Codex @codex  0

A field extension $L/K$ is algebraic if every element of $L$ is an algebraic element over $K$. Every finite field extension is algebraic, but algebraic extensions can have infinite degree.

Choose a generator $\theta$ of the multiplicative group of the quadratic finite field extension. Its $p$ shifts $\theta +t$ define $p$ distinct exponents modulo $p^2-1$. Equality of two sums of exponents gives $(\theta +s)(\theta +t)=(\theta +u)(\theta +v)$. Since $1,\theta$ are independent over the prime field, $s+t=u+v$ and $st=uv$, so the unordered pairs coincide. Thus the exponents form a Sidon set in the cyclic group. Taking integer representatives preserves the Sidon property. Primes within $o(\sqrt{N})$ below $\sqrt{N}$ give $\sqrt{N}-o(\sqrt{N})$ representatives in an interval of length $N$.

For a finite field extension $L/K$, multiplication by $\alpha \in L$ is a $K$-linear map $m_{\alpha }:L\to L$. Its determinant is the field norm:This does not depend on the chosen basis. If $L/K$ is a separable field extension, thenwhere the product runs over all $[L:K]$ field embeddings into an algebraic closure of $K$. Embeddings are counted even when several give the same value on $\alpha$: for $r\in K$, the result is $r^{[L:K]}$. This avoids ambiguity in the phrase “product of algebraic conjugates”.^[ref]

For $L=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2})$ over $K=\mathbb{Q}$, write $\alpha =a+b\sqrt{2}$. In the basis $1,\sqrt{2}$, multiplication by $\alpha$ has columns $(a,b)$ and $(2b,a)$, henceThe determinant calculation and the product of the two field embeddings give the same answer. In particular,A field norm is an arithmetic invariant; it is not a nonnegative norm measuring length, and need not be positive on nonzero elements.

The field norm is multiplicative, $N(\alpha \beta )=N(\alpha )N(\beta )$, because $m_{\alpha \beta }=m_{\alpha }{m}_{\beta }$ and determinants are multiplicative. It vanishes exactly at zero. For a number field over $\mathbb{Q}$, it takes algebraic integers to integers, and an algebraic integer is a unit exactly when its field norm is $1$ or $-1$.^[ref][ref]

This makes the field norm a useful test for divisibility. If nonzero $\alpha ,\beta \in {\mathcal{O}}_L$ and $\alpha$ divides $\beta$, then the integer $N(\alpha )$ divides $N(\beta )$. For example, $3+\sqrt{2}$ has field norm $7$, so it cannot divide $2$, whose field norm is $4$. It does divide $7$, with quotient $3-\sqrt{2}$. This necessary condition can reject a proposed factor without solving for its quotient.

Every finite field extension is a Galois extension, and

A number field is a finite field extension $K/\mathbb{Q}$ of the rational numbers. Its degree of a field extension $[K:\mathbb{Q}]$ is its dimension as a vector space over $\mathbb{Q}$. Every element is an algebraic number; the primitive element theorem also says that $K=\mathbb{Q}(\theta )$ for some single algebraic number $\theta$.

For example,The basis $1,\sqrt{2}$ makes arithmetic explicit: use $(\sqrt{2}{)}^2=2$ to reduce products. Every nonzero element has its inverse in the same field:The denominator cannot vanish unless $a=b=0$, since $\sqrt{2}$ is not a rational number. For instance, $(3+\sqrt{2}{)}^{-1}=(3-\sqrt{2})/7$ belongs to the number field, although it is not an algebraic integer.

A degree-$n$ number field has exactly $n$ distinct field embeddings into the complex numbers fixing $\mathbb{Q}$, because every finite field extension in characteristic zero is a separable field extension. For $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2})$ these are the two real mapsBoth preserve addition and multiplication. Keeping both values, rather than just the positive choice of $\sqrt{2}$, is what makes the field norm and the Minkowski embedding of a number field useful.

Write $\mathcal{O}$ for the valuation ring of $K$, $\pi$ for a uniformizer, $v(\pi )=1$, and $k={\mathbb{F}}_q$ for the residue field. A useful strong form of Hensel lemma is the following: if $f\in \mathcal{O}[X]$ and $a_0\in \mathcal{O}$ satisfythen there is a root $a\in \mathcal{O}$ with $v(a-a_0)>v(f^{\prime }(a_0))$, unique among roots in that ball. If $f(a_0)\ne 0$, its distance satisfies $v(a-a_0)=v(f(a_0))-v(f^{\prime }(a_0))$.

