Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Nullstellensatz roadmap #4

Open
kbuzzard opened this issue Jan 19, 2020 · 7 comments
Open

Nullstellensatz roadmap #4

kbuzzard opened this issue Jan 19, 2020 · 7 comments

Comments

@kbuzzard
Copy link
Collaborator

High-level idea:

  1. Prove Zariski's Lemma following McCabe, Amer. Math Monthly, Vol 83 No 7 (1976), p560-561
  2. Prove weak NSS in the usual way from Zariski's Lemma
  3. Prove NSS using Rabinowitsch's trick (see e.g. Miles Reid's book).
@kbuzzard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

kbuzzard commented Jan 19, 2020

Zariski's Lemma: if k is a field (surely integral domain? Ed) and R=k[x_1,x_2,...,x_n] is an integral domain finitely generated as a k-algebra, which happens to be a field, then R/k is algebraic. Note that k[x_1,x_2,...,x_n] just means "the ring generated by k and the x_i", it's not necessarily a polynomial ring (it is a quotient of a polynomial ring).

[actually an integral domain won't do -- if k is the p-adic integers then R can be the p-adic numbers with x_1=1/p.]

@kbuzzard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

McCabe's proof:

  1. re-arrange the x_i such that the map from the abstract poly ring k[X_1,X_2,...,X_t] -> R sending X_i to x_i is injective, and each x_j for j>t is algebraic over k(X_1,X_2,...,X_t). See https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/116395-maths/topic/Algebraic.20geometry.20course/near/186047827

@kbuzzard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

kbuzzard commented Jan 19, 2020

Now set S=k[x_1,x_2,...,x_t], so S is a polynomial ring and each for each i>t, x_i satisfies an algebraic equation over the field of fractions of S. Hence there's some non-zero y in S such that each yx_i is integral over S; hence each x_i is integral over S[1/y], the abstract localisation (regarded as a subring of the field R).

@kbuzzard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

kbuzzard commented Jan 19, 2020

Hence R is integral over S[1/y], and because R is a field, S[1/y] must also be a field! This is Prop 5.7 in Atiyah--Macdonald.

@kbuzzard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Now this looks fishy. Say the result is false and so t>0. Let m be a max ideal of S; then because S isn't s a field, m has a non-zero element f. In the field S[1/y], f is invertible and it's not hard to deduce from this that some power of y is in m, and hence y is in m. Hence y is in every maximal ideal of S.

@kbuzzard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This means that 1+y is in no maximal ideal of S and is hence a unit. But the units of S are just k^*, so y is in k, and it's non-zero, so S[1/y]=S and S is a field, formally a contradiction.

@kbuzzard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Here's a proof of prop 5.7 of AM: if R is a field and A is a subring such that R is integral over A, then A is also a field. It suffices to prove that if x,y are elements of R with xy=1 and x in A, then y must also be in A. For certainly y is in R, and thus satisfies some monic polynomial with coefficients in A, of degree n say; now multiply by x^{n-1} and re-arrange to see that y is a sum of elements of A.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant