Radical of an ideal

Last updated

In ring theory, a branch of mathematics, the radical of an ideal of a commutative ring is another ideal defined by the property that an element is in the radical if and only if some power of is in . Taking the radical of an ideal is called radicalization. A radical ideal (or semiprime ideal) is an ideal that is equal to its radical. The radical of a primary ideal is a prime ideal.

Contents

This concept is generalized to non-commutative rings in the semiprime ring article.

Definition

The radical of an ideal in a commutative ring , denoted by or , is defined as

(note that ). Intuitively, is obtained by taking all roots of elements of within the ring . Equivalently, is the preimage of the ideal of nilpotent elements (the nilradical) of the quotient ring (via the natural map ). The latter proves that is an ideal. [Note 1]

If the radical of is finitely generated, then some power of is contained in . [1] In particular, if and are ideals of a Noetherian ring, then and have the same radical if and only if contains some power of and contains some power of .

If an ideal coincides with its own radical, then is called a radical ideal or semiprime ideal .

Examples

Properties

This section will continue the convention that is an ideal of a commutative ring :

Applications

One of the primary motivations for studying radicals of ideals is to understand algebraic sets and varieties in algebraic geometry.

For a subset of polynomials and subset of points , where is an algebraically closed field, let

and

be the zero locus of S and vanishing ideal of X, respectively.

If is the ideal in generated by the elements of S, then . Moreover, the vanishing ideal is always a radical ideal: .

The operations V and I are, in a sense, inverses of each other:

For any subset of points X, , where is the closure of X in the Zariski topology. In particular, if X is an algebraic set, since algebraic sets are closed in the Zariski topology.

Hilbert's Nullstellensatz is a fundamental result in commutative algebra and algebraic geometry that addresses the composition of V and I in the opposite order. One version of this celebrated theorem states that for any ideal of polynomials , we have

(Geometrically, this says that if an affine algebraic set is cut out by the polynomial equations , then the only other polynomials that vanish on are those in the radical of the ideal .)

As a corollary, if J is a radical ideal. Thus, we can state more precisely that the V and I operations give a bijective correspondence between radical ideals and algebraic sets:

See also

Notes

  1. Here is a direct proof that is an ideal. Start with with some powers . To show that , we use the binomial theorem (which holds for any commutative ring):
    For each , we have either or . Thus, in each term , one of the exponents will be large enough to make that factor lie in . Since any element of times an element of lies in (as is an ideal), this term lies in . Hence , and so . To finish checking that the radical is an ideal, take with , and any . Then , so . Thus the radical is an ideal.
  2. Proof: On one hand, every prime ideal is radical, and so this intersection contains . On the other hand, suppose is an element of that is not in , and let be the set . By the definition of , must be disjoint from . is also multiplicatively closed. Thus, by a variant of Krull's theorem, there exists a prime ideal that contains and is still disjoint from (see Prime ideal and Zorn's lemma). Since contains , but not , this shows that is not in the intersection of prime ideals containing .
  3. The statement may be strengthened a bit: the radical of is the intersection of all prime ideals of that are minimal among those containing .
  4. For a direct proof, see also the characterisation of the nilradical of a ring.
  5. This fact is also known as fourth isomorphism theorem (or correspondence theorem, or lattice theorem).
  6. Proof: implies .

Citations

  1. Atiyah & Macdonald 1994 , Proposition 7.14
  2. Aluffi, Paolo (2009). Algebra: Chapter 0. AMS. p. 142. ISBN   978-0-8218-4781-7.
  3. Atiyah & Macdonald 1994 , Proposition 4.2
  4. Lang 2002 , Ch X, Proposition 2.10

References