Here is a proof by successive correction. Put $s=v(f^{\prime }(a_0))$, $d_j=v(f(a_j))$, andStop if a root has already been reached. Otherwise the correction has valuation $d_j-s>s$. Integral Taylor expansions show that $v(f^{\prime }(a_{j+1}))=s$ andThus $d_j-2s$ grows at least geometrically, the corrections tend to zero, and completeness gives a limit $a$ with $f(a)=0$. The first correction has strictly smaller valuation than every later nonzero correction, proving the asserted distance. If $x,y$ are in the ball $v(x-a_0),v(y-a_0)>s$, thenThe second factor cannot vanish. Two roots in the ball must therefore coincide. This proves Hensel lemma; in particular a simple root modulo $\pi$ has a unique lift with that residue.

We use this to establish existence and uniqueness of unramified local extensions. For each integer $d\ge 1$, choose a monic irreducible polynomial $\bar{f}\in k[X]$ of degree $d$ and lift it to a monic $f\in \mathcal{O}[X]$. Reduction and Gauss lemma show that $f$ remains irreducible over $K$. LetThe ring $A$ is finite free and complete over $\mathcal{O}$, and $A/\pi A\cong {\mathbb{F}}_{q^d}$. An element outside $\pi A$ is invertible: lift an inverse from the residue field and invert the remaining $1+\pi z$ by a convergent geometric series. Every nonzero element of $A$ is ${\pi }^t$ times such a unit, since ${\bigcap }_t{\pi }^{t}A=0$ in a finite free module. Thus $A$ is a discrete valuation ring, its fraction field is $L$, andThis constructs an unramified extension of each degree.

Conversely, let $M/K$ be an unramified extension of degree $d$. Its residue field is the unique degree-$d$ finite field extension ${\mathbb{F}}_{q^d}/{\mathbb{F}}_q$. Choose a residue root of $\bar{f}$ in it. The root is simple, so Hensel lemma lifts it to a root of $f$ in $M$. This embeds $L$ into $M$, and equality of degrees makes it an isomorphism. All $d$ residue conjugates lift in $L$ itself; hence $L/K$ is Galois, and reduction identifies its Galois group with the cyclic Galois group of the residue field extension. Its distinguished Frobenius automorphism reduces to $x\mapsto x^q$.

There is exactly one unramified extension $K_d$ of each degree inside a fixed algebraic closure, andFor the middle equality, every nonzero element of ${\mathbb{F}}_{q^d}$ lifts uniquely to a $(q^d-1)$st root of unity, because that exponent is prime to $p$. A primitive such residue generates the finite field extension, so its lift generates $K_d$. Taking the union gives the maximal unramified extension, with Galois group $\hat{\mathbb{Z}}$.

We use the Bose-Chowla Sidon construction, deriving its difference property explicitly. Let $p$ be an odd prime and choose a generator $\theta$ of the multiplicative group of a finite field of the quadratic finite field extension ${\mathbb{F}}_{p^2}$. Such a generator cannot belong to ${\mathbb{F}}_p$, so $1,\theta$ are linearly independent over the prime field. For each $t\in {\mathbb{F}}_p$, the nonzero field element $\theta +t$ has a unique exponent $a_t$ modulo $p^2-1$, with ${\theta }^{a_t}=\theta +t$. The $p$ exponents are distinct.

Suppose $a_s-a_t=a_u-a_v$ in the cyclic group. Multiplying the corresponding field elements givesSubtract the common ${\theta }^2$ term. Linear independence of $1,\theta$ gives $s+v=u+t$ and $sv=ut$. Thus the two unordered pairs are the roots of the same monic quadratic polynomial, so $\{s,v\}=\{u,t\}$. Either $s=u,v=t$, giving the same ordered difference, or $s=t,v=u$, giving two zero differences. This is exactly the Sidon set property.

Choose the integer representatives in $\{1,\dots ,p^2-1\}$. Equality of integer differences implies equality modulo $p^2-1$, so their Sidon property persists in the integers. Now apply the given prime-gap hypothesis at $x=\sqrt{N}$ to get $\sqrt{N}-N^{3/8}\le p\le \sqrt{N}$ for large $N$. The representatives fit inside $\{1,\dots ,N\}$, because $p^2-1\le N$, and their cardinality isOnly the supplied short-interval prime existence and the elementary structure of a finite field are used.

Write $e=e(\mathfrak{q}/\mathfrak{p})$, $f=f(\mathfrak{q}/\mathfrak{p})$ and $g$ for the number of primes above $\mathfrak{p}$. The Galois group acts transitively on those primes, with stabilizer $D_{\mathfrak{q}}$. The fundamental identity for prime decomposition and the orbit-stabilizer theorem therefore giveIt remains to establish that the residue action has image of order $f$, rather than assume this in the desired equality.

Use the decomposition group of a prime and local Galois group identification $D_{\mathfrak{q}}=\mathrm{Gal}(F_{\mathfrak{q}}/K_{\mathfrak{p}})$. A generator of the finite field extension $k_{\mathfrak{q}}/k_{\mathfrak{p}}$ has a separable monic minimal polynomial of an algebraic element. Lift its coefficients to ${\mathcal{O}}_{K_{\mathfrak{p}}}$. The Hensel lemma lifts each of its distinct residue roots to $F_{\mathfrak{q}}$. One such lift has field degree at most $f$, while its residue generates the degree-$f$ finite field extension, so its field degree is exactly $f$ and its ramification index of a prime ideal is one. It therefore generates an unramified extension of degree $f$, and sending it to each of the other lifts gives its $f$ embeddings. Because $F_{\mathfrak{q}}/K_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is a Galois extension, these embeddings extend to its automorphisms. Their reductions realize every automorphism of $k_{\mathfrak{q}}/k_{\mathfrak{p}}$. Thus the residue action is surjective, and

Now let $G$ be cyclic of order ${\ell }^2$, and let $H=\mathrm{Gal}(F/L)$ be its unique subgroup of order $\ell$. In a tower of Galois extensions, inertia maps onto inertia in the intermediate extension. This also follows from the just-proved order formula: its image has order $e(F/K)/e(F/L)=e(L/K)$, using multiplicativity of the ramification index of a prime ideal in a tower. If $\mathfrak{p}$ ramifies in $L/K$, this image in $G/H$ is nontrivial. Every proper subgroup of $G$ is contained in $H$, so inertia upstairs must be $G$. HenceThe fundamental identity for prime decomposition then also forces a single prime above $\mathfrak{p}$ and residue-field degree one.

The Noether normalization lemma is valid over every field $k$, including finite fields: a nonzero finitely generated algebra $C$ contains elements $y_1,\dots ,y_d$ with algebraic independence over $k$ such that $C$ is finite as a module over the polynomial ring $k[y_1,\dots ,y_d]$. We prove it without an infinite-field hypothesis.

Write $C=k[a_1,\dots ,a_n]$ and induct on $n$. If the generators have algebraic independence, they already give a polynomial ring and the assertion is immediate. Otherwise choose a nonzero relation $F(a_1,\dots ,a_n)=0$. Choose an integer $M$ larger than every exponent in the monomials of $F$, and setIn $F(Y_1+T^M,Y_2+T^{M^2},\dots ,Y_{n-1}+T^{M^{n-1}},T)$, the largest power of $T$ has a nonzero coefficient in $k$. Indeed, a monomial with exponents $(e_1,\dots ,e_n)$ contributes top weight $e_n+{\sum }_{i<n}{e}_i{M}^i$. These weights are distinct by uniqueness of base-$M$ expansion, so only one monomial contributes the highest power. After rescaling, the substituted relation is monic in $T$.

Consequently $a_n$ is an integral element over $C^{\prime }=k[b_1,\dots ,b_{n-1}]$, and $C=C^{\prime }[a_n]$ is finite over $C^{\prime }$. Apply the induction hypothesis to $C^{\prime }$ and compose the finite module extensions. This proves Noether normalization by weighted substitutions. The induction reaches $n=0$, where $C=k$. For an integral domain $C$, taking fraction fields makes the resulting extension finite algebraic, so $d$ is the transcendence degree of $\mathrm{Frac}(C)/k$. More generally $d=\dim C$: integral extensions preserve Krull dimension, and a polynomial algebra in $d$ variables has Krull dimension $d$.

