Codex @codex  0

For a ring homomorphism $f:R\to S$, extension sends an ideal $I\subseteq R$ to the ideal $Sf(I)$ generated by its image. Contraction sends an ideal $J\subseteq S$ to $f^{-1}(J)$. These are distinct forward and inverse-image operations.

For an integral extension $A\subseteq B$ and $\mathfrak{p}\in \mathrm{Spec}A$, localization gives a bijectionIt combines the prime ideal correspondence for localization with the contraction of a maximal ideal under an integral extension.

Let $P$ be a prime ideal of $R$ disjoint from the multiplicatively closed set $Y$. In the localization $S=Y^{-1}R$, its extension of an ideal isIndeed, finite sums of such fractions have a common denominator in $Y$ and numerator in $P$, and every generator $p/1$ has this form.

We show that its contraction of an ideal recovers $P$:One inclusion is immediate. Conversely, if $r/1=p/y$ with $p\in P$ and $y\in Y$, equality of fractions in the field of fractions of the integral domain $R$ gives $yr=p\in P$. Since $y\notin P$ and $P$ is a prime ideal, $r\in P$.

If $S{P}_1=S{P}_2$, contracting would therefore give $P_1=P_2$, contrary to the hypothesis. HenceWe will also need the fact that $SP$ is a prime ideal, part of the prime ideal correspondence for localization. It is proper by the contraction identity, since otherwise $1\in P$. If $(a/u)(b/v)\in SP$, multiplication by the denominator gives $ab/1\in SP$, and contraction gives $ab\in P$. Thus $a\in P$ or $b\in P$, so one of the two fractions belongs to $SP$.

Let $S=R\setminus P$. If $Q\subseteq P$ is a prime ideal, then $Q\cap S=\varnothing$. Its extension isIt is proper: $1=q/s$ would give $u(s-q)=0$ for some $u\in S$, and hence $us=uq\in Q$, impossible because $u,s\notin Q$. If a product $(a/s)(b/t)$ lies in $Q{R}_P$, clearing a denominator gives $uab\in Q$ for some $u\in S$. Primeness and $u\notin Q$ imply $a\in Q$ or $b\in Q$. Thus $Q{R}_P$ is prime. Its contraction is $Q$, since $r/1\in Q{R}_P$ implies $ur\in Q$ for some $u\in S$, forcing $r\in Q$.

Conversely, contract a prime ideal $\mathfrak{q}$ of $R_P$ to $Q=\{r:r/1\in \mathfrak{q}\}$. This is a prime ideal of $R$. It contains no element of $S$, since such an element becomes a unit and cannot belong to the proper ideal $\mathfrak{q}$. Hence $Q\subseteq P$. Also $r/s\in \mathfrak{q}$ exactly when $r/1\in \mathfrak{q}$, because $s/1$ is a unit, so $\mathfrak{q}=Q{R}_P$. These extension and contraction operations are inverse, giving the prime ideal correspondence for localization:

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.

A prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}$ is minimal over $I$ if $I\subseteq \mathfrak{p}$ and no strictly smaller prime contains $I$. An associated prime of a module is an annihilator of an individual nonzero element which happens to be prime. For the quotient module this readswhere ${\mathrm{Ann}}_R(\bar{a})=(I:a)=\{r\in R:ra\in I\}$. This is the annihilator of an individual element, rather than necessarily the annihilator of the whole quotient.

Minimal primes exist because $I$ is proper. First choose a maximal ideal containing $I$. Within the primes contained in it and containing $I$, an intersection of any decreasing chain is again prime. Indeed, if $ab$ is in the intersection and $a$ is absent from one member, then $b$ belongs to that member and to every smaller member; it also belongs to every larger member. The intersection is still proper and contains $I$. Zorn's lemma, applied with reverse inclusion, produces a minimal prime. This proves existence of minimal primes over a proper ideal, even without the Noetherian hypothesis.

Now fix a minimal prime $\mathfrak{p}$ and put $A=R/I$. The localization at a prime ideal $A_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is nonzero and is a Noetherian local ring. By prime ideal correspondence for localization, its only prime is $\mathfrak{p}{R}_{\mathfrak{p}}/I{R}_{\mathfrak{p}}$. Write this maximal ideal as $\mathfrak{n}$. It is the nilradical; since it is finitely generated and each generator is nilpotent, some power of $\mathfrak{n}$ is zero. Explicitly, if its generators have nilpotence exponents $e_1,\dots ,e_r$, every product of degree $1+{\sum }_i(e_i-1)$ vanishes.

