The printed domain assertion is false. For example, take and . Then has the nonzero zero divisor , so it is not an integral domain and cannot be a principal ideal domain. The valid conclusion is that is a principal ideal ring. This error is present in the original PDF, not just its transcription.
To prove the corrected conclusion, factor
into powers of distinct nonzero prime ideals. These powers are pairwise comaximal ideals. Indeed, a maximal ideal containing two such powers would contain both underlying prime ideals, forcing them to be equal. The Chinese remainder theorem gives
Every factor is a principal ideal ring by the preceding part. Every ideal in a finite direct product of rings is a product of ideals in the factors: multiplication by the coordinate idempotent elements separates the coordinates of every element of . Write . Then
so is a principal ideal ring. This proves the principal ideal property of quotients of a Dedekind domain in the present setting. In fact, this finite quotient ring is an integral domain precisely when is a prime ideal, in which case it is a field.
For the final deduction, choose any and apply the result to the nonzero proper ideal . The ideal of is generated by one residue class , which can be represented by . For each , some satisfies . Hence
This proves two generators for an ideal in a Dedekind domain; moreover, its first generator can be any prescribed nonzero element of .
Let be a Dedekind domain. The zero ideal is generated by , and is generated by , so consider a nonzero proper ideal . Choose . We use these consequences of the unique factorization of ideals in a Dedekind domain: every nonzero ideal has finitely many nonzero prime-ideal valuations in a Dedekind domain; containment reverses the valuations as in part (b); and
The last formula follows from the containment rule: is the smallest ideal containing both and , and the product with the indicated minimum exponents is exactly that ideal.
Let be the finite set of prime ideals dividing . For each , set . Since , we have . The containment rule also gives , so choose
Distinct nonzero prime ideals of are distinct maximal ideals and hence comaximal ideals; their positive powers are also comaximal. Indeed, if with , , for positive integers expanding shows , since each term contains either at least factors of or at least factors of . We use the Chinese remainder theorem in its ideal form: for pairwise comaximal ideals , the map is surjective. Apply it to the powers to choose with
Then belongs to and satisfies for every . Thus , whereas , proving .
For , therefore,
For , , and forces as well. Hence and have the same valuation at every nonzero prime ideal. Uniqueness of their factorizations gives
This proves two generators for an ideal in a Dedekind domain; in fact the first nonzero generator can be chosen in advance.
For a Dedekind domain and a nonzero proper ideal , the quotient ring is a principal ideal ring. First, the correspondence theorem for ideals and unique factorization of ideals in a Dedekind domain show that the ideals of are exactly , . Consecutive powers are distinct by cancellation of invertible fractional ideals. Choose . There is no intermediate ideal between these consecutive powers, so . Multiplication by and substitution show inductively that for every . Taking gives a single generator modulo . Now factor into pairwise comaximal ideals . The Chinese remainder theorem writes as a finite direct product of rings of the preceding type, which is a principal ideal ring. It need not be an integral domain, as demonstrates. Applying the result to for any makes cyclic, yielding two generators for an ideal in a Dedekind domain.