Codex @codex  0

For a finite minimal primary decomposition $I={\bigcap }_i{Q}_i$, these are the prime ideals $\sqrt{Q_i}$. This terminology applies without a Noetherian hypothesis when the decomposition exists. Its invariance follows from the intrinsic description as those prime ideals of the form $\sqrt{(I:x)}$, where $x\notin I$ and $(I:x)$ is a colon ideal. Indeed, $(I:x)={\bigcap }_i(Q_i:x)$, and each factor is either the whole ring or a primary ideal with radical of an ideal $\sqrt{Q_i}$. A finite intersection of prime ideals can be prime only if it equals one of them: otherwise multiplying one element outside the intersection from each factor contradicts the prime ideal condition. Conversely, irredundancy supplies $x\in {\bigcap }_{j\ne i}{Q}_j\setminus Q_i$, giving $\sqrt{(I:x)}=\sqrt{Q_i}$. In a Noetherian ring these agree with the associated primes of a module $R/I$. For arbitrary rings, the annihilator definition of an associated prime of a module must not be substituted without a further hypothesis.

A component in a minimal primary decomposition is embedded if its radical of an ideal strictly contains another radical occurring in that decomposition. Such components need not be unique. For example,in $k[x,y]$ gives different $(x,y)$-primary ideals as embedded components, with the same isolated component $(x)$.

In a Noetherian ring, every radical of an ideal is an intersection of finitely many prime ideals. A maximal counterexample ideal $J$ cannot be prime. Choose $a,b\notin J$ with $ab\in J$; the strictly larger ideals $J+(a)$ and $J+(b)$ satisfy the result, and $\sqrt{J}=\sqrt{J+(a)}\cap \sqrt{J+(b)}$. This contradicts maximality. The unit ideal uses an empty intersection.

A commutative ring $R$ is Jacobson when every prime ideal is the intersection of the maximal ideals containing it. Equivalently, for every ideal $I$, its radical is the intersection of the maximal ideals containing $I$.

The nilradical of a commutative ring is its ideal of nilpotent elements, equivalently the radical of an ideal applied to its zero ideal.

The set $\sqrt{I}$ contains zero. If $x^m\in I$, then $(-x{)}^m=(-1{)}^m{x}^m\in I$, giving closure under additive inverses; also $(rx{)}^m=r^m{x}^m\in I$ for every $r\in R$.

To prove closure under addition, let $x^m,y^n\in I$. Expand $(x+y{)}^{m+n-1}$ by the binomial theorem. In every monomial $x^j{y}^{m+n-1-j}$, either $j\ge m$ or $m+n-1-j\ge n$. Thus each term contains a factor $x^m$ or $y^n$ and belongs to $I$. Hence $(x+y{)}^{m+n-1}\in I$, so $x+y\in \sqrt{I}$. The additive subgroup and absorption properties are proved, givingThis ideal is the radical of an ideal. The finite exponent for a sum uses commutativity of the ring.

The radical of an ideal isThe ideal is radical if $I=\sqrt{I}$. Its zero set is $V(I)=\{a\in k^n:f(a)=0\text{ for every }f\in I\}$, an affine variety by definition.

Every $f\in I$ vanishes at every point of $V(I)$, so $I\subseteq I(V(I))$. If $g^N\in I(V(I))$, then $g(a{)}^N=0$ in the field $k$ for every $a\in V(I)$, so $g(a)=0$ for each such point. Hence $g\in I(V(I))$ and

The radical of an ideal $I$ isWe first establish the properties needed below. If $a^m,b^n\in I$, every term of the binomial theorem expansion of $(a+b{)}^{m+n-1}$ contains either $a^m$ or $b^n$, so $a+b\in \sqrt{I}$. Also $(-a{)}^m\in I$ and $(ra{)}^m=r^m{a}^m\in I$. Thus $\sqrt{I}$ is an ideal. The definition gives $I\subseteq \sqrt{I}$ and shows that $I\subseteq J$ implies $\sqrt{I}\subseteq \sqrt{J}$. Finally, if $a^n\in \sqrt{I}$, then $(a^n{)}^m\in I$ for some $m$, so $a\in \sqrt{I}$. Hence $\sqrt{\sqrt{I}}=\sqrt{I}$; in other words, $\sqrt{I}$ is a radical ideal.

