Prime avoidance lemma

(Redirected from Prime avoidance)

In algebra, the prime avoidance lemma says that if an ideal I in a commutative ring R is contained in a union of finitely many prime ideals Pi's, then it is contained in Pi for some i.

There are many variations of the lemma (cf. Hochster); for example, if the ring R contains an infinite field or a finite field of sufficiently large cardinality, then the statement follows from a fact in linear algebra that a vector space over an infinite field or a finite field of large cardinality is not a finite union of its proper vector subspaces.[1]

Statement and proof

edit

The following statement and argument are perhaps the most standard.

Statement: Let E be a subset of R that is an additive subgroup of R and is multiplicatively closed. Let   be ideals such that   are prime ideals for  . If E is not contained in any of  's, then E is not contained in the union  .

Proof by induction on n: The idea is to find an element that is in E and not in any of  's. The basic case n = 1 is trivial. Next suppose n ≥ 2. For each i, choose

 

where the set on the right is nonempty by inductive hypothesis. We can assume   for all i; otherwise, some   avoids all the  's and we are done. Put

 .

Then z is in E but not in any of  's. Indeed, if z is in   for some  , then   is in  , a contradiction. Suppose z is in  . Then   is in  . If n is 2, we are done. If n > 2, then, since   is a prime ideal, some   is in  , a contradiction.

E. Davis' prime avoidance

edit

There is the following variant of prime avoidance due to E. Davis.

Theorem — [2] Let A be a ring,   prime ideals, x an element of A and J an ideal. For the ideal  , if   for each i, then there exists some y in J such that   for each i.

Proof:[3] We argue by induction on r. Without loss of generality, we can assume there is no inclusion relation between the  's; since otherwise we can use the inductive hypothesis.

Also, if   for each i, then we are done; thus, without loss of generality, we can assume  . By inductive hypothesis, we find a y in J such that  . If   is not in  , we are done. Otherwise, note that   (since  ) and since   is a prime ideal, we have:

 .

Hence, we can choose   in   that is not in  . Then, since  , the element   has the required property.  

Application

edit

Let A be a Noetherian ring, I an ideal generated by n elements and M a finite A-module such that  . Also, let   = the maximal length of M-regular sequences in I = the length of every maximal M-regular sequence in I. Then  ; this estimate can be shown using the above prime avoidance as follows. We argue by induction on n. Let   be the set of associated primes of M. If  , then   for each i. If  , then, by prime avoidance, we can choose

 

for some   in   such that   = the set of zero divisors on M. Now,   is an ideal of   generated by   elements and so, by inductive hypothesis,  . The claim now follows.

Notes

edit
  1. ^ Proof of the fact: suppose the vector space is a finite union of proper subspaces. Consider a finite product of linear functionals, each of which vanishes on a proper subspace that appears in the union; then it is a nonzero polynomial vanishing identically, a contradiction.
  2. ^ Matsumura 1986, Exercise 16.8.
  3. ^ Adapted from the solution to Matsumura 1986, Exercise 1.6.

References

edit
  • Mel Hochster, Dimension theory and systems of parameters, a supplementary note
  • Matsumura, Hideyuki (1986). Commutative ring theory. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Vol. 8. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-36764-6. MR 0879273. Zbl 0603.13001.