A useful bridge to the Hilbert Nullstellensatz is the Zariski lemma. If a field $E$ is a finitely generated algebra over $k$, normalization makes it finite and integral over a polynomial ring $P=k[y_1,\dots ,y_d]$. A subring over which a field is integral is a field: for nonzero $a\in P$, an integral equation for $a^{-1}\in E$, multiplied by $a^{r-1}$, expresses $a^{-1}$ as an element of $P$. Therefore $P$ must be a field. A polynomial ring in a positive number of variables is not a field, since a variable has no polynomial inverse. Hence $d=0$ and $E/k$ is a finite field extension. This proves the Zariski lemma.

Now let $k$ be an algebraically closed field. The Weak Hilbert Nullstellensatz says that every maximal ideal of $k[X_1,\dots ,X_n]$ is uniquely of the formTo prove it, the residue field $k[X]/\mathfrak{m}$ is a field generated as a $k$-algebra by the images of the variables. The Zariski lemma makes it finite algebraic over $k$, and algebraic closedness makes it $k$. Thus each $X_i$ has an image $a_i\in k$. The evaluation map has kernel the displayed ideal: subtracting the constant value of a polynomial expresses its difference as a combination of $X_i-a_i$. That kernel is maximal and contained in $\mathfrak{m}$, so equality holds. Conversely every evaluation kernel is maximal because its quotient is $k$. Uniqueness follows from the variable images. Every proper ideal is contained in a maximal ideal, so it has a common zero; equivalently, an ideal with no common zero is the whole ring.

For an ideal $I\subseteq k[X_1,\dots ,X_n]$, let $V(I)$ be its common-zero set and let $I(V(I))$ be all polynomials vanishing on that set. The Strong Hilbert Nullstellensatz statesThe inclusion $\sqrt{I}\subseteq I(V(I))$ follows because a field has no nonzero nilpotent elements. For the other inclusion, take $f$ vanishing on $V(I)$, with $f\ne 0$, and form the Rabinowitsch trick idealIt has no common zero: at a zero of $I$ the second generator has value one. The Weak Hilbert Nullstellensatz in $n+1$ variables gives $J=(1)$. Hence a finite identity has the form $1={\sum }_j{h}_j(X,T)g_j(X)+h(X,T)(1-Tf)$, with $g_j\in I$. Substitute $T=f^{-1}$ in the localization of a ring $k[X{]}_f$. Clearing the finitely many powers of $f$ occurring in denominators gives $f^r\in I$ for some $r$, so $f\in \sqrt{I}$. The case $f=0$ is immediate. This completes all three proofs. The algebraically closed hypothesis belongs to the two forms of the Hilbert Nullstellensatz; it was not needed for the Noether normalization lemma or the Zariski lemma.

The Weak Hilbert Nullstellensatz states that if $k$ is an algebraically closed field, every maximal ideal of $k[Y_1,\dots ,Y_s]$ isEquivalently, every proper ideal has a common zero. We prove the more general field statement, the Zariski lemma: a field finitely generated as a $k$-algebra is a finite field extension of $k$.

Write such a field as $L=k[b_1,\dots ,b_s]$. Choose a maximal set of algebraically independent elements $t_1,\dots ,t_r$ among these generators and denote the remaining generators by $c_1,\dots ,c_h$. Each $c_j$ is an algebraic element over $K=k(t_1,\dots ,t_r)$, so $L/K$ is a finite field extension. Clearing the denominators in their monic equations, choose a nonzero $d\in k[t_1,\dots ,t_r]$ such that each $c_j$ is an integral element overBecause $L$ is a field and $d^{-1}\in L$, we have $L=D[c_1,\dots ,c_h]$. Thus $L$ is an integral extension of $D$.

A subring over which a field is integral must itself be a field. Indeed, for $0\ne a\in D$, an integral equation for $a^{-1}$ multiplied by $a^{m-1}$ expresses $a^{-1}$ as an element of $D$. But if $r>0$, the ring $D$ is not a field: choose an irreducible polynomial $q(t_1)\in k[t_1]$ which does not divide $d$. There are infinitely many monic irreducible polynomials in $k[t_1]$, by the usual product-plus-one argument, whereas only finitely many can divide the nonzero $d$. The prime ideal $(q)$ stays proper after inverting $d$, so $q$ has no inverse in $D$. Therefore $r=0$, proving that $L/k$ is a finite field extension, and in particular an algebraic field extension.

Apply the Zariski lemma to the residue field $k[Y_1,\dots ,Y_s]/\mathfrak{m}$ of a maximal ideal. When $k$ is an algebraically closed field, this field is $k$ itself. The images $a_i$ of $Y_i$ then give $\mathfrak{m}=(Y_1-a_1,\dots ,Y_s-a_s)$, proving the Weak Hilbert Nullstellensatz.

For the real Laurent polynomial ring, the same argument applies because it is the finitely generated algebraEvery residue field at a maximal ideal is consequently a finite field extension of $\mathbb{R}$, and so is $\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{C}$. Here we use the fundamental theorem of algebra, which makes $\mathbb{C}$ the algebraic closure of $\mathbb{R}$ of degree two. The images of $X_1,X_2$ must be nonzero since these elements are units. It follows that the answer iswith $(\alpha ,\beta )$ and $(\overline{\alpha },\overline{\beta })$ defining the same maximal ideal. If both coordinates are real, evaluation has image $\mathbb{R}$; otherwise its image is $\mathbb{C}$. Thus every displayed kernel is maximal, and the Zariski lemma shows that this list is exhaustive.

For explicit generating sets of an ideal, there are three cases. For real nonzero $a,b$,If $\alpha =a\in {\mathbb{R}}^{\times }$ and $\beta =s+it$ with $t\ne 0$,If $\alpha =u+iv$ with $v\ne 0$ and $\beta =s+it$, thenThe last two quotients are $\mathbb{C}$; the nonzero coordinate condition ensures that the Laurent inverses exist in them. There are no further coincidences in the classification: equal kernels induce an $\mathbb{R}$-isomorphism between the evaluation image fields. The only $\mathbb{R}$-automorphisms of $\mathbb{C}$ are the identity and complex conjugation, so the two pairs must agree or be conjugate.

To prove the intersection assertion, fix a prime ideal $P$ and an element $f\notin P$. The integral domain $B=R/P$ has nonzero image $\bar{f}$. Its localization of a ring $B[{\bar{f}}^{-1}]$ is nonzero and still a finitely generated algebra over $\mathbb{R}$, so it has a maximal ideal $\mathfrak{n}$. By the Zariski lemma, the field $L=B[{\bar{f}}^{-1}]/\mathfrak{n}$ is finite over $\mathbb{R}$.

The image of $B$ in $L$ is a subring containing $\mathbb{R}$ and is a finite-dimensional $\mathbb{R}$-vector space. It is an integral domain, hence a field: multiplication by any nonzero element is an injective linear map of a finite-dimensional vector space and therefore surjective. The kernel of $B\to L$ is thus a maximal ideal which avoids $\bar{f}$, since $\bar{f}$ is invertible in $L$. Its inverse image in $R$ is a maximal ideal containing $P$ but avoiding $f$. As this works for every $f\notin P$,This is the Jacobson ring property for this Laurent polynomial ring.

For a nonzero finitely generated module $M$, its set of associated primes isHere ${\mathrm{Ann}}_R(m)=\{a\in R:am=0\}$ is the annihilator of the element. The Laurent polynomial ring $R$ is a Noetherian ring, so the nonempty collection of annihilators of nonzero elements of $M$ has a maximal member, say $P={\mathrm{Ann}}_R(m)$. It is proper because $m\ne 0$.

If $ab\in P$ and $b\notin P$, then $bm\ne 0$ andMaximality forces ${\mathrm{Ann}}_R(bm)=P$, hence $a\in P$. Thus $P$ is a prime ideal, proving $\boxed{{\mathrm{Ass}}_R(M)\ne \varnothing }$. This argument in fact only needs that $R$ is Noetherian, not the finite generation of $M$.

A proper ideal $Q$ is $P$-primary when its radical of an ideal is $P$ andEquivalently, $ab\in Q$ and $b\notin P$ imply $a\in Q$; equivalently, every zero divisor of $R/Q$ is nilpotent. These formulations distinguish the actual primary ideal property from the weaker assertion that there is only one minimal prime ideal.

For the final example, set $u=X_1-1$ and $v=X_2-1$. ThenSince $R/P\cong \mathbb{R}[X_2,X_2^{-1}]$ is an integral domain, $P$ is a prime ideal. Moreover $I\subseteq P$ and $u^2\in I$, so $\sqrt{I}=P$. Consequently $P$ is the unique minimal prime ideal over $I$.

Nevertheless $uv\in I$, while $u\notin I$ and no power of $v$ belongs to $I$. For the first assertion, reduce modulo $v$: the image of $I$ is $(u^2)$ in $\mathbb{R}[X_1,X_1^{-1}]$, and $u$ is not a multiple of $u^2$ because $u$ is a nonunit in this integral domain. For the second, $v\notin P$, so $v^j\notin P\supseteq I$ for every $j\ge 1$. Thus $I$ is not a $P$-primary ideal: a unique minimal prime does not imply primary. In $R/I$, the nonzero class of $u$ is killed by $v$, a zero divisor which is not nilpotent.

An integral domain $A$ is an integrally closed domain if every element of its fraction field which is an integral element over $A$ belongs to $A$. Explicitly, if $z\in \mathrm{Frac}A$ satisfiesthen $z\in A$. Thus $\boxed{A\text{ is integrally closed exactly when its integral closure in its fraction field is }A}$.

Suppose $A$ is a unique factorization domain and $z=a/b$ is integral, with $a,b\in A$, $b\ne 0$, and with no common irreducible element as a factor. Multiplying its monic equation by $b^d$ givesHence $b$ divides $a^d$. Every irreducible element dividing $b$ is a prime element, so it would divide $a$, contrary to the choice of the fraction. Therefore $b$ is a unit, and $z\in A$. We have proved

The going-down theorem is the following. Let $A\subseteq B$ be an integral extension of integral domains with $A$ an integrally closed domain. IfthenWe first prove this for a module-finite ring extension and then remove that extra hypothesis. We use the Lying-over theorem, the going-up theorem, and the incomparability theorem for integral extensions: primes exist over every base prime, prime chains can be extended upwards, and distinct primes over the same base prime cannot contain one another. The going-up theorem follows by applying the Lying-over theorem to the quotient by the lower prime. These results concern arbitrary integral extensions; none assumes the going-down theorem.

For the finite case, let $K=\mathrm{Frac}A$ and $L=\mathrm{Frac}B$. Since $B$ is module-finite, $L/K$ is a finite field extension. Take a finite normal field extension $E/K$ containing $L$, obtained as a splitting field of the minimal polynomials of finitely many field generators. The extension $E/K$ need not be a separable field extension. Let $C$ be the integral closure of $A$ in $E$. Then $B\subseteq C$, and $C$ is integral over both $A$ and $B$.

We need one auxiliary fact: the finite group $G={\mathrm{Aut}}_K(E)$ acts transitively on the prime ideals of $C$ over any fixed prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}$ of $A$. First observe that an element $w\in E$ fixed by all of $G$ is a purely inseparable algebraic element over $K$. Indeed, all $K$-embeddings of $K(w)$ into an algebraic closure extend to $K$-automorphisms of the normal field extension $E$. Hence the minimal polynomial of an algebraic element $w$ has only one distinct root. In characteristic zero this says $w\in K$; in characteristic $p>0$ it says $w^{p^e}\in K$ for some $e\ge 0$.

Now let $Q,Q^{\prime }$ be primes of $C$ over $\mathfrak{p}$, and suppose $Q$ is different from every $\sigma (Q^{\prime })$, $\sigma \in G$. By the incomparability theorem for integral extensions, $Q$ is contained in none of these conjugate primes. The prime avoidance lemma suppliesThe productis fixed by $G$, is integral over $A$, and lies in $Q$ because one factor is $x$. Choose an exponent $e_0$ equal to $1$ in characteristic zero, or a power of $p$ in characteristic $p$, such that $h^{e_0}\in K$. Since $A$ is an integrally closed domain, $h^{e_0}\in A$. It also lies in $Q\cap A=\mathfrak{p}$, hence in $Q^{\prime }$. Because $Q^{\prime }$ is a prime ideal, some factor $\sigma (x)$ lies in $Q^{\prime }$. This means $x\in {\sigma }^{-1}(Q^{\prime })$, contradicting our choice. Thus $Q=\sigma (Q^{\prime })$ for some $\sigma$, proving transitivity. The power $e_0$ accounts for the possible purely inseparable field extension and makes the argument valid in every characteristic.

Lift the prescribed ${\mathfrak{q}}_2$ to a prime $Q_2$ of $C$ by the Lying-over theorem for $B\subseteq C$. Separately, choose a prime $Q_1^{\prime }$ over ${\mathfrak{p}}_1$ and use the going-up theorem to find $Q_2^{\prime }\supseteq Q_1^{\prime }$ over ${\mathfrak{p}}_2$. Transitivity gives $\sigma \in G$ with $\sigma (Q_2^{\prime })=Q_2$. ThenContracting to $B$ gives ${\mathfrak{q}}_1=Q_1\cap B\subseteq {\mathfrak{q}}_2$ with the required contraction. This proves the going-down theorem for the module-finite case.

For a general integral extension $A\subseteq B$, consider $B_{{\mathfrak{q}}_2}$ and the idealWe claim that $J$ is disjoint from $A\setminus {\mathfrak{p}}_1$. Otherwise, clearing the finitely many denominators in an expression for an element $a\in J\cap (A\setminus {\mathfrak{p}}_1)$ givesThe subalgebra $B_0=A[s,b_1,\dots ,b_h]$ is a module-finite ring extension of $A$, since all its generators are integral elements. Apply the finite case to ${\mathfrak{q}}_2\cap B_0$: there is a prime $Q_1\subseteq {\mathfrak{q}}_2\cap B_0$ contracting to ${\mathfrak{p}}_1$. The displayed identity puts $sa$ in $Q_1$, but $a\notin Q_1$. Thus $s\in Q_1\subseteq {\mathfrak{q}}_2$, a contradiction.

Localize $B_{{\mathfrak{q}}_2}$ further at the multiplicative subset $A\setminus {\mathfrak{p}}_1$. The extension of $J$ is a proper ideal, by the disjointness just proved. Choose a maximal ideal containing it and contract back to a prime ideal of $B_{{\mathfrak{q}}_2}$. This prime contains $J$ and avoids $A\setminus {\mathfrak{p}}_1$. Its contraction ${\mathfrak{q}}_1$ to $B$ lies inside ${\mathfrak{q}}_2$ by the prime ideal correspondence for localization, and its contraction to $A$ is exactly ${\mathfrak{p}}_1$. This completes the proof of the going-down theorem without any finite generation assumption on $B$.

Let $K^{\mathrm{ur}}$ be the maximal unramified extension of $K$, with residue field $\overline{k}$. First show that every geometric solution of $nQ=P$ lies in $E(K^{\mathrm{ur}})$.

The multiplication-by-n morphism on the reduced elliptic curve is surjective over $\overline{k}$. Choose $\overline{Q}$ with $n\overline{Q}=\overline{P}$, defined over some finite finite field extension $k^{\prime }/k$. Let $L/K$ be the corresponding finite unramified extension. By the surjectivity of good reduction over a local field, lift $\overline{Q}$ to $Q_0\in E(L)$. Then $P-n{Q}_0\in E_1(L)$. The multiplication isomorphism of a formal group law gives a unique $R\in E_1(L)$ with $nR=P-n{Q}_0$, so $Q_0+R$ is an $n$-division point of $P$ defined over $L$.

Taking $P=O$ gives every element of $E[n]$ over $K^{\mathrm{ur}}$: reduction is injective on this torsion point of an elliptic curve group because $[n]$ is injective on the formal kernel, and each reduced $n$-torsion point has the unique corrected lift just constructed. Every other division point differs from one lift by an element of $E[n]$. Hence the entire field $K([n{]}^{-1}P)$ is unramified, not merely a field containing one choice of $Q$.

To bound the composite uniformly in $P$, put $f=[K(E[n]):K]$. This division field of an elliptic curve is unramified. The Galois group of $K^{\mathrm{ur}}/K$ is procyclic, generated topologically by its Frobenius element $\sigma$, and ${\sigma }^f$ fixes every element of $E[n]$. If $nQ=P\in E(K)$, thenIteration gives ${\sigma }^{jf}Q=Q+jT$. In particular ${\sigma }^{nf}Q=Q$. Thus every such $Q$, for every $P$ together, lies in the unique unramified extension of degree $nf$. If $M$ is the composite of all these fields, the uniform unramified division field over a local field givesThe prime-to-$p$ hypothesis is essential to the inverse-series argument; no assertion about arbitrary $p$-division is being made.

A linear operator is semisimple if it becomes diagonalizable over an algebraic closure; equivalently, its minimal polynomial has no repeated root over that closure. If an invertible operator $A$ has finite order $r$ prime to the characteristic of a field, its minimal polynomial divides $X^r-1$. The derivative $r{X}^{r-1}$ is coprime to this polynomial, so $A$ is semisimple. Its invariant irreducible summands over a finite field become multiplication by scalars in suitable finite field extensions.