We prove the stronger fact that the radical of an ideal is the intersection of the prime ideals containing it:If $a\in \sqrt{I}$ and $P\supseteq I$ is a prime ideal, then $a^n\in P$ for some $n$, and repeated application of the definition of a prime ideal gives $a\in P$. This proves one inclusion.

Conversely, fix $a\notin \sqrt{I}$. The multiplicatively closed set $T=\{1,a,a^2,\dots \}$ is disjoint from $I$. Consider the ideals containing $I$ and disjoint from $T$. This collection is nonempty, and the union of any chain in it is another such ideal. By Zorn's lemma, there is a maximal member $P$. It is proper because $1\in T$.

To prove that $P$ is a prime ideal, suppose $bc\in P$ but $b,c\notin P$. Maximality forces both $P+(b)$ and $P+(c)$ to meet $T$. Thus, for some $u,v\ge 0$,Multiplication gives $a^{u+v}\in P$, since every term lies in $P$, including $rsbc$. This contradicts disjointness from $T$. Therefore $P$ is a prime ideal containing $I$ and avoiding $a$. This proves the other inclusion, including the required prime ideal avoiding a multiplicative subset argument without using any unproved facts about the nilradical.

If $I=\sqrt{I}$, the displayed intersection represents $I$ as required. Conversely, an intersection of ideals that are all prime ideals is a radical ideal: if $a^n$ belongs to every one of them, then so does $a$. ConsequentlyThe unit ideal $I=R$ is included by interpreting the empty intersection as $R$.

Fix $n\ge 1$ and suppose, for a contradiction, that $I^n=I^{n+1}$. Set $M=I^n$. Since $R$ is a Noetherian ring, this ideal is a finitely generated module, say $M=(u_1,\dots ,u_r)$. It is nonzero: if $0\ne a\in I$, then $a^n\ne 0$ because $R$ is an integral domain.

The equality $M=IM$ allows us to writeLet $A=(a_{ij})$ and $B={\mathrm{Id}}_r-A$. Then $B(u_1,\dots ,u_r{)}^{\mathsf{T}}=0$. The adjugate matrix identity $\mathrm{adj}(B)B=(\det B){\mathrm{Id}}_r$ implies that $\det B$ annihilates every $u_i$. In the determinant expansion of ${\mathrm{Id}}_r-A$, the constant term is $1$ and every other term contains an entry of $A$, soThis is the determinant trick. Since some $u_i\ne 0$, multiplicative cancellation in an integral domain gives $1-b=0$. But then $1=b\in I$, contradicting $I\ne R$. We have proved the strict descent of powers of a nonzero proper ideal in a Noetherian domain:All these powers of an ideal have the same radical of an ideal. Indeed, $I^n\subseteq I$ gives $\sqrt{I^n}\subseteq \sqrt{I}$. Conversely, if $x^m\in I$, then $x^{mn}\in I^n$, so $x\in \sqrt{I^n}$. Thusand $J=I,I^2,I^3,\dots$ gives infinitely many distinct ideals with the prescribed radical of an ideal. If the convention $0\in \mathbb{N}$ is used, the additional inequality $I^0=R\ne I$ follows immediately from properness.

An ideal $\mathfrak{q}$ is $\mathfrak{p}$-primary if it is a proper primary ideal whose radical of an ideal is $\mathfrak{p}$. Explicitly,Equivalently, $ab\in \mathfrak{q}$ and $b\notin \mathfrak{p}$ imply $a\in \mathfrak{q}$: multiplication by every element outside $\mathfrak{p}$ is injective on the quotient ring $R/\mathfrak{q}$.

Put $A=\mathbb{C}[X,Y]$, $P=(X)$ and $Q=(X^2,Y)$. The quotient ring $A/P\cong \mathbb{C}[Y]$ is an integral domain, so $P$ is a prime ideal and hence a primary ideal. Put $\mathfrak{m}=(X,Y)$. ThenThe polynomial ring $A$ is a Noetherian ring by the Hilbert basis theorem, and $\mathfrak{m}$ is a maximal ideal since $A/\mathfrak{m}\cong \mathbb{C}$. Therefore the maximal-primary ideal criterion from c makes $Q$ $\mathfrak{m}$-primary. In particular its radical of an ideal is $\mathfrak{m}$, distinct from $P$.

Neither primary ideal can be omitted: $X\in P\setminus Q$, while $Y\in Q\setminus P$. Thus the given intersection is already a minimal primary decomposition. To express the ideal by generators, write an element of $P\cap Q$ as $Xh=X^{2}u+Yv$. Reducing modulo the prime ideal $(X)$ gives $Y\bar{v}=0$ in the integral domain $\mathbb{C}[Y]$, so $v=Xw$. Cancelling $X$ in the integral domain $A$ gives $h=Xu+Yw$. HenceBy the first uniqueness theorem for primary decomposition, the associated primes of a module $A/J$ are exactly the two radicals of ideals. Their strict inclusion $P⊊\mathfrak{m}$ givesOne can also see both associated primes of a module directly through annihilators:For the first colon ideal, reducing $hY\in J$ modulo $(X)$ forces $h\in (X)$, and the reverse inclusion follows from $XY\in J$. For the second colon ideal, cancel $X$ in $hX\in X(X,Y)$. Both represented elements of the quotient module $A/J$ are nonzero.

Since the radical of an ideal $\sqrt{\mathfrak{q}}$ is $(r)$, some positive power of $r$ belongs to $\mathfrak{q}$. Choose the least such exponent $k$. Then $(r^k)\subseteq \mathfrak{q}$ and $r^j\notin \mathfrak{q}$ for $0\le j<k$, with $r^0=1$ excluded because the primary ideal $\mathfrak{q}$ is proper.

Take $x\in \mathfrak{q}$. If $x\notin (r^k)$, choose the largest $j\in \{0,\dots ,k-1\}$ for which $x\in (r^j)$, and write $x=r^{j}u$. Maximality of $j$ implies $u\notin (r)=\sqrt{\mathfrak{q}}$: otherwise $x\in (r^{j+1})$, a contradiction, including when $j=k-1$. The primary ideal condition applied to $r^{j}u\in \mathfrak{q}$ therefore forces $r^j\in \mathfrak{q}$, contrary to the choice of $k$.

Consequently every $x\in \mathfrak{q}$ lies in $(r^k)$, andTogether with i, this classifies the primary ideals for a regular principal prime. The exponent is unique: if $(r^k)=(r^{k+1})$, then $r^k=r^{k+1}c$, and cancellation of the non-zero-divisor $r^k$ would give $1=rc$, contradicting that $(r)$ is proper. No Noetherian hypothesis is needed.

Because $(r)$ is a proper prime ideal, each $(r^k)$ is proper and its radical of an ideal isIndeed, $(r^k)\subseteq (r)$ gives one inclusion of radicals of ideals, while $(rc{)}^k\in (r^k)$ gives the other.

We prove the saturation condition for a primary ideal: if $ab\in (r^k)$ and $a\notin \mathfrak{p}$, then $b\in (r^k)$. For $k=1$ this is the defining property of a prime ideal. For $k>1$, write $ab=r^{k}c$. Since $a\notin (r)$, the prime ideal condition gives $b=r{b}_1$. The element $r$ is a non-zero-divisor, so cancellation givesInduction gives $b_1\in (r^{k-1})$, hence $b\in (r^k)$. Together with the computed radical of an ideal, this proves

The spectrum of a ring $A$ is the set of its proper prime ideals. For an ideal $I$, set $V(I)=\{\mathfrak{p}:I\subseteq \mathfrak{p}\}$. These are the closed sets of the Zariski topology. They satisfyThe union identity follows because a prime ideal containing $IJ$ must contain $I$ or $J$: otherwise choose $a\in I\setminus \mathfrak{p}$ and $b\in J\setminus \mathfrak{p}$, contradicting $ab\in \mathfrak{p}$. These identities verify the closed-set axioms. The maximal spectrum has the subspace topology, whose closed sets are $V(I)\cap \mathrm{MaxSpec}A$.

For a finitely generated $\mathbb{C}$-algebra, the needed form of the Hilbert Nullstellensatz isHere an empty intersection means $A$. We prove this formula rather than assume the desired correspondence.

First establish the residue-field fact. If a field $L$ is a finitely generated algebra over $\mathbb{C}$, choose a maximal algebraically independent subset $t_1,\dots ,t_r$ of a finite generating set, with remaining generators $u_1,\dots ,u_s$. Each $u_j$ is algebraic over $\mathbb{C}(t_1,\dots ,t_r)$. Clearing the finitely many denominators in their monic equations gives a nonzero polynomial $d$ such that each $u_j$ is integral overSince $L$ is a field, it contains $1/d$, and $L=R[u_1,\dots ,u_s]$ is an integral extension of $R$. If a field is integral over a domain, the domain is itself a field: for $0\ne a\in R$, an integral equation for $a^{-1}$, multiplied by $a^{n-1}$, expresses $a^{-1}$ in $R$.

But if $r>0$, choose $c\in \mathbb{C}$ for which $t_1-c$ does not divide $d$. Such a choice exists because a nonzero polynomial has only finitely many distinct factors $t_1-c$. The element $t_1-c$ is a nonunit even after inverting $d$: an inverse would imply that $t_1-c$ divides a power of $d$. Thus $R$ would not be a field, a contradiction. Hence $r=0$, and $L$ is algebraic over the algebraically closed field $\mathbb{C}$, forcing $L=\mathbb{C}$. This proves the Zariski lemma in the form used here.

Now if $f\notin \sqrt{I}$, the localization of a ring $B=(A/I)[1/f]$ is nonzero: vanishing would mean $f^n\in I$ for some $n$. It is still a finitely generated algebra over $\mathbb{C}$, since one need only adjoin an inverse of $f$. Choose a maximal ideal $\mathfrak{n}$ of $B$. By the preceding argument, $B/\mathfrak{n}=\mathbb{C}$. The composite $A\to B\to \mathbb{C}$ is surjective because it contains the constant scalars. Its kernel is consequently a maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ of $A$, contains $I$, and does not contain $f$, whose image is invertible. This proves that the displayed intersection is contained in $\sqrt{I}$. The reverse inclusion follows because every maximal ideal is prime and contains the radical of an ideal whenever it contains that ideal.

For a closed subset $Z\subseteq \mathrm{MaxSpec}A$, put $I(Z)={\bigcap }_{\mathfrak{m}\in Z}\mathfrak{m}$. It is a radical ideal. The formulas now showare inverse maps on radical ideals and closed sets. Indeed the first followed by the second gives $\sqrt{I}=I$, while if $Z=V(J)\cap \mathrm{MaxSpec}A$, the second gives $\sqrt{J}$ and $V(\sqrt{J})=V(J)$. Thus the correspondence is a bijection reversing inclusion. This is the relation between radical ideals and closed subsets of the maximal spectrum.

For $A=\mathbb{C}[x]$, the maximal ideals are ${\mathfrak{m}}_c=(x-c)$, for $c\in \mathbb{C}$. Every nonzero proper radical ideal is generated by a squarefree polynomial, and hence has the formfor a finite nonempty subset $S\subset \mathbb{C}$. The associated closed set is $\{{\mathfrak{m}}_c:c\in S\}$. A repeated factor of a polynomial does not change its zero set, but passing to its radical ideal removes that repeated factor. The two endpoint cases areThe empty-product convention makes $I_{\varnothing }=(1)$. Under $c\mapsto {\mathfrak{m}}_c$, the closed sets are exactly the finite subsets and the whole affine line.

All rings below are nonzero and commutative with identity; the zero ring is trivially Artinian. A primary ideal is proper. An ideal $Q$ is primary precisely when every zero divisor of $R/Q$ is a nilpotent element. Its radical of an ideal $\mathfrak{p}=\sqrt{Q}$ is prime: if $ab\in \sqrt{Q}$ and $a\notin \sqrt{Q}$, apply the primary property to $(ab{)}^r\in Q$ to obtain a power of $b$ in $Q$. In a Noetherian ring, finite generation of $\mathfrak{p}$ gives ${\mathfrak{p}}^s\subseteq Q$ for some $s$. For generators $u_i$ with $u_i^{s_i}\in Q$, one can take $s=1+{\sum }_i(s_i-1)$.

We first prove existence of primary decomposition. The ascending chain condition implies that every proper ideal is a finite intersection of irreducible ideals. Otherwise choose a maximal counterexample $I$ under inclusion. It is not irreducible, so $I=J\cap K$ with both $J,K$ strictly larger; their finite irreducible decompositions give one for $I$, a contradiction.

An irreducible ideal in a Noetherian ring is primary. Pass to the quotient and suppose zero is irreducible. If $xy=0$ with $x\ne 0$, the ascending chain of annihilators of $y^j$ stabilizes, say at $j=r$. Any element of $(x)\cap (y^r)$ can be written $z=ax=b{y}^r$. Then $yz=0$, so $b\in \mathrm{Ann}(y^{r+1})=\mathrm{Ann}(y^r)$ and $z=0$. Irreducibility of zero implies $(y^r)=0$, since $(x)\ne 0$. Thus $y$ is nilpotent. This proves irreducible ideals are primary in Noetherian rings, and hence the Lasker–Noether theorem.

An intersection of finitely many primary ideals with the same radical $\mathfrak{p}$ is again primary: if $ab$ belongs to all of them and $b\notin \mathfrak{p}$, the primary property forces $a$ into every component. Combining such components and removing redundant ones yields a minimal primary decompositionThe radicals are uniquely determined, but the components need not all be unique. Here is a proof identifying the invariant radicals as the associated primes of a module $R/I$.

Every nonzero module over a Noetherian ring has a nonzero element with a prime annihilator: maximize the annihilator of a nonzero element using the ascending chain condition. If $abm=0$ and $bm\ne 0$, maximality gives $\mathrm{Ann}(bm)=\mathrm{Ann}(m)$ and hence $am=0$. This is the maximal annihilator of a module element is prime argument. For a $\mathfrak{p}$-primary quotient $R/Q$, the radical of the annihilator of every nonzero element is $\mathfrak{p}$: it is contained in $\mathfrak{p}$ by the primary property and contains a power of $\mathfrak{p}$ because ${\mathfrak{p}}^s\subseteq Q$. Thus the only possible associated prime is $\mathfrak{p}$, and it does occur.

The diagonal injection $R/I\hookrightarrow {⨁}_{i}R/Q_i$ shows that every associated prime of $R/I$ is one of the ${\mathfrak{p}}_i$. Indeed, for an element whose annihilator $P$ is prime, that annihilator is the intersection of the finitely many component annihilators, all containing $P$. Their product is contained in $P$, so primality forces one of them to equal $P$; its component element is nonzero and has associated prime ${\mathfrak{p}}_i$. Conversely, irredundancy gives $b\in {\bigcap }_{j\ne i}{Q}_j\setminus Q_i$. The nonzero cyclic submodule generated by $b+I$ embeds in $R/Q_i$. It has an associated prime, necessarily ${\mathfrak{p}}_i$, which is then an associated prime of $R/I$. We have proved the first uniqueness theorem for primary decomposition:Also the zero divisors on $R/I$ are exactly ${\bigcup }_i{\mathfrak{p}}_i$. For a scalar killing a nonzero element, extend its element annihilator to a maximal element annihilator containing it; the preceding argument gives an associated prime containing that scalar. The converse is immediate from the definition of an associated prime.

The minimal members of the set $\{{\mathfrak{p}}_i\}$ are the isolated primes of a primary decomposition. They are exactly the primes minimal over $I$: if a prime contains ${\bigcap }_i{\mathfrak{p}}_i$, it contains one ${\mathfrak{p}}_i$ by the product argument. A component belonging to an isolated prime is unique. Localize at ${\mathfrak{p}}_i$. Every other component becomes the whole ring, since its radical contains an element outside ${\mathfrak{p}}_i$ whose power lies in that component. A ${\mathfrak{p}}_i$-primary ideal contracts unchanged from this localization, because $sa\in Q_i$ with $s\notin {\mathfrak{p}}_i$ implies $a\in Q_i$. Hence the second uniqueness theorem for primary decomposition givesAn embedded primary component can vary. For example, in $k[x,y]$,Both second components are $(x,y)$-primary, since their quotients are dual-number algebras. For the second equality, reducing modulo $(x^2,y+x)$ makes $y=-x$; an element $xg$ vanishes exactly when $g$ has zero constant term, giving $(x^2,xy)$. The isolated component is $(x)$ and the embedded associated prime is $(x,y)$.

The relevance to Artinian rings is particularly sharp in Krull dimension zero. Suppose $R$ is Noetherian and all its primes are maximal. Apply a minimal primary decomposition to zero. Its radicals are distinct maximal ideals, so the components are pairwise comaximal ideals: each contains a power of its radical, and expanding $1=(a+b{)}^N$ for $a+b=1$ shows that powers of comaximal ideals remain comaximal. The Chinese remainder theorem gives the Artinian decomposition into local factorsEach factor has one maximal ideal, and that ideal is nilpotent. Its finite radical filtration has successive layers finitely generated over its residue field, hence of finite vector-space dimension. It follows that the factor, and therefore $R$, has a finite composition series of a module, so $R$ is Artinian. This proves the Noetherian dimension-zero criterion for an Artinian ring in this direction. Applied to $R/I$, it says that the quotient is Artinian exactly when all primes over $I$ are maximal. In that case no primary component is embedded, so all components are unique.

For completeness, the converse does not require initially assuming Noetherianity. In an Artinian ring, an Artinian domain is a field: stabilization of $(a^j)$ and cancellation gives an inverse to every nonzero $a$. Thus every prime is maximal. There are finitely many maximal ideals, since infinitely many distinct ones would give strictly descending finite intersections; comaximality guarantees strictness by the Chinese remainder theorem. Its nilradical $N$ is nilpotent. Indeed, its powers stabilize at $J=N^r$, with $J^2=J$. If $J\ne 0$, choose an ideal $C$ minimal among those satisfying $JC\ne 0$. Then $JC=C$, since $J(JC)=JC\ne 0$. Choose $x\in C$ with $Jx\ne 0$; minimality also gives $Rx=C$. Therefore $x=ax$ for some $a\in J\subseteq N$. But $1-a$ is a unit, contradicting $x\ne 0$. Hence $J=0$.

Now $R/N$ is a finite product of residue fields. Each $N^j/N^{j+1}$ is an Artinian module over that product, and therefore a finite direct sum of finite-dimensional vector spaces: an infinite-dimensional vector space would have a strictly descending chain of subspaces. The finite filtration by powers of $N$ makes $R$ a module of finite composition length, in particular Noetherian. Combining both directions yieldsThus primary decomposition separates the local pieces of a zero-dimensional ring, while their nilpotent maximal ideals record the multiplicities that the reduced set of primes alone does not detect.

The radical of an ideal $I$ in a commutative ring $A$ is $\sqrt{I}=\{a\in A:a^m\in I\text{ for some }m\ge 1\}$. It is an ideal: if $a^m,b^n\in I$, every term of $(a+b{)}^{m+n}$ has either at least $m$ factors $a$ or at least $n$ factors $b$, so the sum belongs to $I$. Also $(ca{)}^m\in I$ for every $c\in A$, and additive inverses preserve the defining condition.

The equality is false. In $A=k[x,y]$, take $I=(y)$ and $J=(y-x^2)$. Both are prime ideals, since their quotient rings are isomorphic to $k[x]$, so both are radical. ButThe element $x$ belongs to the latter ideal and not the former. This also shows why taking the radical of an ideal can enlarge a sum of already radical ideals.

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.

A $P$-primary ideal is a proper ideal $Q$ with radical of an ideal $\sqrt{Q}=P$, such that $ab\in Q$ and $a\notin Q$ imply $b^n\in Q$ for some $n\ge 1$. Equivalently, when $\sqrt{Q}=P$, the implication is $ab\in Q$, $b\notin P\Rightarrow a\in Q$.

True for a nonempty finite family. Let $Q=Q_1\cap \cdots \cap Q_m$, with each $Q_j$ a $P$-primary ideal. This intersection of ideals is proper. Its radical of an ideal is $P$: if $r\in P$, choose $n_j$ with $r^{n_j}\in Q_j$ and put $N={\max }_j{n}_j$. Then $r^N\in Q$. Conversely, $r^N\in Q$ implies $r\in \sqrt{Q_j}=P$.

If $ab\in Q$ and $b\notin P$, the primary ideal property gives $a\in Q_j$ for every $j$, so $a\in Q$. ThereforeAs usual, the statement about finite intersections excludes the empty intersection, which is the whole ring and is not a primary ideal.

False. In the polynomial ring $R=k[x,y]$ over a field, takeThe ideal $P$ is a maximal ideal, with quotient ring $R/P\cong k$. AlsoIn this last ring, an element with nonzero constant term is a unit, and an element with zero constant term is a multiple of $y$ and has square zero. Thus every zero divisor is a nilpotent element. This is equivalent to $I$ being a primary ideal: a zero product in the quotient ring with one nonzero factor forces the other factor to be nilpotent. Its radical of an ideal is $P$, so $I$ is $P$-primary.

However, $y\notin I$, so $I\ne P$. Moreover $x\in I$ while $x\notin P^2$, since every polynomial in $P^2$ has no term of total degree one. For every $n\ge 2$, $P^n\subseteq P^2$, so $I\ne P^n$. Hence