arnaucube
arnaucube/mathPublic Self-hosted repository
math/commutative-algebra-notes.tex
commutative-algebra-notes.texRaw
  1\documentclass{article}
  2\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
  3\usepackage{amsfonts}
  4% \usepackage{yfonts} % WIP
  5\usepackage{amsthm}
  6\usepackage{amsmath}
  7\usepackage{enumerate}
  8\usepackage{hyperref}
  9\usepackage{amssymb}
 10\usepackage{tikz} % diagram
 11
 12\begin{filecontents}[overwrite]{commutative-algebra-notes.bib}
 13@misc{am,
 14  author = {M. F. Atiyah and I. G. MacDonald},
 15  title = {{Introduction to Commutative Algebra}},
 16  year = {1969}
 17}
 18@misc{reid,
 19  author = {Miles Reid},
 20  title = {{Undergraduate Commutative Algebra}},
 21  year = {1995}
 22}
 23@misc{mit-course,
 24  author = {Steven Kleiman},
 25  title = {{Commutative Algebra - MIT OpenCourseWare}},
 26  year = {2008},
 27  note = {\url{https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/18-705-commutative-algebra-fall-2008/}},
 28  url = {https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/18-705-commutative-algebra-fall-2008/}
 29}
 30\end{filecontents}
 31\nocite{*}
 32
 33
 34\theoremstyle{definition}
 35
 36\newtheorem{innerdefn}{Definition}
 37\newenvironment{defn}[1]
 38{\renewcommand\theinnerdefn{#1}\innerdefn}
 39{\endinnerdefn}
 40
 41\newtheorem{innerthm}{Theorem}
 42\newenvironment{thm}[1]
 43{\renewcommand\theinnerthm{#1}\innerthm}
 44{\endinnerthm}
 45
 46\newtheorem{innerlemma}{Lemma}
 47\newenvironment{lemma}[1]
 48{\renewcommand\theinnerlemma{#1}\innerlemma}
 49{\endinnerlemma}
 50
 51\newtheorem{innerprop}{Proposition}
 52\newenvironment{prop}[1]
 53{\renewcommand\theinnerprop{#1}\innerprop}
 54{\endinnerprop}
 55
 56\newtheorem{innercor}{Corollary}
 57\newenvironment{cor}[1]
 58{\renewcommand\theinnercor{#1}\innercor}
 59{\endinnercor}
 60
 61\newtheorem{innereg}{Example}
 62\newenvironment{eg}[1]
 63{\renewcommand\theinnereg{#1}\innereg}
 64{\endinnereg}
 65
 66\newtheorem{innerex}{Exercise}
 67\newenvironment{ex}[1]
 68{\renewcommand\theinnerex{#1}\innerex}
 69{\endinnerex}
 70
 71\newcommand{\aA}{\mathfrak{a}} % TODO: use goth font
 72\newcommand{\mM}{\mathfrak{m}}
 73
 74\title{Commutative Algebra notes}
 75\author{arnaucube}
 76\date{}
 77
 78\begin{document}
 79
 80\maketitle
 81
 82\begin{abstract}
 83    Notes taken while studying Commutative Algebra, mostly from Atiyah \& MacDonald book \cite{am} and Reid's book \cite{reid}.
 84
 85    Usually while reading books and papers I take handwritten notes in a notebook, this document contains some of them re-written to $LaTeX$.
 86
 87    The proofs may slightly differ from the ones from the books, since I try to extend them for a deeper understanding.
 88\end{abstract}
 89
 90\tableofcontents
 91
 92\section{Ideals}
 93
 94\subsection{Definitions}
 95
 96\begin{defn}{ideal}
 97  $I \subset R$ ($R$ ring) such that $0 \in I$ and $\forall x \in I,~ r \in R,~ xr, rx \in I$.\\
 98  \hspace*{2em} ie. $I$ absorbs products in $R$.
 99\end{defn}
100
101\begin{defn}{prime ideal}
102  if $a, b \in R$ with $ab \in P$ and $P \neq R$ ($P$ a prime ideal), implies $a in P$ or $b \in P$.
103\end{defn}
104
105\begin{defn}{principal ideal}
106  generated by a single element, $(a)$.
107
108  $(a)$: principal ideal, the set of all multiples $xa$ with $x \in R$.
109\end{defn}
110
111\begin{defn}{maximal ideal}
112  $\mM \subset A$ ($A$ ring) with $m \neq A$ and there is no ideal $I$ strictly between $\mM$ and $A$. ie. if $\mM$ maximal and $\mM \subseteq I \subseteq A$, either $\mM=I$ or $I=A$.
113\end{defn}
114
115
116\begin{defn}{unit}
117  $x \in A$ such that $xy=1$ for some $y \in A$. ie. element \emph{which divides 1}.
118\end{defn}
119
120\begin{defn}{zerodivisor}
121  $x \in A$ such that $\exists 0 \neq y \in A$ such that $xy=0 \in A$. ie. $x$ \emph{divides 0}..
122
123
124  If a ring does not have zerodivisors is an integral domain.
125\end{defn}
126
127\begin{defn}{prime spectrum - $Spec(A)$}
128  set of prime ideals of $A$. ie.
129
130  $$Spec(A) = \{ P ~|~ P \subset A~ \text{is a prime ideal} \}$$
131\end{defn}
132
133\begin{defn}{integral domain}
134  Ring in which the product of any two nonzero elements is nonzero.
135
136  ie. no zerodivisors.
