Lie theory - sum of nilpotent ideals is nilpotent?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Silversonic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sum Theory
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that the sum of two nilpotent ideals, denoted as I and J, is nilpotent. The proof involves induction on the expression (I+J)^{N+k}, demonstrating that (I+J)^{N+k} equals I^k ∩ J + I ∩ J^k. The base case is established for k = 1, and the inductive step is outlined but requires clarification on handling the terms [J, I^k ∩ J] and [I, I ∩ J^k]. A proposed modification suggests that by multiplying I ∩ J by I + J, one can achieve the desired form, ultimately confirming the nilpotency of the sum.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of nilpotent ideals in ring theory
  • Familiarity with induction proofs in abstract algebra
  • Knowledge of commutators and their properties
  • Experience with algebraic structures, specifically ideals
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of nilpotent ideals in depth
  • Learn about induction techniques in algebraic proofs
  • Explore commutator identities and their applications in ring theory
  • Investigate alternative proofs for the nilpotency of ideal sums
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in abstract algebra, graduate students studying ring theory, and researchers exploring properties of nilpotent ideals.

Silversonic
Messages
121
Reaction score
1
I can't wrap my head around this proof that the sum of two nilpotent ideals is nilpotent, I get stuck at one stage:

http://imageshack.com/a/img706/5732/5wgq.png


I'm fine with every except showing by induction [itex](I+J)^{N+k} = I^k \cap J + I \cap J^k[/itex]. Here's my attempt;

Base case: k = 1,

[itex](I+J)^{N+1} = [I+J, (I+J)^N] \subseteq [I+J,I \cap J] = [I, I \cap J] + [J, I \cap J] \subseteq I \cap J + I \cap J[/itex]

since [itex][I, I \cap J], [J, I \cap J] \subseteq I \cap J[/itex] as [itex]I \cap J[/itex] is an ideal.

Now inductive step;

[itex](I+J)^{N+k+1} = [I+J, (I+J)^{N+k}] = [I+J, I^k \cap J + I \cap J^k] = [I, I^k \cap J] + [J, I^k \cap J] + [I,I \cap J^k] + [J,I \cap J^k][/itex]

Now it's easy to see

[itex][I, I^k \cap J] \subseteq I^{k+1} \cap J[/itex]

[itex][J, I \cap J^k] \subseteq I \cap J^{k+1}[/itex]

But I have no idea what I can do with the [itex][J, I^k \cap J] + [I,I \cap J^k][/itex] term so that it reduces to the form I want. Any help?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you stuck using this exact argument? Unless I have misunderstood something the proof should go through easily with a slight modification: Essentially after repeatedly multiplying I∩J by I+J we should end up with something like ∑Ij∩Jk-j and choosing k so large that either Ij or Jk-j vanishes for each choice of j should complete the argument. Maybe I have misunderstood something here though and this fails for some reason.
 
jgens said:
Are you stuck using this exact argument? Unless I have misunderstood something the proof should go through easily with a slight modification: Essentially after repeatedly multiplying I∩J by I+J we should end up with something like ∑Ij∩Jk-j and choosing k so large that either Ij or Jk-j vanishes for each choice of j should complete the argument. Maybe I have misunderstood something here though and this fails for some reason.

You're quite right, and that's a different way of looking at it than I did. I think by this method it shows it is zero when [itex]k = 2N[/itex] while the one in my screenshot shows it for lower, at [itex]k = N[/itex]. It doesn't matter though since my goal is to show it's just nilpotent, thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K