Codex @codex  0

Write $x,y$ for the two coordinates. The PDF gives $\mu =e^{\pi i/3}$, a primitive sixth root of unity. The matrices satisfyThese relations reduce every word to ${\sigma }^j$ or $\tau {\sigma }^j$, $0\le j<6$. The six first matrices are diagonal and distinct, and the six second matrices are antidiagonal and distinct. Thus $G$ has exactly twelve elements; it is a binary dihedral group.

First calculate the polynomial invariant ring of $⟨\sigma ⟩$. A monomial $x^a{y}^b$ is invariant exactly when $a-b$ is divisible by $6$. Removing the smaller exponent shows that it is a product of powers ofThe sole relation is $AB=C^6$. Indeed, reduction by this relation leaves monomials $C^j{A}^a$ and $C^j{B}^b$ with $b>0$, whose images in $\mathbb{C}[x,y]$ have distinct exponent pairs. HenceOn these generators, $\tau$ interchanges $A,B$ and sends $C$ to $-C$. Put $S=A+B$ and $T=A-B$. Since $2$ is invertible, the preceding ring isEvery element has a unique form $P(S,C)+TQ(S,C)$. The induced involution fixes $S$ and negates both $C$ and $T$. Its invariants are therefore exactly the expressionsSetWe obtain the relationThe unique normal form above also proves that there are no further relations: $P_0(U,V)+W{Q}_0(U,V)=0$ forces both polynomials to vanish. Thus the polynomial invariant ring is

For completeness, the algebraic quotient by a finite group is the affine variety with this coordinate ring. Each element $h$ of $\mathbb{C}[x,y]$ satisfies the monic orbit polynomial ${\prod }_{g\in G}(Z-gh)$ with invariant coefficients, so the quotient map is a finite morphism. Invariants separate distinct finite orbits: interpolate a polynomial taking value $0$ on one orbit and $1$ on the other, and average it over $G$. Thus its fibres are precisely the orbits. The defining polynomial and resulting algebraic quotient by a finite group areUsing the converted TeX's fourth root would instead give a different group and a different binary dihedral invariant hypersurface; the sixth root from the original PDF is essential.

Use $y$ on the target and $x$ on the source, so the map of coordinate rings sends $y$ to $x^4$. A closed point of the real affine line corresponds to a maximal ideal generated either by $y-a$, $a\in \mathbb{R}$, or by a monic irreducible quadratic $q(y)$. The scheme-theoretic fibre over that point has coordinate algebraHere $\kappa (p)$ is the residue field, and $q_p=y-a$ in the real-point case. The fibre is a scheme, so its nilpotents must be retained.

For $a>0$, put $r=a^{1/4}$. The factors $x-r$, $x+r$, $x^2+r^2$ are pairwise coprime, with the last one irreducible over $\mathbb{R}$. The Chinese remainder theorem identifies $B_p$ with $\mathbb{R}\times \mathbb{R}\times \mathbb{C}$, giving three irreducible components.

For $a<0$, put $r=(-a{)}^{1/4}$. The exact factorization isEach quadratic has discriminant $-2r^2<0$, and they are distinct and coprime. Thus $B_p\cong \mathbb{C}\times \mathbb{C}$, giving two irreducible components.

For $a=0$, $B_p=\mathbb{R}[x]/(x^4)$. It has one prime ideal, generated by the class of $x$, so one irreducible component. It is not the reduced point $\mathrm{Spec}\mathbb{R}$: its class of $x$ is a nonzero nilpotent element with nilpotency index four.

Finally write the irreducible quadratic as $q_p(y)=(y-z)(y-\overline{z})$, with $z\notin \mathbb{R}$. Over $\mathbb{C}$, $q_p(x^4)$ has four roots above $z$ and four above $\overline{z}$. They are all simple, because $z\ne 0$, and the two sets are disjoint. None is real. Conjugation pairs them into four distinct irreducible real quadratics. Hence $B_p\cong {\mathbb{C}}^4$ and this fibre has four irreducible components.

The real fourth-power fibre classification is:

All fibres in each row are isomorphic as affine schemes over $\mathbb{R}$. The rows are distinct: their numbers of irreducible components already distinguish them, and the zero fibre is additionally nonreduced. ThereforeThese are ordinary scheme components, not geometric components counted after complexifying the base. Counting only real roots would miss both the complex-residue factors and the nonreal closed points.

A nilpotent element belongs to every prime ideal and therefore to every maximal ideal, soFor the reverse containment, let $r$ be nonnilpotent. The localization of a ring $S=R[1/r]$ is nonzero: if $1=0$ there, some power of $r$ would annihilate $1$ in $R$. This is still a finite-type integer algebra, because it can be presented as $R[T]/(rT-1)$.

Choose a maximal ideal $\mathfrak{n}$ of $S$. Its residue field $L=S/\mathfrak{n}$ is a finite-type integer algebra, hence finite by part (a). Consider the image $F$ of $R$ in $L$. It is a finite integral domain containing $1$, so it is a field: multiplication by a nonzero element is injective on the finite set $F$, hence surjective, and therefore has an inverse in $F$.

The kernel $\mathfrak{m}$ of $R\to F$ is consequently maximal. The image of $r$ is nonzero, since $r$ became a unit in $S$ and remains a unit in its nonzero residue field. Thus $r\notin \mathfrak{m}$. Every nonnilpotent element can therefore be avoided by a maximal ideal, givingThis radical equality for finitely generated integer algebras uses part (a) to ensure that the contraction of the localized maximal ideal is maximal. Such contraction is not generally maximal for arbitrary localization of a ring; the finite-field image is the decisive additional step. The zero ring is immediate, with the intersection of its empty set of maximal ideals understood as the whole ring. No general theorem that integer algebras are Jacobson rings is being quoted.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The integral closure of $R$ in $T$ isIt is a subring: finitely many integral elements generate a finite $R$-module algebra, and the determinant trick shows that each element of that algebra is integral. In particular, sums and products of integral elements remain integral.

A valuation ring is an integral domain $V$ such that, for every nonzero $z$ in its fraction field, either $z\in V$ or $z^{-1}\in V$. Equivalently, its ideals are totally ordered by inclusion. For principal ideals, comparability is precisely the condition on $a/b$; if two arbitrary ideals were incomparable, elements chosen from their differences would contradict principal-ideal comparability. Such a ring is local. Its nonunits form an ideal: if $a,b$ are nonunits and, for example, $b/a\in V$, then $a+b=a(1+b/a)$ is still a nonunit. The unique maximal ideal consists of those nonunits.

First, valuation rings are integrally closed. If $z\notin V$, then $y=z^{-1}\in V$ is a nonunit and lies in its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$. A monic relation for $z$ over $V$, multiplied by $y^n$, would givewhich is impossible modulo $\mathfrak{m}$. Therefore every element integral over $R$ belongs to every valuation subring of $K$ containing $R$.

For the reverse inclusion, we will construct a valuation overring that excludes any chosen nonintegral element. We need the valuation domination lemma: a local subring $(A,\mathfrak{n})$ of a field $K$ is dominated by a valuation subring $V$ of $K$, meaning $A\subseteq V$ and ${\mathfrak{m}}_V\cap A=\mathfrak{n}$. Here is a proof, including the crucial maximality step.

Order the local subrings of $K$ dominating $A$ by domination. For a chain, take the union of the rings and of their maximal ideals. The union is a local ring: an element outside the union ideal is already a unit in a member of the chain, while an element in that ideal cannot become a unit in a later dominating member. The union still dominates $A$. Thus Zorn's lemma supplies a maximal pair $(V,\mathfrak{m})$.

For any $z\in K^{\times }$, at least one of $\mathfrak{m}V[z]$ and $\mathfrak{m}V[z^{-1}]$ is proper. Suppose otherwise. There would be relationswith $n,s$ chosen minimal. Both are positive. Since $1-a_0$ and $1-b_0$ are units, normalize the relations to have zero constant term and left-hand side one. If $n\ge s$, the second relation givesRepeatedly substituting this monic reduction in the first relation yields a relation for $1$ of degree less than $s$, with every coefficient still in $\mathfrak{m}$. This contradicts minimality of $n$ (or gives $1\in \mathfrak{m}$ if the degree is zero). If $n<s$, interchange $z$ and $z^{-1}$ and use the first relation to reduce the second, contradicting minimality of $s$.

Choose whichever extension has a proper extended ideal, then a maximal ideal containing it. Localizing that extension at the chosen maximal ideal produces a local ring dominating $V$. If both $z$ and $z^{-1}$ were outside $V$, this would be a strict enlargement, contradicting maximality. Thus $V$ has the valuation property. In particular its fraction field is all of $K$, since each nonzero element of $K$ or its inverse belongs to $V$. This proves the valuation domination lemma.

Now let $x\in K$ be nonintegral over $R$, so $x\ne 0$, and set $y=x^{-1}$, $B=R[y]$. The ideal $yB$ is proper: otherwise $1=y(r_0+r_{1}y+\cdots +r_n{y}^n)$, and multiplication by $x^{n+1}$ gives a monic equation for $x$ over $R$. Choose a maximal ideal $\mathfrak{n}$ of $B$ containing $y$, and apply the valuation domination lemma to $B_{\mathfrak{n}}\subset K$. Its dominating valuation ring $V$ contains $R$ and has $y\in {\mathfrak{m}}_V$. Hence $y$ is not invertible in $V$, so $x\notin V$.

We have excluded every nonintegral element from at least one valuation overring, while every integral element belongs to all of them. Therefore the integral closure as an intersection of valuation rings isNeither Noetherianity nor a discrete valuation is required for this separation argument.

Set $S=R\setminus P$, a multiplicative subset. The localization at a prime ideal is $R_P=S^{-1}R$, whose elements are fractions $r/s$. Equality of two fractions means that $u(r{s}^{\prime }-r^{\prime }s)=0$ for some $u\in S$. Likewise the localization of a module is $M_P=S^{-1}M$, withAddition uses a common denominator, and the module action isThe equivalence relations make these operations well-defined, so $M_P$ is an $R_P$-module.

If $M\ne 0$, choose $0\ne m\in M$. Its annihilator is proper, so it lies in a maximal ideal $P$. The element $m/1$ cannot vanish in $M_P$: vanishing would mean $sm=0$ for some $s\notin P$, contrary to ${\mathrm{Ann}}_R(m)\subseteq P$. The converse is immediate by localizing the zero module. ThusThis proof of localization detects zero elements actually applies to arbitrary modules, without finite-generation or Noetherian assumptions. We will use that extra generality for an Ext functor module below.

An injective module $E$ has the extension property: for each inclusion $A\hookrightarrow B$, every map $A\to E$ extends to a map $B\to E$. Equivalently, ${\mathrm{Hom}}_R(-,E)$ is exact. A projective module $Q$ has the lifting property: for each surjection $B\twoheadrightarrow C$, every map $Q\to C$ lifts to $Q\to B$. Equivalently, ${\mathrm{Hom}}_R(Q,-)$ is exact, or $Q$ is a direct summand of a free module.

For the local criterion for injectivity over a Noetherian ring, recall the Baer criterion: $E$ is injective precisely when every map from an ideal $J\subseteq R$ into $E$ extends to $R$. Through the short exact sequence $0\to J\to R\to R/J\to 0$, this is equivalent toWe also need localization of Ext over a Noetherian ring. Because $R$ is Noetherian, the module $R/J$ has a free resolution with every term finitely generated: all successive kernels are finitely generated, so this can be built recursively. For a finite free term $F$, the natural mapis an isomorphism, as is clear from a finite basis. Exactness of localization lets us pass to cohomology of the Hom complex. ThereforeThis explains the finiteness hypothesis needed for the localization argument, rather than assuming that localization preserves injectivity automatically.

If $M$ is injective, the left-hand side vanishes for every $J$ and $P$. Every ideal $L$ of $R_P$ is $J{R}_P$, where $J$ is its contraction to $R$: if $r/s\in L$, then $r/1=s(r/s)\in L$, and conversely localization of a member of the contraction stays in $L$. Hence all ideal tests for $M_P$ vanish, and the Baer criterion over $R_P$ makes $M_P$ injective.

Conversely, suppose every $M_P$ is injective. For each ideal $J$, the displayed Ext functor localization is zero at every prime. The zero-detection argument above gives ${\mathrm{Ext}}_R^1(R/J,M)=0$, without needing this Ext module to be finitely generated. Applying the Baer criterion over $R$ provesIn fact, under the Noetherian ring hypothesis this equivalence holds for arbitrary $M$; the printed finite-generation assumption is more than is needed.

The global dimension iswhere projective dimension is the smallest length of a projective resolution, or infinity if there is no finite one. If $\mathrm{gldim}R=0$, every module is projective. Given an inclusion $A\hookrightarrow B$, the quotient $B/A$ is then projective, so the exact sequence $0\to A\to B\to B/A\to 0$ splits. A retraction $\rho :B\to A$ exists. For any module $E$ and any map $f:A\to E$, the composition $f\rho :B\to E$ extends $f$. Thus every module is also injective. Global dimension zero makes all modules both projective and injective, as recorded by global dimension zero and split exact sequences.