 My Math Forum Need some help with a Dedekind domain proof
 User Name Remember Me? Password

 Abstract Algebra Abstract Algebra Math Forum

 November 20th, 2010, 10:27 PM #1 Newbie   Joined: Nov 2010 Posts: 10 Thanks: 0 Need some help with a Dedekind domain proof Hi! Firstly I will just put in some theory that we will use in the proof: Def.: A Dedekind domain is an integral domain R such that: (1) Every ideal is finitely generated; (2) Every nonzero prime ideal is a maximal ideal; (3) R is integrally closed in its field of fractions K = {a/b: a,b ? R, b ? 0} And futheremore (1) is equivalent to the conditions: (1') Every increasing sequence of ideals is eventually constant. (1'') Every non-empty set S of ideals has a (not necessarily unique) maximal member "M". Lemma: In a Dedekind domain every ideal contains a product of prime ideals Cor.2: (cancellation law) If A,B,C are ideals in a Dedekind domain, and AB = AC, then B = C Cor.3: If A and B are ideals in a Dedekind domain R, then A|B iff A ? B And here come the theorem that I want to prove: Thm.1: Every ideal in a Dedekind domain is uniquely representable as a product of prime ideals in the proof, I just say "ok", if I understand the step and a comment or "?" if I do not understand it. Proof of thm.1: PART1: Every ideal is representable as a product of primes: i) If this was not true, then the set of ideals that could not be represented in this way would be non-empty and have a maximal member "M" (by (1'')). ok ii) M is different from R (we just consider proper ideals). ok iii) M is contained in a prime ideal (This come from a result that say that every proper ideal is contained in a maximal ideal, which must also be a prime ideal). ok iv) Then M = PI, where I is an ideal (Cor.3: A|B iff A contain B). ok v) I contain M. ? (why is that?) vi) From (cor.2.) show that the containment is strict. If I = M then RM = PM,then R = P, which is absurd? (I dont quite see this) vii) Then I is strictky larger then M and consequently I is a product of primes. But then so is M, contrary to the assumption I would really appreciate it if some one could lend me a hand with this proof. Thanks for all your effort. (The proof can be found in Daniel A.Marcuss Number Fields page 59) November 21st, 2010, 02:35 PM #2 Senior Member   Joined: Aug 2010 Posts: 195 Thanks: 5 Re: Need some help with a Dedekind domain proof v) If and are ideals of a ring , then an element in is of the form with and . Since an ideal is closed under multiplication from any element in R, is both in and in . Similarly, since ideals are closed under addition, is an element of both and of . Hence we have that and . vi) If we have then becomes . For any ideal of , we have that because so for all . Hence we have and using cancellation, we have but is prime and hence a proper ideal, so this is impossible. November 22nd, 2010, 03:53 AM #3 Newbie   Joined: Nov 2010 Posts: 10 Thanks: 0 Re: Need some help with a Dedekind domain proof Ah, ok I see. Thank you  Tags dedekind, domain, proof ### dedekind domain equivalent conditionsproof

Click on a term to search for related topics.
 Thread Tools Show Printable Version Email this Page Display Modes Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post rayman Abstract Algebra 2 October 19th, 2012 06:38 AM ahmed-ar Algebra 11 December 16th, 2010 09:58 AM tinynerdi Real Analysis 0 October 10th, 2010 02:40 PM good_phy Calculus 1 October 12th, 2008 09:26 AM elizabeth22588 Abstract Algebra 1 September 8th, 2008 06:48 PM

 Contact - Home - Forums - Cryptocurrency Forum - Top      