space V having property (c) is said to be quasicompact (by Bourbaki
at least; others call it compact, but Bourbaki requires a compact space to be Hausdorff). The
proof of (c) shows that every noetherian space is quasicompact. Since an open subspace of
a noetherian space is again noetherian, it will also be quasicompact.
DEFINITION 12.7. A nonempty topological space is said to be irreducible if it is not the
union of two proper closed subsets. Equivalent conditions: any two nonempty open subsets
have a nonempty intersection; every nonempty open subset is dense.
If an irreducible space W is a nite union of closed subsets, W =W
1
L: : : LW
i
, then
W =W
1
or W
2
L: : : LW
i
; if the latter, then W =W
2
or W
3
L: : : LW
i
, etc.. Continuing in
this fashion, we nd that W =W
i
for some i .
The notion of irreducibility is not useful for Hausdorff topological spaces, because the
only irreducible Hausdorff spaces are those consisting of a single point two points would
have disjoint open neighbourhoods.
PROPOSITION 12.8. Let W be a closed subset of spm.A/. If W is irreducible, then I.W/
is prime; the converse is true if A is a Jacobson ring. In particular, the max spectrum of a
Jacobson ring A is irreducible if and only if the nilradical of A is prime.
PROOF. =: Let W be an irreducible closed subset of spm.A/, and suppose fg I.W/.
Then fg lies in each m in W, and so either f m or g m; hence W cV.f / LV.g/, and
so
W =.W V.f // L.W V.g//:
As W is irreducible, one of these sets, say W V.f /, must equal W. But then f I.W/.
We have shown that I.W/ is prime.
=: Assume I.W/ is prime, and suppose W =V.a/ LV.b/ with a and b radical ideals
we have to show that W equals V.a/ or V.b/. Recall that V.a/ LV.b/ =V.ab/ (see
12.1c) and that a b is radical; hence I.W/ = a b (by 12.4). If W = V.a/, then there
exists an f aI.W/. For all g b,
fg ab =I.W/:
Because I.W/ is prime, this implies that b cI.W/; therefore W cV.b/.
2
Thus, in the max spectrum of a Jacobson ring, there are one-to-one correspondences
radical ideals - closed subsets
prime ideals - irreducible closed subsets
maximal ideals - one-point sets:
EXAMPLE 12.9. Let f kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
. According to Theorem 4.6, kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
is a
unique factorization domain, and so .f / is a prime ideal if and only if f is irreducible
(4.1). Thus
V.f / is irreducible f is irreducible.
On the other hand, suppose f factors,
f =
f
n
i
i
; f
i
distinct irreducible polynomials.
Then
.f / =
.f
n
i
i
/; .f
n
i
i
/ distinct ideals,
rad..f // =
.f
i
/; .f
i
/ distinct prime ideals,
V.f / =
V.f
i
/; V.f
i
/ distinct irreducible algebraic sets.
PROPOSITION 12.10. Let V be a noetherian topological space. Then V is a nite union
of irreducible closed subsets, V =V
1
L: : : LV
n
. If the decomposition is irredundant in the
sense that there are no inclusions among the V
i
, then the V
i
are uniquely determined up to
order.
PROOF. Suppose that V can not be written as a nite union of irreducible closed subsets.
Then, because V is noetherian, there will be a closed subset W of V that is minimal among
those that cannot be written in this way. But W itself cannot be irreducible, and so W =
W
1
LW
2
, with each W
i
a proper closed subset of W. Because W is minimal, both W
1
and
W
2
can be expressed as nite unions of irreducible closed subsets, but then so can W. We
have arrived at a contradiction.
Suppose that
V =V
1
L: : : LV
n
=W
1
L: : : LW
n
are two irredundant decompositions. Then V
i
=
}
.V
i
W
}
/, and so, because V
i
is irre-
ducible, V
i
=V
i
W
}
for some j . Consequently, there exists a function f : {1; : : : ; m]
{1; : : : ; n] such that V
i
c W
((i)
for each i . Similarly, there is a function g: {1; : : : ; n]
{1; : : : ; m] such that W
}
c V
v(})
for each j . Since V
i
c W
((i)
c V
v((i)
, we must have
gf.i / =i and V
i
=W
((i)
; similarly fg =id. Thus f and g are bijections, and the decom-
positions differ only in the numbering of the sets.
2
The V
i
given uniquely by the proposition are called the irreducible components of V .
They are the maximal closed irreducible subsets of V . In Example 12.9, the V.f
i
/ are the
irreducible components of V.f /.
COROLLARY 12.11. A radical ideal a in a noetherian Jacobson ring is a nite intersection
of prime ideals, a =p
1
: : : p
n
; if there are no inclusions among the p
i
, then the p
i
are
uniquely determined up to order.
PROOF. Write V.a/ as a union of its irreducible components, V.a/ =
V
i
, and take p
i
=
I.V
i
/.
2
COROLLARY 12.12. A noetherian topological space has only nitely many connected
components (each of which is open).
PROOF. Each connected component is closed, hence noetherian, and so is a nite union of
its irreducible components. Each of these is an irreducible component of the whole space,
and so there can be only nitely many.
2
REMARK 12.13. (a) An irreducible topological space is connected, but a connected topo-
logical space need not be irreducible. For example, Z.X
1
X
2
/ is the union of the coordinate
axes in k
2
, which is connected but not irreducible. A closed subset V of spm.A/ is not
connected if and only if there exist ideals a and b such that ab =I.V / and ab =A.
(b) A Hausdorff space is noetherian if and only if it is nite, in which case its irreducible
components are the one-point sets.
(c) In a noetherian ring, every proper ideal a has a decomposition into primary ideals:
a =
q
i
(see 14). For radical ideals, this becomes a simpler decomposition into prime
ideals, as in the corollary. For an ideal .f / in kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
with f =
f
n
i
i
, it is the
decomposition .f / =
.f
n
i
i
/ noted in Example 12.9.
MAPS OF MAX SPECTRA
Let ': AB be a homomorphism of nitely generated k-algebras (k a eld). Because B is
nitely generated over k, its quotient B=m by any maximal ideal m is a nite eld extension
of k (Zariskis lemma, 11.1). Therefore the image of A in B=m is an integral domain nite
over k, and hence is a eld (see 1). Since this image is isomorphic to A='
-1
.m/, this
shows that the ideal '
-1
.m/ is maximal in A. Therefore ' denes a map
'
+
: spm.B/ spm.A/; m'
-1
.m/;
which is continuous because .'
+
/
-1
.D.f // = D.'.f //. In this way, spm becomes a
functor from nitely generated k-algebras to topological spaces.
THEOREM 12.14. Let ': AB be a homomorphism of nitely generated k-algebras. Let
U be a nonempty open subset of spm.B/, and let '
+
.U/
-
be the closure of its image in
spm.A/. Then '
+
.U/ contains a nonempty open subset of each irreducible component of
'
+
.U/
-
.
PROOF. Let W =spm.B/ and V =spm.A/, so that '
+
is a continuous map W V .
We rst prove the theorem in the case that ' is an injective homomorphism of integral
domains. For some b =0, D.b/ c U. According to Proposition 12.15 below, there exists
a nonzero element a A such that every homomorphim : A k
al
such that .a/ = 0
extends to a homomorphism : B k
al
such that .b/ =0. Let m D.a/, and choose
to be a homomorphismAk
al
with kernel m. The kernel of is a maximal ideal n D.b/
such that '
-1
.n/ =m, and so D.a/ c'
+
.D.b//.
We now prove the general case. If W
1
; : : : ; W
i
are the irreducible components of W,
then '
+
.W/
-
is a union of the sets '
+
.W
i
/
-
, and any irreducible component C of '
+
.U/
-
is contained in one of '
+
.W
i
/
-
, say '
+
.W
1
/
-
. Let q =I.W
1
/ and let p ='
-1
.q/. Because
W
1
is irreducible, they are both prime ideals. The homomorphism ': A B induces an
injective homomorphism ': A=p B=q, and '
+
can be identied with the restriction of '
+
to W
1
. From the rst case, we know that '
+
.U W
1
/ contains a nonempty open subset of
C, which implies that '
+
.U/ does also.
2
In the next two statements, A and B are arbitrary commutative rings they need not
be k-algebras.
PROPOSITION 12.15. Let A c B be integral domains with B nitely generated as an al-
gebra over A, and let b be a nonzero element of B. Then there exists an element a =0 in A
with the following property: every homomorphism : A from A into an algebraically
closed eld such that .a/ =0 can be extended to a homomorphism : B such that
.b/ =0.
We rst need a lemma.
LEMMA 12.16. Let B A be integral domains, and assume B =At =AT =a. Let c c
A be the ideal of leading coefcients of the polynomials in a. Then every homomorphism
: A from A into an algebraically closed eld such that .c/ =0 can be extended
to a homomorphism of B into .
PROOF. If a =0, then c =0, and every extends. Thus we may assume a =0. Let be a
homomorphism A such that .c/ =0. Then there exist polynomials a
n
T
n
a
0
in a such that .a
n
/ = 0, and we choose one, denoted f , of minimum degree. Because
B =0, the polynomial f is nonconstant.
Extend to a homomorphism AT T , again denoted , by sending T to T , and
consider the subset .a/ of T .
FIRST CASE: .a/ DOES NOT CONTAIN A NONZERO CONSTANT. If the -subspace
of T spanned by .a/ contained 1, then so also would .a/,
20
contrary to hypothesis.
Because
T
c
i
.g
i
/ =
c
i
.g
i
T /; c
i
; g
i
a;
this -subspace an ideal, which we have shown to be proper, and so it has a zero c in .
The composite of the homomorphisms
AT