137
138  ie. $\forall~ 0 \neq a,~ 0 \neq b \in A,~ ab \neq 0 \in A$.
139
140  Every field is an integral domain, not the converse.
141\end{defn}
142
143\begin{defn}{principal ideal domain - PID}
144  integral domain in which every ideal is principal. ie.
145  ie. $\forall I \subset R,~ \exists~ a \in I$ such that $I = (a) = \{ ra ~|~ r \in R \}$.
146\end{defn}
147
148\begin{defn}{nilpotent}
149  $a \in A$ such that $a^n=0$ for some $n>0$.
150\end{defn}
151\begin{defn}{nilrad A}
152  set of all nilpotent elements of $A$; is an ideal of $A$.
153
154  if $nilrad A = 0 ~\Longrightarrow$ $A$ has no nonzero nilpotents.
155
156
157  $$nilrad A = \bigcap_{P \in Spec(A)} P$$
158\end{defn}
159
160\begin{defn}{idempotent}
161  $e \in A$ such that $e^2=e$.
162\end{defn}
163
164\begin{defn}{radical of an ideal}
165  $$rad I = \{ f \in A | f^n \in I~ \text{for some} n \}$$
166
167  $rad I$ is an ideal.
168
169  $nilrad A = rad 0$
170
171  $rad I = \bigcap_{\substack{P \in \operatorname{Spec}(A)\\ P \supset I}} P$
172\end{defn}
173
174\begin{defn}{local ring}
175  A \emph{local ring} has a unique maximal ideal.
176
177  Notation: locall ring $A$, its maximal ideal $\mM$, residue field $K=A/\mM$:
178  $$A \supset \mM ~\text{or}~ (A, \mM) ~\text{or}~ (A, \mM, K)$$
179\end{defn}
180
181\subsection{Lemmas, propositions and corollaries}
182\begin{thm}{AM.1.X}{Zorn's lemma} \label{zorn}
183  TODO
184\end{thm}
185
186\begin{thm}{AM.1.3} \label{1.3}
187  Every ring $A \neq 0$ has at lleast one maximal ideal.
188\end{thm}
189\begin{proof}
190  By Zorn's lemma \ref{zorn}.
191\end{proof}
192
193\begin{cor}{AM.1.4} \label{1.4}
194  if $I \neq (1)$ an ideal of $A$, $\exists$ a maximal ideal of $A$ containing $I$.
195\end{cor}
196
197\begin{cor}{AM.1.5} \label{1.5}
198  Every non-unit of $A$ is contained in a maximal ideal.
199\end{cor}
200
201\begin{defn}{Jacobson radical}
202  The \emph{Jacobson radical} of a ring $A$ is the intersection of all the maximal ideals of $A$.
203
204  Denoted $Jac(A)$.
205  
206  $Jac(A)$ is an ideal of $A$.
207\end{defn}
208
209\begin{prop}{AM.1.9} \label{1.9}
210  $x \in Jac(A)$ iff $(1 - xy)$ is a unit in $A$, $\forall y \in A$.
211\end{prop}
212\begin{proof}
213  Suppose $1-xy$ not a unit.
214
215  By \ref{1.5}, $1-xy \in \mM$ for $\mM$ some maximal ideal.
216
217  But $x \in Jac(A) \subseteq \mM$, since $Jac(A)$ is the intersection of all maximal ideals of $A$.
218
219  Hence $xy \in \mM$, and therefore $1 \in \mM$, which is absurd, thus $1-xy$ is a unit.
220
221  Conversely:\\
222  Suppose $x \not\in \mM$ for some maximal ideal $\mM$.
223
224  Then $\mM$ and $x$ generte the unit ideal $(1)$, so that we have $u + xy = 1$ for some $u \in \mM$ and some $y \in A$.
225
226  Hence $1 -xy \in \mM$, and is therefore not a unit.
227\end{proof}
228
229\section{Modules}
230
231\subsection{Modules}
232
233Let $A$ be a ring. An $A$-module is an Abelian group $M$ with a multiplication
234map
235\begin{align*}
236  A \times M &\longrightarrow M\\
237  (f, m) &\longmapsto fm
238\end{align*}
239satisfying $\forall~ f,g \in A,~~ m, n \in M$.
240\begin{enumerate}[i.]
241  \item $f(m \pm n)=fm \pm fn$
242  \item $(f \pm g) m = fm \pm gm$
243  \item $(fg) m = f(gm)$
244  \item $1_A m = m$
245\end{enumerate}
246
247Let $\psi: M \longrightarrow M$ an $A$-linear endomorphism of $M$.\\
248$A[\psi] \subset End M$ is the subring geneerated by $A$ and the action of $\psi$.
249\begin{itemize}
250\item since $\psi$ is $A$-linear, $A[\psi]$ is a commutative ring.
251\item $M$ is a module over $A[\psi]$, so $\psi$ beomes multiplication by a ring element.
252\end{itemize}
253
254\subsection{Cayley-Hamilton theorem, Nakayama lemma, and corollaries}
255
256\begin{prop}{AM.2.4}(Cayley-Hamilton Theorem) \label{2.4}
257  Let $M$ a fingen $A$-module. Let $\aA$ an ideal of $A$, let $\psi$ an
258  $A$-module endomorphism of $M$ such that $\psi(M) \subseteq \aA M$.
