DOCSLIB.ORG

Are Maximal Ideals? Solution. No Principal

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Math 403A Assignment 6. Due March 1, 2013. 1.(8.1) Which principal ideals in Z[x] are maximal ideals? Solution. No principal ideal (f(x)) is maximal. If f(x) is an integer n = 1, then (n, x) is a bigger ideal that is not the whole ring. If f(x) has positive degree, then ± take any prime number p that does not divide the leading coefficient of f(x). (p, f(x)) is a bigger ideal that is not the whole ring, since Z[x]/(p, f(x)) = Z/pZ[x]/(f(x)) is not the zero ring. 2.(8.2) Determine the maximal ideals in the following rings. (a). R R. × Solution. Since (a, b) is a unit in this ring if a and b are nonzero, a maximal ideal will contain no pair (a, 0), (0, b) with a and b nonzero. Hence, the maximal ideals are R 0 and 0 R. ×{ } { } × (b). R[x]/(x2). Solution. Every ideal in R[x] is principal, i.e., generated by one element f(x). The ideals in R[x] that contain (x2) are (x2) and (x), since if x2 R[x]f(x), then x2 = f(x)g(x), which 2 ∈ 2 2 means that f(x) divides x . Up to scalar multiples, the only divisors of x are x and x . (c). R[x]/(x2 3x + 2). − Solution. The nonunit divisors of x2 3x +2=(x 1)(x 2) are, up to scalar multiples, x2 3x + 2 and x 1 and x 2. The− maximal ideals− are− (x 1) and (x 2), since the quotient− of R[x] by− either of those− ideals is the field R. − − (d). R[x]/(x2 + x + 1). Solution. Since every ideal in R[x] is principal, an ideal is maximal if and only if it is generated by a polynomial that cannot be factored into nonunit factors. x2 + x + 1 cannot be factored since its two degree one factors have nonreal coefficients (nonreal roots). Hence, (x2 + x + 1) is a maximal ideal of the polynomial ring. Hence, the quotient ring of the problem is a field, and (0) is the maximal ideal. 3 3 3.(8.3) Prove that F2[x]/(x + x + 1) is a field, but that F3[x]/(x + x + 1) is not a field. 1 Solution. R/J is a field iff J is a maximal ideal in the commutative ring R, by the corre- spondence theorm. Let F be a field and F [x] the polynomial ring over F . Every ideal in F [x] is principal. For f(x) F [x], the ideal (f(x)) is maximal iff f(x) is an irreducible polynomial, since for any ideal∈ (g(x)) in F [x], (f(x)) (g(x)) if and only if g(x) divides f(x), i.e., if f(x) is a polynomial multiple of g(x). ⊂ A degree 2 or 3 polynomial f(x) F [x] is irreducible if and only if it has no linear factor x a F [x], i.e., no root in F . ∈ − ∈ 3 3 x + x + 1 is irreducible in F2[x] since it has no root in F2, but x + x + 1 is reducible in 3 3 F3[x] since x = 1 is a root. Hence, F2[x]/(x + x + 1) is a field, but F3[x]/(x + x + 1) is not a field. 4.(8.4) Establish a bijective correspondence between the maximal ideals of R[x] and the points of the upper half plane. Solution. We know that the maximal ideals in R[x] are generated by the irreducible poly- nomials The bijective correspondence from the points in the upper half of C to the maximal ideals of R[x] takes a real number a to the maximal ideal (x a) and takes a complex number − 2 2 2 a + bi, b> 0, to the maximal ideal ((x (a + bi))(x (a bi))) = (x 2ax + a + b ). That mapping is injective since those ideals− are all distinct.− We− need to show− that those maximal ideals are all the maximal ideals of R[x], we need to show that every irreducible polynomial in R[x] has degree 1 or 2. To see that, begin with the fact that C is a 2-dimensional real vector space, and the fact that every polynomial in R[x] has its roots in C. Suppose that f(x) R[x] is irreducible and that c C is a root of f(x). Then the homomorphism φ : R[x] ∈ C that evaluates each polynomial∈ g(x) R[x] at c has f(x) in its kernal since f(c) =→ 0. Thus, we get a ′ ∈ homomorphism φ : R[x]/(f(x)) C from the quotient ring. Since f(x) is irreducible in R[x], (f(x)) is a maximal ideal, and→ so, it must be the whole kernel of φ. Hence, φ′ is injective, and so, since C is a 2-dimensional real vector space, the real vector space R[x]/(f(x)) that injects into C has dimension 1 or 2. To conclude, the dimension of R[x]/(f(x)) equals the degree of f(x), and so, f(x) has degree 1 or 2. Chapter 12. 