MHB Is the Ideal (x) in k[x, y] a Prime Ideal?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Prime
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
Example (2) on page 682 of Dummit and Foote reads as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

(2) For any field k, the ideal (x) in k[x,y] is primary since it is a prime ideal.

... ... etc

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now if (x) is prime then obviously (x) is primary BUT ...

How do we show that (x) is prime in k[x, y]?

Would appreciate some help

Peter

[This has also been posted on MHF]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm a bit rusty on multi-variate polynomials, but this is what I think is true:

$x|f(x,y) \iff f(0,\alpha) = 0,\ \forall \alpha \in k$

Now suppose that $x|f(x,y) = g(x,y)h(x,y)$ with $x \not\mid g(x,y)$.

We have (for any $\alpha \in k$), $0 = f(0,\alpha) = g(0,\alpha)h(0,\alpha)$ with $g(0,\alpha) \neq 0$.

Since $k$ is a field (and thus an integral domain), it must be the case that for any such $\alpha$ (and thus all of them), that $h(0,\alpha) = 0$, showing that $x|h(x,y)$.

In short, $x$ is a prime element of $k[x,y]$ and thus generates a prime ideal.
 
Thanks Deveno.

Just working through your post now

Peter
 
Peter said:
Thanks Deveno.

Just working through your post now

Peter

Just worked through your post

Really fundamental and interesting way to show (x) is a prime ideal in k[x,y] ...thanks

Peter
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
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...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top