259
260  Then $\psi$ satisfies
261  
262  $$\psi^n + a_1 \psi^{n-1} + \ldots + a_{n-1} \psi + a_n = 0$$
263
264  with $a_i \in \aA$.
265\end{prop}
266\begin{proof}
267  Since $M$ fingen, let $\{ x_1, \ldots, x_n \}$ be generators of $M$.\\
268  By hypothesis, $\psi(M) \subseteq \aA M$; so for any generator $x_i$, it's image $\psi(x_i) \in \aA M$.
269
270  Any element in $\aA M$ is a linear combination of the generators with coefficients in the ideal $\aA$, thus
271  $$\psi(x_i)= \sum_{j=1}^n a_{ij} x_j$$
272  with $a_{ij} \in \aA$.
273  
274  Thus, for a module with $n$ generators, we have $n$ different $\psi(x_i)$ equations:
275
276  $$
277  \left.
278  \begin{aligned}
279    \psi(x_1) &= a_{1,1} x_1 + a_{1,2} x_2 + \ldots + a_{1,n} x_n\\
280    \psi(x_2) &= a_{2,1} x_1 + a_{2,2} x_2 + \ldots + a_{2,n} x_n\\
281    \ldots\\
282    \psi(x_n) &= a_{n,1} x_1 + a_{n,2} x_2 + \ldots + a_{n,n} x_n
283  \end{aligned}
284  \right\}
285  \begin{aligned}
286      &\text{n elements $\psi(x_i) \in \aA M$ which}\\
287      &\text{are linear combinations of the}\\
288      &\text{$n$ generators of $M$}
289  \end{aligned}
290  $$
291  
292  Next step: rearrange in order to use matrix algebra.
293
294  Observe that each row equals $0$, and rearranging the elements at each row we get
295
296  \begin{align*}
297    &\psi(x_1) - (a_{1,1} x_1 + a_{1,2} x_2 + \ldots + a_{1,n} x_n) = 0\\
298    &\psi(x_2) - (a_{2,1} x_1 + a_{2,2} x_2 + \ldots + a_{2,n} x_n) = 0\\
299    &\ldots\\
300    &\psi(x_n) - (a_{n,1} x_1 + a_{n,2} x_2 + \ldots + a_{n,n} x_n) = 0
301  \end{align*}
302
303  Then, group the $x_i$ terms together; as example, take the row $i=1$:
304    $$(\psi - a_{1,1})x_1 - a_{1,2} x_2 - \ldots - a_{1,n} x_n = 0$$
305
306    for $i=2$:
307    $$-a_{2,1} x_1 + (\psi - a_{2,2}) x_2 - \ldots - a_{2,n} x_n = 0$$
308    
309  So, $\forall i \in [n]$, as a matrix:
310  
311  $$
312  \begin{pmatrix}
313    \psi - a_{1,1} & -a_{1,2} & \ldots & -a_{1,n}\\
314    -a_{2,1} & \psi-a_{2,2} & \ldots & -a_{2,n}\\
315    \vdots\\
316    -a_{n,1} & -a_{n,2} & \ldots & \psi-a_{n,n}\\
317  \end{pmatrix}
318  \begin{pmatrix}
319    x_1\\ x_2\\ \vdots\\ x_n
320  \end{pmatrix}
321  =
322  \begin{pmatrix}
323    0\\ 0\\ \vdots\\ 0
324  \end{pmatrix}
325  $$
326
327
328  
329  Denote the previous matrix by $\Phi$. Let $m$ denote the vector $(x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_n)^T$ (ie. the vector of generators of the $A$-module $M$).\\
330  \hspace*{4em}Then we can write the previous equality as
331  \begin{equation}
332    \Phi \cdot m = 0
333    \label{eq:2.4.1}
334  \end{equation}
335
336  We know that
337  \begin{equation}
338    adj(\Phi) \Phi = det(\Phi) I
339    \label{eq:2.4.2}
340  \end{equation}
341  (aka. fundamental identity for the adjugate matrix).
342
343  So if at \eqref{eq:2.4.1} we multiply both sides by $adj(\Phi)$,
344  \begin{align*}
345    adj(\Phi) \cdot \Phi \cdot &m = 0\\
346    (\text{recall from \eqref{eq:2.4.2}:}~ &det(\Phi)\cdot I ~)\\
347    =det(\Phi) \cdot I \cdot &m = 0
348  \end{align*}
349
350  Thus,
351  \begin{align*}
352    det(\Phi) \cdot I \cdot &m = 0\\
353  \begin{pmatrix}
354    det(\Phi) & 0 & \ldots & 0\\
355    0 & det(\Phi) & \ldots & 0\\
356    \vdots\\
357    0 & 0 & \ldots & det(\Phi)
358  \end{pmatrix}
359  \cdot
360  &\begin{pmatrix}
361    x_1\\ x_2\\ \vdots\\ x_n
362  \end{pmatrix}
363                              =
364  \begin{pmatrix}
365    0\\ 0\\ \vdots\\ 0
366  \end{pmatrix}
367  \end{align*}
368
369  $\Longrightarrow$
370  \begin{equation}
371    det(\Phi) \cdot x_i = 0 ~~\forall i \in [n]
372    \label{eq:2.4.3}
373  \end{equation}
374
375  ie. $det(\Phi)$ is an \emph{annihilator} of the generators $x_i$ of $M$, thus of the entire module $M$.