T ; T T c;
factors through AT =a =B and extends .
SECOND CASE: .a/ CONTAINS A NONZERO CONSTANT. This means that a contains
a polynomial
g.T / =b
n
T
n
b
0
such that .b
0
/ =0; .b
1
/ =.b
2
/ = =0:
On dividing f.T / into g.T / we obtain an equation
a
d
n
g.T / =q.T /f.T / r.T /; d N; q; r AT ; degr <m:
When we apply , this becomes
.a
n
/
d
.b
0
/ =.q/.f / .r/:
Because .f / has degree m>0, we must have .q/ =0, and so .r/ is a nonzero constant.
After replacing g.T / with r.T /, we may suppose n <m. If m=1, such a g.T / cant exist,
and so we may suppose m > 1 and (by induction) that the lemma holds for smaller values
of m.
For h.T / = c
i
T
i
c
i-1
T
i-1
c
0
, let h
t
.T / = c
i
c
0
T
i
. Then the A-
module generated by the polynomials T
x
h
t
.T /, s _ 0, h a, is an ideal a
t
in AT . More-
over, a
t
contains a nonzero constant if and only if a contains a nonzero polynomial cT
i
,
which implies t =0 and A =B (since B is an integral domain).
When a
t
does not contain a nonzero constant, we set B
t
= AT =a
t
= At
t
. Then a
t
contains the polynomial g
t
= b
n
b
0
T
n
, and .b
0
/= 0. Because degg
t
< m, the
induction hypothesis implies that extends to a homomorphism B
t
. Therefore, there
exists a c such that, for all h.T / =c
i
T
i
c
i-1
T
i-1
c
0
a,
h
t
.c/ =.c
i
/ .c
i-1
/c c
0
c
i
=0:
On taking h = g, we see that c = 0, and on taking h = f , we obtain the contradiction
.a
n
/ =0.
2
20
Use that, if a system of linear equation with coefcients in a eld k has a solution in some larger eld, then
it has a solution in k.
13 DIMENSION THEORY FOR FINITELY GENERATED K-ALGEBRAS 52
PROOF (OF 12.15) Suppose that we know the proposition in the case that B is generated
by a single element, and write B = At
1
; : : : ; t
n
. Then there exists an element b
n-1
such
that any homomorphism : At
1
; : : : ; t
n-1
such that .b
n-1
/ =0 extends to a homo-
morphism : B such that .b/ =0. Continuing in this fashion (with b
n-1
for b), we
eventually obtain an element a A with the required property.
Thus we may assume B = At . Let a be the kernel of the homomorphism T t ,
AT At .
Case (i). The ideal a =.0/. Write
b =f.t / =a
0
t
n
a
1
t
n-1
a
n
; a
i
A;
and take a =a
0
. If : A is such that .a
0
/ =0, then there exists a c such that
f.c/ =0, and we can take to be the homomorphism
d
i
t
i
.d
i
/c
i
.
Case (ii). The ideal a = .0/. Let f.T / = a
n
T
n
a
0
, a
n
= 0, be an element
of a of minimum degree. Let h.T / AT represent b. Since b = 0, h a. Because f
is irreducible over the eld of fractions of A, it and h are coprime over that eld. In other
words, there exist u; v AT and a nonzero c A such that
uhvf =c:
It follows now that ca
n
satises our requirements, for if .ca
n
/ = 0, then can be ex-
tended to : B by the lemma, and .u.t / b/ =.c/ =0, and so .b/ =0.
2
REMARK 12.17. In case (ii) of the last proof, both b and b
-1
are algebraic over A, and so
there exist equations
a
0
b
n
a
n
=0; a
i
A; a
0
=0:
a
t
0
b
-n
a
t
n =0; a
t
i
A; a
t
0
=0:
One can show that a =a
0
a
t
0
has the property required by the proposition.
ASIDE 12.18. The spectrum spec.A/ of a ring A is the set of prime ideals in A endowed with the
topology for which the closed subsets are those of the form
V.a/ ={p [ p a]; a an ideal in A:
Thus spm.A/ is the subspace of spec.A/ consisting of the closed points. When A is Jacobson, the
map U U spm.A/ is a bijection from the set of open subsets of spec.A/ onto the set of open
subsets of spm.A/; therefore spm.A/ and spec.A/ have the same topologies only the underlying
sets differ.
13 Dimension theory for nitely generated k-algebras
Throughout this section, A is both a nitely generated algebra over eld k and an integral
domain. We dene the transcendence degree of A over k, tr deg
k
A, to be the transcendence
degree over k of the eld of fractions of A (see 8 of my notes Fields and Galois Theory).
Thus A has transcendence degree d if it contains an algebraically independent set of d
elements, but no larger set (ibid. 8.12).
PROPOSITION 13.1. For any linear forms `
1
; : : : ; `
n
in X
1
; : : : ; X
n
, the quotient ring
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=.`
1
; : : : ; `
n
/
is an integral domain of transcendence degree equal to the dimension of the subspace of k
n
dened by the equations
`
i
=0; i =1; : : : ; m:
PROOF. This follows from the more precise statement:
Let c be an ideal in kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
generated by linearly independent linear
forms `
1
; : : : ; `
i
, and let X
i
1
; : : : ; X
i
nr
be such that
{`
1
; : : : ; `
i
; X
i
1
; : : : ; X
i
nr
]
is a basis for the linear forms in X
1
; : : : ; X
n
. Then
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=c .kX
i
1
; : : : ; X
i
nr
:
This is obvious if the forms `
i
are X
1
; : : : ; X
i
. In the general case, because {X
1
; : : : ; X
n
]
and {`
1
; : : : ; `
i
; X
i
1
; : : : ; X
i
nr
] are both bases for the linear forms, each element of one set
can be expressed as a linear combination of the elements of the other. Therefore,
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=k`
1
; : : : ; `
i
; X
i
1
; : : : ; X
i
nr
;
and so
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=c =k`
1
; : : : ; `
i
; X
i
1
; : : : ; X
i
nr
=c
.kX
i
1
; : : : ; X
i
nr
:
2
PROPOSITION 13.2. For any irreducible polynomial f in kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
, the quotient ring
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=.f / has transcendence degree n1.
PROOF. Let
kx
1
; : : : ; x
n
=kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=.f /; x
i
=X
i
.f /;
and let k.x
1
; : : : ; x
n
/ be the eld of fractions of kx
1
; : : : ; x
n
. Since f is not zero, some X
i
,
say, X
n
, occurs in it. Then X
n
occurs in every nonzero multiple of f , and so no nonzero
polynomial in X
1
; : : : ; X
n-1
belongs to .f /. This means that x
1
; : : : ; x
n-1
are algebraically
independent. On the other hand, x
n
is algebraic over k.x
1
; : : : ; x
n-1
/, and so {x
1
; : : : ; x
n-1
]
is a transcendence basis for k.x
1
; : : : ; x
n
/ over k.
2
PROPOSITION 13.3. For any nonzero prime ideal p in a k-algebra A,
tr deg
k
.A=p/ < tr deg
k
.A/:
PROOF. We may suppose
A =kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=a =kx
1
; : : : ; x
n
:
For f A, let

f denote the image of f in A=p, so that A=p = k x
1
; : : : ; x
n
. Let d =
tr deg
k
A=p, and number the X
i
so that x
1
; : : : ; x
d
are algebraically independent (for a proof
that this is possible, see 8.9 of my notes Fields and Galois Theory). I shall show that, for
any nonzero f p, the d 1 elements x
1
; : : : ; x
d
; f are algebraically independent, which
shows that tr deg
k
A _d 1.
Suppose otherwise. Then there is a nontrivial algebraic relation, which we can write
a
0
.x
1
; : : : ; x
d
/f
n
a
1
.x
1
; : : : ; x
d
/f
n-1
a
n
.x
1
; : : : ; x
d
/ =0;
with a
i
kX
1
; : : : ; X
d
and a
0
= 0. Because A is an integral domain, we can cancel a
power of f if necessary to make a
n
.x
1
; : : : ; x
d
/ nonzero. On applying the homomorphism
A A=p to the above equality, we nd that
a
n
. x
1
; : : : ; x
d
/ =0;
which contradicts the algebraic independence of x
1
; : : : ; x
d
.
2
PROPOSITION 13.4. Let A be a unique factorization domain. If p is a prime ideal in A
such that tr deg
k
A=p =tr deg
k
A1, then p =.f / for some f A.
PROOF. The ideal p is nonzero because otherwise A and A=p would have the same tran-
scendence degree. Therefore p contains a nonzero polynomial, and even an irreducible
polynomial f , because it is prime. According to (4.1), the ideal .f / is prime. If .f / =p,
then
tr deg
k
A=p
13.3
> tr deg
k
A=.f /
13.2
= tr deg
k
A1;
which contradicts the hypothesis.
2
THEOREM 13.5. Let f A be neither zero nor a unit, and let p be a prime ideal that is
minimal among those containing .f /; then
tr deg
k
A=p =tr deg
k
A1:
We rst need a lemma.
LEMMA 13.6. Let Abe an integrally closed integral domain, and let Lbe a nite extension
of the eld of fractions K of A. If Lis integral over A, then Nm
11
A, and divides
Nm
11
in the ring A.
PROOF. Let X
i
a
i-1
X
i-1
a
0
be the minimum polynomial of over K. Then
r divides the degree n of L=K, and Nm
11
./ =a
n
r
0
(see 5.40 of my notes Fields and
Galois Theory). Moreover, a
0
lies in A by (5.9). From the equation
0 =.
i-1
a
i-1
i-2
a
1
/ a
0
we see that divides a
0
in A, and therefore it also divides Nm
11
.
2
PROOF (OF THEOREM 13.5). Write rad.f / as an irredundant intersection of prime ideals
rad.f / =p
1
: : : p
i
(see 12.11). Then V.a/ =V.p
1
/ L LV.p
i
/ is the decomposition
of V.a/ into its irreducible components. There exists an m
0
V.p
1
/
i_2
V.p
i
/ and an
open neighbourhood D.h/ of m
0
disjoint from
i_2
V.p
i
/. The ring A
h
(resp. A
h
=S
-1
p)
is an integral domain with the same transcendance degree as A (resp. A=p) in fact, with
the same eld of fractions. In A
h
, rad.
(
1
/ = rad.f /
e
= p
e
1
. Therefore, after replacing A
with A
h
, we may suppose that rad.f / is prime, say, equal to p.
According to the Noether normalization theorem (5.11), there exist algebraically inde-
pendent elements x
1
; : : : ; x
d
in A such that A is a nite kx
1
; : : : ; x
d
-algebra. Note that
d = tr deg
k
A. According to the lemma, f
0
def
= Nm.f / lies in kx
1
; : : : ; x
d
, and we shall
show that pkx
1
; : : : ; x
d
=rad.f
0
/. Therefore, the homomorphism
kx
1
; : : : ; x
d
=rad.f
0
/ A=p
is injective. As it is also nite, this implies that
tr deg
k
A=p =tr deg
k
kx
1
; : : : ; x
d
=rad.f
0
/
13.2
= d 1;
as required.
By assumption A is nite (hence integral) over its subring kx
1
; : : : ; x
d
. The lemma
shows that f divides f
0
in A, and so f
0
.f / cp. Hence .f
0
/ cpkx
1
; : : : ; x
d
, which
implies
rad.f
0
/ cpkx
1
; : : : ; x
d
because p is radical. For the reverse inclusion, let g pkx

1
; : : : ; x
d
. Then g rad.f /,
and so g
n
=f h for some h A, m N. Taking norms, we nd that
g
ne
=Nm.f h/ =f
0
Nm.h/ .f
0
/;
where e is the degree of the extension of the elds of fractions, which proves the claim.
2
COROLLARY 13.7. Let p be a minimal nonzero prime ideal in A; then tr deg
k
.A=p/ =
tr deg
k
.A/ 1.
PROOF. Let f be a nonzero element of p. Then f is not a unit, and p is minimal among
the prime ideals containing f .
2
THEOREM 13.8. The length d of any maximal (i.e., nonrenable) chain of distinct prime
ideals
p
d
p
d-1
p
0
(30)
in A is tr deg
k
.A/. In particular, every maximal ideal of A has height tr deg
k
.A/, and so
the Krull dimension of A is equal to tr deg
k
.A/.
PROOF. From (13.7), we nd that
tr deg
k
.A/ =tr deg
k
.A=p
1
/ 1 = =tr deg
k
.A=p
d
/ d:
But p
d
is maximal, and so A=p
d
is a nite eld extension of k. In particular, tr deg
k
.A=p
d
/ =
0.
2
EXAMPLE 13.9. Let f.X; Y / and g.X; Y / be nonconstant polynomials with no common
factor. Then kX; Y =.f / has Krull dimension 1, and so kX; Y =.f; g/ has dimension zero.
EXAMPLE 13.10. We classify the prime ideals p in A = kX; Y . If A=p has dimension
2, then p = .0/. If A=p has dimension 1, then p = .f / for some irreducible polynomial
f of A (by 13.4). Finally, if A=p has dimension zero, then p is maximal. Thus, when k
is algebraically closed, the prime ideals in kX; Y are exactly the ideals .0/, .f / (with f
irreducible), and .X a; Y b/ (with a; b k).
14 PRIMARY DECOMPOSITIONS 56
REMARK 13.11. Let A be a nitely generated k-algebra (not necessarily an integral do-
main). Every maximal chain of prime ideals in A ending in xed prime ideal p has length
tr deg
k
.A=p/, and so the Krull dimension of A is max.tr deg
k
.A=p// where p runs over the
minimal prime ideals of A. In the next section, we show that a noetherian ring has only
nitely many minimal prime ideals, and so the Krull dimension of A is nite.
If x
1
; : : : ; x
n
is an algebraically independent set of elements of A such that A is a nite
kx
1
; : : : ; x
n
-algebra, then dimA =m.
14 Primary decompositions
In this section, A is an arbitrary commutative ring.
DEFINITION 14.1. An ideal q in A is primary if it is proper and
ab q, b q == a
n
q for some n _1:
Thus, a proper ideal q in A is primary if and only if all zero-divisors in A=q are nilpotent.
A radical ideal is primary if and only if it is prime. An ideal .m/ in Z is primary if and only
if m is a power of a prime.
PROPOSITION 14.2. The radical of a primary ideal q is a prime ideal containing q, and
it is contained in every other prime ideal containing q (i.e., it is the smallest prime ideal
containing p).
PROOF. Suppose ab rad.q/ but b rad.q/. Then some power, say a
n
b
n
, of ab lies in q,
but b
n
q, and so a rad.q/. The shows that rad.q/ is primary, and hence prime (because
it is radical).
Let p be a second prime ideal containing q, and let a rad.q/. For some n, a
n
q cp,
which implies that a p.
2
When q is a primary ideal and p is its radical, we say that q is p-primary.
PROPOSITION 14.3. Every ideal q whose radical is a maximal ideal m is primary (in fact,
m-primary); in particular, every power of a maximal ideal m is m-primary.
PROOF. Every prime ideal containing q contains its radical m, and therefore equals m. This
shows that A=a is local with maximal ideal m=a. Therefore, every element of A=a is either
a unit, and hence is not a zero-divisor, or it lies in m=a, and hence is nilpotent.
2
PROPOSITION 14.4. Let ': A B be a homomorphism of rings. If q is a p-primary ideal
in B, then q
c
def
='
-1
.q/ is a p
c
-primary ideal in A.
PROOF. The map A=q
c
B=q is injective, and so every zero-divisor in A=q
c
is nilpotent.
This shows that q
c
is primary, and therefore rad.q
c
/-primary. But (see 2.10), rad.q
c
/ =
rad.q/
c
=p
c
, as claimed.
2
LEMMA 14.5. Let q and p be a pair of ideals in A such that q cp crad.q/ and
ab q == a p or b q. (31)
Then p is a prime ideal and q is p-primary.
PROOF. Clearly q is primary, hence rad.q/-primary, and rad.q/ is prime. By assumption
p c rad.q/, and it remains to show that they are equal. Let a rad.q/, and let n be the
smallest positive integer such that a
n
q. If n = 1, then a q c p; on the other hand, if
n >1, then a
n
=aa
n-1
q and a
n-1
q, and so a p by (31).
2
PROPOSITION 14.6. A nite intersection of p-primary ideals is p-primary.
PROOF. Let q
1
; : : : ; q
n
be p-primary, and let q = q
1
: : : q
n
. We show that the pair of
ideals q cp satises the conditions of (14.5).
Let a p; since some power of a belongs to each q
i
, a sufciently high power of it will
belong to all of them, and so p crad.q/.
Let ab q but a p. Then ab q
i
but a p, and so b q
i
. Since this is true for all i ,
we have that b q.
2
The minimal prime ideals of an ideal a are the minimal elements of the set of prime
ideals containing a.
DEFINITION 14.7. A primary decomposition of an ideal a is a nite set of primary ideals
whose intersection is a. A primary decomposition S of a is minimal if
(a) the prime ideals rad.q/, q S, are distinct, and
(b) no element of S can be omitted, i.e., for no q
0
S is q
0
c
{q [ q S, q =q
0
].
If a admits a primary decomposition, then it admits a minimal primary decomposition,
because Proposition 14.6 can be used to combine primary ideals with the same radical, and
any q
i
that fails (b) can simply be omitted. The prime ideals occurring as the radical of an
ideal in a minimal primary decomposition of a are said to belong to a.
PROPOSITION 14.8. Suppose a = q
1
q
n
where q
i
is p
i
-primary for i = 1; : : : ; n.
Then the minimal prime ideals of a are the minimal elements of the set {p
1
; : : : ; p
n
].
PROOF. Let p be a prime ideal containing a, and let q
t
i
be the image of q
i
in the integral
domain A=p. Then p contains q
1
q
n
, and so q
t
1
q
t
n
=0. This implies that, for some i ,
q
t
i
=0, and so p contains q
i
. Now (14.2) shows that p contains p
i
:
2
In particular, if a admits a primary decomposition, then it has only nitely many mini-
mal prime ideals, and so its radical is a nite intersection of prime ideals.
For an ideal a in A and an element x A, we let
.a: x/ ={a A [ ax a]:
It is again an ideal in A, which equals A if x a.
LEMMA 14.9. Let q be a p-primary ideal and let x Aq. Then .q: x/ is p-primary (and
hence rad.q: x/ =p).
PROOF. For any a .q: x/, we know that ax q and x q, and so a p. Hence .q: x/ cp.
On taking radicals, we nd that rad.q: x/ =p. Let ab .q: x/. Then xab q, and so either
a p or xb q (because q is p-primary); in the second case, b .q: x/ as required.
2
THEOREM 14.10. Let a =q
1
: : : q
n
be a minimal primary decomposition of a, and let
p
i
=rad.q
i
/. Then
{p
1
; : : : ; p
n
] ={rad.a: x/ [ x A; rad.a: x/ prime].
In particular, the set {p
1
; : : : ; p
n
] is independent of the choice of the minimal primary de-
composition.
PROOF. For any a A,
.a: a/ =.
q
i
: a/ =
.q
i
: a/;
and so
rad.a: a/ =rad
.q
i
: a/
(14.9)
=

