Prove $(0) = (x)cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n)$ in $R=frac{k[x,y,z]}{(x^2,xy)}$
Studying for my algebra final and doing some practice problems, and I can't seem to understand this one...
Full problem:
Let $k$ be a field, and $R=frac{k[x,y,z]}{(x^2,xy)}$. For $ninmathbb{N}, lambdain k^*,$ show $(0) = (x)cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n)$.
I was going to do a proof by contradiction, but I'm having trouble understanding the form of elements of $R$. I feel like if I understood that better, it would be fairly easy to show that no nonzero element of R can be in the right hand side of the equation provided.
Any help and hints are greatly appreciated, thanks in advance!
edit: So my next thought is to find a minimal primary decomposition for $(x^2, xy)$, as it's my understanding that that decomposition is the same as the primary decomposition for $(0)$ in $R$. It's a monomial ideal, so you can reduce it to $(x)cap(x^2,y)$. I'm not really sure where to go from here though.
abstract-algebra ring-theory commutative-algebra ideals polynomial-rings
add a comment |
Studying for my algebra final and doing some practice problems, and I can't seem to understand this one...
Full problem:
Let $k$ be a field, and $R=frac{k[x,y,z]}{(x^2,xy)}$. For $ninmathbb{N}, lambdain k^*,$ show $(0) = (x)cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n)$.
I was going to do a proof by contradiction, but I'm having trouble understanding the form of elements of $R$. I feel like if I understood that better, it would be fairly easy to show that no nonzero element of R can be in the right hand side of the equation provided.
Any help and hints are greatly appreciated, thanks in advance!
edit: So my next thought is to find a minimal primary decomposition for $(x^2, xy)$, as it's my understanding that that decomposition is the same as the primary decomposition for $(0)$ in $R$. It's a monomial ideal, so you can reduce it to $(x)cap(x^2,y)$. I'm not really sure where to go from here though.
abstract-algebra ring-theory commutative-algebra ideals polynomial-rings
add a comment |
Studying for my algebra final and doing some practice problems, and I can't seem to understand this one...
Full problem:
Let $k$ be a field, and $R=frac{k[x,y,z]}{(x^2,xy)}$. For $ninmathbb{N}, lambdain k^*,$ show $(0) = (x)cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n)$.
I was going to do a proof by contradiction, but I'm having trouble understanding the form of elements of $R$. I feel like if I understood that better, it would be fairly easy to show that no nonzero element of R can be in the right hand side of the equation provided.
Any help and hints are greatly appreciated, thanks in advance!
edit: So my next thought is to find a minimal primary decomposition for $(x^2, xy)$, as it's my understanding that that decomposition is the same as the primary decomposition for $(0)$ in $R$. It's a monomial ideal, so you can reduce it to $(x)cap(x^2,y)$. I'm not really sure where to go from here though.
abstract-algebra ring-theory commutative-algebra ideals polynomial-rings
Studying for my algebra final and doing some practice problems, and I can't seem to understand this one...
Full problem:
Let $k$ be a field, and $R=frac{k[x,y,z]}{(x^2,xy)}$. For $ninmathbb{N}, lambdain k^*,$ show $(0) = (x)cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n)$.
I was going to do a proof by contradiction, but I'm having trouble understanding the form of elements of $R$. I feel like if I understood that better, it would be fairly easy to show that no nonzero element of R can be in the right hand side of the equation provided.
Any help and hints are greatly appreciated, thanks in advance!
edit: So my next thought is to find a minimal primary decomposition for $(x^2, xy)$, as it's my understanding that that decomposition is the same as the primary decomposition for $(0)$ in $R$. It's a monomial ideal, so you can reduce it to $(x)cap(x^2,y)$. I'm not really sure where to go from here though.
abstract-algebra ring-theory commutative-algebra ideals polynomial-rings
abstract-algebra ring-theory commutative-algebra ideals polynomial-rings
edited Dec 8 at 20:32
asked Dec 8 at 18:38
tenzs
63
63
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Let $pi: k[x,y,z] rightarrow k[x,y,z]/(x^2, xy)$ be the canonical projection. Note that an ideal $J subseteq k[x,y,z]/(x^2, xy)$ is $0$ iff $pi^{-1}(J) subseteq (x^2, xy)$. Thus we don't really need to work in the factor ring at all. Rather, it suffices to show that $f in (x) cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n) subseteq k[x,y,z]$ implies $f in (x^2, xy)$.
