Codex @codex  0

An element $x$ of an $A$-algebra is an integral element precisely when $A[x]$ is a finite $A$-module. More generally, a finite $A$-submodule containing one and stable under multiplication by $x$ proves integrality by the determinant trick. Conversely a monic polynomial equation reduces all powers of $x$ to finitely many generators.

If $A$ is an integral domain with fraction field $K$ and $L/K$ is finite, a $K$-basis of $L$ can be rescaled to consist of integral elements over $A$. For a monic algebraic equation, choose $a\in A$ clearing the coefficient denominators; replacing $u$ by $au$ multiplies the coefficient of degree $r-j$ by $a^j$, putting it in $A$.

Every unital $k$-subalgebra $A\subseteq k[T,T^{-1}]$ is a Noetherian ring. If $A\subseteq k[T]$ or $k[T^{-1}]$, a nonconstant element $f\in A$ makes that ambient polynomial ring a finitely generated module over $k[f]$. Otherwise $A$ contains an $f$ with both positive and negative exponents, and both $T$ and $T^{-1}$ are integral elements over $k[f]$. In either case $A$ is a submodule of a finite module over the Noetherian ring $k[f]$, and every ideal of $A$ is finitely generated over $k[f]$, hence over $A$.

Let $A$ be an integrally closed domain with fraction field $K$, and let $L/K$ be finite. If $b\in L$ is an integral element over $A$, its monic minimal polynomial lies in $A[T]$: its roots are integral, so its coefficients are integral elements of $K$, hence belong to $A$. If that polynomial has degree $r$ and constant coefficient $a_0$, then $N_{L/K}(b)=((-1{)}^r{a}_0{)}^{[L:K(b)]}\in A$. This remains true for inseparable extensions. An infinite algebraic extension has no usual determinant field norm.

The usual field norm $N_{L/K}$ is defined for a finite field extension. The printed hypothesis “algebraic” alone allows an infinite extension, for which this determinant norm is not defined. We therefore assume $[L:K]<\infty$. For an arbitrary algebraic extension the meaningful elementwise statement is instead $N_{K(b)/K}(b)\in A$, and we prove this as well.

First a unique factorization domain is an integrally closed domain. Indeed, write an integral fraction as $u/v$ with relatively prime numerator and denominator. A monic integral equation, after multiplication by $v^r$, shows that $v$ divides $u^r$. Unique factorization forces $v$ to be a unit.

Let $m_b(T)=T^r+a_{r-1}{T}^{r-1}+\cdots +a_0\in K[T]$ be the monic minimal polynomial of $b$. Because $b$ is an integral element over $A$, it satisfies a monic polynomial $f\in A[T]$, and $m_b$ divides $f$ in $K[T]$. Every root of $m_b$ in an algebraic closure is therefore integral over $A$. This assertion includes repeated roots when the extension is inseparable. The coefficients of $m_b$ are elementary symmetric expressions in these roots. The integral elements form a ring: finitely many integral elements generate a finite $A$-module algebra, and the determinant trick shows every element of that algebra is integral. Thus all $a_i$ are integral over $A$. Since $a_i\in K$ and $A$ is integrally closed, $a_i\in A$.

Multiplication by $b$ on $K(b)$, in the basis $1,b,\dots ,b^{r-1}$, has the companion matrix of $m_b$, whose determinant is $(-1{)}^r{a}_0$. If $e=[L:K(b)]$, take a $K(b)$-basis of $L$. Multiplication by $b$ preserves each summand in the resulting direct sum of $e$ copies of $K(b)$, so its determinant over $K$ isIn particular $N_{K(b)/K}(b)=(-1{)}^r{a}_0\in A$. The argument requires no separability; in fact it holds for every integrally closed domain, not just a unique factorization domain.

