Graduate Deduce that the spectrum of a local ring is always connected

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the connectivity of the spectrum of a local ring, emphasizing that if the variety associated with an ideal is non-empty, then the ideal cannot contain the unit element. It highlights that the closure of points in the spectrum contains the unique closed point, establishing the connectedness of the spectrum. The conversation also touches on the relationship between the category of rings and their spectra, noting that products of rings correspond to disjoint unions of their spectra. The principle that the intersection of ideals leading to the whole ring reinforces the connectivity argument is also discussed. Overall, the thread explores the intricate connections between algebraic structures and topological properties in the context of local rings.
mad mathematician
Messages
129
Reaction score
23
Iv'e got this proof from some claim:
1731782790886.png


Any Pure maths doctors out there who can explain to me why since ##V\ne \emptyset## that ##1\notin \mathfrak{b}##?

Thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
If ##1\in \mathfrak{b}## then ##\mathfrak{b}=A## and ##V(\mathfrak{b)}=V(A)=\emptyset.##
 
  • Like
Likes nuuskur, jedishrfu and mad mathematician
This fact about local rings is obvious if you visualize the spec of a local ring as a bunch of sub varieties of different dimensions passing through a common point, i.e.:

general principles:
1) a one point set is connected.
2) the closure of a connected set is connected;
3) the union of connected sets all having a common point is connected;
4) any space is the union of the closures of its individual points.

special fact about local rings:
5) the closure of each point in the spec of a local ring contains the unique closed point, i.e. the unique maximal ideal;
hence: ????

the more general connectivity principle in post #1 is not as obvious to me though.

OK, guided by the statement, since the intersection of the sets associated to two ideals is the set associated to the sum of the ideals, it follows that if that intersection is empty, then the sum of the ideals is the whole ring, which gives the result.

But more efficiently, and to me more intuitively, although more sophisticated, is the fact that the association of a ring R to the space spec(R) is a direction reversing equivalence of categories. Hence direct sums (or "coproducts", as they are now called) of spaces, i.e. disjoint unions, correspond to direct products of rings. I.e. the correspondence between rings and specs of rings, is arrow reversing, hence products correspond to sums, (and a spec is a sum, i.e. disjoint union, of two specs, iff it is disconnected).

[For the same reason, the spec of the tensor product of two rings (coproduct in category of commutative rings) is the direct product of the two specs.]

for those who may not know "category" terminology, a product X = AxB, of two objects A,B is roughly something such that any two maps Y-->A, Y-->B define a map Y-->X.

and a coproduct X of A and B is roughly an object X = A+B, so that any two maps A-->Y and B-->Y define a unique map X-->Y.

thus any maps out of A and B define a map out of their coproduct, and any maps into A and B define a map into their product.

in particular note that any maps out of spec(R) and spec(S) define a map out of their disjoint sum.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
15K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
17K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
12K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 175 ·
6
Replies
175
Views
26K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
12K