To do this, write $f = g(xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n) = hx$ for some $g,h in k[x,y,z]$. Since $x$ is a prime element in $k[x,y,z]$, necessarily $x$ divides $g$ or $xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n$. The latter is clearly impossible, so $x$ divides $g$, and it follows quickly that $f in (x^2, xy)$.
Note that we didn't need $k$ to be a field, it could have been any commutative ring.
Thanks so much, this was really helpful!
– tenzs
Dec 9 at 5:43
add a comment |
For a geometric perspective, we think of $R$ as the ring of polynomial functions on $X = operatorname{Spec} R$ which we can think of as ${(a,b,c) in k^3 : a^2 = ab = 0}$. This is contained inside the plane ${a = 0}$. But because of the square, there is a non-reduced structure. Namely, if $b = 0$ then $a^2 = 0$ is the only remaining equation and we think of this as having a doubled line ${a = 0, b = 0}$ inside $X$. Therefore $X$ is the plane ${a = 0}$ where the line ${a = 0, b = 0}$ is doubled.
To say that a function $f in R$ is zero now means that $f$ should vanish if we substitute $x = 0$ and should vanish "doubly" if we substitute $x = 0, y = 0$.
So now let's say we have a function (i.e. polynomial) $f in (x)cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n)$. Then we can factor $f$ as $f = xg = (xz^{n - 1} + lambda y^n)h$. If we substitute $x = 0$ then we can see that $f = xg = 0$. So indeed $f$ vanishes on the plane ${a = 0}$ in $k^3$.
On the other hand, still keeping $x = 0$, we have $0 = f = lambda y^n h$. Now if we substitute $y = 0$ we can see that somehow $f$ is vanishing a second time. To make this more precise, the fact that $lambda y^n h(0,y,z) = 0$ means $h$ factors as $h = xh_0$ so that $f = (x z^{n - 1} + lambda y^{n-1})x h_0$ and now setting $y = 0$ we get $f = x^2z^{n - 1}$ which indeed vanishes doubly on the line ${a = 0, b = 0}$.
Ignoring the geometric perspective, you can still see that we have shown that $f in (x) cap (xz^{n - 1} lambda y^n)$ (inside $k[x,y,z]$) implies $f in (x^2, xy)$.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3031463%2fprove-0-x-cap-xzn-1-lambda-yn-in-r-frackx-y-zx2-xy%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Let $pi: k[x,y,z] rightarrow k[x,y,z]/(x^2, xy)$ be the canonical projection. Note that an ideal $J subseteq k[x,y,z]/(x^2, xy)$ is $0$ iff $pi^{-1}(J) subseteq (x^2, xy)$. Thus we don't really need to work in the factor ring at all. Rather, it suffices to show that $f in (x) cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n) subseteq k[x,y,z]$ implies $f in (x^2, xy)$.
To do this, write $f = g(xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n) = hx$ for some $g,h in k[x,y,z]$. Since $x$ is a prime element in $k[x,y,z]$, necessarily $x$ divides $g$ or $xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n$. The latter is clearly impossible, so $x$ divides $g$, and it follows quickly that $f in (x^2, xy)$.
Note that we didn't need $k$ to be a field, it could have been any commutative ring.
Thanks so much, this was really helpful!
– tenzs
Dec 9 at 5:43
add a comment |
Let $pi: k[x,y,z] rightarrow k[x,y,z]/(x^2, xy)$ be the canonical projection. Note that an ideal $J subseteq k[x,y,z]/(x^2, xy)$ is $0$ iff $pi^{-1}(J) subseteq (x^2, xy)$. Thus we don't really need to work in the factor ring at all. Rather, it suffices to show that $f in (x) cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n) subseteq k[x,y,z]$ implies $f in (x^2, xy)$.
To do this, write $f = g(xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n) = hx$ for some $g,h in k[x,y,z]$. Since $x$ is a prime element in $k[x,y,z]$, necessarily $x$ divides $g$ or $xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n$. The latter is clearly impossible, so $x$ divides $g$, and it follows quickly that $f in (x^2, xy)$.
Note that we didn't need $k$ to be a field, it could have been any commutative ring.
Thanks so much, this was really helpful!
– tenzs
Dec 9 at 5:43
add a comment |
Let $pi: k[x,y,z] rightarrow k[x,y,z]/(x^2, xy)$ be the canonical projection. Note that an ideal $J subseteq k[x,y,z]/(x^2, xy)$ is $0$ iff $pi^{-1}(J) subseteq (x^2, xy)$. Thus we don't really need to work in the factor ring at all. Rather, it suffices to show that $f in (x) cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n) subseteq k[x,y,z]$ implies $f in (x^2, xy)$.