376
377
378  So, we're interested into calculating the $det(\Phi)$.
379
380  By the Leibniz formula,
381  $$\det(A) = \sum_{\sigma \in S_n} sgn(\sigma) \prod_{i=1}^n a_{i, \sigma(i)}$$
382
383  thus,
384  $$det(\Phi) = \underbrace{(\psi - a_{11}) (\psi - a_{22}) \ldots (\psi - a_{nn})}_{\text{diagonal of $\Phi$, leading term of the determinant}} - \ldots$$
385
386  The \emph{determinant trick} is that the terms that go after the "leading term of the determinant", will belong to $\aA$ and their combinations with $\psi$ will not be bigger than $\psi^n$. Furthermore, when expanding it
387  \begin{itemize}
388    \item highest power is $1 \cdot \psi^n$
389    \item coefficient of $\psi^{n-1}$ is $-( \underbrace{ a_{11} + a_{22} + \ldots + a_{nn} }_{a_1})$,\\
390      where, since each $a_{ii} \in \aA,~~ a_1 \in \aA$
391    \item the rest of coefficients of $\psi^k$ are also elements in $\aA$
392  \end{itemize}
393
394  So we have
395  $$det(\Phi) = \psi^n + a_1 \psi^{n-1} + a_2 \psi^{n-2} + \ldots + a_{n-1} \psi + a_n$$
396  with $a_i \in \aA$.
397
398  \vspace{0.5cm}
399
400  Now, notice that we had $det(\Phi) \cdot x_i = 0 ~\forall~ i\in [n]$.
401
402  % next part might be removed
403  Since $M$ is a fingen $A$-module, any element $m \in M$ can be written as a linear combination of $M$'s generators $x_i$, ie.
404  $$m = r_1 x_1 + r_2 x_2 + \ldots r_n x_n \in M$$
405
406  If we multiply $m \in M$ by $d = det(\Phi)$,
407  \begin{align*}
408    d \cdot m &= d \cdot (r_1 x_1 + r_2 x_2 + \ldots r_n x_n)\\
409              &= r_1(d \cdot x_1) + r_2 (d \cdot x_2) + \ldots + r_n (d \cdot x_n)\\
410    (\text{every}~ &d \cdot x_i = det(\Phi)x_i = 0 ~\forall~ i)\\
411              &= r_1 (0) + \ldots + r_n (0)\\
412              &= 0
413  \end{align*}
414
415  Therefore, $det(\Phi) \cdot m = 0$.
416  % end of might be removed
417
418  The matrix $\Phi$ is the \emph{characteristic matrix}, $xI-A$, viewed as an operator. Then,
419  $$det(\Phi) = det(xI-A) = p(x)$$
420  where $p(x)$ is the \emph{characteristic polynomial}.
421
422  If a linear transformation turns every basis vector ($x_i$) into zero, then that transformation is the zero transformation. So in our case, $det(\Phi)$ is the zero transformation, thus $det(\Phi)=0$.
423  Therefore,
424  $$\psi^n + a_1 \psi^{n-1} + a_2 \psi^{n-2} + \ldots + a_{n-1} \psi + a_n = 0$$
425
426
427  %%%%%% OLD START
428
429  % \vspace{3cm}
430  % 
431  % Kronecker delta:
432  % $\delta_{ij} =
433  % \begin{cases}
434  %   1 & \text{if } i = j,\\
435  %   0 & \text{otherwise}
436  % \end{cases}$
437  % 
438  % With the Kronecker delta, $\psi(x_i)$ can be expressed as
439  % $$\psi(x_i) = \sum_{j=1}^n \delta_{ij} \psi(x_j)$$
440  % so the previous matrix can be characterized as
441  % $$\sum_{j=1}^n (\delta_{ij} \psi - a_{ij}) x_j = 0$$
442  % 
443  % The entries of the matrix are \emph{endomorphisms} (elements of the ring $A[\psi]$)
444  % \begin{itemize}
445  %   \item the term $(\psi - a_{11})$ is an operator that acts on $x_1$; as $(\psi(x_1)-a_{11}\cdot x_1)$
446  %   \item the term $(-a_{12})$ is an operator that acts on $x_2$; as multiplication by it, ie. $(-a_{12} \cdot x_2)$
447  % \end{itemize}
448  % 
449  % We need a single element $x \in A$ that \emph{annihilates} every $m \in M$ simultaneously, ie. $xM=0$. We're going to use the determinant for getting $x$.
450  % 
451  % Since $A$ is a commutative ring, and $\psi$ commutes with any $a \in A$,
452  % the ring of operators $A[\psi]$ is a commutative ring.
453  % 
454  % $\Longrightarrow~$ so we can treat the matrix as a matrix of real numbers and calculate its determinant.
455  % 
456  % 
457  % \vspace{0.75cm}
458  % This is called \emph{"the determinant trick"}.\\
459  % We're interested in the determinant because it is the only way to turn a system of multiple equations in a single scalar-like equation that describes the endomorphism $\psi$.\\
460  % $\rightarrow$ Because in module theory, we lack of "division", so can not "solve for $\psi$" the system of equations.\\
461  % $\rightarrow$ The determinant provides a way to find a polynomial that \emph{annihilates} the module; the \emph{characteristic polynomial}, which related $\psi$ to the ideal $\aA$
462  % 
463  % $$det(M) \cdot x_i = 0~~ \forall i$$
464  % where $x_i$ are the generators of $M$.