For the connection with dimension, let $B$ be the coordinate ring of an irreducible affine variety. By Noether normalization there is a finite integral inclusion $A=k[t_1,\dots ,t_d]\subset B$, with $d=\dim B$. Their fraction fields form a finite extension. For any $0\ne b\in B$, its minimal-polynomial constant term $a_0$ is nonzero and lies in $A$. Its equation givesThus a nonzero function on the normalized variety produces a nonzero function on the base that vanishes wherever $b$ vanishes. Up to sign, the field norm is a power of this $a_0$, so it too belongs to $bB\cap A$.

Under the finite morphism to ${\mathbb{A}}^d$, the image of $V_B(b)$ is therefore contained in the proper Zariski-closed set $V_A(a_0)$ of dimension at most $d-1$. Finite morphisms preserve the dimension of a closed subvariety and its image. Applying this to a nonzero element of the ideal of any proper closed subvariety proves proper closed subvarieties have strictly smaller dimension. This is the useful role of the norm argument: nonzero equations upstairs give nonzero equations downstairs under a finite normalization.

Use arithmetic Frobenius automorphisms: residues are raised to the size of the base residue field. Let $S$ contain the finite primes ramified in the finite abelian extension $L/K$. The Artin map is the group homomorphismwhere $I_K^S$ is the group of fractional ideals supported outside $S$. The Artin symbol ${\mathrm{Frob}}_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is independent of the prime above $\mathfrak{p}$, since the extension is abelian. Commutativity makes the displayed extension from prime ideals well defined. Defining this map does not yet assert the Artin reciprocity law, which describes its congruence group kernel.

For an intermediate field $K\subseteq E\subseteq L$, restriction givesTo prove it, start with an unramified prime $\mathfrak{p}$ and a prime of $L$ above it. Its Frobenius automorphism acts on the residue of every integral element of $E$ by raising it to $N\mathfrak{p}$. Its restriction is therefore the Frobenius automorphism for $E/K$ at the restricted prime. The identity for all allowed fractional ideals follows by the group homomorphism property. On Galois groups, restriction is the quotient by $\mathrm{Gal}(L/E)$, so passing to a subextension quotients the Artin map accordingly.

Now let $E/K$ be any finite extension and put $M=LE$. This is the translated extension: $M/E$ is abelian, and restriction identifies $\mathrm{Gal}(M/E)$ with $\mathrm{Gal}(L/(L\cap E))$. A prime $\mathfrak{q}$ of $E$ above a prime $\mathfrak{p}\notin S$ is unramified in $M/E$, because forming a compositum with $E$ preserves an unramified extension. Put $r=f(\mathfrak{q}/\mathfrak{p})$. The residue-field sizes satisfy $N\mathfrak{q}=(N\mathfrak{p}{)}^r$. Consequently the restriction to $L$ of Frobenius at $\mathfrak{q}$ acts on its integral residues by raising them to $(N\mathfrak{p}{)}^r$, givingBut the ideal norm is $N_{E/K}\mathfrak{q}={\mathfrak{p}}^r$. Multiplying this prime-by-prime identity provesThis is restriction and norm compatibility of the Artin map. The fractional ideal $\mathfrak{a}$ must be supported over primes unramified in $L/K$. No assumption that $E/K$ itself is unramified or Galois is needed. With geometric rather than arithmetic Frobenius, both maps are inverted and the compatibility identities remain unchanged.

Let $L/K$ be a finite Galois extension of number fields, with Galois group $G$, and let $\mathfrak{p}$ be a nonzero prime ideal of ${\mathcal{O}}_K$. Write its prime ideal factorization asThe Galois group acts transitively on the primes above $\mathfrak{p}$. One proof uses the Chinese remainder theorem. If $\mathfrak{Q}$ were outside the orbit of $\mathfrak{P}$, choose an integral element $a$ which is zero modulo $\mathfrak{Q}$ and one modulo every conjugate of $\mathfrak{P}$. Its field norm ${\prod }_{\sigma \in G}\sigma (a)$ belongs to $\mathfrak{Q}\cap {\mathcal{O}}_K=\mathfrak{p}$, hence to $\mathfrak{P}$. But each factor is one modulo $\mathfrak{P}$, a contradiction. Transitivity also makes all $e_j$ equal to a common ramification index $e$ and all $f_j$ equal to a common residue degree $f$.

Fix $\mathfrak{P}$ above $\mathfrak{p}$. Its decomposition group is the stabilizerThe orbit-stabilizer theorem gives $|D_{\mathfrak{P}}|=|G|/g$. Elements of $D_{\mathfrak{P}}$ act on the residue field $\kappa (\mathfrak{P})$ over $\kappa (\mathfrak{p})$; the group kernel is the inertia groupThus inertia measures the automorphisms invisible after reduction, whereas decomposition measures all automorphisms preserving the chosen prime.

The completion $L_{\mathfrak{P}}/K_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is a Galois extension with group $D_{\mathfrak{P}}$: preservation of $\mathfrak{P}$ lets an automorphism extend continuously to the completion, and the local embeddings of this normal extension arise in this way. The degree of a field extension formula is $[L_{\mathfrak{P}}:K_{\mathfrak{p}}]=ef$. Reduction gives the exact sequenceFor surjectivity, lift a primitive residue-field generator by the Hensel lemma to obtain the maximal unramified subextension of a local field extension of $L_{\mathfrak{P}}/K_{\mathfrak{p}}$. Its automorphisms are the residue-field automorphisms. They extend to $L_{\mathfrak{P}}$ because the latter is normal. Since a finite residue field extension has a cyclic Galois group of order $f$, the exact sequence yieldsThe fixed field of local inertia is the maximal unramified subextension of a local field extension, and the extension above it is totally ramified. Primes in the same global orbit have conjugate decomposition groups and inertia groups, so the orders do not depend on the chosen prime.

If $e=1$, inertia is trivial and $D_{\mathfrak{P}}$ is generated by the unique Frobenius automorphism acting on residues by $z\mapsto z^{N\mathfrak{p}}$. Its order is $f$. In a ramified extension this residue action determines only a coset modulo inertia. A prime splits completely exactly when $e=f=1$, equivalently its decomposition group is trivial. A totally ramified prime has $g=f=1$ and $I_{\mathfrak{P}}=D_{\mathfrak{P}}=G$; an unramified prime has $I_{\mathfrak{P}}=1$. In an abelian extension, conjugation does nothing, so the associated groups and unramified Artin symbol are independent of the prime above $\mathfrak{p}$.

An extension $A\subseteq B$ is an integral extension when every $b\in B$ is an integral element over $A$, meaning thatfor some monic polynomial. The Krull dimension of a ring is the supremum of the lengths $r$ of strict chains ${\mathfrak{p}}_0⊊\cdots ⊊{\mathfrak{p}}_r$ of prime ideals; the number counted is the number of inclusions.

We prove the prime-chain facts needed for integral extensions preserve Krull dimension. Taking quotients preserves an integral equation. Localizing both rings by the same multiplicative subset of $A$ also preserves integrality: for $b/s$, divide the equation for $b$ by $s^n$, so its new coefficients are $a_i/s^{n-i}$. Localizing just $B$ at all elements outside one of its primes would not be the same operation.

Two elementary field observations are useful. If a field $C$ is integral over a subdomain $R$, then $R$ is a field, by the inverse argument given in Question 2. Conversely, if an integral domain $C$ is integral over a field $R$, every nonzero $c\in C$ has a monic equation with nonzero constant term: cancel a factor of $c$ from an equation if necessary. Dividing by $c$ and by that constant term expresses $c^{-1}$ as a polynomial in $c$. Thus $C$ is a field. In particular, the contraction of a maximal ideal under an integral extension is maximal.

For the Lying-over theorem, fix $\mathfrak{p}\in \mathrm{Spec}A$ and localize by $S=A\setminus \mathfrak{p}$. The nonzero domain $S^{-1}B$ is integral over the local ring $A_{\mathfrak{p}}$. Choose a maximal ideal $\mathfrak{n}$ of $S^{-1}B$. Its contraction is maximal in $A_{\mathfrak{p}}$, so it is the unique maximal ideal $\mathfrak{p}{A}_{\mathfrak{p}}$. The prime ideal correspondence for localization now pulls $\mathfrak{n}$ back to a prime ideal $\mathfrak{q}$ of $B$ with $\mathfrak{q}\cap A=\mathfrak{p}$.

For the going-up theorem, suppose $\mathfrak{p}\subseteq {\mathfrak{p}}^{\prime }$ and $\mathfrak{q}\cap A=\mathfrak{p}$. The injection $A/\mathfrak{p}\hookrightarrow B/\mathfrak{q}$ is still integral. Apply the just-proved Lying-over theorem to ${\mathfrak{p}}^{\prime }/\mathfrak{p}$. Pulling the resulting prime back gives ${\mathfrak{q}}^{\prime }\supseteq \mathfrak{q}$ with ${\mathfrak{q}}^{\prime }\cap A={\mathfrak{p}}^{\prime }$.

For the incomparability theorem for integral extensions, suppose $\mathfrak{q}\subseteq {\mathfrak{q}}^{\prime }$ have the same contraction $\mathfrak{p}$. Write $R=A/\mathfrak{p}$ and $C=B/\mathfrak{q}$. The latter is a domain integral over $R$. Localizing both by $R\setminus \{0\}$ makes $S^{-1}C$ integral over the fraction field of $R$, so $S^{-1}C$ is a field. The prime ${\mathfrak{q}}^{\prime }/\mathfrak{q}$ is disjoint from $S$ and therefore localizes to a proper prime, which must be zero in this field. Since $C$ is a domain and all denominators are nonzero, an element of $C$ whose localization is zero was already zero. Hence ${\mathfrak{q}}^{\prime }/\mathfrak{q}=0$, proving ${\mathfrak{q}}^{\prime }=\mathfrak{q}$.

A strict prime chain in $B$ therefore contracts to a strict chain in $A$, giving $\dim B\le \dim A$. Conversely, start over the bottom of any finite prime chain in $A$ using Lying-over theorem, and successively use going-up theorem to lift the entire chain. Distinct contractions ensure that the lifted inclusions are strict, giving the reverse inequality. Taking suprema, including when arbitrarily long chains exist, proves

For an algebraic extension $K/\mathbb{Q}$, its ring $\mathcal{O}$ of algebraic integers is an integral extension of $\mathbb{Z}$. The primes of $\mathbb{Z}$ are $(0)$ and the maximal ideals $(p)$, so the longest strict chains have length one; for example $(0)⊊(2)$. The preceding argument yieldsThis Krull dimension of rings of algebraic integers argument also covers infinite algebraic extensions. It uses integrality, not an assumption that $K$ is a number field or that $\mathcal{O}$ is Noetherian.

Put $S=R^G$, the ring of invariants. It is an integral domain because it is a subring of the domain $R$. Embed $\mathrm{Frac}S$ in $\mathrm{Frac}R$ in the evident way.

Suppose $q\in \mathrm{Frac}S$ is an integral element over $S$. Its monic equation has coefficients in $S\subseteq R$, so $q$ is integral over $R$. Since $R$ is a normal domain, $q\in R$.

Write $q=a/b$ with $a,b\in S$ and $b\ne 0$. Each ring automorphism in $G$ extends to the fraction field by acting on numerator and denominator, and fixes this fraction. Hence $q\in R^G=S$. We have proved that $S$ is integrally closed in its own fraction field:This normality of a ring of invariants argument actually works for any group; finiteness is not needed for this conclusion. For finite $G$, there is additionally an integral extension $R^G\subseteq R$, since for each $r\in R$ the orbit polynomial under a finite automorphism groupis monic, has coefficients fixed by $G$ and vanishes at $r$. Neither argument divides by $|G|$, so it is valid when the characteristic divides the group order. Here normality means integral closedness of a domain.

Put $K=\mathrm{Frac}(A)$ and let $B$ be the integral closure of $A$ in $L$. We first establish the elementary integral extension machinery, and then use the trace pairing to put $B$ inside a finite $A$-module.

An integral element $x$ satisfies a monic polynomial over the base ring. If its equation has degree $r$, the powers $1,x,\dots ,x^{r-1}$ generate $A[x]$ as an $A$-module. More generally, adjoining finitely many integral elements gives a finitely generated module: reduce the exponent of each generator using its monic equation. Conversely, if an $A$-submodule $M$ of an extension algebra contains $1$, is finitely generated, and is stable under multiplication by $x$, choose generators $m_j$ and write $x{m}_j={\sum }_i{a}_{ij}{m}_i$. Multiplying $(xI-(a_{ij}))$ by its adjugate shows that its monic determinant annihilates every $m_j$, hence annihilates $1$. This finite-module criterion for integrality is the determinant trick.

If $x,y$ are integral elements, the finite $A$-module $A[x,y]$ is stable under $x+y$, $xy$ and $-x$. The criterion proves that these are integral elements. Thus the integral closure really is a subring. It also proves integral dependence is transitive: if $x$ is integral over an integral $A$-algebra $C$, take the finitely many coefficients of its equation, form their finite $A$-subalgebra $C_0$, and observe that $C_0[x]$ is finite over $C_0$ and therefore finite over $A$. The criterion applies to $x$. In particular, an algebra generated by finitely many integral elements is a finite integral extension, even though an arbitrary integral extension need not be finite.

Choose a $K$-basis $v_1,\dots ,v_d$ of $L$. Each basis element is algebraic over $K$. Ifchoose a nonzero $a_i\in A$ clearing all coefficient denominators. Then $e_i=a_i{v}_i$ satisfies a monic equation with coefficients $a_i^j{c}_{ij}\in A$. Hence all $e_i$ belong to $B$ and still form a $K$-basis. This is integral field basis by denominator clearing.

We next prove the trace of an integral element over a normal domain property. For $z\in B$, its images under all $K$-embeddings of $L$ into an algebraic closure are integral elements over $A$, because each satisfies the same monic equation. Their sum is integral by the subring property just proved. Since $L/K$ is a separable field extension, that sum is the field trace ${\mathrm{Tr}}_{L/K}(z)$ and lies in $K$. The normality assumption means that $A$ is a normal domain, equivalently an integrally closed domain, soThe same conclusion applies to $z{e}_i$, since $B$ is a ring.

The trace pairing of a finite separable field extension is nondegenerate. One can see this directly using the allowed Galois theory: for a primitive element $u$, the embedding matrix of $1,u,\dots ,u^{d-1}$ is a Vandermonde matrix in the distinct conjugates of $u$. Its determinant is nonzero, and the trace Gram matrix is its transpose times itself. Nondegeneracy is unchanged by a change of basis.

Let $M={\sum }_{i}A{e}_i$. Its trace-dual lattice isNondegeneracy supplies a trace-dual $K$-basis $e_1^{\ast },\dots ,e_d^{\ast }$, with $\mathrm{Tr}(e_i{e}_j^{\ast })={\delta }_{ij}$. The coefficient formula givesEquivalently, the matrix $T=(\mathrm{Tr}(e_i{e}_j))$ has entries in $A$ and nonzero determinant $D$; if $b={\sum }_i{c}_i{e}_i\in B$, then $Tc\in A^d$ and the adjugate formula gives $Dc\in A^d$. Thus $B\subseteq D^{-1}M$ as well. Both descriptions exhibit a finite free ambient $A$-module.

A finite $A$-module is a Noetherian module when $A$ is a Noetherian ring, and every submodule of a Noetherian module is finitely generated. Since $B$ is an $A$-submodule of $M^{\vee }$, we obtainThis proves finiteness of integral closure in a finite separable extension. The hypotheses have distinct roles: separability makes the trace pairing nonsingular, normality puts integral traces back in $A$, and Noetherianity makes the contained submodule finite. Also $\mathrm{Frac}(B)=L$, since the integral basis elements span $L$ over $K$, and $B$ is itself Noetherian because its ideals are $A$-submodules of a finite $A$-module.

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 Laurent polynomial ring is a localization of a ring:The Hilbert basis theorem makes $k[X_1,X_2]$ a Noetherian ring, and Localization of a Noetherian ring preserves this property. Thus $\boxed{R\text{ is Noetherian}}$.

For separating finite Laurent support by an integer weight, take a nonzero Laurent polynomial $r$ and let $F\subset {\mathbb{Z}}^2$ be its finite set of exponent pairs with nonzero coefficients. Choose an integer $N$ such thatwhere the maximum is zero if $F$ has only one member. Set $(a_1,a_2)=(1,N)$. If $m_1+N{m}_2=m_1^{\prime }+N{m}_2^{\prime }$, thenso $m_2=m_2^{\prime }$ and then $m_1=m_1^{\prime }$. Consequently all powers of $T$ in ${\theta }_{(1,N)}(r)$ are distinct. The linear independence of the Laurent monomials prevents cancellation, givingThe choice depends on the finite support of $r$; a single fixed substitution need not detect every nonzero element.

For Noetherianity of subalgebras of a one-variable Laurent polynomial ring, let $A$ be a unital $k$-subalgebra of $k[T,T^{-1}]$. If $A=k$, it is already a Noetherian ring. Otherwise we find a nonconstant $f\in A$ and an ambient ring $B$ containing $A$ such that $B$ is a finitely generated module over $k[f]$.

If $A\subseteq k[T]$, choose a nonconstant polynomial $f=a_d{T}^d+\cdots +a_0$ in $A$, where $a_d\ne 0$. Then $T$ is an integral element over $k[f]$, since it satisfies the monic polynomial equationThus $B=k[T]$ is a finitely generated module over $k[f]$, generated by $1,T,\dots ,T^{d-1}$. The case $A\subseteq k[T^{-1}]$ is identical after replacing $T$ by $T^{-1}$.

In the remaining case $A$ is contained in neither of these two polynomial rings. There is an element with a positive exponent and an element with a negative exponent. If either already has both, use it as $f$. Otherwise their sum has both, since the positive powers of the first and the negative powers of the second cannot cancel. We obtainMultiplying this identity by $T^p$ gives a polynomial equation for $T$ with leading coefficient $a_q$:Dividing by $a_q$ makes it monic. Similarly, multiplication by $T^{-q}$ gives a monic equation for $T^{-1}$ after division by $a_{-p}$. Both generators are therefore integral elements over $k[f]$, so $B=k[T,T^{-1}]$ is a finitely generated module over $k[f]$.

In all three cases $k[f]$ is a Noetherian ring, as a quotient of a one-variable polynomial ring. The subalgebra $A\subseteq B$ is also a $k[f]$-submodule, so it is a Noetherian module. Every ideal of $A$ is a $k[f]$-submodule of $A$ and is therefore finitely generated over $k[f]$, hence over $A$. This proves

For the final request, take the following subalgebra of the two-variable Laurent polynomial ring:Let $J=X_{1}k[X_1,X_2]$, an ideal of $A$. We haveas $k$-vector spaces. In particular, the classes of $X_1{X}_2^j$, for $j\ge 0$, are linearly independent. If $J$ had finitely many generators as an $A$-module, their classes would span $J/J^2$ over $A/J=k$, contradicting its infinite dimension. Hence $J$ is not finitely generated and $A$ is not a Noetherian ring. This illustrates why the preceding result is special to one Laurent variable.

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.