oq
i
p
i
: (32)
If rad.a: a/ is prime, then it equals one of the p
i
(otherwise, for each i there exists an
a
i
p
i
p, and a
1
a
n
oq
i
p
i
but not p, which is a contradiction). Hence RHSLHS.
For each i , there exists an a
}=i
q
}
q
i
because the decomposition is minimal, and (32)
shows that rad.a: a/ =p
i
.
2
THEOREM 14.11. In a noetherian ring, every ideal admits a primary decomposition.
The theorem is a consequence of the following more precise statement, but rst we need
a denition: an ideal a is said to be irreducible if
a =bc (b, c ideals) == a =b or a =c:
PROPOSITION 14.12. Let A be a noetherian ring.
(a) Every ideal in A can be expressed as a nite intersection of irreducible ideals.
(b) Every irreducible ideal in A is primary.
PROOF. (a) Suppose (a) fails, and let a be maximal among the ideals for which it fails.
Then, in particular, a itself is not irreducible, and so a =b c with b and c properly con-
taining a. Because a is maximal, both b and c can be expressed as nite intersections of
irreducible ideals, but then so can a.
(b) Let a be irreducible in A, and consider the quotient ring A
t
def
= A=a: Let a be a
zero-divisor in A
t
, say ab = 0 with b = 0. We have to show that a is nilpotent. As A
t
is
noetherian, the chain of ideals
..0/: a/ c..0/: a
2
/ c
becomes constant, say, ..0/: a
n
/ =..0/: a
n1
// = . Let c .a
n
/ .b/. Then c .b/
implies ca =0, and c .a
n
/ implies that c =da
n
for some d A. Now
.da
n
/a =0 =d .0: a
n1
/ =.0: a
n
/ =c =0:
Hence .a
n
/ .b/ = .0/. Because a is irreducible, so also is the zero ideal in A
t
, and it
follows that a
n
=0.
2
A p-primary ideal a in a noetherian ring contains a power of p by Proposition 3.15. The
next result proves a converse when p is maximal.
PROPOSITION 14.13. Let m be a maximal ideal of a noetherian ring. Any proper ideal a
of A that contains a power of a maximal ideal m is m-primary.
15 ARTINIAN RINGS 59
PROOF. Suppose that m
i
ca, and let p be a prime ideal belonging to a. Then m
i
ca cp,
so that m c p, which implies that m = p. Thus m is the only prime ideal belonging to a,
which means that a is m-primary.
2
EXAMPLE 14.14. We give an example of a power of a prime ideal p that is not p-primary.
Let
A =kX; Y; Z=.Y
2
XZ/ =kx; y; z:
The ideal .X; Y / in kX; Y; Z is prime and contains .Y
2
XZ/, and so the ideal p =.x; y/
in A is prime. Now xz =y
2
p
2
, but one checks easily that x p
2
and z p, and so p
2
is
not p-primary.
REMARK 14.15. Let a be an ideal in a noetherian ring, and let b =
n_1
a
n
. We give
another proof that ab =b (see p. 12). Let
ab =q
1
: : : q
x
; rad.q
i
/ =p
i
;
be a minimal primary decomposition of ab. We shall show that b c ab by showing that
b cq
i
for each i .
If there exists a b bq
i
, then
ab cab cq
i
,
from which it follows that a cp
i
. We know that p
i
i
cq
i
for some r (see 3.15), and so
b =
a
n
ca
i
cp
i
i
cq
i
,
which is a contradiction. This completes the proof.
DEFINITION 14.16. A Dedekind domain is a noetherian integrally closed integral domain
of dimension 1.
THEOREM 14.17. Every proper nonzero ideal a in a Dedekind domain can be written in
the form
a =p
i
1
1
p
i
s
x
with the p
i
distinct prime ideals and the r
i
> 0; the ideals p
i
are exactly the prime ideals
containing a, and the exponents r
i
are uniquely determined.
PROOF. For the proof, which is quite elementary, see Chapter 3 of my notes Algebraic
Number Theory.
2
15 Artinian rings
A ring A is artinian if every descending chain of ideals a
1
a
2
in A eventually
becomes constant; equivalently, if every nonempty set of ideals has a minimal element.
Similarly, a module M over a ring A is artinian if every descending chain of submodules
N
1
N
2
in M eventually becomes constant.
PROPOSITION 15.1. An artinian ring has Krull dimension zero; in other words, every
prime ideal is maximal.
15 ARTINIAN RINGS 60
PROOF. Let p be a prime ideal of an artinian ring A, and let A
t
= A=p. Then A
t
is an
artinian integral domain. For any nonzero element a of A
t
, the chain .a/ .a
2
/
eventually becomes constant, and so a
n
= a
n1
b for some b A
t
and n _ 1. We can
cancel a
n
to obtain 1 =ab. Thus a is a unit, A
t
is a eld, and p is maximal:
2
COROLLARY 15.2. In an artinian ring, the nilradical and the Jacobson radical coincide.
PROOF. The rst is the intersection of the prime ideals (2.5), and the second is the inter-
section of the maximal ideals (2.6).
2
PROPOSITION 15.3. An artinian ring has only nitely many maximal ideals.
PROOF. Let m
1
: : : m
n
be minimal among nite intersections of maximal ideals in an
artinian ring, and let m be another maximal ideal in the ring. If m is not equal to one of the
m
i
, then, for each i , there exists an a
i
m
i
m. Now a
1
a
n
lies in m
1
: : : m
n
but not
in m (because m is prime), contradicting the minimality of m
1
: : : m
n
.
2
PROPOSITION 15.4. In an artinian ring, some power of the nilradical is zero.
PROOF. Let N be the nilradical of the artinian ring A. The chain NN
2
eventually
becomes constant, and so N
n
=N
n1
= for some n _1. Suppose N
n
=0. Then there
exist ideals a such that a N
n
= 0, for example N, and we may suppose that a has been
chosen to be minimal among such ideals. There exists an a a such that a N
n
=0, and
so a =.a/ (by minimality). Now .aN
n
/N
n
=aN
2n
=aN
n
=0 and aN
n
c .a/, and so
aN
n
=.a/ (by minimality again). Hence a =ax for some x N
n
. Now a =ax =ax
2
=
=a0 =0 because x N. This contradicts the denition of a, and so N
n
=0.
2
LEMMA 15.5. Let A be a ring in which some nite product of maximal ideals is zero.
Then A is artinian if and only if it is noetherian.
PROOF. Suppose m
1
m
n
=0 with the m
i
maximal ideals (not necessarily distinct), and
consider
A m
1
m
1
m
i-1
m
1
m
i
m
1
m
n
=0:
The action of Aon the quotient M
i
def
=m
1
m
i-1
=m
1
m
i
factors through the eld A=m
i
,
and the subspaces of the vector space M
i
are in one-to-one correspondence with the ideals
of A contained between m
1
m
i-1
and m
1
m
i
. If A is either artinian or noetherian, then
M
i
satises a chain condition on subspaces and so it is nite-dimensional as a vector space
and both artinian and noetherian as an A-module. Now repeated applications of Proposition
3.3 (resp. its analogue for artinian modules) show that if A is artinian (resp. noetherian),
then it is noetherian (resp. artinian) as an A-module, and hence as a ring.
2
THEOREM 15.6. A ring is artinian if and only if it is noetherian of dimension zero.
PROOF. =: Let A be an artinian ring. After (15.1), it remains to show that A is noetherian,
but according to (15.2), (15.3), and (15.4), some nite product of maximal ideals is zero,
and so this follows from the lemma.
=: Let A be a noetherian ring of dimension zero. The zero ideal admits a primary
decomposition (14.11), and so A has only nitely many minimal prime ideals, which are all
maximal because dimA =0. Hence N is a nite intersection of maximal ideals (2.5), and
since some power of N is zero (3.15), we again have that some nite product of maximal
ideals is zero, and so can apply the lemma.
2
16 DIMENSION THEORY FOR NOETHERIAN RINGS 61
THEOREM 15.7. Every artinian ring is (uniquely) a product of local artinian rings.
PROOF. Let A be artinian, and let m
1
; : : : ; m
i
be the distinct maximal ideals in A. We saw
in the proof of (15.6) that some product m
n
1
1
m
n
r
i
=0. For i =j , the ideal m
n
i
i
m
n
j
}
is
not contained in any maximal ideal, and so equals A. Now the Chinese remainder theorem
2.12 shows that
A .A=m
n
1
1
A=m
n
r
i
,
and each ring A=m
n
i
i
is obviously local.
2
PROPOSITION 15.8. Let A be a local artinian ring with maximal ideal m. If m is principal,
so also is every ideal in A; in fact, if m =.t /, then every ideal is of the form .t
i
/ for some
r _0.
PROOF. Because m is the Jacobson radical of A, some power of m is zero (by 15.4); in
particular, .0/ = .t
i
/ for some r. Let a be a nonzero ideal in A. There exists an integer
r _ 0 such that a c m
i
but a ,c m
i1
. Therefore there exists an element a of a such that
a =ct
i
for some c A but a .t
i1
/. The second condition implies that c m, and so it
is a unit; therefore a =.a/.
2
EXAMPLE 15.9. The ring A=kX
1
; X
2
; X
3
; : : :=.X
1
; X
2
2
; X
3
3
; : : :/ has only a single prime
ideal, namely, .x
1
; x
2
; x
3
; : : :/, and so has dimension zero. However, it is not noetherian
(hence not artinian).
16 Dimension theory for noetherian rings
Let Abe a noetherian ring and let p be a prime ideal in A. Let A
p
=S
-1
Awhere S =Ap.
We begin by studying extension and contraction of ideals with respect to the homomor-
phism A A
p
(cf. 2.9). Recall (6.6) that A
p
is a local ring with maximal ideal p
e
def
=pA
p
.
The ideal
p
n
ec
={a A [ sa p
n
for some s S]
is called the nth symbolic power of p, and is denoted p
(n)
. If m is maximal, then m
(n)
=m
n
(see 6.7).
LEMMA 16.1. The ideal p
(n)
is p-primary.
PROOF. According to Proposition 14.3, the ideal .p
e
/
n
is p
e
-primary. Hence (see 14.4),
..p
e
/
n
/
c
is .p
e
/
c
-primary. But p
ec
=p (see 6.4), and
...p
e
/
n
/
c
2.10
= ..p
n
/
e
/
c
def
=p
(n)
: (33)
2
LEMMA 16.2. Consider ideals a c p
t
c p with p
t
prime. If p
t
is a minimal prime ideal of
a, then p
te
is a minimal prime ideal of a
e
(extension relative to A A
p
).
PROOF. If not, there exists a prime ideal p
tt
=p
te
such that p
te
p
tt
a
e
. Now, by (6.4),
p
t
=p
tec
and p
ttc
=p
tec
, and so
p
t
=p
tec
p
ttc
a
ec
a
contradicts the minimality of p
t
.
2
THEOREM 16.3 (KRULLS PRINCIPAL IDEAL THEOREM). Let Abe a noetherian ring. For
any nonunit b A, the height of a minimal prime ideal p of .b/ is at most one.
PROOF. Consider A A
p
. According to Lemma 16.2, p
e
is a minimal prime ideal of
.b/
e
=.
b
1
/, and (6.4) shows that the theorem for A
p
p
e
.
b
1
/ implies it for Ap .b/.
Therefore, we may replace A with A
p
, and so assume that A is a noetherian local ring with
maximal ideal p.
Suppose that p properly contains a prime ideal p
1
: we have to show that p
1
p
2
==
p
1
=p
2
.
Let p
(i)
1
be the rth symbolic power of p
1
. The only prime ideal of the ring A=.b/ is
p=.b/, and so A=.b/ is artinian (apply 15.6). Therefore the descending chain of ideals
p
(1)
1
.b/
=.b/
p
(2)
1
.b/
=.b/
p
(3)
1
.b/
=.b/
eventually becomes constant: there exists an s such that
p
(x)
1
.b/ =p
(x1)
1
.b/ =p
(x2)
1
.b/ = : (34)
We claim that, for any m_s,
p
(n)
1
c.b/p
(n)
1
p
(n1)
1
: (35)
Let x p
(n)
1
. Then
x .b/ p
(n)
1
(34)
= .b/ p
(n1)
1
;
and so x = ab x
t
with a A and x
t
p
(n1)
1
. As p
(n)
1
is p
1
-primary (see 16.1) and
ab =xx
t
p
(n)
1
but b p
1
, we have that a p
(n)
1
. Nowx =ab x
t
.b/p
(n)
1
p
(n1)
1
as claimed.
We next show that, for any m_s,
p
(n)
1
=p
(n1)
1
.
As b p, (35) shows that p
(n)
1
=p
(n1)
1
=p
p
(n)
1
=p
(n1)
1
, and so p
(n)
1
=p
(n1)
1
=0 by
Nakayamas lemma (3.7).
Now
p
x
1
cp
(x)
1
=p
(x1)
1
=p
(x2)
1
=
and so p
x
1
c
n_x
p
(n)
1
. Note that
n_x
p
(n)
1
(33)
=
n_x
..p
e
1
/
n
/
c
=.
n_x
.p
e
1
/
n
/
c
3.14
= .0/
c
;
and so for any x p
x
1
, there exists an a Ap
1
such that ax =0. Let x p
1
; then ax
x
=0
for some a Ap
1
Ap
2
, and so x p
2
(because p
2
is prime). We have shown that
p
1
=p
2
, as required.
2
In order to extend Theorem 16.6 to non principal ideals, we shall need a lemma.
LEMMA 16.4. Let p be a prime ideal in a noetherian ring A, and let S be a nite set of
prime ideals in A, none of which contains p. If there exists a chain of distinct prime ideals
p p
d-1
p
0
;
then there exists such a chain with p
1
not contained in any ideal in S.
PROOF. We rst prove this in the special case that the chain has length 2. Suppose that
p p
1
p
0
are distinct prime ideals and that p is not contained in any prime ideal in S.
According to Proposition 2.8, there exists an element
a p.p
0
L
{p
t
S]/:
As p contains .a/ p
0
, it also contains a minimal prime ideal p
t
1
of .a/ p
0
. Now p
t
1
=p
0
is a minimal prime ideal of the principal ideal ..a/ p
0
/=p
0
in A=p
0
, and so has height 1,
whereas the chain p=p
0
p
1
=p
0
p
0
=p
0
shows that p=p
0
has height at least 2. Therefore
p p
t
1
p
0
are distinct primes, and p
t
1
S because it contains a. This completes the proof
of the special case.
Now consider the general case. On applying the special case to p p
d-1
p
d-2
, we
see that there exists a chain of distinct prime ideals p p
t
d-1
p
d-2
such that p
t
d-1
is not
contained in any ideal in S. Then on applying the special case to p
t
d-1
p
d-2
p
d-1
, we
we see that there exists a chain of distinct prime ideals p p
t
d-1
p
t
d-2
p
d-2
such that
p
t
d-2
is not contained in any ideal in S. Repeat the argument until the proof is complete.
2
THEOREM 16.5. Let A be a noetherian ring. For any proper ideal a = .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/, the
height of a minimal prime ideal of a is at most m.
PROOF. For m=1, this was just proved. Thus, we may suppose m_2 and that the theorem
has been proved for ideals generated by m1 elements. Let p be a minimal prime ideal of
a, and let p
t
1
; : : : ; p
t
t
be the minimal prime ideals of .a
2
; : : : ; a
n
/. Each p
t
i
has height at most
m1. If p is contained in one of the p
t
i
, it will have height _m1, and so we may suppose
that it isnt.
Let p have height d. We have to show that d _m. According to the lemma, there exists
a chain of distinct prime ideals
p =p
d
p
d-1
p
0
; d _1;
with p
1
not contained in any p
t
i
, and so Proposition 2.8 shows that there exists a
b p
1
i
i=1
p
t
i
:
We next show that p is a minimal prime ideal of .b; a
2
; : : : ; a
n
/. Certainly p contains a
minimal prime ideal p
t
of this ideal. As p
t
.a
2
; : : : ; a
n
/, p contains one of the p
t
i
s, but, by
construction, it cannot equal it. If p =p
t
, then
p p
t
p
i
are distinct ideals, which shows that p
def
= p=.a
2
; : : : ; a
n
/ has height at least 2 in

