Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2010 iii Paper 3 3 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
An extension is an integral extension when every is an integral element over , meaning thatfor some monic polynomial. The Krull dimension of a ring is the supremum of the lengths of strict chains 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 also preserves integrality: for , divide the equation for by , so its new coefficients are . Localizing just at all elements outside one of its primes would not be the same operation.
Two elementary field observations are useful. If a field is integral over a subdomain , then is a field, by the inverse argument given in Question 2. Conversely, if an integral domain is integral over a field , every nonzero has a monic equation with nonzero constant term: cancel a factor of from an equation if necessary. Dividing by and by that constant term expresses as a polynomial in . Thus is a field. In particular, the contraction of a maximal ideal under an integral extension is maximal.
For the Lying-over theorem, fix and localize by . The nonzero domain is integral over the local ring . Choose a maximal ideal of . Its contraction is maximal in , so it is the unique maximal ideal . The prime ideal correspondence for localization now pulls back to a prime ideal of with .
For the going-up theorem, suppose and . The injection is still integral. Apply the just-proved Lying-over theorem to . Pulling the resulting prime back gives with .
For the incomparability theorem for integral extensions, suppose have the same contraction . Write and . The latter is a domain integral over . Localizing both by makes integral over the fraction field of , so is a field. The prime is disjoint from and therefore localizes to a proper prime, which must be zero in this field. Since is a domain and all denominators are nonzero, an element of whose localization is zero was already zero. Hence , proving .
A strict prime chain in therefore contracts to a strict chain in , giving . Conversely, start over the bottom of any finite prime chain in 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 , its ring of algebraic integers is an integral extension of . The primes of are and the maximal ideals , so the longest strict chains have length one; for example . The preceding argument yieldsThis Krull dimension of rings of algebraic integers argument also covers infinite algebraic extensions. It uses integrality, not an assumption that is a number field or that is Noetherian.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2012 iii Paper 13 1 i Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
Use the usual convention that a variety is an irreducible variety. For a quasi-projective algebraic set , its algebraic dimension is the supremum of the lengths of strict chainsof nonempty irreducible closed subsets of . It is the maximum of the algebraic dimensions of its irreducible components. On an affine algebraic set, the correspondence between irreducible closed subsets and prime ideals reverses inclusion, so this is the Krull dimension of the coordinate ring. On a quasi-projective algebraic set, it is the supremum of the Krull dimensions of the coordinate rings of its affine open subsets. At a closed point , the Krull dimension of the local ring measures chains through .
Here is a closed-point dimension lemma for affine domains that avoids transcendence degree. Put . By Noether normalization, there is a integral extensionThe number of variables is because integral extensions preserve Krull dimension and . For any maximal ideal of , its contraction to is a maximal ideal. Since is an algebraically closed field, has height of a prime ideal . The going-down theorem applies because is an integrally closed domain and is a integral domain. It lifts a length- chain below to one below . HenceThe opposite inequality follows from .
For the nonempty open subset , choose a nonempty principal open subset and a closed point . Every prime ideal below avoids , so the preceding chain survives in the localization . Consequently . Conversely, any chain of irreducible closed subsets in gives a chain of the same length after taking closures in : intersecting those closures with recovers the original subsets. Therefore
For the principal hypersurface dimension lemma, let be a minimal prime ideal over . Since in the integral domain , . The Krull principal ideal theorem gives . Choose a closed point on lying on none of the other finitely many irreducible components of . Such a point exists because those other components cut out proper closed subsets of the irreducible variety , and closed points are dense. Set . Then andWrite . Choose a system of parameters in and lift it to . The ideal has radical equal to the maximal ideal of . The Krull height theorem yields . On the other hand, any chain of prime ideals containing can be extended strictly at the bottom by the zero prime ideal of the integral domain , giving . Thus . Since is a localization of , . Extending a chain in by also gives . Hence every component has the required dimension:This argument uses Noether normalization, going-down theorem, and the Krull height theorem, never the dimension from the function field theorem. Irreducibility is essential: if the word variety were instead allowed to mean an arbitrary reducible affine algebraic set, neither assertion would hold without extra hypotheses. For example, a disjoint union of an affine plane and an affine line has an open component of smaller algebraic dimension; a function equal to on the plane and a coordinate on the line has a nonempty zero set of algebraic dimension .
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2013 iii Paper 2 2 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
The Noether normalization lemma is valid over every field , including finite fields: a nonzero finitely generated algebra contains elements with algebraic independence over such that is finite as a module over the polynomial ring . We prove it without an infinite-field hypothesis.