To do this, write $f = g(xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n) = hx$ for some $g,h in k[x,y,z]$. Since $x$ is a prime element in $k[x,y,z]$, necessarily $x$ divides $g$ or $xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n$. The latter is clearly impossible, so $x$ divides $g$, and it follows quickly that $f in (x^2, xy)$.
Note that we didn't need $k$ to be a field, it could have been any commutative ring.
Let $pi: k[x,y,z] rightarrow k[x,y,z]/(x^2, xy)$ be the canonical projection. Note that an ideal $J subseteq k[x,y,z]/(x^2, xy)$ is $0$ iff $pi^{-1}(J) subseteq (x^2, xy)$. Thus we don't really need to work in the factor ring at all. Rather, it suffices to show that $f in (x) cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n) subseteq k[x,y,z]$ implies $f in (x^2, xy)$.
To do this, write $f = g(xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n) = hx$ for some $g,h in k[x,y,z]$. Since $x$ is a prime element in $k[x,y,z]$, necessarily $x$ divides $g$ or $xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n$. The latter is clearly impossible, so $x$ divides $g$, and it follows quickly that $f in (x^2, xy)$.
Note that we didn't need $k$ to be a field, it could have been any commutative ring.
edited Dec 8 at 22:08
answered Dec 8 at 21:58
Badam Baplan
4,361722
4,361722
Thanks so much, this was really helpful!
– tenzs
Dec 9 at 5:43
add a comment |
Thanks so much, this was really helpful!
– tenzs
Dec 9 at 5:43
Thanks so much, this was really helpful!
– tenzs
Dec 9 at 5:43
Thanks so much, this was really helpful!
– tenzs
Dec 9 at 5:43
add a comment |
For a geometric perspective, we think of $R$ as the ring of polynomial functions on $X = operatorname{Spec} R$ which we can think of as ${(a,b,c) in k^3 : a^2 = ab = 0}$. This is contained inside the plane ${a = 0}$. But because of the square, there is a non-reduced structure. Namely, if $b = 0$ then $a^2 = 0$ is the only remaining equation and we think of this as having a doubled line ${a = 0, b = 0}$ inside $X$. Therefore $X$ is the plane ${a = 0}$ where the line ${a = 0, b = 0}$ is doubled.
To say that a function $f in R$ is zero now means that $f$ should vanish if we substitute $x = 0$ and should vanish "doubly" if we substitute $x = 0, y = 0$.
So now let's say we have a function (i.e. polynomial) $f in (x)cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n)$. Then we can factor $f$ as $f = xg = (xz^{n - 1} + lambda y^n)h$. If we substitute $x = 0$ then we can see that $f = xg = 0$. So indeed $f$ vanishes on the plane ${a = 0}$ in $k^3$.
On the other hand, still keeping $x = 0$, we have $0 = f = lambda y^n h$. Now if we substitute $y = 0$ we can see that somehow $f$ is vanishing a second time. To make this more precise, the fact that $lambda y^n h(0,y,z) = 0$ means $h$ factors as $h = xh_0$ so that $f = (x z^{n - 1} + lambda y^{n-1})x h_0$ and now setting $y = 0$ we get $f = x^2z^{n - 1}$ which indeed vanishes doubly on the line ${a = 0, b = 0}$.
Ignoring the geometric perspective, you can still see that we have shown that $f in (x) cap (xz^{n - 1} lambda y^n)$ (inside $k[x,y,z]$) implies $f in (x^2, xy)$.
add a comment |
For a geometric perspective, we think of $R$ as the ring of polynomial functions on $X = operatorname{Spec} R$ which we can think of as ${(a,b,c) in k^3 : a^2 = ab = 0}$. This is contained inside the plane ${a = 0}$. But because of the square, there is a non-reduced structure. Namely, if $b = 0$ then $a^2 = 0$ is the only remaining equation and we think of this as having a doubled line ${a = 0, b = 0}$ inside $X$. Therefore $X$ is the plane ${a = 0}$ where the line ${a = 0, b = 0}$ is doubled.
To say that a function $f in R$ is zero now means that $f$ should vanish if we substitute $x = 0$ and should vanish "doubly" if we substitute $x = 0, y = 0$.
So now let's say we have a function (i.e. polynomial) $f in (x)cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n)$. Then we can factor $f$ as $f = xg = (xz^{n - 1} + lambda y^n)h$. If we substitute $x = 0$ then we can see that $f = xg = 0$. So indeed $f$ vanishes on the plane ${a = 0}$ in $k^3$.
On the other hand, still keeping $x = 0$, we have $0 = f = lambda y^n h$. Now if we substitute $y = 0$ we can see that somehow $f$ is vanishing a second time. To make this more precise, the fact that $lambda y^n h(0,y,z) = 0$ means $h$ factors as $h = xh_0$ so that $f = (x z^{n - 1} + lambda y^{n-1})x h_0$ and now setting $y = 0$ we get $f = x^2z^{n - 1}$ which indeed vanishes doubly on the line ${a = 0, b = 0}$.
Ignoring the geometric perspective, you can still see that we have shown that $f in (x) cap (xz^{n - 1} lambda y^n)$ (inside $k[x,y,z]$) implies $f in (x^2, xy)$.
add a comment |
For a geometric perspective, we think of $R$ as the ring of polynomial functions on $X = operatorname{Spec} R$ which we can think of as ${(a,b,c) in k^3 : a^2 = ab = 0}$. This is contained inside the plane ${a = 0}$. But because of the square, there is a non-reduced structure. Namely, if $b = 0$ then $a^2 = 0$ is the only remaining equation and we think of this as having a doubled line ${a = 0, b = 0}$ inside $X$. Therefore $X$ is the plane ${a = 0}$ where the line ${a = 0, b = 0}$ is doubled.
To say that a function $f in R$ is zero now means that $f$ should vanish if we substitute $x = 0$ and should vanish "doubly" if we substitute $x = 0, y = 0$.
So now let's say we have a function (i.e. polynomial) $f in (x)cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n)$. Then we can factor $f$ as $f = xg = (xz^{n - 1} + lambda y^n)h$. If we substitute $x = 0$ then we can see that $f = xg = 0$. So indeed $f$ vanishes on the plane ${a = 0}$ in $k^3$.
On the other hand, still keeping $x = 0$, we have $0 = f = lambda y^n h$. Now if we substitute $y = 0$ we can see that somehow $f$ is vanishing a second time. To make this more precise, the fact that $lambda y^n h(0,y,z) = 0$ means $h$ factors as $h = xh_0$ so that $f = (x z^{n - 1} + lambda y^{n-1})x h_0$ and now setting $y = 0$ we get $f = x^2z^{n - 1}$ which indeed vanishes doubly on the line ${a = 0, b = 0}$.
Ignoring the geometric perspective, you can still see that we have shown that $f in (x) cap (xz^{n - 1} lambda y^n)$ (inside $k[x,y,z]$) implies $f in (x^2, xy)$.
For a geometric perspective, we think of $R$ as the ring of polynomial functions on $X = operatorname{Spec} R$ which we can think of as ${(a,b,c) in k^3 : a^2 = ab = 0}$. This is contained inside the plane ${a = 0}$. But because of the square, there is a non-reduced structure. Namely, if $b = 0$ then $a^2 = 0$ is the only remaining equation and we think of this as having a doubled line ${a = 0, b = 0}$ inside $X$. Therefore $X$ is the plane ${a = 0}$ where the line ${a = 0, b = 0}$ is doubled.
To say that a function $f in R$ is zero now means that $f$ should vanish if we substitute $x = 0$ and should vanish "doubly" if we substitute $x = 0, y = 0$.
So now let's say we have a function (i.e. polynomial) $f in (x)cap (xz^{n-1} + lambda y^n)$. Then we can factor $f$ as $f = xg = (xz^{n - 1} + lambda y^n)h$. If we substitute $x = 0$ then we can see that $f = xg = 0$. So indeed $f$ vanishes on the plane ${a = 0}$ in $k^3$.
On the other hand, still keeping $x = 0$, we have $0 = f = lambda y^n h$. Now if we substitute $y = 0$ we can see that somehow $f$ is vanishing a second time. To make this more precise, the fact that $lambda y^n h(0,y,z) = 0$ means $h$ factors as $h = xh_0$ so that $f = (x z^{n - 1} + lambda y^{n-1})x h_0$ and now setting $y = 0$ we get $f = x^2z^{n - 1}$ which indeed vanishes doubly on the line ${a = 0, b = 0}$.
Ignoring the geometric perspective, you can still see that we have shown that $f in (x) cap (xz^{n - 1} lambda y^n)$ (inside $k[x,y,z]$) implies $f in (x^2, xy)$.
answered Dec 8 at 22:37
Trevor Gunn
14.2k32046
14.2k32046
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3031463%2fprove-0-x-cap-xzn-1-lambda-yn-in-r-frackx-y-zx2-xy%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown