Prove Primary Ideals in \mathbb{Z}: Peter's Questions Answered

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of primary ideals in the ring of integers \(\mathbb{Z}\), specifically addressing the ideal \((4)\) and its classification as primary or not. Participants explore definitions and provide proofs related to primary ideals, including examples and counterexamples.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the primary ideals in \(\mathbb{Z}\) are \(0\) and the ideals \((p^m)\) for prime \(p\) and \(m \ge 1\), as stated in Dummit and Foote.
  • One participant initially claims that \((4)\) is not primary, but another counters that \((4)\) is primary because \(4 = 2^2\), which is a power of a prime.
  • Participants discuss the proof that \((4)\) is primary by showing that if \(ab \in (4)\) and \(a \notin (4)\), then \(b\) must be a multiple of \(2\), leading to \(b^2 \in (4)\).
  • To demonstrate that \((6)\) is not primary, it is noted that if \(a = 2\) and \(b = 3\), then the definition of primary ideals is not satisfied.
  • One participant seeks clarification on how to formally show that if \(ab \in (p^m)\) and \(a \notin (p^m)\), then \(b\) must be a multiple of \(p\), leading to further discussion on prime factorization.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is disagreement regarding the classification of the ideal \((4)\) as primary, with some participants asserting it is primary while others initially contest this. The discussion remains unresolved on the broader implications of these classifications.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the formal proof techniques required to establish the properties of primary ideals, particularly in relation to prime factorization and the implications of the definitions provided.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and researchers interested in algebra, specifically those studying ring theory and the properties of ideals in commutative rings.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
In Dummit and Foote on page 682 Example 1 reads as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The primary ideals in \mathbb{Z} are 0 and the ideals (p^m) for p a prime and m \ge 1.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So given what D&F say, (4) is obviously not primary.

I began trying to show from definition that (4) was not a primary from the definition, but failed to do this

Can anyone help in this ... and come up with an easy way to show that (4) is not primary?

Further, can anyone please help me prove that the primary ideals in \mathbb{Z} are 0 and the ideals (p^m) for p a prime and m \ge 1.


PeterNote: the definition of a primary idea is given in D&F as follows:

Definition. A proper ideal Q in the commutative ring R is called primary if whenever ab \in Q and a \notin Q then b^n \in Q for some positive integer n.

Equivalently, if ab \in Q and a \notin Q then b \in rad \ Q
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
In Dummit and Foote on page 682 Example 1 reads as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The primary ideals in \mathbb{Z} are 0 and the ideals (p^m) for p a prime and m \ge 1.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So given what D&F say, (4) is obviously not primary.
But (4) is primary, because $4 = 2^2$, which is a power of a prime.
 
Opalg said:
But (4) is primary, because $4 = 2^2$, which is a power of a prime.

oh! You are right of course!

Thanks so much for that! :-(

Peter
 
Peter said:
oh! You are right of course!

Thanks so much for that! :-(

Peter

Are you able to indicate how a proof regarding the nature of the ideals in Z in general might go?Peter
 
Peter said:
Are you able to indicate how a proof regarding the nature of the ideals in Z in general might go?
To show that $(4)$ is primary, we have to show that if ab \in (4) and a \notin (4) then b^n \in (4) for some positive integer $n.$

So suppose that $ab\in(4)$, in other words $ab$ is a multiple of $4$, and that $a\notin(4)$. Thus $a$ could be an odd number, or an odd multiple of $2$, but not a multiple of $4$. It follows that $b$ cannot be an odd number, so it must be a multiple of $2$, say $b=2c.$ Then $b^2 = 4c^2\in(4)$.

The same argument applies for any prime power $p^m$. If $ab\in(p^m)$ but $a\notin(p^m)$ then $b$ must be a multiple of $p$ and so $b^m\in(p^m).$

To show that $(6)$, for example, is not primary, use the fact that $6=2\times3$. If you take $a=2$ and $b=3$ in the definition of a primary ideal, you see that $2$ is not a multiple of $6$, so the definition asks that some power of $3$ should be a multiple of $6$. But that cannot happen, because every power of $3$ is an odd number. Therefore the definition of primary is not satisfied and so $(6)$ is not a primary ideal of $\mathbb Z.$
 
Opalg said:
To show that $(4)$ is primary, we have to show that if ab \in (4) and a \notin (4) then b^n \in (4) for some positive integer $n.$

So suppose that $ab\in(4)$, in other words $ab$ is a multiple of $4$, and that $a\notin(4)$. Thus $a$ could be an odd number, or an odd multiple of $2$, but not a multiple of $4$. It follows that $b$ cannot be an odd number, so it must be a multiple of $2$, say $b=2c.$ Then $b^2 = 4c^2\in(4)$

The same argument applies for any prime power $p^m$. If $ab\in(p^m)$ but $a\notin(p^m)$ then $b$ must be a multiple of $p$ and so $b^m\in(p^m).$

To show that $(6)$, for example, is not primary, use the fact that $6=2\times3$. If you take $a=2$ and $b=3$ in the definition of a primary ideal, you see that $2$ is not a multiple of $6$, so the definition asks that some power of $3$ should be a multiple of $6$. But that cannot happen, because every power of $3$ is an odd number. Therefore the definition of primary is not satisfied and so $(6)$ is not a primary ideal of $\mathbb Z.$

Thanks for the helpful post, Opalg

Appreciate your help,Peter
 
I have been reflecting on Opalg's helpful post above ... and I think I need a bit more help ...

I can follow the particular numerical cases but I am having trouble in showing, formally and explicitly, that ...

$$ ab \in (p^m) $$ and $$ a \notin (p^m) $$

$$ \Longrightarrow b $$ is a multiple of $$ p $$

Would appreciate help in this matter.

Peter
 
Peter said:
I am having trouble in showing, formally and explicitly, that ...

$$ ab \in (p^m) $$ and $$ a \notin (p^m) $$

$$ \Longrightarrow b $$ is a multiple of $$ p $$

Would appreciate help in this matter.r
Think about the prime factorisation of $ab$. It has to contain the prime $p$ at least $m$ times. If $a\notin(p^m)$ then the prime factorisation of $a$ contains $p$ fewer than $m$ times. Therefore at least one $p$ must occur in the prime factorisation of $b$.
 
Opalg said:
Think about the prime factorisation of $ab$. It has to contain the prime $p$ at least $m$ times. If $a\notin(p^m)$ then the prime factorisation of $a$ contains $p$ fewer than $m$ times. Therefore at least one $p$ must occur in the prime factorisation of $b$.

Thanks Oplalg, that post was REALLY helpful!

Peter
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
48
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K