Write and induct on . If the generators have algebraic independence, they already give a polynomial ring and the assertion is immediate. Otherwise choose a nonzero relation . Choose an integer larger than every exponent in the monomials of , and setIn , the largest power of has a nonzero coefficient in . Indeed, a monomial with exponents contributes top weight . These weights are distinct by uniqueness of base- expansion, so only one monomial contributes the highest power. After rescaling, the substituted relation is monic in .
Consequently is an integral element over , and is finite over . Apply the induction hypothesis to and compose the finite module extensions. This proves Noether normalization by weighted substitutions. The induction reaches , where . For an integral domain , taking fraction fields makes the resulting extension finite algebraic, so is the transcendence degree of . More generally : integral extensions preserve Krull dimension, and a polynomial algebra in variables has Krull dimension .
A useful bridge to the Hilbert Nullstellensatz is the Zariski lemma. If a field is a finitely generated algebra over , normalization makes it finite and integral over a polynomial ring . A subring over which a field is integral is a field: for nonzero , an integral equation for , multiplied by , expresses as an element of . Therefore 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 and is a finite field extension. This proves the Zariski lemma.
Now let be an algebraically closed field. The Weak Hilbert Nullstellensatz says that every maximal ideal of is uniquely of the formTo prove it, the residue field is a field generated as a -algebra by the images of the variables. The Zariski lemma makes it finite algebraic over , and algebraic closedness makes it . Thus each has an image . The evaluation map has kernel the displayed ideal: subtracting the constant value of a polynomial expresses its difference as a combination of . That kernel is maximal and contained in , so equality holds. Conversely every evaluation kernel is maximal because its quotient is . 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 , let be its common-zero set and let be all polynomials vanishing on that set. The Strong Hilbert Nullstellensatz statesThe inclusion follows because a field has no nonzero nilpotent elements. For the other inclusion, take vanishing on , with , and form the Rabinowitsch trick idealIt has no common zero: at a zero of the second generator has value one. The Weak Hilbert Nullstellensatz in variables gives . Hence a finite identity has the form , with . Substitute in the localization of a ring . Clearing the finitely many powers of occurring in denominators gives for some , so . The case 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.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2014 iii Paper 1 3 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
An integral extension means that every element satisfies a monic polynomial with coefficients in :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 is integral over a subdomain and is a field, then is a field: for , a monic equation for , multiplied by a suitable power of , expresses as an element of . 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 at . The inclusion remains injective and integral, and is nonzero. Any maximal ideal of contracts to the unique maximal ideal of , by the field criterion just proved. The prime ideal correspondence for localization then gives a prime of contracting to .
For the going-up theorem, suppose lies over and . The quotient inclusion is integral. Apply Lying-over theorem to the prime ; lifting back gives contracting to .
For the incomparability theorem for integral extensions, suppose contract to the same . After localizing at , both are maximal ideals, because they lie over the maximal ideal of . Their inclusion is therefore equality. The bijection between primes under localization gives .
Now contract a strict chain of primes in . Incomparability theorem for integral extensions ensures that every contraction remains strict, so . Conversely, Lying-over theorem lifts the first member of any finite chain in , and repeated going-up theorem lifts the remaining members; different contractions ensure a strict chain in . Taking suprema, including the possibility of infinity, givesThis proves that integral extensions preserve Krull dimension.
For the given quotient, put . The relation is monic in , so monic polynomial division gives a unique representative . Thus is injective and is free of rank two as a -module. In particular, is integral over . The one-variable polynomial ring has dimension one: its zero prime is strictly below , and every nonzero prime is maximal because is a principal ideal domain. HenceThis is an instance of dimension of a monic plane hypersurface. No irreducibility or algebraic-closure assumption on is needed; monicity supplies the integral extension in every characteristic.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2018 iii Paper 101 6 d Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
We use three theorems for an integral extension , none requiring Noetherian hypotheses. The Lying-over theorem says that each prime ideal of is for some prime ideal of . The going-up theorem says that if in and , there is with . The incomparability theorem for integral extensions says that comparable prime ideals of with the same contraction to are equal.
Take any strict chainin . The contraction of an ideal operation gives , which are prime ideals of , by the proof in Question 1(b), and remain strictly increasing by the incomparability theorem for integral extensions. Thus every chain length in occurs in , giving .
Conversely, take any strict chain in . Use the Lying-over theorem to choose over , then repeatedly use the going-up theorem to obtain with the prescribed contractions. Each inclusion must be strict, since its contractions are distinct. Hence every chain length in occurs in , giving .
Taking suprema proves integral extensions preserve Krull dimension:The argument works equally well when the dimensions are infinite, since it compares all finite chain lengths.