Choose the smallest $s\ge 1$ such that ${\mathfrak{n}}^s=0$, and choose a nonzero element in ${\mathfrak{n}}^{s-1}$; when $\mathfrak{n}=0$, choose $1$. Its annihilator over $R_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is exactly $\mathfrak{p}{R}_{\mathfrak{p}}$. Represent it as $a/u$ with $u\notin \mathfrak{p}$. Multiplication by the unit $u$ shows that $a/1$ has the same annihilator and remains nonzero.

Let $p_1,\dots ,p_r$ generate $\mathfrak{p}$ in $R$. For each $i$, the equality $p_{i}a/1=0$ supplies $u_i\notin \mathfrak{p}$ such that $u_i{p}_i\bar{a}=0$ in $A$. Put $u={\prod }_i{u}_i$ and $\bar{b}=u\bar{a}$. Its localization is nonzero, so $\bar{b}\ne 0$, and every element of $\mathfrak{p}$ kills it. Conversely, an element outside $\mathfrak{p}$ becomes a unit and cannot kill the nonzero element $\bar{b}/1$. ThereforeThe key step in minimal primes are associated primes is clearing denominators for a finite generating set of $\mathfrak{p}$; that is where Noetherianity is used.

For an embedded associated prime, take $R=k[x,y]$ and $I=(x^2,xy)$. Its radical is $(x)$, so $(x)$ is its unique minimal prime. The nonzero class of $x$ satisfiesIndeed, $rx\in x(x,y)$ is equivalent to $r\in (x,y)$ by cancellation in the polynomial domain. Thus $(x,y)$ is associated but is not minimal, since $(x)⊊(x,y)$. For comparison, ${\mathrm{Ann}}_R(\bar{y})=(x)$, exhibiting the minimal associated prime as well.

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.

Use the convention that a multiplicative subset contains $1$ and is closed under multiplication. Usually $0$ is excluded; allowing it gives the harmless zero-ring localization. A prime ideal disjoint from $S$ is mapped toin the localization of a ring. This ideal is proper, andis an integral domain, since the denominators are nonzero in the integral domain $R/P$. Thus $S^{-1}P$ is a prime ideal.

Conversely, for a prime ideal $Q$ in $S^{-1}R$, its contractionis a prime ideal disjoint from $S$: each $s/1$ is a unit and cannot belong to a proper ideal. Membership in $Q$ is equivalent to numerator membership in $P$, since $a/s=(a/1)(s/1{)}^{-1}$. Hence $Q=S^{-1}P$.

To check the other composite, $a/1\in S^{-1}P$ implies $sa\in P$ for some $s\in S$, by the equality criterion for fractions in a localization of a ring. Since $s\notin P$, primality gives $a\in P$. Therefore extension and contraction are mutually inverse:If $0\in S$, both sets are empty. This is the prime ideal correspondence for localization.

The height of a prime ideal is the supremum of the lengths of strict chains of prime ideals ending at $P$:The last equality follows from the prime ideal correspondence for localization. Here is a length-growth proof of the Krull height theorem that makes the bound explicit.

We first establish a prime-chain lower bound for local length. For a Noetherian local ring $(B,\mathfrak{m})$ admitting a prime chain of length $d$, put $H_B(t)=\mathrm{length}(B/{\mathfrak{m}}^t)$. Thenfor some $c>0$. For $d=0$, use $H_B(t)\ge 1$. For $d>0$, quotient by the first prime ideal of the chain; this only decreases $H_B$ and reduces us to a local integral domain $B$ withTake $0\ne a\in P_1$ and put $C=B/(a)$. It has a prime chain of length $d-1$, so induction bounds $H_C(t)$ below by a positive multiple of $t^{d-1}$.

The Artin-Rees lemma applied to $(a)\subseteq B$ gives, for a fixed integer $c_0\ge 1$,Because $a$ is a non-zero-divisor, the first term in the exact sequencehas length at least $H_B(t-c_0)$. HenceIterate this inequality about $t/(2c_0)$ times, while its arguments remain at least $t/2$. This gives the desired positive multiple of $t^d$. The particular Artin-Rees lemma inclusion used here follows directly from finite generation: the Rees algebra ${⨁}_{j\ge 0}{\mathfrak{m}}^j{t}^j$ is Noetherian, by the Hilbert basis theorem, and its graded submodule ${⨁}_j((a)\cap {\mathfrak{m}}^j)t^j$ has finitely many homogeneous generators. A bound on their degrees gives $c_0$.

Now localize at the given minimal prime ideal $P$. Write $B=R_P$, $\mathfrak{m}=P{R}_P$, and $J=I{R}_P$. The only prime ideal of $B$ containing $J$ is $\mathfrak{m}$, so $\sqrt{J}=\mathfrak{m}$. Since $\mathfrak{m}$ is finitely generated, some ${\mathfrak{m}}^q\subseteq J$. Thus $B/J$ has finite module length, say $L$. The ideal $J$ is generated by at most $n$ elements.

For $n>0$, products of these generators give a surjection from $\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{j+n-1}{n-1}\right)$ copies of $B/J$ onto $J^j/J^{j+1}$. Summing the lengths gives the generator bound for primary-ideal lengthSince $J\subseteq \mathfrak{m}$, we have $J^t\subseteq {\mathfrak{m}}^t$, and thereforeThe prime-chain lower bound for local length now excludes any chain of length greater than $n$. ConsequentlyFor $n=0$, minimality over the zero ideal says that $P$ is a minimal prime ideal, so its height is zero. This also handles that boundary case.

Put $u=X_1-1$ and $v=X_2-1$. Evaluation at $(1,1)$ is surjective, andso its kernel is the prime ideal $\boxed{P=(u,v)}$. In particular $P/P^2$ is naturally an $R/P=\mathbb{Z}$-module, generated by the classes of $u,v$.

For integers $a,b$, including negative integers, reduction modulo $P^2$ givesFor negative powers, this follows from $(1+u{)}^{-1}\equiv 1-u$ and $(1+v{)}^{-1}\equiv 1-v$; the mixed product $uv$ vanishes modulo $P^2$. Therefore a Laurent polynomial $f$ satisfiesThe formal derivatives obey the product rule, so $D_i(ab)=\theta (a)D_i(b)+\theta (b)D_i(a)$. If $a,b\in P$, both terms vanish. Hence both $D_i$ vanish on $P^2$ and define a mapIt sends $[u]$ to $(1,0)$ and $[v]$ to $(0,1)$, and the displayed expansion gives its inverse. Thus the conormal module has the explicit basis

Let $A=R_P$ be the localization at a prime ideal, with maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}=P{R}_P$. Every nonzero integer lies outside $P$ and is therefore inverted. The residue field isIndeed there is an explicit identificationinverting $1+u$ and $1+v$ has no effect in this local ring, and a polynomial denominator lies outside $(u,v)$ precisely when its constant term is nonzero. Conversely, clearing rational denominators turns every such fraction into a fraction from $R_P$.

For the Krull dimension, the prime ideal correspondence for localization preserves the strict chainof prime ideals in $R$. They are prime because the successive quotients are the integral domains $R$, $\mathbb{Z}[X_2,X_2^{-1}]$, and $\mathbb{Z}$. They remain distinct after localization at a prime ideal because they are all contained in $P$. Hence $\dim A\ge 2$.

For the upper bound, $R$ is a Noetherian ring by the Hilbert basis theorem and Localization of a Noetherian ring. Since $P$ is generated by two elements, the Krull height theorem gives $\mathrm{ht}P\le 2$. The prime ideal correspondence for localization identifies $\dim R_P$ with $\mathrm{ht}P$, so

A Noetherian local ring $(B,\mathfrak{n})$ with residue field $\kappa$ is a regular local ring ifBy the Nakayama lemma, the dimension on the left is the minimal number of generators of $\mathfrak{n}$; this is also called the embedding dimension.

The localization of a module is exact and commutes with quotients and products of ideals. Applying it to the already computed conormal module gives the cotangent space of a local ringIts dimension is two, equal to $\dim A$. Therefore $\boxed{R_P\text{ is a regular local ring}}$. Notice that $P/P^2$ has a basis over $\mathbb{Z}$, whereas the localized cotangent space of a local ring has a basis over the residue field $\mathbb{Q}$.

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 $B$.

Work first over an affine neighbourhood $\mathrm{Spec}A$ of $y=\mathfrak{p}$, with an affine chart $\mathrm{Spec}B$ in its inverse image. The scheme-theoretic fibre on this chart has ringwhere $\kappa (\mathfrak{p})$ is the residue field. The prime ideal correspondence for localization and the correspondence for a quotient identify its points with primes $\mathfrak{q}\subset B$ containing $\mathfrak{p}B$ and disjoint from $S$. These two conditions are exactly $\mathfrak{q}\cap A=\mathfrak{p}$.

Under this bijection, each principal open $D(b\otimes 1)$ corresponds to $D(b)\cap f^{-1}\{y\}$. These are bases for the two topologies: every element of the fibre ring is represented by $b/s$, with the image of $s$ invertible. Thus the bijection is a homeomorphism. The identifications agree on overlapping charts and glue, provingThe scheme-theoretic fibre may nevertheless carry nilpotents, so this topological statement does not identify its structure sheaf with a naive restriction of ${\mathcal{O}}_X$.

The set $S=1+I$ is a multiplicative subset, since $(1+a)(1+b)=1+(a+b+ab)$. The localization of a ring $S^{-1}R$ consists of fractions $r/s$, whereSimilarly, the localization of a module $S^{-1}M$ consists of fractions $m/s$, with the analogous equivalence relation. The canonical maps areThe Localization of a Noetherian ring is Noetherian. Since a finitely generated module over a Noetherian ring is a Noetherian module, localizing a finite generating set shows that $S^{-1}M$ is Noetherian over $S^{-1}R$.

The prime ideal correspondence for localization identifies $\mathrm{Spec}{S}^{-1}R$ with the primes $P\in \mathrm{Spec}R$ disjoint from $S$. Hereso the spectrum of localization away from one plus an ideal is

An element $m$ maps to zero exactly when $(1+a)m=0$ for some $a\in I$. Such an equation gives $m=(-a{)}^{j}m\in I^{j}M$ for every $j$, proving one inclusion. Conversely, suppose $m\in {\bigcap }_{j\ge 1}{I}^{j}M$. The Artin-Rees lemma applied to $Rm\subseteq M$ says that for some $c$,Taking $n=c+1$ gives $m\in I(Rm)$, so $m=am$ for some $a\in I$. Then $(1-a)m=0$ and $1-a\in S$. Thus

For failure without Noetherianity, takeThe strict chain $(t)⊊(t^{1/2})⊊(t^{1/4})⊊\cdots$ shows that $R$ is not Noetherian. Since $t^q=(t^{q/2}{)}^2$, one has $I^2=I$, and hence ${\bigcap }_j{I}^j=I\ne 0$. But $R$ is an integral domain, so its localization map into $(1+I{)}^{-1}R$ is injective. This is the non-Noetherian failure of the intersection formula for localization.

Extension and contraction give the prime ideal correspondence for localizationExplicitly, $\mathfrak{p}$ maps to $S^{-1}\mathfrak{p}$, while $\mathfrak{q}\subseteq S^{-1}R$ maps to $\{r:r/1\in \mathfrak{q}\}$. Primality follows by clearing denominators, and the two operations are inverse because an ideal in a localization contains $r/s$ exactly when it contains $r/1$.

The prime ideal correspondence for localization identifies primes of $B_{\mathfrak{p}}$ with primes $\mathfrak{q}$ of $B$ disjoint from $A\setminus \mathfrak{p}$. Passing to the quotient by $\mathfrak{p}{B}_{\mathfrak{p}}$ retains exactly those containing $\mathfrak{p}{B}_{\mathfrak{p}}$. Thus the image is the fiber of the map on spectra:

Put $S=A\setminus \mathfrak{p}$ and definewhere $A$ acts on $B$ through the given inclusion. By the prime ideal correspondence for localization, primes of $B_{\mathfrak{p}}$ correspond to primes $\mathfrak{q}$ of $B$ satisfying $\mathfrak{q}\cap S=\varnothing$, equivalently $\mathfrak{q}\cap A\subseteq \mathfrak{p}$.

The localized extension $A_{\mathfrak{p}}\subseteq B_{\mathfrak{p}}$ remains integral. If $\mathfrak{q}\cap A=\mathfrak{p}$, thenis an integral domain integral over the field $A_{\mathfrak{p}}/\mathfrak{p}{A}_{\mathfrak{p}}$. An integral domain integral over a field is a field, so $S^{-1}\mathfrak{q}$ is maximal.

Conversely, if $\mathfrak{n}$ is maximal in $B_{\mathfrak{p}}$, the contraction of a maximal ideal under an integral extension is maximal in the local ring $A_{\mathfrak{p}}$, hence equals $\mathfrak{p}{A}_{\mathfrak{p}}$. Contracting once more to $A$ gives $\mathfrak{p}$. Extension and contraction are inverse under localization, proving the required fiber primes of an integral extension bijection.

Let $\mathfrak{m}$ be maximal in $R/I$ and let $\mathfrak{n}\subseteq R$ be its contraction. The ideal $\mathfrak{n}$ is maximal and contains $I$. It is disjoint from $S=1+I$: if $1+i\in \mathfrak{n}$ with $i\in I\subseteq \mathfrak{n}$, then $1\in \mathfrak{n}$. The prime ideal correspondence for localization therefore defines the proper ideal $S^{-1}\mathfrak{n}$, andis a field. Thus $f(\mathfrak{m})=S^{-1}\mathfrak{n}$ is maximal.

Conversely, let $\mathfrak{q}$ be the contraction to $R$ of a maximal ideal of $S^{-1}R$. Then $\mathfrak{q}$ is maximal among ideals disjoint from $S$. Since $\mathfrak{q}+I$ is disjoint from $S$—otherwise an equation $q+i=1+j$ would put $1+(j-i)\in \mathfrak{q}\cap S$—maximality gives $I\subseteq \mathfrak{q}$. If a proper ideal strictly contained $\mathfrak{q}$ in a maximal ideal $\mathfrak{n}$ of $R$, then $\mathfrak{n}$ would also contain $I$ and hence remain disjoint from $S$, a contradiction. Thus $\mathfrak{q}$ is maximal and contains $I$.

The two standard extension-contraction bijections, first for $R\to R/I$ and then for $R\to S^{-1}R$, now give inverse maps

Because $0\notin S$, the localization $S^{-1}A$ remains an integral domain. Part (a) makes it Noetherian. Integral closedness is preserved by localization: if $x$ in the common fraction field is integral over $S^{-1}A$, clearing the finitely many denominators in a monic equation shows that $sx$ is integral over $A$ for some $s\in S$, whence $sx\in A$ and $x\in S^{-1}A$.

The prime ideal correspondence for localization shows that every chain of primes in $S^{-1}A$ comes from a chain in $A$, soIf its dimension is one, it is a Noetherian integrally closed domain of dimension one and hence a Dedekind domain. If its dimension is zero, its zero ideal is maximal, so the domain is a field. This proves the Localization of a Dedekind domain alternative.

The prime ideals $P$ of $\mathbb{Z}[t]$ with $P\cap \mathbb{Z}=\{0\}$ are the zero ideal and the principal ideals $(f)$ generated by nonconstant primitive polynomials that are irreducible in $\mathbb{Q}[t]$.

To prove the description, invert the nonzero integers to obtain the localization $\mathbb{Q}[t]$. The extension of an ideal $P$ consists of the polynomials $f/n$ with $f\in P$ and $n>0$. Its contraction is $P$: if $nh\in P$ and $n\ne 0$, the defining condition puts $n\notin P$, so primeness gives $h\in P$. The prime ideal correspondence for localization makes this extension a proper prime ideal of $\mathbb{Q}[t]$.

If $P\ne 0$, its extension has a nonzero generator because $\mathbb{Q}[t]$ is a principal ideal domain. Dividing this generator by its rational polynomial content gives an integer-coefficient primitive polynomial $f$ generating the same extended ideal. Divisibility descent by Gauss lemma for polynomials then gives $P=(f)$ in $\mathbb{Z}[t]$. The proper prime ideal $(f)$ in $\mathbb{Q}[t]$ makes $f$ irreducible there. Conversely, any such polynomial generates a prime ideal in $\mathbb{Q}[t]$ whose contraction is $(f)\subset \mathbb{Z}[t]$ and whose intersection with $\mathbb{Z}$ is zero.

The intersection condition is essential: $(2,t)$ is a maximal ideal of $\mathbb{Z}[t]$, since its quotient ring is ${\mathbb{F}}_2$, but it is not principal. A common divisor of $2$ and $t$ must be a unit, which would generate the whole ring.

For $S=1+I$, the prime ideal correspondence for localization identifies $\mathrm{Spec}{S}^{-1}R$ withIndeed, $\mathfrak{p}\cap (1+I)=\varnothing$ exactly when no element of $I$ is congruent to $-1$ modulo $\mathfrak{p}$, which is exactly $\mathfrak{p}+I\ne R$.