Hubbry Logo
Prime idealPrime idealMain
Open search
Prime ideal
Community hub
Prime ideal
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Prime ideal
Prime ideal
from Wikipedia
A Hasse diagram of a portion of the lattice of ideals of the integers The purple nodes indicate prime ideals. The purple and green nodes are semiprime ideals, and the purple and blue nodes are primary ideals.

In algebra, a prime ideal is a subset of a ring that shares many important properties of a prime number in the ring of integers.[1][2] The prime ideals for the integers are the sets that contain all the multiples of a given prime number, together with the zero ideal.

Primitive ideals are prime, and prime ideals are both primary and semiprime.

Prime ideals for commutative rings

[edit]

Definition

[edit]

An ideal P of a commutative ring R is prime if it has the following two properties:

  • If a and b are two elements of R such that their product ab is an element of P, then a is in P or b is in P,
  • P is not the whole ring R.

This generalizes the following property of prime numbers, known as Euclid's lemma: if p is a prime number and if p divides a product ab of two integers, then p divides a or p divides b. We can therefore say

A positive integer n is a prime number if and only if is a prime ideal in

The set of prime ideals of a commutative ring R is known as its (prime) spectrum and is denoted . Depending on context, this terminology and notation are also used to refer to the set of prime ideals equipped with additional structures, a topology and a sheaf of rings, that make it a geometric object known as an affine scheme.

Examples

[edit]
  • A simple example: In the ring the subset of even numbers is a prime ideal.
  • Given an integral domain , any prime element generates a principal prime ideal . For example, take an irreducible polynomial in a polynomial ring over some field . Eisenstein's criterion for integral domains (hence UFDs) can be effective for determining if an element in a polynomial ring is irreducible.
  • If R denotes the ring of polynomials in two variables with complex coefficients, then the ideal generated by the polynomial Y 2X 3X − 1 is a prime ideal (see elliptic curve).
  • In the ring of all polynomials with integer coefficients, the ideal generated by 2 and X is a prime ideal. The ideal consists of all polynomials constructed by taking 2 times an element of and adding it to X times another polynomial in (which converts the constant coefficient in the latter polynomial into a linear coefficient). Therefore, the resultant ideal consists of all those polynomials whose constant coefficient is even.
  • In any ring R, a maximal ideal is an ideal M that is maximal in the set of all proper ideals of R, i.e. M is contained in exactly two ideals of R, namely M itself and the whole ring R. Every maximal ideal is in fact prime. In a principal ideal domain every nonzero prime ideal is maximal, but this is not true in general. For the UFD , Hilbert's Nullstellensatz states that every maximal ideal is of the form
  • If M is a smooth manifold, R is the ring of smooth real functions on M, and x is a point in M, then the set of all smooth functions f with f (x) = 0 forms a prime ideal (even a maximal ideal) in R.

Non-examples

[edit]
Although the first two rings are integral domains (in fact the first is a UFD) the last is not an integral domain since it is isomorphic to
since factors into , which implies the existence of zero divisors in the quotient ring, preventing it from being isomorphic to and instead to non-integral domain (by the Chinese remainder theorem).
This shows that the ideal is not prime. (See the first property listed below.)
  • Another non-example is the ideal since we have
but neither nor are elements of the ideal.

Properties

[edit]
  • An ideal I in the ring R (with unity) is prime if and only if the factor ring R/I is an integral domain. In particular, a commutative ring (with unity) is an integral domain if and only if (0) is a prime ideal. (The zero ring has no prime ideals, because the ideal (0) is the whole ring.)
  • An ideal I is prime if and only if its set-theoretic complement is multiplicatively closed.[3]
  • Every nonzero ring contains at least one prime ideal (in fact it contains at least one maximal ideal), which is a direct consequence of Krull's theorem.
  • More generally, if S is any multiplicatively closed set in R, then a lemma essentially due to Krull shows that there exists an ideal of R maximal with respect to being disjoint from S, and moreover the ideal must be prime. This can be further generalized to noncommutative rings (see below).[4] In the case S = {1}, we have Krull's theorem, and this recovers the maximal ideals of R. Another prototypical m-system is the set, {x, x2, x3, x4, ...}, of all positive powers of a non-nilpotent element.
  • The preimage of a prime ideal under a ring homomorphism is a prime ideal. The analogous fact is not always true for maximal ideals, which is one reason algebraic geometers define the spectrum of a ring to be its set of prime rather than maximal ideals; one wants a homomorphism of rings to give a map between their spectra.
  • The set of all prime ideals (called the spectrum of a ring) contains minimal elements (called minimal prime ideals). Geometrically, these correspond to irreducible components of the spectrum.
  • The sum of two prime ideals is not necessarily prime. For an example, consider the ring with prime ideals P = (x2 + y2 − 1) and Q = (x) (the ideals generated by x2 + y2 − 1 and x respectively). Their sum P + Q = (x2 + y2 − 1, x) = (y2 − 1, x) however is not prime: y2 − 1 = (y − 1)(y + 1) ∈ P + Q but its two factors are not. Alternatively, the quotient ring has zero divisors so it is not an integral domain and thus P + Q cannot be prime.
  • Not every ideal which cannot be factored into two ideals is a prime ideal; e.g. cannot be factored but is not prime.
  • In a commutative ring R with at least two elements, if every proper ideal is prime, then the ring is a field. (If the ideal (0) is prime, then the ring R is an integral domain. If q is any non-zero element of R and the ideal (q2) is prime, then it contains q and then q is invertible.)
  • A nonzero principal ideal is prime if and only if it is generated by a prime element. In a UFD, every nonzero prime ideal contains a prime element.

Uses

[edit]

One use of prime ideals occurs in algebraic geometry, where varieties are defined as the zero sets of ideals in polynomial rings. It turns out that the irreducible varieties correspond to prime ideals. In the modern abstract approach, one starts with an arbitrary commutative ring and turns the set of its prime ideals, also called its spectrum, into a topological space and can thus define generalizations of varieties called schemes, which find applications not only in geometry, but also in number theory.

The introduction of prime ideals in algebraic number theory was a major step forward: it was realized that the important property of unique factorisation expressed in the fundamental theorem of arithmetic does not hold in every ring of algebraic integers, but a substitute was found when Richard Dedekind replaced elements by ideals and prime elements by prime ideals; see Dedekind domain.

Prime ideals for noncommutative rings

[edit]

The notion of a prime ideal can be generalized to noncommutative rings by using the commutative definition "ideal-wise". Wolfgang Krull advanced this idea in 1928.[5] The following content can be found in texts such as Goodearl's[6] and Lam's.[7] If R is a (possibly noncommutative) ring and P is a proper ideal of R, we say that P is prime if for any two ideals A and B of R:

  • If the product of ideals AB is contained in P, then at least one of A and B is contained in P.

It can be shown that this definition is equivalent to the commutative one in commutative rings. It is readily verified that if an ideal of a noncommutative ring R satisfies the commutative definition of prime, then it also satisfies the noncommutative version. An ideal P satisfying the commutative definition of prime is sometimes called a completely prime ideal to distinguish it from other merely prime ideals in the ring. Completely prime ideals are prime ideals, but the converse is not true. For example, the zero ideal in the ring of n × n matrices over a field is a prime ideal, but it is not completely prime.

This is close to the historical point of view of ideals as ideal numbers, as for the ring "A is contained in P" is another way of saying "P divides A", and the unit ideal R represents unity.

Equivalent formulations of the ideal PR being prime include the following properties:

  • For all a and b in R, (a)(b) ⊆ P implies aP or bP.
  • For any two right ideals of R, ABP implies AP or BP.
  • For any two left ideals of R, ABP implies AP or BP.
  • For any elements a and b of R, if aRbP, then aP or bP.

Prime ideals in commutative rings are characterized by having multiplicatively closed complements in R, and with slight modification, a similar characterization can be formulated for prime ideals in noncommutative rings. A nonempty subset SR is called an m-system if for any a and b in S, there exists r in R such that arb is in S.[8] The following item can then be added to the list of equivalent conditions above:

  • The complement RP is an m-system.

Examples

[edit]
  • Any primitive ideal is prime.
  • As with commutative rings, maximal ideals are prime, and also prime ideals contain minimal prime ideals.
  • A ring is a prime ring if and only if the zero ideal is a prime ideal, and moreover a ring is a domain if and only if the zero ideal is a completely prime ideal.
  • Another fact from commutative theory echoed in noncommutative theory is that if A is a nonzero R-module, and P is a maximal element in the poset of annihilator ideals of submodules of A, then P is prime.

Important facts

[edit]
  • Prime avoidance lemma. If R is a commutative ring, and A is a subring (possibly without unity), and I1, ..., In is a collection of ideals of R with at most two members not prime, then if A is not contained in any Ij, it is also not contained in the union of I1, ..., In.[9] In particular, A could be an ideal of R.
  • If S is any m-system in R, then a lemma essentially due to Krull shows that there exists an ideal I of R maximal with respect to being disjoint from S, and moreover the ideal I must be prime (the primality of I can be proved as follows: if , then there exist elements such that by the maximal property of I. Now, if , then , which is a contradiction).[4] In the case S = {1}, we have Krull's theorem, and this recovers the maximal ideals of R. Another prototypical m-system is the set, {x, x2, x3, x4, ...}, of all positive powers of a non-nilpotent element.
  • For a prime ideal P, the complement RP has another property beyond being an m-system. If xy is in RP, then both x and y must be in RP, since P is an ideal. A set that contains the divisors of its elements is called saturated.
  • For a commutative ring R, there is a kind of converse for the previous statement: If S is any nonempty saturated and multiplicatively closed subset of R, the complement RS is the union of prime ideals of R.[10]
  • The intersection of members of a chain of prime ideals is a prime ideal, and in a commutative ring the union of members of a chain of prime ideals is a prime ideal. With Zorn's Lemma, these observations imply that the poset of prime ideals of a commutative ring (partially ordered by inclusion) has maximal and minimal elements.

Connection to maximality

[edit]

Prime ideals can frequently be produced as maximal elements of certain collections of ideals. For example:

  • An ideal maximal with respect to having empty intersection with a fixed m-system is prime.
  • An ideal maximal among annihilators of submodules of a fixed R-module M is prime.
  • In a commutative ring, an ideal maximal with respect to being non-principal is prime.[11]
  • In a commutative ring, an ideal maximal with respect to being not countably generated is prime.[12]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
In , a prime ideal of a commutative RR with identity is a proper ideal PRP \neq R such that whenever the product abPab \in P for elements a,bRa, b \in R, then at least one of aPa \in P or bPb \in P. This property is equivalent to the R/PR/P forming an , meaning it has no zero divisors. Prime ideals generalize the concept of prime numbers from the integers to ideals in arbitrary rings, where the principal ideals generated by prime integers in Z\mathbb{Z}, such as (p)(p) for a prime pp, serve as prototypical examples. In polynomial rings like Z\mathbb{Z}, examples include the zero ideal (0)(0), principal ideals (p)(p) for prime pp, (x)(x), and (p,x)(p, x), with the latter being maximal. The zero ideal is prime in any integral domain, while in fields, the only proper ideal is the zero ideal, which is prime. Every maximal ideal is prime, but the converse does not hold; for instance, (x)(x) in R\mathbb{R} is prime yet not maximal, as R/(x)R\mathbb{R}/(x) \cong \mathbb{R} is an integral domain but not a field. Prime ideals play a central role in , forming the basis for the , which endows the set of prime ideals with a used to model geometric objects like affine varieties. Their study underpins key results such as the existence of maximal ideals via , ensuring every nonzero ring contains at least one prime ideal. In , prime ideals correspond to irreducible varieties, highlighting their foundational importance in bridging and geometry.

Prime ideals in commutative rings

Definition

In commutative ring theory, a prime ideal of a RR with identity is a proper ideal PRP \neq R such that whenever the product abPab \in P for elements a,bRa, b \in R, then at least one of aPa \in P or bPb \in P. This property ensures that the ideal captures a form of "indivisibility" analogous to prime numbers. In the commutative case, this elementwise condition is equivalent to the condition that for any ideals a\mathfrak{a} and b\mathfrak{b} of RR, if the product ideal abP\mathfrak{ab} \subseteq P, then aP\mathfrak{a} \subseteq P or bP\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P. This ideal product formulation aligns with the standard definition of prime ideals in noncommutative rings. The definition requires commutativity to make the elementwise condition meaningful, as noncommutative rings use a different formulation involving ideal products.

Equivalent characterizations

A prime ideal PP in a commutative ring RR with unity admits several equivalent characterizations that provide alternative perspectives on its defining property that whenever abPab \in P, then aPa \in P or bPb \in P. One standard characterization is that PP is prime if and only if the quotient ring R/PR/P is an integral domain. To see this equivalence, assume first that PP is prime. Suppose ab=0\overline{a} \overline{b} = 0 in R/PR/P, so abPab \in P. By primeness of PP, either aPa \in P or bPb \in P, hence a=0\overline{a} = 0 or b=0\overline{b} = 0. Thus, R/PR/P has no zero divisors. Moreover, the unity 1\overline{1} is preserved in the quotient (since 1P1 \notin P, as PP is proper), making R/PR/P an integral domain. Conversely, assume R/PR/P is an integral domain. If abPab \in P, then ab=0\overline{a} \overline{b} = 0 in R/PR/P, so a=0\overline{a} = 0 or b=0\overline{b} = 0, meaning aPa \in P or bPb \in P. Commutativity ensures the ring operations in R/PR/P align with those of an integral domain, while the unity condition guarantees the quotient is unital. Another equivalent characterization concerns products and intersections of ideals: an ideal PP is prime if and only if for any ideals a,b\mathfrak{a}, \mathfrak{b} of RR, abP\mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P implies aP\mathfrak{a} \subseteq P or bP\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P. This is equivalent to the elementwise defining property in the commutative setting. Indeed, suppose the elementwise condition holds and abP\mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P. If neither aP\mathfrak{a} \subseteq P nor bP\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P, there exist aaPa \in \mathfrak{a} \setminus P and bbPb \in \mathfrak{b} \setminus P. Then ababPab \in \mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P, so aPa \in P or bPb \in P, a contradiction. Conversely, if abPab \in P, then the principal ideals satisfy (a)(b)=(ab)P(a)(b) = (ab) \subseteq P, so (a)P(a) \subseteq P or (b)P(b) \subseteq P, meaning aPa \in P or bPb \in P. Moreover, if PP is prime, then for any ideals a,b\mathfrak{a}, \mathfrak{b}, the following are equivalent: (1) aP\mathfrak{a} \subseteq P or bP\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P, (2) abP\mathfrak{a} \cap \mathfrak{b} \subseteq P, (3) abP\mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P.
  • (1) ⇒ (3): If aP\mathfrak{a} \subseteq P, then abPbP\mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P (since PP is an ideal). Similarly if bP\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P.
  • (3) ⇒ (2): If abP\mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P and xabx \in \mathfrak{a} \cap \mathfrak{b}, then x2=xxabPx^2 = x \cdot x \in \mathfrak{a}\mathfrak{b} \subseteq P. Since PP is prime, x2Px^2 \in P implies xPx \in P. Thus abP\mathfrak{a} \cap \mathfrak{b} \subseteq P.
  • (2) ⇒ (1): Suppose neither containment holds. Let aaPa \in \mathfrak{a} \setminus P and bbPb \in \mathfrak{b} \setminus P. Then abaab \in \mathfrak{a} (since a\mathfrak{a} is an ideal) and abbab \in \mathfrak{b} (since b\mathfrak{b} is an ideal), so ababPab \in \mathfrak{a} \cap \mathfrak{b} \subseteq P. Since PP is prime, abPab \in P implies aPa \in P or bPb \in P, a contradiction.
The equivalence follows by the cycle of implications. Another equivalent characterization involves localization: PP is prime if and only if the localization R(P)=S1RR_{(P)} = S^{-1}R, where S=RPS = R \setminus P is the multiplicative set of elements outside PP, is an . For the forward direction, assume PP is prime, so R/PR/P is an integral domain by the previous characterization. The natural map RR(P)R \to R_{(P)} has kernel K={rRsS,sr=0}K = \{ r \in R \mid \exists s \in S, \, sr = 0 \}. For any rKr \in K, sr=0sr = 0 with sPs \notin P implies sr=0\overline{s} \overline{r} = 0 in R/PR/P, and since s0\overline{s} \neq 0 and R/PR/P has no zero divisors, r=0\overline{r} = 0, so rPr \in P. Thus, KPK \subseteq P. In fact, K=PK = P under these conditions, and R(P)(R/P)(0)R_{(P)} \cong (R/P)_{(0)}, the localization of the domain R/PR/P at its nonzero elements, which is the field of fractions of R/PR/P and hence an integral domain. For the converse, assume R(P)R_{(P)} is an integral domain. The maximal ideal of R(P)R_{(P)} is m=PR(P)={p/spP,sS}m = P R_{(P)} = \{ p/s \mid p \in P, s \in S \}, and the contraction of mm back to RR is {rRr/1m}={rRsS,srP}\{ r \in R \mid r/1 \in m \} = \{ r \in R \mid \exists s \in S, \, sr \in P \}. Since R(P)/mR_{(P)} / m is a field (hence an integral domain), mm is prime in R(P)R_{(P)}. If abPab \in P, then (a/1)(b/1)=ab/1m(a/1)(b/1) = ab/1 \in m, so a/1ma/1 \in m or b/1mb/1 \in m because mm is prime, implying aPa \in P or bPb \in P. The unital and commutative structure ensures the localization preserves these properties without introducing extraneous zero divisors. A more general characterization uses arbitrary multiplicative sets: PP is prime if and only if for every multiplicative set SRS \subseteq R with SP=S \cap P = \emptyset, the localization S1RS^{-1}R has no zero divisors (i.e., is an ). If PP is prime, then R/PR/P is an , and the image SS' of SS in R/PR/P is a multiplicative set consisting of nonzero elements (since SP=S \cap P = \emptyset). The localization S1RS^{-1}R maps to (S)1(R/P)(S')^{-1}(R/P), which is a subring of the field of fractions of the domain R/PR/P and thus an ; by faithfulness of the localization under these conditions, S1RS^{-1}R is also an . Conversely, taking S=RPS = R \setminus P yields that R(P)R_{(P)} is an , reducing to the previous characterization. The unity in RR ensures 1S1 \in S for such sets, and commutativity allows the fraction field to apply directly. Yet another equivalent characterization is that PP is prime if and only if there exists a nonempty multiplicatively closed subset SRS \subseteq R such that PP is maximal among the proper ideals disjoint from SS. In particular, taking S={1}S = \{1\} shows that every maximal ideal is prime, as it is maximal with respect to excluding {1}\{1\}. This theorem is extremely useful in commutative ring theory. For the nontrivial direction, suppose PP is an ideal maximal with respect to the exclusion of a nonempty multiplicatively closed subset SRS \subseteq R, i.e., PS=P \cap S = \emptyset and no larger proper ideal satisfies this. Then PP is proper, as otherwise it would contain elements of SS. To show PP is prime, suppose a,bPa, b \notin P. Then the ideals P+RaP + Ra and P+RbP + Rb properly contain PP, so each intersects SS; let u(P+Ra)Su \in (P + Ra) \cap S and v(P+Rb)Sv \in (P + Rb) \cap S. Since SS is multiplicatively closed, uvSuv \in S. Moreover, uv(P+Ra)(P+Rb)P+Rabuv \in (P + Ra)(P + Rb) \subseteq P + Rab. Thus, uv(P+Rab)Suv \in (P + Rab) \cap S. If abPab \in P, then P+Rab=PP + Rab = P, so uvPS=uv \in P \cap S = \emptyset, a contradiction. Therefore, abPab \notin P. The converse direction follows by taking S=RPS = R \setminus P, for which PP is clearly maximal among ideals disjoint from SS.

Examples

In the ring of integers Z\mathbb{Z}, the prime ideals are the principal ideals (p)(p) generated by a pp, along with the zero ideal (0)(0). For instance, (2)(2) is prime because if ab(2)ab \in (2), then 2 divides abab, so 2 divides aa or bb, meaning a(2)a \in (2) or b(2)b \in (2). The Z/(p)Z/pZ\mathbb{Z}/(p) \cong \mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z} is a field, hence an . In the polynomial ring kk over a field kk, the prime ideals are the zero ideal (0)(0) and the principal ideals (f)(f) where ff is an irreducible polynomial. For example, (x)(x) is prime, as k/(x)kk/(x) \cong k is a field (thus an integral domain). The zero ideal is prime since kk is an integral domain. In Z\mathbb{Z}, examples include (0)(0), (p)(p) for prime pp, (x)(x), and (p,x)(p, x). The ideal (p,x)(p, x) is maximal (hence prime), with Z/(p,x)Fp\mathbb{Z}/(p, x) \cong \mathbb{F}_p, a field. The ideal (x)(x) is prime but not maximal, as Z/(x)Z\mathbb{Z}/(x) \cong \mathbb{Z}, an integral domain but not a field. More generally, in the polynomial ring RR over a commutative ring RR, the ideal (x)(x) is prime if and only if RR is an integral domain, since the quotient R/(x)RR/(x) \cong R, and an ideal is prime precisely when the quotient is an integral domain. In any , the zero ideal (0)(0) is prime, since the ring itself has no zero divisors. In a field, the zero ideal is the only proper ideal and is prime.

Non-examples

In the Z\mathbb{Z}, the principal ideal (4)(4) generated by 4 is not prime. To see this, note that 22=4(4)2 \cdot 2 = 4 \in (4), but 2(4)2 \notin (4), violating the condition that if the product of two elements lies in the ideal, then at least one must lie in it. Equivalently, the Z/(4)\mathbb{Z}/(4) has zero divisors, such as the images of 2 and 2 whose product is zero, so it is not an . Similarly, in Z\mathbb{Z}, the ideal (6)(6) is not prime because 23=6(6)2 \cdot 3 = 6 \in (6), yet neither 2 nor 3 belongs to (6)(6). The quotient Z/(6)\mathbb{Z}/(6) is isomorphic to Z/6Z\mathbb{Z}/6\mathbb{Z}, which contains zero divisors like the classes of 2 and 3, confirming it fails to be an . In the k[x,y]k[x, y] over a field kk, the ideal (x2,y)(x^2, y) is not prime. Here, xx=x2(x2,y)x \cdot x = x^2 \in (x^2, y), but x(x2,y)x \notin (x^2, y) since xx cannot be expressed as a combination of x2x^2 and yy with coefficients in k[x,y]k[x, y]. The quotient k[x,y]/(x2,y)k[x, y]/(x^2, y) has zero divisors, as the image of xx squared is zero while the image of xx is nonzero, so it is not an . Consider the ring Z/6Z\mathbb{Z}/6\mathbb{Z}, which has zero divisors. Its zero ideal (0)(0) is not prime because 23=0(0)\overline{2} \cdot \overline{3} = \overline{0} \in (0), but neither 2\overline{2} nor 3\overline{3} is zero in the ring. This ring is not an , directly showing the zero ideal fails the primeness condition.

Algebraic properties

In commutative rings, the RR, denoted N(R)\mathfrak{N}(R), which consists of all elements, equals the of all prime ideals of RR. More generally, for any ideal II of RR, the radical I\sqrt{I}
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.