465  % 
466  % Use $\Phi$ to denote the previous matrix. The determinant is the only function that can take that matrix $\Phi$ and produce a single scalar $x=det(\Phi)$ such that the following identity holds: $adj(\Phi)\cdot \Phi=det(\Phi) \cdot \aA$.
467  % \vspace{0.5cm}
468  % 
469  % Since $det(M)$ kills every generator, it must kill every element in $M$\\
470  % $\Longrightarrow~~ det(M)$ is the zero map.
471  % 
472  % Leibniz formula of the determinant of an $n \times n$ matrix:
473  % $$
474  % det(M) = \sum_{\sigma \in S_n} sign(\sigma) \prod_{i=1}^n M_{i, \sigma(i)}
475  % $$
476  % 
477  % so,
478  % $$(\psi - a_{11}) (\psi - a_{22}) \ldots (\psi - a_{nn})$$
479  % expanding it,
480  % \begin{itemize}
481  %   \item highest power is $1 \cdot \psi^n$
482  %   \item coefficient of $\psi^{n-1}$ is $-( \underbrace{ a_{11} + a_{22} + \ldots + a_{nn} }_{a_1})$,\\
483  %     where, since each $a_{ii} \in \aA,~~ a_1 \in \aA$
484  %   \item the rest of coefficients of $\psi^k$ are also elements in $\aA$
485  % \end{itemize}
486  % 
487  % So we have
488  % $$p(\psi) = \psi^n + a_1 \psi^{n-1} + a_2 \psi^{n-2} + \ldots + a_{n-1} \psi + a_n$$
489  % with $a_i \in \aA$.
490  % 
491  % Since this determinant annihilates the generators (ie. $det(M)x_i=0$), the resulting enddomorphism $p(\psi)$ is the zero map on the entire module $M$, so:
492  % $$\psi^n + a_1 \psi^{n-1} + a_2 \psi^{n-2} + \ldots + a_{n-1} \psi + a_n = 0$$
493  % with $a_i \in \aA$, as stated in the Cayley-Hamilton theorem.
494  
495  %%%%% OLD END
496\end{proof}
497
498
499\vspace{0.5cm}
500
501\begin{cor}{AM.2.5} \label{2.5}
502  Let $M$ a fingen $A$-module, let $\aA$ an ideal of $A$ such that $\aA M = M$.
503
504  Then, $\exists~ x \equiv 1 \pmod \aA$ such that $xM = 0$.
505\end{cor}
506\begin{proof}
507  take $\psi = \text{identity}$. Then in Cayley-Hamilton (\ref{2.4}):
508  \begin{align*}
509    &\psi^n + a_1 \psi^{n-1} + a_2 \psi^{n-2} + \ldots + a_{n-1} \psi + a_n = 0\\
510    \Longrightarrow~ &id_M + a_1 id_M + a_2 id_M + \ldots + a_{n-1} id_M + a_n = 0\\
511    \Longrightarrow~ &(1 + a_1 + \ldots + a_n) id_M = 0
512  \end{align*}
513  apply it to $m \in M$, where since $id_M(m)=m$ (by definition of the identity), we then have
514  $$(1 + a_1 + \ldots + a_n) \cdot m = 0$$
515  with $a_i \in \aA$.
516
517  \begin{enumerate}[\text{part} i.]
518    \item $xM=0$:\\
519      Thus the scalar $x = (1 + a_1 + \ldots + a_n)$ annihilates every $m \in M$, ie. the entire module $M$.
520
521    \item $x \equiv 1 \pmod \aA$:\\
522      $x \equiv 1 \pmod \aA ~~ \Longleftrightarrow (x-1) \in \aA$\\
523      then from $x = (1 + \underbrace{a_1 + \ldots + a_n}_b) \in \aA$, set $b=a_1 + \ldots + a_n$,\\
524      so that $x=(1+b) \in \aA$.\\
525
526      Then $x-1 = (1+b)-1 = b \in \aA$\\
527      so $x-1 \in \aA$, thus $x \equiv 1 \pmod \aA$ as stated.
528  \end{enumerate}
529\end{proof}
530
531
532
533\begin{prop}{AM.2.6}{Nakayama's lemma} \label{2.6}
534  Let $M$ a fingen $A$-module, let $\aA$ an ideal of $A$ such that $\aA \subseteq Jac(A)$.
535
536  Then $\aA M = M$ implies $M=0$.
537\end{prop}
538\begin{proof}
539  By \ref{2.5}: since $\aA M = M$, we have $x M =0$ for some $x \equiv 1 \pmod {Jac(A)}$. (notice that at \ref{2.5} is $\pmod \aA$ but here we use $\pmod {Jac(A)}$, since we have $\aA \subseteq Jac(A)$).
540
541  (recall \ref{1.9}: $x \in Jac(A)$ iff $(1 - xy)$ is a unit in $A$, $\forall y \in A$).\\
542  By \ref{1.9}, $x$ is a unit in $A$ (thus $x^{-1}\cdot x=1$).
543
544  Hence $M = x^{-1} \cdot \underbrace{x~ \cdot M}_{=0~ \text{(by \ref{2.5})}} = 0$.
545
546  Thus, if $\aA M = M$ then $M=0$.
547\end{proof}
548
549
550
551\begin{cor}{AM.2.7} \label{2.7}
552  Let $M$ a fingen $A$-module, let $N \subseteq M$ a submodule of $M$, let $\aA \subseteq Jac(A)$ an ideal.
553
554  Then $M = \aA M + N \stackrel{\text{implies}}{\Longrightarrow} M=N$.
555\end{cor}
556\begin{proof}
557  The idea is to apply Nakayama (\ref{2.6}) to $M/N$.
558
559  Since $M$ fingen $\Longrightarrow~~ M/N$ is fingen and an $A$-module.
560
561  Since $\aA \subseteq Jac(A) ~\Longrightarrow~$ Nakayama applies to $M/N$ too.
562
563  By definition,
564  $$\aA M = \left\{ \sum a_i \cdot m_i ~~|~~ a_i \in \aA, m_i \in M \right\}$$
565  where $m_i$ are the generators of $M$.
566
567  Then, for $M/N$,
568  $$\aA (\frac{M}{N}) = \left\{ \sum a_i \cdot (m_i + N) ~~|~~ a_i \in \aA, m_i \in M \right\}$$
569
570  observe that $a_i(m_i+N)= a_i m_i +N$, thus
571  $$\sum_i a_i \cdot (m_i + N) = \underbrace{(\sum_i a_i \cdot m_i)}_{\in \aA M} + N \in \aA M + N$$
572
573  Hence,
574
575  \begin{equation}
576    \aA (\frac{M}{N}) = \left\{ x + N ~~|~~ x \in \aA M \right\} = \aA M + N
577    \label{eq:2.7.1}
578  \end{equation}
579
580  By definition, if we take $\frac{\aA M + N}{N}$, then
581  $$\frac{\aA M + N}{N} = \left\{ y + N ~~|~~ y \in \aA M +N \right\} = \aA M + N$$
582
583  thus every $y \in \aA M +N$ can be written as
584  $$y=x+n,~~ \text{with}~ x \in \aA M,~ n\in N$$
585  which comes from \eqref{eq:2.7.1}.
586
587  Thus, $y + N = (x+n)+N = x+N$, since $n \in N$ is zero in the quotient.
588  
589  Hence, every element of $\frac{\aA M +N}{N}$ has the form
590  $$\frac{\aA M + N}{N} = \left\{ x + N ~~|~~ x \in \aA M \right\}$$
591  as in \eqref{eq:2.7.1}.
592
593  Thus
594  \begin{equation}
595    \aA (\frac{M}{N}) = \aA M + N = \frac{\aA M +N}{N}
596    \label{eq:2.7.2}
597  \end{equation}
598
599  By the Collorary assumption, $M = \aA M + N$; quotient it by $N$:
600  \begin{equation}
601    \frac{M}{N} = \frac{\aA M +N}{N}
602  \label{eq:2.7.3}
603  \end{equation}
604
605  So, from \eqref{eq:2.7.2} and \eqref{eq:2.7.3}:
606  $$\aA (\frac{M}{N}) = \aA M +N = \frac{\aA M +N}{N} = \frac{M}{N}$$
607  thus, $\aA (\frac{M}{N}) = \frac{M}{N}$.
608
609  By Nakayama's lemma \ref{2.6}, if $\aA (\frac{M}{N}) = \frac{M}{N} ~\stackrel{implies}{\Longrightarrow}~ \frac{M}{N}=0$
610
611  Note that
612  $$\frac{M}{N} = \{ m + N ~|~ m \in M \}$$
613  (the zero element in $\frac{M}{N}$ is the coset $N=0+N$)
614
615  Then, $\frac{M}{N}=0$ means that the quotient has exactly one element, the zero coset $N$.
616
617  Thus, every coset $m + N$ equals the zero coset $N$, so $m-0 \in N ~\Longrightarrow~ m \in N$.
618
619  Hence every $m \in M$ lies in $N$, ie. $\forall m \in M,~ m \in N$.
620
621  So $M \subseteq N$. But notice that by the Corollary, we had $N \subseteq M$, therefore $M = N$.
622
623  Thus, if $M = \aA M + N \stackrel{implies}{\Longrightarrow} M = N$.
624\end{proof}
625
626
627
628\begin{prop}{AM.2.8} \label{2.8}
629  Let $x_i \forall i \in [n]$ be elements of $M$ whose images $\frac{M}{m M}$ from a basis of this vecctor space. Then the $x_i$ generate $M$.
630\end{prop}
631\begin{proof}
632  Let $N$ submodule $M$, generated by the $x_i$.
633
634  Then the composite map $N \longrightarrow M \longrightarrow \frac{M}{m M}$ maps $N$ onto $\frac{M}{m M}$, hence $N + \aA M = M$, which by \ref{2.7} implies $N = M$.
635\end{proof}
636
637
638\begin{prop}{AM.2.10} \label{2.10}
639  Split exact sequence. TODO
640\end{prop}
641
642\section{Noetherian rings}
643
644\begin{defn}{}{Ascending Chain Condition}
645  A partially orddered set $\Sigma$ has the \emph{ascending chain condition} (a.c.c.) if every chain
646  $$s_1 \leq s_2 \leq \ldots \leq s_k \leq \ldots$$
647  eventually breaks off, that is, $s_k = s_{k+1} = \ldots$ for some $k$.
