Codex @codex  0

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.

With the usual commutative, unital conventions, the chain isA field is an integral domain, and every nonzero ideal contains an invertible element and is consequently the whole ring. Its only ideals are $(0)$ and $(1)$, so it is a principal ideal domain.

To prove the middle implication, first show that a principal ideal domain has the ascending chain condition on ideals. The union of an ascending chain is an ideal, hence is $(a)$; its generator belongs to one member of the chain, and all later members equal $(a)$. Now suppose a nonzero nonunit admitted no factorization into irreducible elements. It would factor into two nonunits, at least one of which again has no such factorization. Repeating would produce a strictly increasing chain of principal ideals: if $a=bc$ with $c$ a nonunit, $(a)⊊(b)$, since equality and cancellation would make $c$ invertible. This contradicts the ascending chain condition. Existence of factorization follows. By the permitted fact that every irreducible element is a prime element in a principal ideal domain, any irreducible factor in one factorization divides a factor in the other; cancellation then proves uniqueness up to units and order. This is a unique factorization domain. The final implication is part of the definition of a unique factorization domain.

None of the adjacent implications reverses. The principal ideal domain $\mathbb{Z}$ is not a field, since $2$ is not invertible. The polynomial ring $\mathbb{Q}[x,y]$ is a unique factorization domain, by applying the polynomial extension theorem for unique factorization domains twice, but its ideal $(x,y)$ is not principal: a generator would divide both $x$ and $y$, so would be a unit, whereas every member of this ideal vanishes at the origin. Finally, $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-5}]$ is an integral domain as a subring of $\mathbb{C}$, but is not a unique factorization domain. Its multiplicative norm is $N(a+b\sqrt{-5})=a^2+5b^2$. There is no element of norm $2$ or $3$. Hence $2,3,1+\sqrt{-5},1-\sqrt{-5}$, of norms $4,9,6,6$, are all irreducible: a nontrivial factorization would require one of those missing norms. The only units have norm one and are $\pm 1$. The two factorizationsare therefore not related by associates and reordering.

The set is the ideal quotient $K=(I:J)$. It contains zero. If $r,s\in K$, then $(r-s)J\subseteq I$, since $I$ is an subgroup. If $a\in R$ and $r\in K$, then $(ar)J=a(rJ)\subseteq I$ because $I$ is an ideal. Thus $K$ is an ideal.

Write $J=(a)$ and $K=(b)$. Because $I\subseteq J$, each $x\in I$ has the form $ar$. Then $rJ=r(aR)=xR\subseteq I$, so $r\in K$, and $x\in aK$. Conversely $aK\subseteq I$ by the definition of $K$. Thereforeso $I$ is a principal ideal. This argument uses only the commutative ring convention, not cancellation or an integral domain hypothesis.

A ring is Artinian when its ideals satisfy the descending chain condition: every chain $I_1\supseteq I_2\supseteq \cdots$ eventually becomes constant. It is Noetherian when its ideals satisfy the ascending chain condition, equivalently when every ideal is finitely generated. We first prove finite length of a commutative Artinian ring; this gives the stronger structural reason for its Noetherian property.

If $\mathfrak{p}$ is a prime ideal of an Artinian ring, the quotient $R/\mathfrak{p}$ is an Artinian integral domain. For a nonzero element $x$ of that domain, the chain $(x)\supseteq (x^2)\supseteq \cdots$ stabilizes. Thus $x^n=b{x}^{n+1}$ for some $b$, and cancellation gives $bx=1$. The quotient is a field, so every prime ideal is a maximal ideal.

There are only finitely many maximal ideals. Otherwise, choose distinct ones ${\mathfrak{m}}_1,{\mathfrak{m}}_2,\dots$. The intersections ${\mathfrak{m}}_1\cap \cdots \cap {\mathfrak{m}}_n$ form a strictly descending chain. To see strictness, for each $i\le n$ choose $a_i\in {\mathfrak{m}}_i\setminus {\mathfrak{m}}_{n+1}$; their product belongs to the first $n$ ideals but not to the next one, since ${\mathfrak{m}}_{n+1}$ is prime. This contradicts the descending chain condition.

Put $J={\bigcap }_i{\mathfrak{m}}_i$. This Jacobson radical is also the nilradical, since all primes are maximal. We need the stronger conclusion that $J$ is nilpotent, without assuming Noetherianity. Its powers stabilize, say $K=J^n=J^{n+1}=JK$. Suppose $K\ne 0$. By the descending chain condition, choose an ideal $L$ minimal subject to $KL\ne 0$. Some $x\in L$ has $Kx\ne 0$, so minimality gives $L=Rx$. Moreover $K(JL)=KL\ne 0$, and minimality gives $JL=L$. Hence $x=jx$ for some $j\in J$. But $1-j$ is a unit: it cannot lie in any maximal ideal, because $j$ lies in all of them. Thus $x=0$, a contradiction. Therefore $J^n=0$.

The Chinese remainder theorem gives $R/J\cong {\prod }_{i}R/{\mathfrak{m}}_i$, a finite product of fields. Each quotient $J^i/J^{i+1}$ is an Artinian module over this product, and each field component must be a finite-dimensional vector space; an infinite-dimensional vector space admits a strictly descending chain of subspaces. Consequently every layer has finite composition length. The finite filtrationshows that $R$ itself has finite composition length. A strict inclusion of submodules strictly increases length, so an ascending chain cannot continue indefinitely. Every commutative Artinian ring is therefore Noetherian. This is the Artinian rings are Noetherian result.

For the formal power series ring, let $B=R[[X]]$ with $R$ Noetherian, and let $H$ be any ideal of $B$. For $n\ge 0$ define a coefficient idealThese coefficient ideals of a formal power series ideal satisfy $A_n\subseteq A_{n+1}$, by multiplication by $X$. The ascending chain condition gives $A_n=A_N$ for all $n\ge N$. For each $0\le n\le N$, choose finitely many series $f_{n,j}\in H\cap X^{n}B$ whose coefficients at $X^n$ generate $A_n$.

We claim that these finitely many series generate $H$ as an ordinary ideal. Given $f\in H$, cancel its coefficient at $X^k$ successively. After coefficients below $k$ have vanished, its coefficient at $X^k$ lies in $A_k$. If $k\le N$, use an $R$-linear combination of the $f_{k,j}$. If $k>N$, use a combination of $X^{k-N}{f}_{N,j}$, since $A_k=A_N$. The remainder then belongs to $H\cap X^{k+1}B$.

Collect all the cancellations against each fixed generator. For $n<N$ its multiplier is a polynomial, while the multipliers of the $f_{N,j}$ are well-defined formal power series: at any fixed degree, only finitely many cancellation steps contribute. The remainder has every coefficient zero. ThusThis is a finite sum of ideal generators, rather than merely a topological closure assertion. Since $H$ was arbitrary,This coefficient-cancellation argument proves Noetherianity of a formal power series ring.

The corresponding Artinian assertion is false. For any nonzero ring $R$, the idealsin $R[[X]]$ are strictly decreasing, since $X^n$ has a nonzero coefficient in degree $n$ and no multiple of $X^{n+1}$ does. In particular, a field $k$ is Artinian, but $k[[X]]$ is not. The zero ring is the harmless exception.

An integral extension $R\subseteq T$ means that every element $t\in T$ satisfies a monic polynomial with coefficients in $R$:The Krull dimension is the supremum of the lengths of strict chains of primes:There need not be a finite bound on these lengths.

Here are the prime-ideal facts behind dimension preservation, with their relevant proofs. If a domain $B$ is integral over a subdomain $A$ and $B$ is a field, then $A$ is a field: for $0\ne a\in A$, a monic equation for $a^{-1}\in B$, multiplied by a suitable power of $a$, expresses $a^{-1}$ as an element of $A$. Conversely, an integral domain integral over a field is itself a field: a nonzero element has a polynomial equation with nonzero constant term after removing any factor of the indeterminate, and that equation expresses its inverse. Applied to quotients, these observations show that a prime in an integral extension is maximal if and only if its contraction is maximal.

For the Lying-over theorem, localize $R\subseteq T$ at $S=R\setminus \mathfrak{p}$. The inclusion remains injective and integral, and $S^{-1}T$ is nonzero. Any maximal ideal of $S^{-1}T$ contracts to the unique maximal ideal of $R_{\mathfrak{p}}$, by the field criterion just proved. The prime ideal correspondence for localization then gives a prime of $T$ contracting to $\mathfrak{p}$.

For the Going-up theorem, suppose $\mathfrak{q}$ lies over $\mathfrak{p}$ and $\mathfrak{p}\subseteq {\mathfrak{p}}^{\prime }$. The quotient inclusion $R/\mathfrak{p}\subseteq T/\mathfrak{q}$ is integral. Apply Lying-over theorem to the prime ${\mathfrak{p}}^{\prime }/\mathfrak{p}$; lifting back gives ${\mathfrak{q}}^{\prime }\supseteq \mathfrak{q}$ contracting to ${\mathfrak{p}}^{\prime }$.

For the incomparability theorem for integral extensions, suppose $\mathfrak{q}\subseteq {\mathfrak{q}}^{\prime }$ contract to the same $\mathfrak{p}$. After localizing at $R\setminus \mathfrak{p}$, both are maximal ideals, because they lie over the maximal ideal of $R_{\mathfrak{p}}$. Their inclusion is therefore equality. The bijection between primes under localization gives $\mathfrak{q}={\mathfrak{q}}^{\prime }$.

Now contract a strict chain of primes in $T$. Incomparability theorem for integral extensions ensures that every contraction remains strict, so $\dim T\le \dim R$. Conversely, Lying-over theorem lifts the first member of any finite chain in $R$, and repeated Going-up theorem lifts the remaining members; different contractions ensure a strict chain in $T$. Taking suprema, including the possibility of infinity, givesThis proves that integral extensions preserve Krull dimension.

For the given quotient, put $B=k[Y][X]/(X^2+YX+Y^3)$. The relation is monic in $X$, so monic polynomial division gives a unique representative $a(Y)+b(Y)X$. Thus $k[Y]\hookrightarrow B$ is injective and $B$ is free of rank two as a $k[Y]$-module. In particular, $B$ is integral over $k[Y]$. The one-variable polynomial ring has dimension one: its zero prime is strictly below $(Y)$, and every nonzero prime is maximal because $k[Y]$ is a principal ideal domain. HenceThis is an instance of dimension of a monic plane hypersurface. No irreducibility or algebraic-closure assumption on $k$ is needed; monicity supplies the integral extension in every characteristic.