A
def
=
A=.a
2
; : : : ; a
n
/. But p is a minimal ideal in

Aof the principal ideal .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/=.a
2
; : : : ; a
n
/,
which contradicts Theorem 16.3. Hence p is minimal, as claimed.
But now p=.b/ is a minimal prime ideal of .b; a
2
; : : : ; a
n
/ in R=.b/, and so the height
of p=.b/ is at most m1 (by induction). The prime ideals
p=.b/ =p
d
=.b/ p
d-1
=.b/ p
1
=.b/
are distinct, and so d 1 _m1. This completes the proof that d =m.
2
The height of an ideal a in a noetherian ring is the minimum height of a prime ideal
containing it,
ht.a/ = min
pa, p prime
ht.p/:
The theorem shows that ht.a/ is nite.
The following provides a (strong) converse to Theorem 16.5.
THEOREM 16.6. Let A be a noetherian ring, and let a be a proper ideal of A of height r.
Then there exist r elements a
1
; : : : ; a
i
of a such that, for each i _r, .a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/ has height
i .
PROOF. If r =0, then we take the empty set of a
i
s. Thus, suppose r _ 1. There are only
nitely many prime ideals of height 0, because such an ideal is a minimal prime ideal of
.0/, and none of these ideals can contain a because it has height _1. Proposition 2.8 shows
that there exists an
a
1
a
{prime ideals of height 0]:

By construction, .a
1
/ has height at least 1, and so Theorem 16.3 shows it has height exactly
1.
This completes the proof when r =1, and so suppose that r _2. There are only nitely
many prime ideals of height 1 containing .a
1
/ because such an ideal is a minimal prime
ideal of .a
1
/, and none of these ideals can contain a because it has height _2. Choose
a
2
a
{prime ideals of height 1 containing .a

1
/]:
By construction, .a
1
; a
2
/ has height at least 2, and so Theorem 16.5 shows that it has height
exactly 2.
This completes the proof when r =2, and when r > 2 we can continue in this fashion
until it is complete.
COROLLARY 16.7. Every prime ideal of height r in a noetherian ring arises as a minimal
prime ideal for an ideal generated by r elements.
PROOF. According to the theorem, an ideal a of height r contains an ideal .a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/ of
height r. If a is prime, then it is a minimal ideal of .a
1
; : : : ; a
i
/.
2
COROLLARY 16.8. Let A be a commutative noetherian ring, and let a be an ideal in A that
can be generated by n elements. For any prime ideal p in A containing a,
ht.p=a/ _ht.p/ _ht.p=a/ n:
PROOF. The rst inequality follows immediately from the correspondence between ideals
in A and in A=a.
Denote the quotient map A A
t
def
= A=a by a a
t
. Let ht.p=a/ = d. Then there
exist elements a
1
; : : : ; a
d
in A such that p=a is a minimal prime ideal of .a
t
1
; : : : ; a
t
d
/. Let
b
1
; : : : ; b
n
generate a. Then p is a minimal prime ideal of .a
1
; : : : ; a
d
; b
1
; : : : ; b
n
/, and hence
has height _d n.
2
We now use dimension theory to prove a stronger version of generic atness (9.11).
17 REGULAR LOCAL RINGS 65
THEOREM 16.9 (GENERIC FREENESS). Let A be a noetherian integral domain, and let B
be a nitely generated A-algebra. For any nitely generated B-module M, there exists a
nonzero element a of A such that M
o
is a free A
o
-module.
PROOF. Let F be the eld of fractions of A. We prove the theorem by induction on the
Krull dimension of F
B, starting with the case of Krull dimension 1. Recall that this

means that F
B =0, and so a1
B
=0 for some nonzero a A. Then M
o
=0, and so
the theorem is trivially true (M
o
is the free A
o
-module generated by the empty set).
In the general case, an argument as in (9.12) shows that, after replacing A, B, and M
with A
o
, B
o
, and M
o
for a suitable a A, we may suppose that the map B F
B
is injective we identify B with its image. The Noether normalization shows that there
exist algebraically independent elements x
1
; : : : ; x
n
of F
B such that F
B is a nite
Fx
1
; : : : ; x
n
-algebra. As in the proof of (9.11), there exists a nonzero a A such that B
o
is a nite A
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
-algebra. Hence M
o
is a nitely generated A
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
-module.
As any extension of free modules is free
21
, Proposition 3.5 shows that it sufces to
prove the theorem for M
o
= A
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
=p for some prime ideal p in A
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
.
If p =0, then M
o
is free over A
o
(with basis the monomials in the x
i
). Otherwise, F
.A
o
x
1
; : : : ; x
n
=p/ has Krull dimension less than that of F
B, and so we can apply the

induction hypothesis.
2
17 Regular local rings
Throughout this section, A is a noetherian local ring with maximal ideal m and residue eld
k. The Krull dimension d of A is equal to the height of m, and
ht.m/
(16.5)
_ minimum number of generators of m
(3.9)
= dim
k
.m=m
2
/:
When equality holds, the ring A is said to be regular. In other words, dim
k
.m=m
2
/ _ d,
and equality holds exactly when the ring is regular.
For example, when A has dimension zero, it is regular if and only if its maximal ideal
can be generated by the empty set, and so is zero. This means that A is a eld; in particular,
it is an integral domain. The main result of this section is that all regular rings are integral
domains.
LEMMA 17.1. Let A be a noetherian local ring with maximal ideal m, and let c mm
2
.
Denote the quotient map A A
t
def
=A=.c/ by a a
t
. Then
dim
k
m=m
2
=dim
k
m
t
=m
t2
1
where m
t
def
=m=.c/ is the maximal ideal of A
t
.
PROOF. Let e
1
; : : : ; e
n
be elements of msuch that {e
t
1
; : : : ; e
t
n
] is a k-linear basis for m
t
=m
t2
.
We shall show that {e
1
; : : : ; e
n
; c] is a basis for m=m
2
.
As e
t
1
; : : : ; e
t
n
span m
t
=m
t2
, they generate the ideal m
t
(see 3.9), and so m=.e
1
; : : : ; e
n
/
.c/, which implies that {e
1
; : : : ; e
n
; c] spans m=m
2
.
Suppose that a
1
; : : : ; a
n1
are elements of A such that
a
1
e
1
a
n
e
n
a
n1
c 0 mod m
2
. (36)
21
If M
t
is a submodule of M such that M
tt
def
=M=M
t
is free, then M ~M
t
M
tt
.
17 REGULAR LOCAL RINGS 66
Then
a
t
1
e
t
1
a
t
n
e
t
n
0 mod m
t2
,
and so a
t
1
; : : : ; a
t
n
m
t
. It follows that a
1
; : : : ; a
n
m. Now (36) shows that a
n1
c m
2
.
If a
n1
m, then it is a unit in A, and c m
2
, which contradicts its denition. Therefore,
a
n1
m, and the relation (36) is the trivial one.
2
PROPOSITION 17.2. If A is regular, then so also is A=.a/ for any a mm
2
; moreover,
dimA =dimA=.a/ 1.
PROOF. With the usual notations, (16.8) shows that
ht.m
t
/ _ht.m/ _ht.m
t
/ 1:
Therefore
dim
k
.m
t
=m
t2
/ _ht.m
t
/ _ht.m/ 1 =dim
k
.m=m
2
/ 1 =dim
k
.m
t
=m
t2
/:
Equalities must hold throughout, which proves that A
t
is regular with dimension dimA1.
2
THEOREM 17.3. Every regular noetherian local ring is an integral domain.
PROOF. Let A be a regular local ring of dimension d. We have already noted that the
statement is true when d =0.
We next prove that A is an integral domain if it contains distinct ideals a p with
a =.a/ principal and p prime. Let b p, and suppose b a
n
=.a
n
/ for some n _1. Then
b =a
n
c for some c A. As a is not in the prime ideal p, we must have that c p ca, and
so b a
n1
. Continuing in this fashion, we see that b
n
a
n
3.14
= {0]. Therefore p ={0],
and so A is an integral domain.
We now assume d _ 1, and proceed by induction on d. Let a mm
2
. As A=.a/ is
regular of dimension d 1, it is an integral domain, and so .a/ is a prime ideal. If it has
height 1, then the last paragraph shows that A is an integral domain. Thus, we may suppose
that, for all a mm
2
, the prime ideal .a/ has height 0, and so is a minimal prime ideal
of A. Let S be the set of all minimal prime ideals of A recall (14) that S is nite. We
have shown that mm
2
c
{p [ p S], and so m c m
2
L
{p [ p S]. It follows from

Proposition 2.8 that either m cm
2
(and hence m =0) or m is a minimal prime ideal of A,
but both of these statements contradict the assumption that d _1:
2
COROLLARY 17.4. A regular noetherian local ring of dimension 1 is a principal ideal do-
main (with a single nonzero prime ideal).
PROOF. Let A be a regular local ring of dimension 1 with maximal ideal m;and let a be
a nonzero proper ideal in A. The conditions imply that m is principal, say m = .t /. The
radical of a is m because m is the only prime ideal containing a, and so a m
i
for some
r (by 3.15). The ring A=m
i
is local and artinian, and so a =.t
x
/ m
i
for some s _ 1 (by
15.8). This implies that a =.t
x
/ by Nakayamas lemma (3.7).
2
THEOREM 17.5. Let A be a regular noetherian local ring.
(a) For any prime ideal p in A, the ring A
p
is regular.
(b) The ring A is a unique factorization domain (hence is integrally closed).
PROOF. The best proofs use homological algebra, and are (at present) beyond this primer.
For an account of the theorems in the same spirit as this primer, see http://www.math.
uchicago.edu/
~
may/MISC/RegularLocal.pdf. See also Matsumura 1986 19.3, 20.3.
2
18 CONNECTIONS WITH GEOMETRY 67
18 Connections with geometry
Throughout this section, k is a eld.
AFFINE k-ALGEBRAS
Let A be a nitely generated k-algebra. Recall (11.8) that the nilradical of A is equal to the
intersection of the maximal ideals of A.
PROPOSITION 18.1. Let A be a nitely generated k-algebra over a perfect eld k. If A is
reduced, then so also is K
k
A for every eld K k.
PROOF. Let .e
i
/ be a basis for K as a k-vector space, and suppose =
e
i
a
i
is a
nonzero nilpotent element in K
k
A. Because A is reduced, there exists a maximal ideal
m in Asuch that some a
i
do not belong to m. The image of in K
k
.A=m/ is a nonzero
nilpotent, but A=m is a nite separable eld extension of k, and so this is impossible.
22
2
When k is not perfect, Proposition 18.1 fails, because then k has characteristic p =0
and it contains an element a that is not a pth power. The polynomial X
;
a is irreducible
in kX, but X
;
a =.X /
;
in k
al
X. Therefore, A =kX=.X
;
a/ is a eld, but
k
al
k
A =k
al
X=.X /
;
is not reduced.
DEFINITION 18.2. An afne k-algebra is a nitely generated k-algebra A such that k
al
k
A is reduced.
Let A be a nitely generated k-algebra. If A is afne, then K
k
A is reduced for
every nite extension K of k, because a k-homomorphism K k
al
denes an injective
homomorphism K
k
A k
al
k
A. Conversely, if A is reduced and k is perfect, then
(18.1) shows that A is afne.
PROPOSITION 18.3. If A is an afne k-algebra and B is a reduced k-algebra, then A
k
B
is reduced.
PROOF. Let .e
i
/ be a basis for A as a k-vector space, and suppose =
e
i
b
i
is a
nonzero nilpotent element of A
k
B. Let B
t
be the k-subalgebra of B generated by the
(nitely many) nonzero b
i
. Because B
t
is reduced, there exists a maximal ideal m in B
t
such that some b
i
do not belong to m. Then the image of in A
k
.B
t
=m/ is a nonzero
nilpotent, but B
t
=m is a nite eld extension of k (Zariskis lemma, 11.1), and so this is
impossible.
2
COROLLARY 18.4. If A and B are afne k-algebras, then so also is A
k
B.
PROOF. By denition, k
al
k
Ais reduced, and k
al
k
.A
k
B/ ..k
al
k
A/
k
B, which
is reduced by (18.3).
2
22
Every nite separable eld extension of k is of the form kX=.f.X// with f.X/ separable and therefore
without repeated factors in any extension eld of k; hence K
k
kX=.f.X// .KX=.f.X// is a product
of elds.
LOCALLY RINGED SPACES
Let V be a topological space, and let k be a k-algebra. A presheaf O of k-algebras on
V assigns to each open subset U of V a k-algebra O.U/ and to each inclusion U
t
c U a
restriction map
f f [U
t
: O.U/ O.U
t
/:
when U =U
t
the restriction map is required to be the identity map, and if
U
tt
cU
t
cU;
then the composite of the restriction maps
O.U/ O.U
t
/ O.U
tt
/
is required to be the restriction map O.U/ O.U
tt
/. In other words, a presheaf is a con-
travariant functor to the category of k-algebras fromthe category whose objects are the open
subsets of V and whose morphisms are the inclusions. A homomorphism of presheaves
: O O
t
is a family of homomorphisms of k-algebras
.U/: O.U/ O
t
.U/
commuting with the restriction maps, i.e., a natural transformation.
A presheaf O is a sheaf if for every open covering {U
i
] of an open subset U of V
and family of elements f
i
O.U
i
/ agreeing on overlaps (that is, such that f
i
[U
i
U
}
=
f
}
[U
i
U
}
for all i; j ), there is a unique element f O.U/ such that f
i
= f [U
i
for all
i .
23
A homomorphism of sheaves on V is a homomorphism of presheaves.
For v V , the stalk of a sheaf O (or presheaf) at v is
O
=lim
O.U/ (limit over open neighbourhoods of v/:

In other words, it is the set of equivalence classes of pairs .U; f / with U an open neighbour-
hood of v and f O.U/; two pairs .U; f / and .U
t
; f
t
/ are equivalent if f [U
tt
=f [U
tt
for some open neighbourhood U
tt
of v contained in U U
t
.
A ringed space is a pair .V; O/ consisting of topological space V together with a sheaf
of rings. If the stalk O
of O at v is a local ring for all v V , then .V; O/ is called a locally

ringed space.
A morphism .V; O/ .V
t
; O
t
/ of ringed spaces is a pair .'; / with ' a continuous
map V V
t
and a family of maps
.U
t
/: O
t
.U
t
/ O.'
-1
.U
t
//; U
t
open in V
t
,
commuting with the restriction maps. Such a pair denes homomorphismof rings
: O
t
c()
for all v V . A morphism of locally ringed spaces is a morphism of ringed space such
that
is a local homomorphism for all v.

