Difference between revisions of "Noetherian ring"
Ulf Rehmann (talk | contribs) m (tex encoded by computer) |
(latex details) |
||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
''left (right)'' | ''left (right)'' | ||
− | A [[ | + | A [[ring]] $A$ satisfying one of the following equivalent conditions: |
− | satisfying one of the following equivalent conditions: | ||
− | 1) | + | 1) $A$ is a left (or right) [[Noetherian module]] over itself; |
− | is a left (or right) [[ | ||
− | 2) every left (or right) ideal in | + | 2) every left (or right) ideal in $A$ has a finite generating set; |
− | has a finite generating set; | ||
− | 3) every strictly ascending chain of left (or right) ideals in $ | + | 3) every strictly ascending chain of left (or right) ideals in $A$ |
breaks off after finitely many terms. | breaks off after finitely many terms. | ||
Line 29: | Line 26: | ||
Noetherian rings are named after E. Noether, who made a systematic study of such rings and carried over to them a number of results known earlier only under more stringent restrictions (for example, Lasker's theory of primary decompositions). | Noetherian rings are named after E. Noether, who made a systematic study of such rings and carried over to them a number of results known earlier only under more stringent restrictions (for example, Lasker's theory of primary decompositions). | ||
− | A right Noetherian ring need not be left Noetherian and vice versa. For example, let | + | A right Noetherian ring need not be left Noetherian and vice versa. For example, let $A$ |
be the ring of matrices of the form | be the ring of matrices of the form | ||
Line 42: | Line 39: | ||
where $ a $ | where $ a $ | ||
− | is a rational integer and | + | is a rational integer and $\alpha$ |
− | and | + | and $\beta$ |
− | are rational numbers, with the usual addition and multiplication. Then | + | are rational numbers, with the usual addition and multiplication. Then $A$ |
is right, but not left, Noetherian, since the left ideal of elements of the form | is right, but not left, Noetherian, since the left ideal of elements of the form | ||
Line 60: | Line 57: | ||
Quotient rings and finite direct sums of Noetherian rings are again Noetherian, but a subring of a Noetherian ring need not be Noetherian. For example, a polynomial ring in infinitely many variables over a field is not Noetherian, although it is contained in its field of fractions, which is Noetherian. | Quotient rings and finite direct sums of Noetherian rings are again Noetherian, but a subring of a Noetherian ring need not be Noetherian. For example, a polynomial ring in infinitely many variables over a field is not Noetherian, although it is contained in its field of fractions, which is Noetherian. | ||
− | If | + | If $A$ |
− | is a left Noetherian ring, then so is the polynomial ring | + | is a left Noetherian ring, then so is the polynomial ring $A[X]$. |
− | The corresponding property holds for the ring of formal power series over a Noetherian ring. In particular, polynomial rings of the form $ | + | The corresponding property holds for the ring of formal power series over a Noetherian ring. In particular, polynomial rings of the form $K[X_{1} \dots X _ {n}] $ |
or $ \mathbf Z [ X _ {1} \dots X _ {n} ] $, | or $ \mathbf Z [ X _ {1} \dots X _ {n} ] $, | ||
− | where $ | + | where $K$ |
− | is a field and | + | is a field and $\mathbf Z$ |
− | the ring of integers, and also quotient rings of them, are Noetherian. Every [[ | + | the ring of integers, and also quotient rings of them, are Noetherian. Every [[Artinian ring]] is Noetherian. The localization of a commutative Noetherian ring $A$ |
− | relative to some multiplicative system | + | relative to some multiplicative system $S$ |
− | is again Noetherian. If in a commutative Noetherian ring | + | is again Noetherian. If in a commutative Noetherian ring $A$, |
$ \mathfrak m $ | $ \mathfrak m $ | ||
is an ideal such that no element of the form $ 1 + m $, | is an ideal such that no element of the form $ 1 + m $, | ||
where $ m \in \mathfrak m $, | where $ m \in \mathfrak m $, | ||
− | is a divisor of zero, then $ \cap _ {k=} | + | is a divisor of zero, then $ \cap _ {k=1} ^ \infty \mathfrak m ^ {k} = 0 $. |
This means that any such ideal $ \mathfrak m $ | This means that any such ideal $ \mathfrak m $ | ||
defines on $ A $ | defines on $ A $ | ||
Line 79: | Line 76: | ||
====References==== | ====References==== | ||
− | <table><TR><TD valign="top">[1]</TD> <TD valign="top"> | + | <table> |
+ | <TR><TD valign="top">[1]</TD> <TD valign="top"> B.L. van der Waerden, "Algebra" , '''1–2''' , Springer (1967–1971) (Translated from German)</TD></TR> | ||
+ | <TR><TD valign="top">[2]</TD> <TD valign="top"> S. Lang, "Algebra" , Addison-Wesley (1974)</TD></TR> | ||
+ | <TR><TD valign="top">[3]</TD> <TD valign="top"> C. Faith, "Algebra: rings, modules, and categories" , '''1''' , Springer (1973)</TD></TR> | ||
+ | </table> |
Latest revision as of 18:51, 3 April 2024
left (right)
A ring $A$ satisfying one of the following equivalent conditions:
1) $A$ is a left (or right) Noetherian module over itself;
2) every left (or right) ideal in $A$ has a finite generating set;
3) every strictly ascending chain of left (or right) ideals in $A$ breaks off after finitely many terms.
An example of a Noetherian ring is any principal ideal ring, i.e. a ring in which every ideal has one generator.
Noetherian rings are named after E. Noether, who made a systematic study of such rings and carried over to them a number of results known earlier only under more stringent restrictions (for example, Lasker's theory of primary decompositions).
A right Noetherian ring need not be left Noetherian and vice versa. For example, let $A$ be the ring of matrices of the form
$$ \left \| \begin{array}{cc} a &\alpha \\ 0 &\beta \\ \end{array} \right \| , $$
where $ a $ is a rational integer and $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are rational numbers, with the usual addition and multiplication. Then $A$ is right, but not left, Noetherian, since the left ideal of elements of the form
$$ \left \| \begin{array}{cc} 0 &\alpha \\ 0 & 0 \\ \end{array} \right \| $$
does not have a finite generating set.
Quotient rings and finite direct sums of Noetherian rings are again Noetherian, but a subring of a Noetherian ring need not be Noetherian. For example, a polynomial ring in infinitely many variables over a field is not Noetherian, although it is contained in its field of fractions, which is Noetherian.
If $A$ is a left Noetherian ring, then so is the polynomial ring $A[X]$. The corresponding property holds for the ring of formal power series over a Noetherian ring. In particular, polynomial rings of the form $K[X_{1} \dots X _ {n}] $ or $ \mathbf Z [ X _ {1} \dots X _ {n} ] $, where $K$ is a field and $\mathbf Z$ the ring of integers, and also quotient rings of them, are Noetherian. Every Artinian ring is Noetherian. The localization of a commutative Noetherian ring $A$ relative to some multiplicative system $S$ is again Noetherian. If in a commutative Noetherian ring $A$, $ \mathfrak m $ is an ideal such that no element of the form $ 1 + m $, where $ m \in \mathfrak m $, is a divisor of zero, then $ \cap _ {k=1} ^ \infty \mathfrak m ^ {k} = 0 $. This means that any such ideal $ \mathfrak m $ defines on $ A $ a separable $ \mathfrak m $- adic topology. In a commutative Noetherian ring every ideal has a representation as an incontractible intersection of finitely many primary ideals. Although such a representation is not unique, the number of ideals and the set of prime ideals associated with the given primary ideals are uniquely determined.
References
[1] | B.L. van der Waerden, "Algebra" , 1–2 , Springer (1967–1971) (Translated from German) |
[2] | S. Lang, "Algebra" , Addison-Wesley (1974) |
[3] | C. Faith, "Algebra: rings, modules, and categories" , 1 , Springer (1973) |
Noetherian ring. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. URL: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Noetherian_ring&oldid=55702