MHB Affine Algebraic Sets - Properties of the map I - Dummit and Foote, page 661

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am trying to gain an understanding of the basics of elementary algebraic geometry and am reading Dummit and Foote Chapter 15: Commutative Rings and Algebraic Geometry ...

At present I am focused on Section 15.1 Noetherian Rings and Affine Algebraic Sets ... ...

I need someone to help me to fully understand the reasoning/analysis following the listing of some properties of $$\mathcal{I}$$ ... in particular the reasoning pertaining to property (10) ... ...

The relevant text from D&F page 661 is as follows:View attachment 4828In the above text we see the following statement by D&F:

" ... ... The last relation shows the maps $$\mathcal{Z}$$ and $$\mathcal{I}$$ act as inverses of each other provided one restricts to the collection of affine algebraic sets $$ V = \mathcal{Z} (I) \text{ in } \mathbb{A}^n$$ and to the set of ideals in $$k [ \mathbb{A}^n ]$$ of the form $$\mathcal{I} (V)$$ ... ... "I cannot see why we have to restrict to ideals in $$k [ \mathbb{A}^n ]$$ of the form $$\mathcal{I} (V)$$ when property 10 is stated in terms of ideals $$I = \mathcal{I} (A)$$ where $$A$$ is an arbitrary subset of $$\mathbb{A}^n$$ ... and hence NOT restricted to an affine algebraic set $$V$$ ... ... ?

Can someone please help me to clarify this issue/problem ... ?

Peter
***EDIT***

To ensure MHB readers understand the notation and context of the above post I am providing D&F's definitions of $$\mathcal{Z}$$ and $$\mathcal{I}$$, as follows:View attachment 4829
View attachment 4830View attachment 4831
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Note that if I take an arbitrary subset $$A \subseteq \mathbb{A}^n$$, the zeroes of any polynomial vanishing on all of $$A$$ may be much larger than the set $$A$$. Let's look at an example: let $$k = \mathbb{C}$$ and $$A = \mathbb{Z} \subseteq \mathbb{A}^1$$. Then for a polynomial $$f \in \mathbb{C}[x]$$ to be in $$\mathcal{I}(A)$$, $f(a) = 0$ for every integer $a$. But the only polynomial in 1 variable with infinitely many zeroes is the zero polynomial. Hence $\mathcal{I}(A) = \{0\}$. We note in this case, since everything is a zero of the zero polynomial, $\mathcal{Z}(\mathcal{I}(A)) = \mathcal{Z}(\{0\}) = \mathbb{A}^1$.

In effect, $\mathcal{Z}(\mathcal{I}(A))$ fills in all of the missing parts of $A$ to give you the smallest algebraic set containing the original $A$. The closure, if you will.

By a similar token, $\mathcal{I}(\mathcal{Z}(S))$ takes an arbitrary subset $S \subseteq k[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$ and returns a certain kind of ideal of $k[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$.

Let's look at a quick example: let $S = \{x^2\} \subseteq k[x]$. Then $\mathcal{Z}(\{x^2\})$ is the set of points of $\mathbb{A}^1$ for which $x^2$ evaluates to zero. Clearly this is the single point $0$. Hence $\mathcal{Z}(\{x^2\}) = \{0\}$. Now $\mathcal{I}(\mathcal{Z}(\{x^2\})) = \mathcal{I}(\{0\})$, but any function divisible by $x$ has $0$ as a root (and these are all such functions), hence we have $\mathcal{I}(\mathcal{Z}(\{x^2\})) = xk[x] = (x)$. So we started with the single element $x^2$ and we got the entire ideal generated by $x$.
In general, both $\mathcal{Z}(\mathcal{I}(-))$ and $\mathcal{I}(\mathcal{Z}(-))$ are both processes which enlarge sets. In particular, both the maps $\mathcal{Z}(-)$ and $\mathcal{I}(-)$ are not injective in general (we've effectively given examples in the case of $\mathbb{A}^1$) so we can only hope that these maps can make a bijection between carefully chosen subsets of $\mathbb{A}^n$ and carefully chosen ideals of $k[x_1\ldots,x_n]$. The content of D&F's claim is that we do, indeed, get the bijection we're hoping for.
 
Turgul said:
Note that if I take an arbitrary subset $$A \subseteq \mathbb{A}^n$$, the zeroes of any polynomial vanishing on all of $$A$$ may be much larger than the set $$A$$. Let's look at an example: let $$k = \mathbb{C}$$ and $$A = \mathbb{Z} \subseteq \mathbb{A}^1$$. Then for a polynomial $$f \in \mathbb{C}[x]$$ to be in $$\mathcal{I}(A)$$, $f(a) = 0$ for every integer $a$. But the only polynomial in 1 variable with infinitely many zeroes is the zero polynomial. Hence $\mathcal{I}(A) = \{0\}$. We note in this case, since everything is a zero of the zero polynomial, $\mathcal{Z}(\mathcal{I}(A)) = \mathcal{Z}(\{0\}) = \mathbb{A}^1$.

In effect, $\mathcal{Z}(\mathcal{I}(A))$ fills in all of the missing parts of $A$ to give you the smallest algebraic set containing the original $A$. The closure, if you will.

By a similar token, $\mathcal{I}(\mathcal{Z}(S))$ takes an arbitrary subset $S \subseteq k[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$ and returns a certain kind of ideal of $k[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$.

Let's look at a quick example: let $S = \{x^2\} \subseteq k[x]$. Then $\mathcal{Z}(\{x^2\})$ is the set of points of $\mathbb{A}^1$ for which $x^2$ evaluates to zero. Clearly this is the single point $0$. Hence $\mathcal{Z}(\{x^2\}) = \{0\}$. Now $\mathcal{I}(\mathcal{Z}(\{x^2\})) = \mathcal{I}(\{0\})$, but any function divisible by $x$ has $0$ as a root (and these are all such functions), hence we have $\mathcal{I}(\mathcal{Z}(\{x^2\})) = xk[x] = (x)$. So we started with the single element $x^2$ and we got the entire ideal generated by $x$.
In general, both $\mathcal{Z}(\mathcal{I}(-))$ and $\mathcal{I}(\mathcal{Z}(-))$ are both processes which enlarge sets. In particular, both the maps $\mathcal{Z}(-)$ and $\mathcal{I}(-)$ are not injective in general (we've effectively given examples in the case of $\mathbb{A}^1$) so we can only hope that these maps can make a bijection between carefully chosen subsets of $\mathbb{A}^n$ and carefully chosen ideals of $k[x_1\ldots,x_n]$. The content of D&F's claim is that we do, indeed, get the bijection we're hoping for.
Thanks so much for the help, Turgul ... I had nearly given up on the elements of basic algebraic geometry ... much obliged for the help ...

... will be working through your post carefully, shortly

Thanks again,

Peter
 
Last edited:
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top