Arxiv:1910.09884V4 [Math.AC] 16 Dec 2020

arXiv:1910.09884v4 [math.AC] 16 Dec 2020 oe e ig aik ovret lr-ig lxnrffcomp Alexandroff ultra-ring; convergent; Zariski ring; set power ewrs Stone- Keywords: OPCIIAIN FTPLGCLSPACES TOPOLOGICAL OF COMPACTIFICATIONS .Aeado opcicto 16 17 14 compactifications disconnected References Totally compactification compactification 8. in Alexandroff application their and 7. Ultra-rings 6. 0 .Mnmlsetu sStone- as spectrum Minimal 3. Preliminaries 2. Introduction 1. .Mxmlsetu sStone- as spectrum Maximal 5. .TeStone- The 4. 00MteaisSbetCasfiain 40,5D5 42,5 14M27, 54D35, 14A05, Classification: Subject Mathematics 2010 hssuyaegvn seily ti hw htteStone- the that shown is it Especially, given. are study this opcictoso h iceespace discrete the of compactifications asn oaiscranqoin.Antrladsml a to way simple Stone- the and use on is natural results approach A nontrivial new obtain this then to quotient. introduced, certain is ultra-rings its construct a to passing rmteStone- the from aiyo oa ig ohidxdb set a by a indexed of product both direct integral rings the of local of family of spectrum a maximal family of the that product also proved direct and is the domains it of them, spectrum among minimal Especially the made. been have cations opcicto fa rirr oooia space topological arbitrary an of compactification n infiatavne ntecmatfiain ftopological of Stone- the compactifications on the especially on spaces, advances significant and Abstract. I OMTTV ALGEBRA COMMUTATIVE VIA ehcmatfiain iia pcrm aia spectrum; maximal spectrum; minimal compactification; Cech ˇ ehcmatfiaino nabtaysae9 space arbitrary an of compactification Cech ˇ nti ae,uigcmuaieagba hnnew then algebra, commutative using paper, this In .TRZDHADM .REZAEE R. M. AND TARIZADEH A. ehcmatfiaino h iceespace discrete the of compactification Cech ˇ Contents ehadAeado compactifi- Alexandroff and Cech ˇ 1 ehcmatfiain4 compactification Cech ˇ ehcmatfiain11 compactification Cech ˇ X ehcompactification. Cech ˇ oeapiain of applications Some . X r h Stone- the are X sobtained is actification. X A0 13A15. 4A20, Cech Cech ˇ ˇ by d 18 3 2 2 A.TARIZADEHANDM.R.REZAEE

1. Introduction Compactification is one of the main topics which is investigated in this paper from new points of view. Among various compactifications, the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of a discrete space X is particularly important. One of the main reasons of its importance is that it admits a semigroup structure whenever X is a semigroup, and this semigroup structure has vast and interesting applications in diverse fields of mathematics specially in combinatorial number theory, Ramsey theory, topological dynamics and Ergodic theory. An accessible concrete description of this compactification often remains elusive. For instance the semigroup βN, the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of the natural numbers, is amazingly complicated and there are some unanswered questions about its semigroup structure. For example, whether or not βN contains any elements of finite order which are not idempotent still remains a challenging open problem. See [9] and [19] and their rich bibliography for the further studies. Perhaps as another main reason for the importance of the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of a discrete space is its vital role in proving Theorem 4.4 which states that every topological space admits the Stone-Cechˇ compactification. Classically, the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of a discrete space is usu- ally constructed via the ultrafilters on that space. In this paper, we find two new and interesting ways to construct this compactification using only the standard methods of commutative algebra. In fact in Theorem 3.5, we prove that the minimal spectrum of the direct product of a family of integral domains indexed by a set X is the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of the discrete space X. In Theorem 5.4, it is shown that the maximal spectrum of the direct product of a family of local rings indexed by X is the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of the discrete space X. These results improve all of the former constructions of the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of a discrete space, and also show that this compactification is independent of choosing of integral domains and local rings. In particular, we get that βX = Spec (X) here βX P denotes the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of the discrete space X, and the classical approach is also recovered, see Remark 3.10. Then various applications of these results are given. In particular, these results allow us to understand the number of prime ideals of the infinite direct products of integral domains and local rings more precisely. Also the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of an arbitrary topological space X is deduced from the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of the discrete space X by passing to a its certain quotient, see Theorem 4.4. COMPACTIFICATIONS OF SPACES 3

In §6, using ultra-rings and Theorems 3.5 and 5.4, then we obtain pow- erful results on the Stone-Cechˇ compactification, see Theorems 6.2 and 6.3. We have also found a new way to build the Alexandroff (one-point) compactification of a discrete space, see Corollary 7.3. This result tells us that for any set X then αX = Spec( ) here αX denotes the Alexandroff compactification of the discrete spaceR X and is a certain subring of (X). Then in Theorem 8.2, we show that everyR totally disconnected compactificationP of a discrete space X is precisely of the form Spec( ′) where the ring ′ satisfies in the extensions of rings ′ R (X). (This resultR is also proved in [13, Theorems 2.2 andR ⊆ 2.3] R by⊆ anotherP approach using Boolean algebras). Therefore all of the totally disconnected compactifications of a discrete space are in the scope of the Zariski topology. In particular this class, up to iso- morphisms, forms a set and the extensions of the corresponding rings put a partial order over this set in a way that the Alexandroff compactification is the minimal one and the Stone-Cechˇ compactification is the maximal one.

2. Preliminaries In this paper, all rings are commutative. If ϕ : R R′ is a morphism of rings then the induced map Spec(R′) Spec(→ R) given by p ϕ−1(p) is either denoted by Spec(ϕ) or by→ ϕ∗. Let X be a set and I an ideal of the power set ring (X). If A, B I then A B = A + B + A B I. Also if A IPand B A, then∈ B I. For∪ the definition of∩ power∈ set ring see e.g.∈ [16, §2].⊆ By Fin(X)∈ we mean the set of all finite subsets of X. It is an ideal of (X). For the definition of Clop(X) see [16, §3]. By a compact spaceP we mean a quasi-compact and Hausdorff topological space.

Definition 2.1. By a compactification of a topological space X we mean a compact space X together with a continuous open embedding η : X X such that eη(X) is a dense subspace of X. If moreover → X η(X) consistinge only a single point then X is callede the one-point ore \ the Alexandroff compactification of X ande it is often denoted by αX, and this single point is called the point at infinity.

Let R be a ring. The set of minimal primes of R is denoted by Min(R) and the set of maximal ideals of R is denoted by Max(R). Note that 4 A.TARIZADEHANDM.R.REZAEE

Min(R) is not necessarily Zariski quasi-compact. The Jacobson radical of R is denoted by J.

Definition 2.2. The Stone-Cechˇ compactification of a topological space X is the pair (βX,η) where βX is a compact space and η : X βX is a continuous map such that the following universal property holds.→ For each such pair (Y,ϕ), i.e. Y is a compact space and ϕ : X Y is a continuous map, then there exists a unique continuous map→ϕ : βX Y such that ϕ = ϕ η. e → e ◦ It is important to notice that the Stone-Cechˇ compactification need not to be a compactification in the sense of Definition 2.1. All of the remained undefined notions such as flat topology, retraction, mp-ring and etc can be found in [1], [14] and [15].

3. Minimal spectrum as Stone-Cechˇ compactification The main result of this section states that the minimal spectrum of the direct product of a family of integral domains indexed by a set X is the Stone-Cechˇ compactiﬁcation of the discrete space X. We start with the following result which generalizes [5, p. 460].

Proposition 3.1. Consider the canonical ring map π : R S−1R where S is a multiplicative subset of a ring R, and let f R→. Then ∈ f T p if and only if there exists some g S such that fg is ∈ p∈Im π∗ ∈ nilpotent.

Proof. If f T p then: ∈ p∈Im π∗

−1 f/1 \ S p = \ q = √0. ∈ ∗ p∈Im π q∈Spec(S−1R)

Thus there exist a nutural number n 1 and some g S such that f ng = 0. Hence, fg is nilpotent. The reverse≥ implication∈ is easy.

Corollary 3.2. ([8, Lemma 1.1] and [10, Lemma 3.1]) Let p be a prime ideal of a ring R. Then p is a minimal prime of R if and only if for each f p there exists some g R p such that fg is nilpotent. ∈ ∈ \ COMPACTIFICATIONS OF SPACES 5

Proof. It is an immediate consequence of Proposition 3.1.

Theorem 3.3. Let R be a ring. Then the induced Zariski topology over Min(R) is ﬁner than the induced ﬂat topology. These two topologies over Min(R) are the same if and only if Min(R) is Zariski compact.

Proof. Let f R. If p W = Min(R) V (f) then by Corol- lary 3.2, there exists∈ some g ∈ R p such that∩ fg is nilpotent. This yields that p Min(R) D(g∈) \W . Therefore W is a Zariski open of Min(R). Hence∈ the Zariski∩ topology⊆ over Min(R) is finer than the flat topology. For any ring R, then by [1, Lemma 3.2], Min(R) is Zariski Hausdorff. Also Min(R) is flat quasi-compact. Therefore if these two topologies over Min(R) are the same then Min(R) is Zariski compact. Conversely, suppose Min(R) is Zariski compact. In the above we observed that U = Min(R) D(f) is a Zariski clopen of Min(R). Every closed subspace of a quasi-compact∩ space is quasi- compact. Thus there exist a finitely many elements g1, ..., gn R n ∈ c such that U = Min(R) U = S Min(R) D(fi). It follows that \ i=1 ∩ U = Min(R) V (I) where I = (g1, ..., gn) is a finitely generated ideal of R. Thus U∩is a flat open of Min(R).

Throughout this paper, Λ = Q Rx where each Rx is an integral x∈X domain. For each f =(fx) Λ, the set Supp(f)= x X : fx =0 is simply denoted by S(f). Clearly∈ S(fg)=S(f) S({g) for∈ all f,g6 }Λ. ∩ ∈

Corollary 3.4. The space Min(Λ) is Zariski compact.

Proof. By Theorem 3.3, it suffices to show that for each f Λ then U = Min(Λ) D(f) is a flat open of Min(Λ). Consider the∈ se- ∩ quence e =(ex) Λ where ex is either 0 or 1, according as x S(f) or x / S(f). Then∈ clearly ef = 0 and g = ge for all g Ann(f∈). Hence Ann(∈ f) is generated by the sequence e. Now let p ∈ Min(Λ) V (e). If f p then by Corollary 3.2, there exists some∈h Λ ∩p such that fh∈ is nilpotent. But Λ is a reduced ring. Hence∈h \Ann(f). Thus h = he p. But this is a contradiction. This shows∈ that U = Min(Λ) V∈(e) is a flat open of Min(Λ). Here is a second∩ proof. The ideal (f) as Λ module is isomorphic to (1 e). Thus every principal ideal of Λ is a projective− module. It is well − 6 A.TARIZADEHANDM.R.REZAEE known that every principal ideal of a ring R is a projective R module if and only if R is a reduced mp-ring and Min(R) is Zariski− compact, for its proof see [17, Theorem 4.1] or [18, Proposition 3.4]. Therefore the space Min(Λ) is compact.

For each x X then px := Ker πx is a minimal prime of Λ and it is ∈ generated by the sequence 1 ∆x where πx :Λ Rx is the canonical − → projection, ∆x =(δx,y)y∈X and δx,y is the Kronecker delta. In the following result and also in Theorems 4.4, 5.4, 8.2 and Corollary 7.3, we study compactiﬁcations, especially the Stone-Cechˇ compactiﬁ- cation by purely algebraic methods.

Theorem 3.5. The space Min(Λ) together with the canonical map ˇ η : X Min(Λ) given by x px is the Stone-Cech compactiﬁca- tion of→ the discrete space X.

Proof. By Corollary 3.4, the space Min(Λ) is compact. It remains to check out the universal property of the Stone-Cechˇ compactification. Let Y be a compact topological space and ϕ : X Y a function. We shall find a continuous function ϕ : Min(Λ) Y →such that ϕ = ϕ η and then we show that such functione is unique.→ If p Min(Λ)e then◦ the subsets S(f) with f Λ p have the finite intersection∈ prop- ∈ \ erty. It follows that the subsets ϕ S(f) and so their closures ϕ S(f) with f Λ p have the finite intersection property. This yields that ∈ \ T ϕ S(f) = because Y is quasi-compact. We claim that this f∈Λ\p 6 ∅ intersection has exactly one point. If y and y′ are two distinct points of the intersection then there exist disjoint opens U and V in Y such ′ that y U and y V . Then consider the sequence f Λ where fx is either∈ 0 or 1, according∈ as x ϕ−1(U) or x / ϕ−1(U∈). Then we have either f p or 1 f p∈since f is an idempotent.∈ If f p then ϕ−1(V ) ∈S(1 f)−= .∈ So we may choose some x in this inter-∈ ∩ −−1 6 ∅ section. Thus x / ϕ (U), hence fx = 1. But this is a contradiction since x S(1 ∈f). If 1 f p then ϕ−1(U) S(f) = , but this is again∈ a contradiction.− − Hence,∈ there exists a∩ unique6 point∅ y Y p ∈ such that T ϕ S(f) = yp . This establishes the claim. Then we f∈Λ\p { } define the map ϕ : Min(Λ) Y as p y . It is easy to see that → p ϕ(x) T ϕeS(f) for all x X. Therefore ϕ = ϕ η. Now we ∈ f∈Λ\px ∈ e ◦ show that ϕ is continuous. Let U be an open of Y and let p (ϕ)−1(U). e ∈ e COMPACTIFICATIONS OF SPACES 7

There exists an open neighborhood V of yp such that V U, because it is well known that every compact space is a normal space.⊆ Let h Λ ∈ be a sequence which is deﬁned as hx = 1 or hx = 0, according as x ϕ−1(V ) or x / ϕ−1(V ). Then p D(h), since if h p then 1 ∈ h / p and so ∈ϕ−1(V ) S(1 h) =∈ , which is impossible.∈ To conclude− ∈ the continuity of ϕ∩we show− that6 ∅ Min(Λ) D(h) (ϕ)−1(U). Suppose there exists some eq Min(Λ) D(h) such∩ that y⊆/ eU. Thus ∈ ∩ q ∈ yq W := Y V . It follows that W ϕ S(h) = . But this is impossi- ∈ \ −1 ∩ 6 ∅ ble since S(h)= ϕ (V ) and so W ϕ S(h) W V = . Therefore ϕ is continuous. If Min(Λ) D(f∩) is non-empty⊆ then∩ f ∅= 0 and so ∩ 6 theree exists some x X such that px D(f). This shows that η(X) is a dense subspace∈ of Min(Λ), hence the∈ uniqueness of ϕ is deduced from the basic fact that if two continuous maps into a Hausdorﬀe space agree on a dense subspace of the domain, they are equal.

Remark 3.6. The space Min(Λ) is the compactiﬁcation of the discrete space X in the sense of Deﬁnition 2.1. Because the map η : X Min(Λ) given by x px is an open embedding since px = → { } Min(Λ) D(∆x) for all x X. ∩ ∈

Lemma 3.7. If each Rx is a ﬁeld then every prime ideal of Λ is a maximal ideal.

Proof. Let p be a prime ideal of Λ and f Λ p. Then consider ∈ \ the sequence g =(gx) Λ where gx is 1 or 1/f(x), according as fx =0 ∈ or fx = 0. Then it is obvious that f(1 fg)=0 p. This yields that 16 fg p. Therefore Λ/p is a ﬁeld.− As a second∈ proof, the assertion− is also∈ deduced from the fact that Λ is an absolutely ﬂat ring.

Corollary 3.8. The space Spec(Λ) together with the canonical map η : X Spec(Λ) is the Stone-Cechˇ compactiﬁcation of the discrete → space X if and only if each Rx is a ﬁeld.

Proof. If each Rx is a field then the assertion is deduced from The- orem 3.5 and Lemma 3.7. Conversely, if m is a maximal ideal of Rx −1 −1 then πx (m)= πx (0) because Spec(Λ) is Hausdorff and so every prime ideal of Λ is a maximal ideal. But πx is surjective and so the induced ∗ map πx is injective. Therefore the zero ideal of Rx is a maximal ideal and so it is a field. 8 A.TARIZADEHANDM.R.REZAEE

Corollary 3.9. The space Spec (X) together with the canonical map P ˇ η : X Spec (X) given by x mx = (X x ) is the Stone-Cech compactiﬁcation→ P of the discrete space X.P \{ }

Z Proof. The map (X) Q 2 given by A χA is an iso- P → x∈X morphism of rings where χA is the characteristic function of A and Z = 0, 1 . Then apply Corollary 3.8. 2 { }

Remark 3.10. Here we establish a bridge that allows us to trans- late all of the theory of Boolean algebras into the standard language of commutative algebra (and vice versa). For instance, the classical approach to construct the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of a discrete space X is easily recovered. Indeed, if X is a set then one can easily check that the map M (X) M = A (X): Ac M is a homeomorphism from SpecP (X)\ onto F{(X),∈ the P space of∈ ultrafilters} on X equipped with the StoneP topology. Recall that the collection of d(A) = F F (X): A F with A (X) forms a base for the opens of{ the∈ Stone topology.∈ The} space F∈(X P) is called the Stone space of the Boolean algebra (X). Note that the above identification can be generalized to any BooleanP ring R. In fact, the map M R M is a homeomorphism from Spec(R) onto the Stone space of the corre-\ sponding Boolean algebra of R.

If X is a set with the cardinality κ and X is a compactiﬁcation of the discrete space X, then by [3, Tag 0909] ande assuming the generalized κ continuum hypothesis, we have X κ, 2κ, 22 . | e|∈{ }

Corollary 3.11. If X and Y are two sets then we have the following canonical bijections:

Mor (X,βY ) Mor (βX,βY ) Mor (Y ), (X) . Set ≃ Top ≃ Ring P P

Proof. The ﬁrst bijection is implied form Corollary 3.9, and the second bijection is an immediate consequence of [16, Theorem 5.6]. COMPACTIFICATIONS OF SPACES 9

4. The Stone-Cechˇ compactification of an arbitrary space It is well known that every completely regular topological space admits the Stone-Cechˇ compactification. In this section, we prove “every topological space admits the Stone-Cechˇ compactification”. To realize this, first we prove some results which are interesting in their own right. These results are also proved in [12] by using the theory of ultrafilters. In fact this work [12] was the main motivation in emerging the ideas of this section. We will proceed by using the ring-theoretic methods. We believe that this approach is so simple than the theory of ultrafiters. Let X be a topological space, x X and M a maximal ideal of (X). Then we say that M is convergent∈ (or, Zariski convergent) to theP point x if whenever U is an open of X containing x, then M D(U). ∈

Lemma 4.1. Let X be a set. If M is a maximal ideal of (X) then (η)∗(M) is convergent to the point M βX = Spec (X)P. P ∈ P

Proof. Let U be an open of βX such that M U. If U (η)∗(M) then η−1(U) M. But there exists some A ∈ (X) such∈ thatP M ∈ ∈ P −1 ∈ D(A) U. If x A then η(x)= mx D(A) and so x η (U). This shows⊆ that A ∈η−1(U). Thus A M∈. But this is a contradiction.∈ ⊆ ∈

Lemma 4.2. Let X be a topological space and let A be a subset of X with the property that D(A) contains every maximal ideal of (X) which is convergent to a point of A. Then A is an open subset ofPX.

Proof. Take x A and let be the set of all opens of X which are containing x. Then∈ by the hypothesis,S the ideal of (X) generated by A and the elements U c = X U with U isP the whole ring. \ ∈ S Thus we may ﬁnd a ﬁnite number U1, ..., Un of elements of such that n n S c X = A ( S Ui ). It follows that x T Ui A. Hence, A is an open ∪ i=1 ∈ i=1 ⊆ of X.

Note that the converse of the above lemma holds trivially. Let ϕ : X Y be a continuous map of topological spaces. If a maximal ideal →M of (X) converges to some point x X, then clearly (ϕ)∗(M) is convergentP to ϕ(x). In the following result∈ we establish Pits converse. 10 A.TARIZADEHANDM.R.REZAEE

Corollary 4.3. Let ϕ : X Y be a function between topological spaces with the property that →(ϕ)∗(M) is convergent to ϕ(x) whenever a maximal ideal M of P(X) converges to some point x X. Then ϕ is continuous. P ∈

Proof. It is easily deduced from Lemma 4.2.

Theorem 4.4. Every topological space X admits the Stone-Cechˇ com- pactiﬁcation.

Proof. Consider the equivalence relation on βX = Spec (X) defined as M N if ϕ : X Y is a continuous∼ function to a compactP space Y then ∼ϕ(M)= ϕ(N)→ where ϕ : βX Y is the unique continuous function suche that eϕ = ϕ η, seee the proof→ of Theorem 3.5. Now to prove that the pair (X′, πe ◦ η) is the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of the space X it suffices to show◦ that π η : X X′ is continuous where π : βX X′ = βX/ is the canonical◦ map→ and X′ is equipped with the quotient→ topology.∼ To prove the continuity of π η, by Corol- lary 4.3, it will be enough to show that if a maximal ideal◦ M of (X) converges to some point x X then (π η)∗(M) is convergentP to ∈ P∗ ◦ ∗ ∗ the point (π η)(x). We have (π η) (M) = (π) (η) (M). By Lemma 4.1, N◦ := (η)∗(M) isP convergent◦ to theP point PM βX. Thus (π)∗(N) is convergentP to the point π(M) since π is continuous.∈ Then P we show that M mx. Because take A (X) M and let V be an open of a compact∼ space Y such that ϕ(∈x) P V \where ϕ : X Y is a continuous map. Then ϕ−1(V ) / M. Note∈ that S(A) = A.→ Now if ∈ V ϕ(A) = then A M, a contradiction. Hence, ϕ(x) ϕ S(A). Thus∩ by the∅ definition∈ of ϕ, see the proof of Theorem 3.5,∈ we get that ∗ ϕ(x)= ϕ(M) and so M emx. Therefore (π η) (M) is convergent to the pointe π(M)=(π η∼)(x). Note that duringP ◦ to verify the universal ◦ property of the Stone-Cechˇ compactification for the pair (X′, π η), the uniqueness is deduced from the fact that (π η)(X) is a dense subspace◦ of X′. ◦

It seems that the notion “Zariski convergent” still has the potential that can be developed further to apply for other purposes. COMPACTIFICATIONS OF SPACES 11

5. Maximal spectrum as Stone-Cechˇ compactification In this section, we prove that the maximal spectrum of the direct product of a family of local rings indexed by a set X is the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of the discrete space X. Then some applications are also given. Let R be a ring and f R. If m U = Max(R) D(f) then there exist some g m and h∈ R such∈ that 1 = fh + g∩. This yields that m Max(R) ∈V (g) U.∈ Thus U is a flat open of Max(R). Therefore the∈ flat topology∩ over⊆ Max(R) is finer than the Zariski topology.

Proposition 5.1. For a ring R the following statements are equiva- lent. (i) R/J is absolutely flat. (ii) The Zariski and flat topologies over Max(R) are the same. (iii) Max(R) is flat compact.

Proof. (i) (ii): If f R then there exists some g R such that f(1 fg) J⇒. It follows that∈ Max(R) V (f) = Max(R)∈ D(1 fg). (ii) − (iii∈) : The subset Max(R) is∩ Zariski quasi-compact∩ and− ﬂat Hausdorﬀ.⇒ (iii) (i) : See [15, Theorem 4.5]. ⇒

Lemma 5.2. Let R be a ring such that R/J is absolutely ﬂat. Then the clopens of Max(R) are precisely of the form Max(R) V (f) where f R. ∩ ∈

Proof. By Proposition 5.1, the Zariski and flat topologies over Max(R) are the same. If f R then we observed that Max(R) V (f) is a clopen of Max(R). Conversely,∈ let U be a clopen of Max(∩R). It is easy to see that every closed subspace of a quasi-compact space n is quasi-compact. Hence, we may write U = S Max(R) V (Ik) k=1 ∩ where each Ik is a (finitely generated) ideal of R. This yields that c U = Max(R) V (I) where I = I1...In. Similarly we get that U = Max(R) U =∩ Max(R) V (J) where J is a (finitely generated) ideal of R. It follows\ that I + J∩= R. Thus there exist some f I and g J such that f + g = 1. This implies that U = Max(R) V∈(f). ∈ ∩

Throughout this paper, Γ = Q Rx where each Rx is a local ring x∈X −1 with the maximal ideal mx. For each x X then Mx := π (mx) is a ∈ x 12 A.TARIZADEHANDM.R.REZAEE maximal ideal of Γ, because the ring map Γ/Mx Rx/mx induced by → the canonical projection πx :Γ Rx is an isomorphism. → If f =(fx) Γ then we deﬁne Ω(f)= x X : fx / mx . It is obvious that f is invertible∈ in Γ if and only if{ Ω(f∈)= X. It∈ is also} easy to see that Ω(fg)=Ω(f) Ω(g) for all f,g Γ. ∩ ∈

Lemma 5.3. Let f Γ. Then Ω(f)= if and only if f J. ∈ ∅ ∈

Proof. If Ω(f) = then fx mx for all x. This yields that Ω(1 + fg) = X for all∅g Γ. Thus∈ f J. Conversely, if f J ∈ ∈ ∈ then f Mx for all x. So Ω(f) is empty. ∈

Theorem 5.4. The space Max(Γ) together with the canonical map ˇ η : X Max(Γ) given by x Mx is the Stone-Cech compactiﬁca- tion of→ the discrete space X.

Proof. If f Γ then consider the sequence g = (gx) Γ such ∈ −1 ∈ that gx is either 0 or fx , according as fx mx or fx / mx. Then Ω(1 + fh(1 fg)) = X for all h Γ. Hence,∈f(1 fg) ∈J. Thus Γ/J is absolutely− flat. Therefore by∈ Proposition 5.1,− the space∈ Max(Γ) is compact. Then we verify the universal property of the Stone-Cechˇ compactification. Let Y be a compact topological space and ϕ : X Y a function. If M Max(Γ) then by Lemma 5.3, the subsets Ω(f→) with f Γ M have∈ the finite intersection property. Thus by a similar argument∈ \ as applied in the proof of Theorem 3.5, there exists a unique point yM Y such that T ϕΩ(f) = yM . Then we define the ∈ f∈Γ\M { } map ϕ : Max(Γ) Y as M yM . Again exactly like the proof of Theoreme 3.5, it is→ shown that ϕ = ϕ η and ϕ is continuous. Fi- nally, to prove the uniqueness of ϕ ite suffices◦ toe show that η(X) is a dense subspace of Max(Γ). The spacee Max(Γ) is totally disconnected, see [15, Proposition 4.4]. It is well known that in a compact totally disconnected space, the collection of clopens is a base for the opens. Using this and Lemma 5.2, then the collection of Max(Γ) V (f) with f Γ forms a base for the opens of Max(Γ). Now if Max(Γ)∩ V (f) is non-empty∈ then Ω(f) = X. Hence there exists some x X such∩ that 6 ∈ Mx Max(Γ) V (f). Therefore η(X) is a dense subspace of Max(Γ). ∈ ∩ COMPACTIFICATIONS OF SPACES 13

Remark 5.5. The canonical map η : X Max(Γ) given by x Mx → is an open embedding. In fact, Mx = Max(Γ) D(∆x) for all x X. { } ∩ ∈ To see this let M Max(Γ) D(∆x) and f M. If f / Mx then ∈ ∩ ∈ ∈ Ω(1 ∆x + ∆xf) = X and so 1 ∆x + ∆xf is invertible in the ring − − Γ. But this is a contradiction because 1 ∆x + ∆xf M. Therefore − ∈ M Mx and so M = Mx. ⊆

Corollary 5.6. There exists a unique homeomorphism: Min(Λ) ≃ / Max(Γ) such that px is mapped into Mx for all x X. ∈

Proof. It is deduced from the universal property of the Stone-Cechˇ compactiﬁcation by taking into account Theorems 3.5 and 5.4.

In the next section, we will precisely determine the rule of isomorphism of Corollary 5.6.

Corollary 5.7. Let R be a ring and let X be a subset of Spec(R). Then the following spaces are canonically isomorphic (up to a unique isomorphism). (i) Min( Q R/p). p∈X (ii) Spec Q κ(p). p∈X (iii) Max( Q Rp). p∈X

Proof. It is an immediate consequence of Corollary 5.6.

Corollary 5.8. If X is an inﬁnite set with the cardinality κ, then κ Min(Λ) = Max(Γ) = Spec (X) =22 . | | | | | P |

Proof. It follows from Corollaries 3.9 and 5.6 and the fact that the cardinality of the Stone-Cechˇ compactiﬁcation of the inﬁnite discrete κ space X is equal to 22 , to see the proof of this fact please consider [9, Theorem 3.58] or [19, Theorem on page 71].

Corollary 5.9. Let X and Y be two sets with the cardinalities κ and λ, respectively. Then the number of all ring maps (X) (Y ) is P → P 14 A.TARIZADEHANDM.R.REZAEE

κ either κλ or 2λ2 , according as X is ﬁnite or inﬁnite.

Proof. It is deduced from Corollaries 3.11 and 5.8.

If κ is an inﬁnite cardinal, then λ2κ = max λ, 2κ . To see its proof apply Cantor’s theorem and [6, p. 162, Lemma{ 6R]} which states that κκ = κ.

Corollary 5.10. Let X be a set with the cardinality κ. Then the num- κ ber of all ring maps (X) (X) is either κκ or 22 , according as X is ﬁnite or inﬁnite. P → P

Proof. It is an immediate consequence of Corollary 5.9.

6. Ultra-rings and their application in compactification In this section, we introduce a new way to construct the ultraproduct of rings which greatly simpliﬁes the general method in the literature, for the general method and its applications see e.g. [2], [4], [7] and [11]. Then we use this new approach to determine precisely the iso- morphisms whose rules are already obtained in an implicit way, see e.g. Corollary 5.6. Let (Rx) be a family of rings indexed by a set X and R = Q Rx. x∈X Let M be a maximal ideal of (X). Then it can be easily seen that M ∗ = f R : S(f) MP is an ideal of R, because clearly S(0) = {M ∈and so 0 ∈M ∗,} also S(f + g) S(f) S(g) and S(fg) ∅S( ∈f) S(g) for all ∈f,g R. We call the quotient⊆ ∪ ring R/M ∗ ⊆ ∩ ∈ the ultraproduct (or, ultra-ring) of the family (Rx) with respect to M. It is interesting to notice the map ϕ : R (X) given by f S(f) is not a morphism of rings, since it is not additive,→ P in fact S(f)+S(g) S(f +g). In spite of this, the inverse image of each ideal of (X) under⊆ ϕ is an ideal of R. In particular, M ∗ = ϕ−1(M). P ∗ If each Rx is a non-zero ring then M is a proper ideal of R, and we have the following result which shows that some properties (statements in ﬁrst-order logic) of rings are preserved under the formation of ultraproducts.

Theorem 6.1. The following statements hold. ∗ (i) If each Rx is a ﬁeld, then R/M is a ﬁeld. COMPACTIFICATIONS OF SPACES 15

∗ (ii) If each Rx is an integral domain, then R/M is an integral domain. ∗ (iii) If each Rx is a local ring, then R/M is a local ring. (iv) If each Kx is the fraction field of an integral domain Rx, then the ultra-ring of the family (Kx) with respect to M is the fraction field of R/M ∗. (v) If each Rx is a local ring with the residue field Kx, then the ultra- ∗ ring of the family (Kx) with respect to M is the residue field of R/M .

∗ Proof. (i) : Take f R M and consider the sequence g =(gx) R ∈ −\1 ∈ where each gx is either fx or 1, according as x S(f) or x / S(f). Then clearly S(1 fg) S(f)c M. Thus S(1∈ fg) M ∈and so 1 fg M ∗. − ⊆ ∈ − ∈ (ii−) : Suppose∈ fg M ∗ for some f,g R. Then clearly S(f) S(g) S(fg) M. Thus∈ S(f) S(g) M.∈ It follows that either f ∩ M ∗ or⊆ g M∈∗. ∩ ∈ ∈ (iii∈) : Clearly M ♭ = f R : Ω(f) M is a proper ideal of R ∗ ♭ { ∈ ∈ } and M M , since Ω(f) = x X : fx / mx S(f) for all ⊆ { ∈ ∈ } ⊆ ♭ f R where mx is the maximal ideal of Rx. If f R M then ∈ c ∈ \ −1 S(1 fg) Ω(f) M where g =(gx) and each gx is either fx or 1, according− ⊆ as x Ω(∈f) or x / Ω(f). Therefore S(1 fg) M and so 1 fg M ∗. Hence,∈ M ♭/M∈∗ is the only maximal ideal− of∈R/M ∗. The proof− of∈ (iv) is easy and left as an exercise to the reader. (v) : It suﬃces to show that the map R/M ♭ R′/M ∗ given by ♭ ∗ → ′ f + M f + M is an isomorphism of rings where R = Q Kx, x∈X ∗ ′ M = g R : S(g) M and f =(fx + mx) with mx is the maximal { ∈ ♭∈ } ideal of Rx. If f M then S(f) Ω(f) M and so S(f) M. Hence, the above map is∈ well-deﬁned. Clearly⊆ it∈ is also an isomorphism.∈

Theorem 6.2. The map ϕ : Spec (X) Min(Λ) given by M M ∗ is a homeomorphism. P →

Proof. First we need to show that M ∗ is a minimal prime of Λ. By Theorem 6.1 (ii), M ∗ is a prime ideal of Λ. Suppose there exists a prime ideal p of Λ such that p M ∗. If f M ∗ then consider the sequence ⊆ ∈ g = (gx) Λ where each gx is either 1 or 0, according as x S(f) or x / S(f).∈ Then clearly S(g) = S(f) M and so g M ∗.∈ Moreover f(1∈ g) = 0. This yields that f p. Hence,∈ M ∗ is a∈ minimal prime of − ∈ −1 Λ. The map ϕ is continuous, since ϕ Min(Λ) D(f) = D S(f) ∗ ∩ for all f Λ. Clearly mx = px for all x X, where mx = (X x ) ∈ ∈ P \{ } ′ and for px see the above of Theorem 3.5. This shows that η = ϕ η ◦ 16 A.TARIZADEHANDM.R.REZAEE where η : X Min(Λ) and η′ : X Spec (X) are the canonical → → P maps. Therefore, by the universal property of the Stone-Cechˇ com- pactiﬁcation and by taking into account Theorem 3.5 and Corollary 3.9, we deduce that ϕ is a homeomorphism.

Theorem 6.3. The map ψ : Spec (X) Max(Γ) given by M M ♭ is a homeomorphism. P →

Proof. By the proof of Theorem 6.1(iii), M ♭ is a maximal ideal of Γ. Hence, the above map is well-deﬁned. It is also continuous, since −1 ♭ ψ Max(Γ) D(f) = D Ω(f) for all f Γ. Moreover m = Mx for ∩ ∈ x all x X, where mx = (X x ) and for Mx see Theorem 5.4. This shows∈ that η = ψ η′ whereP η\{: X} Max(Γ) and η′ : X Spec (X) are the canonical◦ maps. Thus, by→ the universal property→ of the SPtone- Cechˇ compactiﬁcation and by taking into account Corollary 3.9 and Theorem 5.4, we deduce that ψ is a homeomorphism.

7. Alexandroff compactification Let be the set of all subsets of a set X which are either finite or cofiniteR (i.e. its complement is finite). Then clearly is a subring of the power set ring (X). In the following result the maximalR ideals of are characterized.P R Recall that if x X then mx = (X x ) is a maximal ideal of (X). ∈ P \{ } P

Theorem 7.1. Let X be an inﬁnite set. Then the maximal ideals of are precisely Fin(X) or of the form mx where x X. R ∩ R ∈

Proof. First we have to show that Fin(X) is a maximal ideal of . Clearly Fin(X) = since X is inﬁnite. If there exists an ideal I ofR strictly containing6 R Fin(X) then we may choose some A I such thatR A / Fin(X). It follows that Ac Fin(X) and so 1 =∈A + Ac I. Hence,∈ Fin(X) is a maximal ideal∈ of . Conversely, let M be a max-∈ R imal ideal of such that M = mx for all x X. It follows that R 6 ∩ R ∈ Ax := X x M for all x X. But x .Ax = 0 M. There- fore x \{M}∈R\for all x X. This∈ yields that{ } Fin(X) ∈ M and so Fin(X{ )=} ∈M. ∈ ⊆ COMPACTIFICATIONS OF SPACES 17

Remark 7.2. Let X be an inﬁnite set. Here we give a second proof to show that Fin(X) is a maximal ideal of . There exists a maximal ideal M of (X) such that Fin(X) M sinceR Fin(X) = (X). We have then Fin(P X)= M . Thus Fin(⊆ X) is a maximal6 idealP of . ∩ R R

Corollary 7.3. If X is an infinite set then Spec( ) is the Alexandroff compactification of the discrete space X. R

Proof. The space Spec( ) is compact. The map η : X Spec( ) R → R given by x mx is an open embedding. Because by Theorem ∩ R 7.1, D( x ) = mx for all x X. Now if A is a subset of X { } { ∩ R} ∈ then η(A) = S D( x ). If U is an open neighborhood of Fin(X) in x∈A { } Spec( ) then U c is a finite set. Hence, η(X) is a dense subspace of Spec(R). R Clearly Fin(X) is the point at infinity of the Alexandroff compactification of the infinite discrete space X.

8. Totally disconnected compactifications In this section it is shown that every totally disconnected compact- iﬁcation of a discrete space X is precisely of the form Spec( ′) where the ring ′ satisﬁes in the extensions of rings ′ (XR) and for see §7.R R ⊆ R ⊆ P R

Lemma 8.1. Let f : X Y be a continuous map of topological spaces such that f(X) is a→ dense subspace of Y . Then the induced map Clop(f) : Clop(Y ) Clop(X) is injective. →

Proof. Let A be a clopen of Y such that f −1(A) = . If A is non- empty then A f(X) is non-empty. But this is a contradiction.∅ ∩ Here is a second proof. Let D1 and D2 be two clopens of Y such that −1 −1 f (D1) = f (D2). Suppose there exists some y D1 such that c ∈ y / D2. It follows that (D1 D2) f(X) = . Hence there exists some x ∈ X such that f(x) D ∩Dc. But∩ this6 is∅ a contradiction. Therefore ∈ ∈ 1 ∩ 2 D1 = D2. 18 A.TARIZADEHANDM.R.REZAEE

Theorem 8.2. Every totally disconnected compactiﬁcation of a discrete space X is precisely of the form Spec( ′) where the ring ′ sat- isﬁes in the extensions of rings ′ R(X). R R ⊆ R ⊆ P

Proof. It is easy to see that for any such ring ′ then Spec( ′) together with the canonical open embedding η : X R Spec( ′) whichR ′ → R sends each point x X into mx is a totally disconnected compact- ∈ ∩R ification of the discrete space X. Conversely, let (X, η) be a totally disconnected compactification of a discrete space X.e By [16, Corollary 5.4], the space X is homeomorphic to Spec(R) where R = Clop(X). By Lemma 8.1,e the induced map Clop(η): R Clop(X) = (X)e is an injective ring map. So the ring R is isomorphic→ to ′, theP image of Clop(η). It remains to show that ′. Take AR . If A R ⊆ R ∈ R is finite then D := η(A) = S η(x) is a closed subset of X and so x∈A{ } e D Clop(X). Therefore A = η−1(D) ′. But if A is cofinite then the∈ above argumente shows that Ac ∈′, Rand so A =1 Ac ′. ∈ R − ∈ R

Remark 8.3. If (X, η) is an arbitrary compactiﬁcation of a discrete space X then by [16,e Theorem 5.2], the space of connected components ′ ′ ′ π0(X) is homeomorphic to Spec( ) where = Clop(X). Also , viae the ring map Clop(η), can beR viewed asR a subring ofe (X) andR containing . Note that there are compactiﬁcations of a discreteP space which are notR totally disconnected.

References [1] M. Aghajani and A. Tarizadeh, Characterizations of Gelfand rings specially clean rings and their dual rings, Results Math. 75(3):125 (2020). [2] J. Becker et al., Ultraproducts and approximation in local rings I, Invent. Math. 51 (1979) 189-203. [3] A.J. de Jong et al., Stacks Project, see http://stacks.math.columbia.edu. [4] J. Denef and L. Lipshitz, Ultraproducts and approximation in local rings II, Math. Ann. 253 (1980) 1-28. [5] G. De Marco and A. Orsatti, Commutative rings in which every prime ideal is contained in a unique maximal ideal, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 30 (3) (1971) 459-466. [6] H. Enderton, Elements of set theory, Academic Press, Inc. (1977). [7] D. Erman et al., Big polynomial rings and Stillman’s conjecture, Invent. Math. 218(2) (2019) 413-439. [8] M. Henriksen and M. Jerison, The space of minimal prime ideals of a commutative ring, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 115 (1965) 110-130. COMPACTIFICATIONS OF SPACES 19

[9] N. Hindman and D. Strauss, Algebra in the Stone-Cechˇ compactification, theory and applications, second edition, De Gruyter Textbook (2012). [10] J. Kist, Minimal prime ideals in commutative semigroups, Proc. London Math. Soc. 13(3) (1963) 31-50. [11] H. Schoutens, The use of ultraproducts in commutative algebra, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer (2010). [12] M. Stekelenburg, Ultrafilters and topology, Bachelor Project, Leiden Univ. (2014). [13] U.M. Swamy and et al., Compactifications of discrete spaces, Int. J. Contemp. Math. Sciences, 4(22) (2009) 1079-1084. [14] A. Tarizadeh, Flat topology and its dual aspects, Commun. Algebra 47(1) (2019) 195-205. [15] A. Tarizadeh, Zariski compactness of minimal spectrum and flat compactness of maximal spectrum, J. Algebra Appl. 18(11) (2019) 1950202 (8 pages). [16] A. Tarizadeh and Z. Taheri, Stone type representations and dualities by power set ring, to appear J. Pure Appl. Algebra, arXiv:1905.10612, (2019). [17] A. Tarizadeh, Structure theory of p.p. rings and their generalizations, arXiv:2001.10419, (2020). [18] W. Vasconcelos, Finiteness in projective ideals, J. Algebra 25 (1973) 269-278. [19] R.C. Walker, The Stone-Cechˇ compactification, Springer (1974).

Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Basic Sciences, University of Maragheh, P. O. Box 55136-553, Maragheh, Iran. Email address: [email protected], [email protected]