Let B be a base for the topology on V that is closed under nite intersections. A sheaf
on B can be dened in the obvious way, and such a sheaf O extends to a sheaf O
t
on V : for
any open subset U of V , dene O
t
.U/ to be the set of families
.f
U
0 /
U
0
cU,U
0
B
; f
U
0 O.U
t
/;
agreeing on overlaps. Then O
t
is a sheaf of k-algebras on V , and there is a canonical
isomorphism O O
t
[B.
23
This condition implies that O.0/ =0.
AFFINE ALGEBRAIC SPACES AND VARIETIES
Let A be a nitely generated k-algebra, and let V = spm.A/. Recall (12) that the set of
principal open subsets of V
B ={D.f / [ f A]
is a base for the topology on V . Moreover, B is closed under nite intersections because
D.f
1
f
i
/ =D.f
1
/ : : : D.f
i
/:
For a principal open subset D of V , dene O
.D/ =S
-1
T
A where S
T
is the multiplicative
subset A
pT
p. If D =D.f /, then S
T
is the smallest saturated multiplicative subset
containing f , and so O
.D/ .A
(
(see 6.12). If D D
t
, then S
T
c S
T
0 , and so there
is a canonical restriction homomorphism O
.D/ O
.D
t
/. These restriction maps
make D O
.D/ into a functor on B satisfying the sheaf condition: for any covering
D =
iJ
D
i
of a D B by D
i
B and family of elements f
i
O
.D
i
/ agreeing on
overlaps, there is a unique element f O
.D/ such that f

i
=f [D
i
for all i .
For an open subset U of V , dene O
.U/ to be the set of families .f

T
/
T
agreeing
on overlaps; here D runs over the principal open sets D c U. Clearly U O
.U/ is a
functor on the open subsets of V , and it is not difcult to check that it is a sheaf. Moreover,
in the denition of O
.U/, instead of taking all principal open subsets of U, it sufces to

take a covering collection. In particular, if U =D.f /, then
O
.U/ .O
.D.f // .A
(
:
In summary:
PROPOSITION 18.5. There exists an essentially unique sheaf O
of k-algebras on V =
spm.A/ such that
(a) for all basic open subsets D =D.f / of V ,
O.D/ =S
-1
T
A .A
(
;
(b) for all inclusions D
t
cD of basic open subsets, the restriction map O.D/ O.D
t
/
is the canonical map S
-1
T
A S
-1
T
0
A.
We write Spm.A/ for spm.A/ endowed with this sheaf of k-algebras.
PROPOSITION 18.6. For every mspm.A/, the stalk O
m
is canonically isomorphic to O
m
.
PROOF. Apply (7.3).
2
Thus Spm.A/ is a locally ringed space. An afne algebraic space is topological space
V together with a sheaf of k-algebras O such that .V; O/ is isomorphic to Spm.A/ for some
nitely generated k-algebra A. A regular map of afne algebraic spaces is morphism of
locally ringed spaces.
EXAMPLE 18.7. Afne n-space A
n
= Spm.kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
/. To give a regular map V
A
1
is the same as giving a homomorphism of k-algebras kX O.V /, i.e., an element of
O.V /. For this reason, O.V / is often called the ring (or k-algebra) of regular functions on
V .
PROPOSITION 18.8. For any afne algebraic space .V; O
V
/ and locally ringed space .W; O
W
/,
the canonical map
Hom.V; W/ Hom
k-alg
.O
W
.W/; O
V
.V //
is an isomorphism.
PROOF. Exercise for the reader.
2
An afne algebraic space V denes a functor
R V.R/
def
=Hom
k-alg
.O.V /; R/: (37)
from k-algebras to sets. For example, A
n
.R/ .R
n
for all k-algebras R.
An afne algebraic variety is an afne algebraic space V such that O
V
.V / is an afne
algebra.
TANGENT SPACES; NONSINGULAR POINTS; REGULAR POINTS
Let k" be the ring of dual numbers (so "
2
=0). For an afne algebraic space V over k,
the map " 0: k" k denes a map
V.k"/ V.k/.
For any a V.k/, we dene the tangent space to V at a, Tgt
o
.V /, to be the inverse image
of a under this map.
PROPOSITION 18.9. There is a canonical isomorphism
Tgt
o
.V / .Hom
k-lin
.m
o
=m
2
o
; k/:
This follows from the next two lemmas.
Let V = V.a/ c k
n
, and assume that the origin o lies on V . Let a
I
be the ideal gen-
erated by the linear terms f
I
of the f a. By denition, T
o
.V / = V.a
I
/. Let A
I
=
kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=a
I
, and let m be the maximal ideal in kV consisting of the functions zero
at o; thus m=.x
1
; : : : ; x
n
/.
LEMMA 18.10. There is a canonical isomorphism
Hom
k-lin
.m=m
2
; k/
:
Hom
k-alg
.A
I
; k/:
PROOF. Let n = .X
1
; : : : ; X
n
/ be the maximal ideal at the origin in kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
. Then
m=m
2
.n=.n
2
a/, and as f f
I
n
2
for every f a, it follows that m=m
2
.n=.n
2
a
I
/. Let f
1,I
; : : : ; f
i,I
be a basis for the vector space a
I
. From linear algebra we know that
there are nr linear forms X
i
1
; : : : ; X
i
nr
forming with the f
i,I
a basis for the linear forms
on k
n
. Then X
i
1
m
2
; : : : ; X
i
nr
m
2
form a basis for m=m
2
as a k-vector space, and the
lemma shows that A
I
. kX
i
1
: : : ; X
i
nr
. A homomorphism : A
I
k of k-algebras is
determined by its values .X
i
1
/; : : : ; .X
i
nr
/, and they can be arbitrarily given. Since the
k-linear maps m=m
2
k have a similar description, the rst isomorphismis nowobvious.
2
LEMMA 18.11. There is a canonical isomorphism
Hom
k-alg
.A
I
; k/
:
T
o
.V /:
PROOF. To give a k-algebra homomorphism A
I
k is the same as to give an element
.a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ k
n
such that f.a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ =0 for all f A
I
, which is the same as to give
an element of T
1
.V /.
2
REMARK 18.12. Let V = SpmkX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=.f
1
; : : : ; f
n
/, and let .a
1
; : : : ; a
n
/ V.k/.
Then Tgt
o
.V / is canonically isomorphic to the subspace of k
n
dened by the equations
@f
i
@X
1
o
X
1

@f
i
@X
n
o
X
n
, i =1; : : : ; m:
When a is the origin, this is a restatement of (18.11), and the general case can be deduced
from this case by a translation.
The dimension of an afne algebraic space V is the Krull dimension of O.V /. If V
is irreducible, then O.V /=N is an integral domain, and the dimension of V is equal to the
transcendence degree over k of the eld of fractions of O.V /=N; moreover, all maximal
ideals have height dimV (13.11).
PROPOSITION 18.13. Let V be an afne algebraic space over k, and let a V.k/. Then
dimTgt
o
.V / _dimV , and equality holds if and only if O.V /
m
a
is regular.
PROOF. Let n be the maximal ideal of the local ring A = O.V /
m
a
. Then A=n = k, and
dim
k
n=n
2
_ht.n/, with equality if and only if Ais regular. As m
o
=m
2
o
.n=n
2
(6.7), Propo-
sition 18.9 implies that dimTgt
o
.V / =dim
k
n=n
2
, from which the statement follows.
2
An a V.k/ is nonsingular if dimTgt
o
.V / =dimV ; otherwise it is singular. An afne
algebraic space V is regular if all of its local rings O.V /
m
are regular, and it is smooth if
V
k
al is regular. Thus an algebraic space over an algebraically closed eld is smooth if and
only if all a V.k/ are nonsingular. A smooth algebraic space is regular, but the converse
is false. For example, let k
t
be a nite inseparable extension of k, and let V be a smooth
algebraic space over k
t
; when we regard V is an algebraic space over k, it is regular, but
not smooth.
PROPOSITION 18.14. A smooth afne algebraic space V is a regular afne algebraic vari-
ety; in particular, O.V / is an integral domain. Conversely, if k is perfect, then every regular
afne algebraic space over k is smooth.
PROOF. Let A = O.V /. If V is smooth, then all the local the local rings of k
al
k
A
are regular; in particular, they are integral domains (17.3). This implies that k
al
k
A is
reduced, because it implies that the annihilator of any nilpotent element is not contained in
any maximal ideal, and so is the whole ring. Therefore A is an afne algebra, and so V is
an afne algebraic variety. Let m be a maximal ideal in A, and let n =m.k
al
k
A/. Then
n is a maximal ideal of k
al
k
A, and
n=n
2
.k
al
.m=m
2
/;
and so dim
k
.m=m
2
/ =dim
k
al .n=n
2
/. This implies that A
m
is regular. In particular, A
m
is
an integral domain for all maximal ideals of A, which implies that A is integral domain,
because it implies that the annihilator of any zero-divisor is not contained in any maximal
ideal. Conversely, if V is regular, A is an integral domain, and hence an afne k-algebra if
k is perfect.
2
PROPOSITION 18.15. Let V be an irreducible afne algebraic space over an algebraically
closed eld k, and identify V with V.k/. The set of nonsingular points of V is open, and it
is nonempty if V is an algebraic variety.
PROOF. We may suppose V =SpmkX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=.f
1
; : : : ; f
n
/. Let d =dimV . Accord-
ing to Remark 18.12, the set of singular points of V is the zero-set of the ideal generated by
the .nd/ .nd/ minors of the matrix
Jac.f
1
; : : : ; f
n
/.a/ =
J(
1
JA
1
.a/
J(
1
JA
n
.a/
:
:
:
:
:
:
J(
m
JA
1
.a/
J(
m
JA
n
.a/
;
which is closed. Therefore the set of nonsingular points is open.
Now suppose that V is an algebraic variety. The next two lemmas allow us to sup-
pose that V =kX
1
; : : : ; X
n
=.f / where f is a nonconstant irreducible polynomial. Then
dimV =n1, and so we have to show that the equations
f =0;
@f
@X
1
=0; ;
@f
@X
n
=0
have no common zero. If
J(
JA
1
is identically zero on V.f /, then f divides it. But
J(
JA
1
has
degree less than that of f and f is irreducible, and so this implies that
J(
JA
1
=0. Therefore
f is a polynomial in X
2
; : : : ; X
n
(characteristic zero) or X
;
1
; X
2
; : : : ; X
n
(characteristic p).
Continuing in this fashion, we nd that either f is constant (characteristic zero) or a pth
power (characteristic p), which contradict the hypothesis.
2
Let V be an irreducible afne algebraic variety. Then O.V / is an integral domain, and
we let k.V / denote its eld of fractions. Two irreducible afne algebraic varieties V and
W are said to be birationally equivalent if k.V / ~k.W/.
LEMMA 18.16. Two irreducible varieties V and W are birationally equivalent if and only
if there are open subsets U and U
t
of V and W respectively such that U ~U
t
.
PROOF. Assume that V and W are birationally equivalent. We may suppose that A=O.V /
and B = O.W/ have a common eld of fractions K. Write B = kx
1
; : : : ; x
n
. Then
x
i
= a
i
=b
i
, a
i
; b
i
A, and B c A
b
1
...b
r
. Since Spm.A
b
1
...b
r
/ is a basic open subvariety
of V , we may replace A with A
b
1
...b
r
, and suppose that B cA. The same argument shows
that there exists a d B cA such A cB
d
. Now
B cA cB
d
==B
d
cA
d
c.B
d
/
d
=B
d
;
and so A
d
= B
d
. This shows that the open subvarieties D.b/ c V and D.b/ c W are
isomorphic. This proves the only if part, and the if part is obvious.
2
LEMMA 18.17. Every irreducible algebraic variety of dimension d is birationally equiva-
lent to a hypersurface in A
d1
.
PROOF. Let V be an irreducible variety of dimension d. According to 8.21 of my notes
Fields and Galois Theory, there exist algebraically independent elements x
1
; : : : ; x
d
k.V /
such that k.V / is nite and separable over k.x
1
; : : : ; x
d
/. By the primitive element theorem
(ibid. 5.1), k.V / = k.x
1
; : : : ; x
d
; x
d1
/ for some x
d1
. Let f kX
1
; : : : ; X
d1
be an
irreducible polynomial satised by the x
i
, and let H be the hypersurface f = 0. Then
k.V / ~k.H/.
2
REFERENCES 73
ALGEBRAIC SCHEMES, SPACES, AND VARIETIES
An algebraic space over k is a locally ringed space that admits a nite open covering by
afne algebraic spaces. An algebraic variety over k is a locally ringed space .X; O
A
/
that admits a nite open covering by afne algebraic spaces and satises the following
separation condition: for every pair '
1
; '
2
: Z X of locally ringed space with Z and
afne algebraic variety, the subset of Z on which '
1
and '
2
agree is closed.
Let .X; O
A
/ be an algebraic scheme over k, i.e., a scheme of nite type over k, and let
X
t
be the subset of X obtained by omitting all the nonclosed points. Then .X
t
; O
A
[X
t
/ is
an algebraic space over k. Conversely, let .X; O
A
/ be an algebraic space over k; for each
open subset U of X, let U
t
be the set of irreducible closed subsets of U, and regard U
t
as a
subset of X
t
in the obvious way; then .X
t
; O
A
0 / where O
A
0 .U
t
/ =O
A
.U/ is an algebraic
scheme over k.
References
BOURBAKI, N. AC. Alg` ebre Commutative. Elements of Mathematics. Masson, Hermann.
Chap. IIV Masson 1985; Chap. VVII Hermann 1975; Chap. VIII-IX Masson 1983;
Chap. X Masson 1998.
CARTIER, P. 2007. A primer of Hopf algebras, pp. 537615. In Frontiers in number theory,
physics, and geometry. II. Springer, Berlin. Preprint available at IHES.
KRULL, W. 1938. Dimensionstheorie in stellenringen. J. Reine Angew. Math. 179:204226.
MATSUMURA, H. 1986. Commutative ring theory, volume 8 of Cambridge Studies in
Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
NAGATA, M. 1962. Local rings. Interscience Tracts in Pure and Applied Mathematics, No.
13. Interscience Publishers, New York-London.
NORTHCOTT, D. G. 1953. Ideal theory. Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics and Mathemat-
ical Physics, No. 42. Cambridge, at the University Press.
Index
algebra, 1
afne, 66
nite, 2
nitely generated, 2
nitely presented, 11
symmetric, 29
tensor, 28
belong to, 56
birationally equivalent, 71
coefcient
leading, 9
components
irreducible, 48
content of a polynomial, 14
contraction
of an ideal, 6
Cramers formula, 15
decomposition
minimal primary, 56
primary, 56
Dedekind domain, 58
degree
of a polynomial, 15
total, 15
dimension
Krull, 11
of an afne algebraic space, 70
directed, 24
domain
Dedekind, 58
unique factorization, 13
element
integral over a ring, 15
irreducible, 13
prime, 13
extension
of an ideal, 6
faithfully at, 30
at, 30
generate
an algebra, 2
height, 63
of a prime ideal, 11
homomorphism
nite, 2
nite type, 2
of algebras, 2
of presheaves, 67
of sheaves, 67
ideal, 2
generated by a subset, 3
irreducible, 57
maximal, 3
minimal prime, 56
primary, 55
prime, 3
principal, 3
radical, 4
idempotent, 2
trivial, 2
identity element, 1
integral closure, 17
lemma
Gausss, 13
Nakayamas, 10
Zariskis, 41
limit
direct, 24
map
bilinear, 25
regular, 68
module
artinian, 58
nitely presented, 35
noetherian, 8
monomial, 15
morphism
of locally ringed spaces, 67
of ringed spaces, 67
multiplicative subset, 3
nilpotent, 4
nilradical, 4
nonsingular, 70
orthogonal idempotents, 2
complete set of, 2
polynomial
primitive, 14
presheaf, 67
primary, 55
74
INDEX 75
radical
Jacobson, 5
of an ideal, 4
regular, 70
relations
between generators, 35
relatively prime, 6
ring
artinian, 58
integrally closed, 17
Jacobson, 45
local, 5
noetherian, 8
of regular functions, 68
reduced, 4
regular local, 64
ringed space, 67
locally, 67
saturated multiplicative set, 24
set
directed, 24
sheaf, 67
singular, 70
smooth, 70
space
afne algebraic, 68
tangent, 69
spectrum, 45
stalk, 67
subring, 1
symbolic power, 60
system
direct, 24
tensor product
of algebras, 27
of modules, 26
theorem
Chinese remainder, 6
generic atness, 33
Hilbert basis, 9
Krull intersection, 12
Krulls principal ideal, 61
Noether normalization, 18
Nullstellensatz, 42
strong Nullstellensatz, 42
topological space
irreducible , 47
noetherian, 46
quasicompact, 46
topology
Zariski, 44
unit, 1
variety
afne algebraic, 69

Jmilne CA

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Jmilne CA

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

A Primer of Commutative Algebra

. Throughout ring means commutative

and is closed under addition,

=0, the map k A is injective,

for the multiplicative monoid A{0] and A

: However, the map a

{m[ m maximal in A]:

using standard properties of determinants.

== .a/.t / .b/.s/ =0;

N can be written as a nite sum

N; .x; y/ x y/ has the correct universal property because any bilin-

M is a functor from left

M; N/; N a B-module. (9)

is the tensor product of the k-algebras kX

N need not be injective. For example, when we tensor the

N may be zero even when neither M nor N is nonzero. For example,

is an exact functor, i.e.,

N, which is zero by assumption; because A B is faithfully at, this

M is at (resp. faithfully at) as a B-module.

N is at, and let N

N is injective. Thus M is at.

, which shows that d

which shows that, if d

B and the B-module B

M, because, for example,

B has an B-linear section, namely, f.b b

M, which proves the second statement.

M =0, we see that '.m/B =B.

B. Then for some nonzero

B is a nitely generated F-algebra, the Noether normalization theorem

B. To see this, note that F

B is the ring of fractions of B

B is injective. On identifying B with its image, we arrive at the situation

k.p/ form a basis. Then the map

k.q// =r. Thus

to the map mt f.m/g.t /: M

M A denote the evaluation map f mf.m/.

N denes an A-linear map

N. As x =x 1 maps to x .1/ under T N , this shows

. The linear map : AMM

. Therefore M is a direct summand of a free module of nite rank.

is projective, and if M is reexive, then M ..M

1 is divisible by a monic irreducible polynomial distinct from p

are exactly the ideals .X

because p is radical. For the reverse inclusion, let g pkx

{prime ideals of height 0]:

{prime ideals of height 1 containing .a

B, starting with the case of Krull dimension 1. Recall that this

B, and so we can apply the

{p [ p S]. It follows from

O.U/ (limit over open neighbourhoods of v/:

of O at v is a local ring for all v V , then .V; O/ is called a locally

is a local homomorphism for all v.

.D/ such that f

.U/ to be the set of families .f

.U/, instead of taking all principal open subsets of U, it sufces to

Anda mungkin juga menyukai