648\end{defn}
649
650$\Longrightarrow~ \Sigma$ has the a.c.c. iff every non-empty subset $S \subset \Sigma$ has a maximal element.\\
651\hspace*{2em} if $\empty \neq S \subset \Sigma$ does not have a maximal element, choose $s_1 \in S$, and for each $s_k$, an element $s_{k+1}$ with $s_k < s_{k+1}$, thus contradicting the a.c.c.
652
653\begin{defn}{R.3.2}{Noetherian ring}
654  Let $A$ a ring; 3 equivalent conditions:
655  \begin{enumerate}[i.]
656    \item the set $\Sigma$ of ideals of $A$ has the a.c.c.; in other words, every increasing chain of ideals
657      $$I_1 \subset I_2 \subset \ldots \subset I_k \subset \ldots$$
658      eventually stops, that is $I_k = I_{k+1}=\ldots$ for some $k$.
659    \item every nonempty set $S$ of iddeals has a maximal element
660    \item every iddeal $I \subset A$ is finitely generated
661  \end{enumerate}
662  If these conditions hold, then $A$ is \emph{Noetherian}.
663\end{defn}
664\begin{proof}
665  TODO
666\end{proof}
667
668\begin{defn}{R.3.4.D}{Noetherian modules}
669  An $A$-module $M$ is Noetherian if the submoles of $M$ have the a.c.c.,\\
670  that is, ay increasing chain
671  $$M_1 \subset M_2 \subset \ldots \subset M_k \subset \ldots$$
672  of submodules eventually stops.
673\end{defn}
674
675As in with rings, it is equivalent to say that
676\begin{enumerate}[i.]
677  \item any nonempty set of modulesof $M$ has a maximal element
678  \item every submodule of $M$ is finite
679\end{enumerate}
680
681
682
683\begin{prop}{R.3.4.P}
684  Let $0 \longrightarrow L \xrightarrow{\ \alpha \ } M \xrightarrow{\ \beta \ } N \longrightarrow 0$ be a s.e.s. (split exact sequence, \ref{2.10}).
685
686  Then, $M$ is Noetherian $\Longleftrightarrow~ L$ and $N$ are Noetherian.
687\end{prop}
688\begin{proof}
689  $\Longrightarrow$: trivial, since ascending chains of submodules in $L$ and $N$ correspond one-to-one to certain chains in $M$.
690
691  $\Longleftarrow$: suppose $M_1 \subset M_2 \subset \ldots \subset M_k \subset \ldots$ is an increasing chain of submodules of $M$.
692
693  Then identifying $\alpha(L)$ with $L$ and taking intersection gives a chain
694  $$L \cap M_1 \subset L \cap M_2 \subset \ldots \subset L \cap M_k \subset \ldots$$
695  of submodules of $L$, and applying $\beta$ gives a chain
696  $$\beta(M_1) \subset \beta(M_2) \subset \ldots \beta(M_k) \subset \ldots$$
697  of submodules of $N$.
698
699  Each of these two chains eventually stop, by the assumption on $L$ and $N$, so that we only need to prove the following lemma which completes the proof.
700\end{proof}
701
702\begin{lemma}{R.3.4.L}
703  for submodules $M_1 \subset M_2 \subset M$,
704  $$L \cap M_1 = L \cap M_2 ~\text{and}~ \beta(M_1) = \beta(M_2) ~\Longrightarrow~ M_1 = M_2$$
705\end{lemma}
706\begin{proof}
707  if $m\in M_2$, then $\beta(m) \in \beta(M_1) = \beta(M_2)$, so that there is an $n \in M_1$ such that $\beta(m)=\beta(m)$.
708
709  Then $\beta(m-n)=0$, so that
710  $$m - n \in M_2 \cap ker(\beta)=M_1 \cap ker(\beta)$$
711
712  Hence $m \in M_1$, thus $M_1 = M_2$.
713\end{proof}
714
715\newpage
716
717\section{Exercises}
718
719For the exercises, I follow the assignements listed at \cite{mit-course}.
720
721The exercises that start with \textbf{R} are the ones from the book \cite{reid}, and the ones starting with \textbf{AM} are the ones from the book \cite{am}.
722
723\subsection{Exercises Chapter 1}
724
725\begin{ex}{R.1.1}
726  Ring $A$ and ideals $I, J$ such that $I \cup J$ is not an ideal. What's the smallest ideal containing $I$ and $J$?
727\end{ex}
728\begin{proof}
729  Take ring $A= \mathbb{Z}$. Set $I = 2 \mathbb{Z},~ J=3 \mathbb{Z}$.
730
731  $I,~J$ are ideals of $A$ ($=\mathbb{Z}$). And $I \cup J = 2 \mathbb{Z} \cup 3 \mathbb{Z}$.\\
732  Observe that for $2 \in I,~ 3 \in J ~\Longrightarrow~ 2,3 \in I \cup J$, but $2+3 = 5 \not\in I \cup J$.
733
734  Thus $I \cup J$ is not closed under addition; thus is not an ideal.
735
736
737  Smallest ideal of $\mathbb{Z}$ ($=A$) containing $I$ and $J$ is their sum:
738
739  $$I+J = \{ a+b | a \in I, b \in J \}$$
740
741  $gcd(2,3)=1$, so $I+J = \mathbb{Z}$.
742
743  Therefore, smallest ideal containing $I$ and $J$ is the whole ring $\mathbb{Z}$.
744\end{proof}
745
746\begin{ex}{R.1.5}
747  let $\psi: A \longrightarrow B$ a ring homomorphism. Prove that $\psi^{-1}$ takes prime ideals of $B$ to prime ideals of $A$.\\
748  In particular if $A \subset B$ and $P$ a prime ideal of $B$, then $A \cap P$ is a prime ideal of $A$.
749\end{ex}
750\begin{proof}
751  (Recall: prime ideal is if $a,b \in R$ and $a \cdot b \in P$ (with $R \neq P$), implies $a \in P$ or $b \in P$).
752
753  Let
754  $$\psi^{-1}(P) = \{ a \in A | \psi(a) \in P \} = A \cap P$$
755  The claim is that $\psi^{-1}(P)$ is prime iddeal of $A$.
756
757  \begin{enumerate}[i.]
758    \item show that $\psi^{-1}(P)$ is an ideal of $A$:\\
759      $0_A \in \psi^{-1}(P)$, since $\psi(0_A)=0_B \in P$ (since every ideal contains $0$).
760
761      If $a,b \in \psi^{-1}(P)$, then $\psi(a), \psi(b) \in P$, so
762      $$\psi(a-b)= \psi(a) - \psi(b) \in P$$
763      hence $a-b \in \psi^{-1}(P)$.
764
765      If $a \in \psi^{-1}(P)$ and $r \in A$, then $\psi(ra) = \psi(r) \psi(a) \in P$, since $P$ is an ideal.\\
766      Thus $ra \in \psi^{-1}(P)$.
767
768      $\Longrightarrow$ so $\psi^{-1}$ is an ideal of $A$.
769
770    \item show that $\psi^{-1}(P)$ is prime:\\
771      $\psi^{-1}(P) \neq A$, since if $\psi^{-1}(P)=A$, then $1_A \in \psi^{-1}(P)$, so $\psi(1_A)=1_B \in P$, which would mean that $P=B$, a contradiction since $P$ is prime ideal of $B$.
772
773      Take $a,b \in A$ with $ab \in \psi^{-1}(P)$; then $\psi(ab) \in P$, and since $\psi$ is a ring homomorphism, $\psi(ab) = \psi(a)\psi(b)$.
774
775      Since $P$ prime ideal, then $\psi(a)\psi(b) \in P$ implies either $\psi(a) \in P$ or $\psi(b) \in P$.\\
776      Thus $a \in \psi^{-1}(P)$ or $b \in \psi^{-1}(P)$.
777
778      Hence $\psi^{-1}(P)$ ($=A \cap P$) is a prime ideal of $A$.
779  \end{enumerate}
780\end{proof}
781
782
783\begin{ex}{R.1.6}
784  prove or give a counter example:
785  \begin{enumerate}[a.]
786    \item the intersection of two prime ideals is prime
787    \item the ideal $P_1+P_2$ generated by $2$ prime ideals $P_1,P_2$ is prime
788    \item if $\psi: A \longrightarrow B$ ring homomorphism, then $\psi^{-1}$ takes maximal ideals of $B$ to maximal ideals of $A$
789  \end{enumerate}
790\end{ex}
791\begin{proof}
792  \begin{enumerate}[a.]
793    \item let $I = 2 \mathbb{Z} = (2)$, $J = 3 \mathbb{Z} = (3)$ be ideals of $\mathbb{Z}$, both prime.
794
795      Then $I \cap J = (2) \cap (3) = (6)$.
796
797      The ideal $(6)$ is not prime in $\mathbb{Z}$, since $2 \cdot 3 \in (6)$, but $2 \neq (6)$ and $3 \neq (6)$.
798
799      Thus the intersection of two primes can not be prime.
800
801    \item $P_1=(2),~ P_2=(3)$, both prime.
802
803      Then,
804      $$P_1 + P_2 = (2)+(3)=\{ a+b | a \in P_1, b \in P_2 \}$$
805
806      $\longrightarrow~$ in a principal ideal domain (like $\mathbb{Z}$), the sum of two principal ideals is again principal, and given by $(m)+(n)=(gcd(m,n))$.
807
808      (recall: principal= generated by a single element)
809
810      So, $P_1+P_2= (2)+(3) = (gcd(2,3))=(1)=\mathbb{Z}$.
811
812      The whole ring is not a prime ideal (by the definition of the prime ideal), so $P_1+P_2$ is not a prime ideal.
813
814      Henceforth, the sum of two prime ideals is not necessarily prime.
815
816    \item let $A=\mathbb{Z},~ B=\mathbb{Q},~ \psi: A \longrightarrow B$.
817
818      Since $\mathbb{Q}$ is a field, its only maximal ideal is $(0)$.
819
820      Then
821      \begin{align*}
822        \psi^{-1}( (0) ) &= (0) \subset \mathbb{Z}\\
823        \text{ie.}~ \psi^{-1}( m_B ) &= (m_B) \subset A
824      \end{align*}
825
826      But $(0)$ is not maximal in $\mathbb{Z}$, because $\mathbb{Z}/(0) \cong \mathbb{Z}$ is not a field.
827
828      Thus the preimages of maximal ideals under arbitrary ring homomorphisms need not be maximal.
829  \end{enumerate}
830\end{proof}
831
832\subsection{Exercises Chapter 2}
833
834\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
835\bibliography{commutative-algebra-notes.bib}
836
837\end{document}