5.(1.3) (a). Let n and m be relatively prime integers and let a and b be any integers. Show that there is an integer x such that x = a in Z/mZ and x = b in Z/nZ. 2 Solution. Because n and m are relatively prime, Zm Zn = Zmn. Hence, the kernel of the natural homomorphism ∩ Z Z/mZ Z/nZ → × equals Zmn. Therefore, there is the injection φ′ : Z/mnZ Z/mZ Z/nZ, → × and since the two rings have the same number mn elements, the injection is a bijection, and the two rings are isomorphic. Take any element (a, b) in Z/mZ Z/nZ, and take x to be the corresponding element in × Z/mnZ under the isomorphism. We also know this result from problem 4 in assignment 5 since (m)+(n)= Z when m and n are relatively prime. (b). Find all such solutions x′ to part (a). Solution. For x′, choose any element of the coset x + mnZ. 6.(2.6) Prove that the following rings are Euclidean domains. (a). Z[ω], ω = e2πi/3. Solution. Here we are following the book’s proof that the Gaussian integers form a Eu- clidean domain. See the discussion of problem 7 below before beginning the solution to problem 6. Define the size of an element a + bω to be the square of its length as a complex number. The size of ω = 1/2+ i√3/2 is 1. − The fundamental domain for the lattice in C given by the points of Z[ω] is the parallelogram determined by 1 and ω. The four circles with centers at the four vertices of the parallel- ogram, each passing− through the center of the parallelogram, cover the parallelogram. The long diagonal of the parallelogram goes from 0 to 2ω and has length 2. Drawing a pic- ture, one sees that all points of parallelogram lie with distance 1 of some vertex, and so, at distance-square less than one of some vertex. Therefore, each complex number is at distance-squared less than 1 of some point of the lattice. To divide c + dω by a + bω (elements of Z[ω]), locate (a + bω)−1(c + dω) at distance- squared less than 1 of some point x + yω of the lattice. Since the size measurement is multiplicative, the size (c + dω) (a + bω)(x + yω) 2 = (a + bω)((a + bω)−1(c + dω) (x + yω)) | − | | − | 3 is less than a + bω 1, as required. | |· (b). Z[√ 2]. − Solution. Define the size of a + b√ 2 to be a2 +2b2. The elements a + b√ 2 form a rectangular lattice in C of side lengths− 1 and √2. Each point in the rectangle− is within distance √3/2 of one of the vertices, and so within distance-squared of 3/4 of one of the vertices. We can repeat the argument in (a) and in 7., since the distance-squared is less than 1 to conclude that the domain is Euclidean. 7.(2.8). Describe a systematic way to do division with remainder in Z[i]. Use it to divide 4+36i by 5+ i. Solution. The size of a + bi is defined to be a2 + b2, the square of its length as a complex number. We can always divide an element by a unit without remainder. The goal of division of c + di by a nonunit a + bi is to produce an expression c + di (x + yi)(a + bi) that has size less than the size of a + bi, for some values of x and y in Z. − To do that, the elements of the Gaussian integers form a square lattice in C of side length 1. Draw 4 circles with centers at the four vertices, passing through the center of the square (they have radius 1/√2). Those circles cover the square. Hence, each point in the square is within distance 1/√2 of at least one of the vertices, i.e., within distance-squared 1/2. Each complex number lies in one of the squares, and so the minimum distance-squared from a complex number to a point of the lattice is less than or equal to 1/2. To divide c + di by a + bi, locate (a + bi)−1(c + di) in some square, and find the closest vertex x + yi to (a + bi)−1(c + di).
Recommended publications
  • Dimension Theory and Systems of Parameters

    Dimension Theory and Systems of Parameters

    Dimension theory and systems of parameters Krull's principal ideal theorem Our next objective is to study dimension theory in Noetherian rings. There was initially amazement that the results that follow hold in an arbitrary Noetherian ring. Theorem (Krull's principal ideal theorem). Let R be a Noetherian ring, x 2 R, and P a minimal prime of xR. Then the height of P ≤ 1. Before giving the proof, we want to state a consequence that appears much more general. The following result is also frequently referred to as Krull's principal ideal theorem, even though no principal ideals are present. But the heart of the proof is the case n = 1, which is the principal ideal theorem. This result is sometimes called Krull's height theorem. It follows by induction from the principal ideal theorem, although the induction is not quite straightforward, and the converse also needs a result on prime avoidance. Theorem (Krull's principal ideal theorem, strong version, alias Krull's height theorem). Let R be a Noetherian ring and P a minimal prime ideal of an ideal generated by n elements. Then the height of P is at most n. Conversely, if P has height n then it is a minimal prime of an ideal generated by n elements. That is, the height of a prime P is the same as the least number of generators of an ideal I ⊆ P of which P is a minimal prime. In particular, the height of every prime ideal P is at most the number of generators of P , and is therefore finite.
  • Formal Power Series - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia

    Formal Power Series - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia

    Formal power series - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_power_series Formal power series From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In mathematics, formal power series are a generalization of polynomials as formal objects, where the number of terms is allowed to be infinite; this implies giving up the possibility to substitute arbitrary values for indeterminates. This perspective contrasts with that of power series, whose variables designate numerical values, and which series therefore only have a definite value if convergence can be established. Formal power series are often used merely to represent the whole collection of their coefficients. In combinatorics, they provide representations of numerical sequences and of multisets, and for instance allow giving concise expressions for recursively defined sequences regardless of whether the recursion can be explicitly solved; this is known as the method of generating functions. Contents 1 Introduction 2 The ring of formal power series 2.1 Definition of the formal power series ring 2.1.1 Ring structure 2.1.2 Topological structure 2.1.3 Alternative topologies 2.2 Universal property 3 Operations on formal power series 3.1 Multiplying series 3.2 Power series raised to powers 3.3 Inverting series 3.4 Dividing series 3.5 Extracting coefficients 3.6 Composition of series 3.6.1 Example 3.7 Composition inverse 3.8 Formal differentiation of series 4 Properties 4.1 Algebraic properties of the formal power series ring 4.2 Topological properties of the formal power series
  • 6. Localization

    6. Localization

    52 Andreas Gathmann 6. Localization Localization is a very powerful technique in commutative algebra that often allows to reduce ques- tions on rings and modules to a union of smaller “local” problems. It can easily be motivated both from an algebraic and a geometric point of view, so let us start by explaining the idea behind it in these two settings. Remark 6.1 (Motivation for localization). (a) Algebraic motivation: Let R be a ring which is not a field, i. e. in which not all non-zero elements are units. The algebraic idea of localization is then to make more (or even all) non-zero elements invertible by introducing fractions, in the same way as one passes from the integers Z to the rational numbers Q. Let us have a more precise look at this particular example: in order to construct the rational numbers from the integers we start with R = Z, and let S = Znf0g be the subset of the elements of R that we would like to become invertible. On the set R×S we then consider the equivalence relation (a;s) ∼ (a0;s0) , as0 − a0s = 0 a and denote the equivalence class of a pair (a;s) by s . The set of these “fractions” is then obviously Q, and we can define addition and multiplication on it in the expected way by a a0 as0+a0s a a0 aa0 s + s0 := ss0 and s · s0 := ss0 . (b) Geometric motivation: Now let R = A(X) be the ring of polynomial functions on a variety X. In the same way as in (a) we can ask if it makes sense to consider fractions of such polynomials, i.
  • Gsm073-Endmatter.Pdf

    Gsm073-Endmatter.Pdf

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/gsm/073 Graduat e Algebra : Commutativ e Vie w This page intentionally left blank Graduat e Algebra : Commutativ e View Louis Halle Rowen Graduate Studies in Mathematics Volum e 73 KHSS^ K l|y|^| America n Mathematica l Societ y iSyiiU ^ Providence , Rhod e Islan d Contents Introduction xi List of symbols xv Chapter 0. Introduction and Prerequisites 1 Groups 2 Rings 6 Polynomials 9 Structure theories 12 Vector spaces and linear algebra 13 Bilinear forms and inner products 15 Appendix 0A: Quadratic Forms 18 Appendix OB: Ordered Monoids 23 Exercises - Chapter 0 25 Appendix 0A 28 Appendix OB 31 Part I. Modules Chapter 1. Introduction to Modules and their Structure Theory 35 Maps of modules 38 The lattice of submodules of a module 42 Appendix 1A: Categories 44 VI Contents Chapter 2. Finitely Generated Modules 51 Cyclic modules 51 Generating sets 52 Direct sums of two modules 53 The direct sum of any set of modules 54 Bases and free modules 56 Matrices over commutative rings 58 Torsion 61 The structure of finitely generated modules over a PID 62 The theory of a single linear transformation 71 Application to Abelian groups 77 Appendix 2A: Arithmetic Lattices 77 Chapter 3. Simple Modules and Composition Series 81 Simple modules 81 Composition series 82 A group-theoretic version of composition series 87 Exercises — Part I 89 Chapter 1 89 Appendix 1A 90 Chapter 2 94 Chapter 3 96 Part II. AfRne Algebras and Noetherian Rings Introduction to Part II 99 Chapter 4. Galois Theory of Fields 101 Field extensions 102 Adjoining
  • Ring (Mathematics) 1 Ring (Mathematics)

    Ring (Mathematics) 1 Ring (Mathematics)

    Ring (mathematics) 1 Ring (mathematics) In mathematics, a ring is an algebraic structure consisting of a set together with two binary operations usually called addition and multiplication, where the set is an abelian group under addition (called the additive group of the ring) and a monoid under multiplication such that multiplication distributes over addition.a[›] In other words the ring axioms require that addition is commutative, addition and multiplication are associative, multiplication distributes over addition, each element in the set has an additive inverse, and there exists an additive identity. One of the most common examples of a ring is the set of integers endowed with its natural operations of addition and multiplication. Certain variations of the definition of a ring are sometimes employed, and these are outlined later in the article. Polynomials, represented here by curves, form a ring under addition The branch of mathematics that studies rings is known and multiplication. as ring theory. Ring theorists study properties common to both familiar mathematical structures such as integers and polynomials, and to the many less well-known mathematical structures that also satisfy the axioms of ring theory. The ubiquity of rings makes them a central organizing principle of contemporary mathematics.[1] Ring theory may be used to understand fundamental physical laws, such as those underlying special relativity and symmetry phenomena in molecular chemistry. The concept of a ring first arose from attempts to prove Fermat's last theorem, starting with Richard Dedekind in the 1880s. After contributions from other fields, mainly number theory, the ring notion was generalized and firmly established during the 1920s by Emmy Noether and Wolfgang Krull.[2] Modern ring theory—a very active mathematical discipline—studies rings in their own right.
  • Formal Power Series Rings, Inverse Limits, and I-Adic Completions of Rings

    Formal Power Series Rings, Inverse Limits, and I-Adic Completions of Rings

    Formal power series rings, inverse limits, and I-adic completions of rings Formal semigroup rings and formal power series rings We next want to explore the notion of a (formal) power series ring in finitely many variables over a ring R, and show that it is Noetherian when R is. But we begin with a definition in much greater generality. Let S be a commutative semigroup (which will have identity 1S = 1) written multi- plicatively. The semigroup ring of S with coefficients in R may be thought of as the free R-module with basis S, with multiplication defined by the rule h k X X 0 0 X X 0 ( risi)( rjsj) = ( rirj)s: i=1 j=1 s2S 0 sisj =s We next want to construct a much larger ring in which infinite sums of multiples of elements of S are allowed. In order to insure that multiplication is well-defined, from now on we assume that S has the following additional property: (#) For all s 2 S, f(s1; s2) 2 S × S : s1s2 = sg is finite. Thus, each element of S has only finitely many factorizations as a product of two k1 kn elements. For example, we may take S to be the set of all monomials fx1 ··· xn : n (k1; : : : ; kn) 2 N g in n variables. For this chocie of S, the usual semigroup ring R[S] may be identified with the polynomial ring R[x1; : : : ; xn] in n indeterminates over R. We next construct a formal semigroup ring denoted R[[S]]: we may think of this ring formally as consisting of all functions from S to R, but we shall indicate elements of the P ring notationally as (possibly infinite) formal sums s2S rss, where the function corre- sponding to this formal sum maps s to rs for all s 2 S.
  • 9. Ideals and the Zariski Topology Definition 9.1. Let X ⊂ a N Be A

    9. Ideals and the Zariski Topology Definition 9.1. Let X ⊂ a N Be A

    9. Ideals and the Zariski Topology Definition 9.1. Let X ⊂ An be a subset. The ideal of X, denoted I(X), is simply the set of all polynomials which vanish on X. Let S ⊂ K[x1; x2; : : : ; xn]. Then the vanishing locus of S, denoted V (S), is n f p 2 A j f(x) = 0; 8f 2 S g: Lemma 9.2. Let X, Y ⊂ An and I, J ⊂ K[x] be any subsets. (1) X ⊂ V (I(X)). (2) I ⊂ I(V (I)). (3) If X ⊂ Y then I(Y ) ⊂ I(X). (4) If I ⊂ J then V (J) ⊂ V (I). (5) If X is a closed subset then V (I(X)) = X. Proof. Easy exercise. Note that a similar version of (5), with ideals replacing closed subsets, does not hold. For example take the ideal I ⊂ K[x], given as hx2i. Then V (I) = f0g, and the ideal of functions vanishing at the origin is hxi. It is natural then to ask what is the relation between I and I(V (I)). Clearly if f n 2 I then f 2 I(V (I)). Definitionp 9.3. Let I be an ideal in a ring R. The radical of I, denoted I, is f r 2 R j rn 2 I, some n g: It is not hard to check that the radical is an ideal. Theorem 9.4 (Hilbert's Nullstellensatz). Let K be an algebraically closed field and let pI be an ideal. Then I(V (I)) = I. p Proof. One inclusion is clear, I(V (I)) ⊃ I.
  • Commutative Algebra

    Commutative Algebra

    Commutative Algebra Andrew Kobin Spring 2016 / 2019 Contents Contents Contents 1 Preliminaries 1 1.1 Radicals . .1 1.2 Nakayama's Lemma and Consequences . .4 1.3 Localization . .5 1.4 Transcendence Degree . 10 2 Integral Dependence 14 2.1 Integral Extensions of Rings . 14 2.2 Integrality and Field Extensions . 18 2.3 Integrality, Ideals and Localization . 21 2.4 Normalization . 28 2.5 Valuation Rings . 32 2.6 Dimension and Transcendence Degree . 33 3 Noetherian and Artinian Rings 37 3.1 Ascending and Descending Chains . 37 3.2 Composition Series . 40 3.3 Noetherian Rings . 42 3.4 Primary Decomposition . 46 3.5 Artinian Rings . 53 3.6 Associated Primes . 56 4 Discrete Valuations and Dedekind Domains 60 4.1 Discrete Valuation Rings . 60 4.2 Dedekind Domains . 64 4.3 Fractional and Invertible Ideals . 65 4.4 The Class Group . 70 4.5 Dedekind Domains in Extensions . 72 5 Completion and Filtration 76 5.1 Topological Abelian Groups and Completion . 76 5.2 Inverse Limits . 78 5.3 Topological Rings and Module Filtrations . 82 5.4 Graded Rings and Modules . 84 6 Dimension Theory 89 6.1 Hilbert Functions . 89 6.2 Local Noetherian Rings . 94 6.3 Complete Local Rings . 98 7 Singularities 106 7.1 Derived Functors . 106 7.2 Regular Sequences and the Koszul Complex . 109 7.3 Projective Dimension . 114 i Contents Contents 7.4 Depth and Cohen-Macauley Rings . 118 7.5 Gorenstein Rings . 127 8 Algebraic Geometry 133 8.1 Affine Algebraic Varieties . 133 8.2 Morphisms of Affine Varieties . 142 8.3 Sheaves of Functions .
  • Class Numbers of Number Rings: Existence and Computations

    Class Numbers of Number Rings: Existence and Computations

    CLASS NUMBERS OF NUMBER RINGS: EXISTENCE AND COMPUTATIONS GABRIEL GASTER Abstract. This paper gives a brief introduction to the theory of algebraic numbers, with an eye toward computing the class numbers of certain number rings. The author adapts the treatments of Madhav Nori (from [1]) and Daniel Marcus (from [2]). None of the following work is original, but the author does include some independent solutions of exercises given by Nori or Marcus. We assume familiarity with the basic theory of fields. 1. A Note on Notation Throughout, unless explicitly stated, R is assumed to be a commutative integral domain. As is customary, we write Frac(R) to denote the field of fractions of a domain. By Z, Q, R, C we denote the integers, rationals, reals, and complex numbers, respectively. For R a ring, R[x], read ‘R adjoin x’, is the polynomial ring in x with coefficients in R. 2. Integral Extensions In his lectures, Madhav Nori said algebraic number theory is misleadingly named. It is not the application of modern algebraic tools to number theory; it is the study of algebraic numbers. We will mostly, therefore, concern ourselves solely with number fields, that is, finite (hence algebraic) extensions of Q. We recall from our experience with linear algebra that much can be gained by slightly loosening the requirements on the structures in question: by studying mod- ules over a ring one comes across entire phenomena that are otherwise completely obscured when one studies vector spaces over a field. Similarly, here we adapt our understanding of algebraic extensions of a field to suitable extensions of rings, called ‘integral.’ Whereas Z is a ‘very nice’ ring—in some sense it is the nicest possible ring that is not a field—the integral extensions of Z, called ‘number rings,’ have surprisingly less structure.
  • NOTES in COMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA: PART 1 1. Results/Definitions Of

    NOTES in COMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA: PART 1 1. Results/Definitions Of

    NOTES IN COMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA: PART 1 KELLER VANDEBOGERT 1. Results/Definitions of Ring Theory It is in this section that a collection of standard results and definitions in commutative ring theory will be presented. For the rest of this paper, any ring R will be assumed commutative with identity. We shall also use "=" and "∼=" (isomorphism) interchangeably, where the context should make the meaning clear. 1.1. The Basics. Definition 1.1. A maximal ideal is any proper ideal that is not con- tained in any strictly larger proper ideal. The set of maximal ideals of a ring R is denoted m-Spec(R). Definition 1.2. A prime ideal p is such that for any a, b 2 R, ab 2 p implies that a or b 2 p. The set of prime ideals of R is denoted Spec(R). p Definition 1.3. The radical of an ideal I, denoted I, is the set of a 2 R such that an 2 I for some positive integer n. Definition 1.4. A primary ideal p is an ideal such that if ab 2 p and a2 = p, then bn 2 p for some positive integer n. In particular, any maximal ideal is prime, and the radical of a pri- mary ideal is prime. Date: September 3, 2017. 1 2 KELLER VANDEBOGERT Definition 1.5. The notation (R; m; k) shall denote the local ring R which has unique maximal ideal m and residue field k := R=m. Example 1.6. Consider the set of smooth functions on a manifold M.
  • Math 558 Exercises

    Math 558 Exercises

    Math 558 Exercises (1) Let R be a commutative ring and let P be a prime ideal of the power series ring R[[x]]. Let P (0) denote the ideal in R of constant terms of elements of P . (i) If x 6∈ P and P (0) is generated by n elements of R, prove that P is generated by n elements of R[[x]]. (ii) If x ∈ P and P (0) is generated by n elements of R, prove that P is generated by n + 1 elements of R[[x]]. (iii) If R is a PID, prove that every prime ideal of R[[x]] of height one is principal. (2) Let R be a DVR with maximal ideal yR and let S = R[[x]] be the formal power series ring over R in the variable x. Let f ∈ S. Recall that f is a unit in S if and only if the constant term of f is a unit in R. (a) If g is a factor of f and S/fS is a finite R-module, then S/gS is a finite R-module. (b) If n is a positive integer and f := xn + y, then S/fS is a DVR that is a finite R-module if and only if R = Rb, i.e., R is complete. (c) If f is irreducible and fS 6= xS, then S/fS is a finite R-module implies that R is complete. (d) If R is complete, then S/fS is a finite R-module for each nonzero f in S such that fS ∩R = (0).
  • Maximal Ideals and Zorn's Lemma

    Maximal Ideals and Zorn's Lemma

    MAXIMAL IDEALS AND ZORN'S LEMMA 1. Maximal ideals and fields Proposition 1. Let R be a nontrivial, commutative, unital ring. Then R is simple if and only if it is a field. Proof. Suppose R is simple. Suppose 0 =6 x 2 R. Then xR is a nontrivial ideal of R, so xR = R. Thus 9 x−1 2 R : xx−1 = 1, i.e., x 2 R∗. Conversely, suppose R is a field and J is a nontrivial ideal of R. Consider 0 =6 x 2 J. Now 1 = xx−1 2 Jx−1 ⊆ J. Then if y 2 R, we have y = 1y 2 Jy ⊆ J, so J is improper. Definition 2. An ideal of a ring is maximal if it is proper, but is not properly contained in any proper ideal of the ring. Proposition 3. Let K be an ideal in a commutative, unital ring R. Then K is maximal if and only if R=K is a field. Proof. K is maximal , R=K is nontrivial and simple (cf. Exercise 2) , R=K is a field. Definition 4. In the context of Proposition 3, the field R=K is called the residue field of the maximal ideal K. 2. Zorn's Lemma and the existence of maximal ideals Definition 5. Let (X; ≤) be a poset. (a) A subset C of X is a chain or a flag if c ≤ d or d ≤ c for all c; d in C. (b) An element u of X is an upper bound for a subset S of X if x ≤ u for all x in S.