Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am doing exercise 3.23 in Atiyah Macdonald and in the first part of the problem they ask to show that the ring $A_f = S^{-1}A$ where $S = \{1,f,f^2 \ldots \}$ depends only on the choice of the basic open set $X_f$ and not on $f$. For reference,

$$X_f \stackrel{\text{def}}{\equiv} \{P \in \operatorname{Spec}(A) : f \notin P\}.$$

I interpret this as saying that if there is another $g \in A$ such that $X_g = X_f$, then $A_f \cong A_g$. Since $X_f = X_g$ we deduce that $\operatorname{rad}\Big((f)\Big) = \operatorname{rad}\Big((g) \Big).$ From these equalities of radicals, this means that there are equations

\begin{eqnarray*} f^n &=& ag \hspace{5mm} \\ g^m &=& bf \end{eqnarray*}

for some $n,m \in \Bbb{N}$ such that $n,m >0$ and $a,b \in A$. Now we may suppose that $f$ and $g$ are not nilpotent for then $A_f \cong A_g \cong 0$. To show that $A_f \cong A_g$ I am trying to use Corollary 3.3 of Atiyah - Macdonald:

${\color{blue}{\text{Corollary 3.3: If $\tilde{g}: A \rightarrow B$ is a ring homomorphism such that}}}$

${\color{blue}{\text{(i) $s \in S \implies \tilde{g}(s)$ is a unit }}}$

${\color{blue}{\text{(ii) $\tilde{g}(a) = 0\implies as = 0$ for some $s \in S$}}}$

${\color{blue}{\text{(iii) Every element in $B$ is of the form $\tilde{g}(a)\tilde{g}(s)^{-1}$ for some $a\in A$ and $s \in S$ }}}$

${\color{blue}{\text{then there is a unique isomorphism $h:S^{-1}A \rightarrow B$ such that $\tilde{g}$ factorises }}}$ ${\color{blue}{\text{through the localisation $S^{-1}A$.}}}$

In our case we can set $B = P^{-1}A$ where $P = \{1,g,g^2, \ldots\}$.

$\textbf{Difficulty:}$ I have been spending some time now trying to define such a map $\tilde{g} : A \longrightarrow P^{-1}A$. Now it seems to me from those two equations above that there are only choices (up-to multiplication by some constant) orf such a map $\tilde{g}$. The problem is every time I define my $\tilde{g}$, property ${\color{blue}{(iii)}}$ is not satisfied. For example, I have tried to define for $x \in A$

$$ \tilde{g}(x) = \frac{bx}{a} \hspace{4mm} \text{or} \hspace{4mm} \tilde{g}(x) = \frac{x^n}{ab} \hspace{4mm} \text{or} \hspace{4mm} \tilde{g}(x) = \frac{bx}{ag^{m-1}}.$$

Suppose I try to write some $x/g^k$ in $P^{-1}A$ as $g(x')g(s)^{-1}$ for some $a' \in A$ and $s \in S$. Then one candidate we have is $x' =x$ and $s = f$. But then we only get

$$g(x)g(f)^{-1} = \frac{bx}{g^m}.$$

If I try say $g(xf)g(f)^{-1}$ to remove the $g^m$ in the denominator the problem is that I just end up with $x$. The problems are similar for the second and third $\tilde{g}$ I defined above. How can I get around this? Please do not give it all away as I would like to enjoy some of the fun!


share|improve this question
Truly, your dedication to that book is moving. :) –  Ravi Donepudi May 9 '12 at 13:31
@FortuonPaendrag what do you mean? –  fpqc May 9 '12 at 13:34
Your interpretation is correct. I think you are overcomplicating things. All you have to do is show that an $A$-algebra in which $f$ is invertible also has an inverse for $g$ and vice-versa. Then you will have shown that $A_f$ has the universal property of $A_g$ and vice-versa, so they must be isomorphic. –  Zhen Lin May 9 '12 at 13:37
@ZhenLin Do you mean to say I should define a map directly from $A_f$ to $A_g$? I do not understand what you mean by "an $A$ - algebra in which $f$ is invertible". –  fpqc May 9 '12 at 13:39
@BenjaminLim: Look up the definition of $A$-algebra, and it should be clear what I mean. I absolutely do not mean for you define a map directly – that it what the universal property does for you. –  Zhen Lin May 9 '12 at 14:06
show 3 more comments

2 Answers

up vote 2 down vote accepted

I think you have to define $\tilde g\colon A \to A_g$ to be the canonical map $\tilde g(x) = x/1$. What is the inverse of $\tilde{g}(f)$? In order to check (iii), you just have to show that $1/g$ is of the desired form. Look at $\tilde{g}(a)\tilde g(f^n)^{-1}$ and use both of your equations. [This seems like a reasonable guess in view of $f^n = ag$, and indeed it does work.]

share|improve this answer
I hope I haven't given too much away -- I think there's still a bit to untangle here for you. And now I'm late for the train! –  Dylan Moreland May 9 '12 at 13:55
Sorry I meant that indeed it does, for example the element $x/g^k \in A_g$ is the image of $\tilde{g}(a^k x)\tilde{g}((f^n)^k)^{-1}$. –  fpqc May 9 '12 at 23:18
I just realised something. If $\tilde{g}$ is our canonical map then $\tilde{g}(f) = \frac{f}{1}$. Now for this to be invertible we need that $f \in \{1,g,g^2,\ldots \}$. Now we have that $g^m = bf$ so that if I can write $f = \frac{g^m}{b}$ I should be done. The problem is that I don't know if $b \in \{1,g,g^2,\ldots \}$ so how can I do this? –  fpqc May 10 '12 at 4:18
@BenjaminLim Hopefully I'm not misinterpreting you: it is not necessarily the case that the only invertible elements of $A_g$ are the $g^i$. I'll try to think of a better reason for why $f$ is invertible, beyond "I can write down an inverse, $b/g^m$." –  Dylan Moreland May 10 '12 at 5:39
It's ok I got it now with Arturo's comment above. Up to now I was assuming this tacitly all along! –  fpqc May 10 '12 at 5:59
show 1 more comment

You can use universal properties.

You know that $f^n = ag$ for some $a$; that means that $g$ is invertible in $A_f$, and therefore there is a unique homomorphism $\varphi\colon A_g\to A_f$ that commutes with the canonical maps $A\to A_g$ and $A\to A_f$; symmetrically, since $g^m=bf$ for some $b$, $f$ is invertible in $A_g$ so there is a unique homomorphism $\psi\colon A_f\to A_g$ that commutes with the canonical maps.

Now consider $\psi\circ\varphi\colon A_f\to A_f$. This is the unique map that commutes with the canonical map $A\to A_f$, hence $\psi\circ\varphi$ is the identity. Likewise, $\varphi\circ\psi\colon A_g\to A_g$ must be the identity, by the uniqueness clause of the universal property of localizations. Therefore, $\varphi=\psi^{-1}$, so $A_f\cong A_g$, as desired.

share|improve this answer
Thanks for your answer. How do you know that $f$ is invertible in $A_g$ from the equation $g^m = bf$? Don't I need that $b \in \{1,g,\ldots\}$? –  fpqc May 10 '12 at 4:21
@Benjamin: $g$ is invertible in $A_g$, hence $g^m$ is invertible in $A_g$ (being a product of units). Since $f$ divides an invertible element, it is itself invertible: if $x$ divides $u$ and $u$ is invertible, then there exists $v$ with $uv=1$, there exists $y$ with $xy=u$, so $x(yv) = (xy)v = uv = 1$. –  Arturo Magidin May 10 '12 at 4:23
@Benjamin: No, there are other elements besides those in $\{1,g,\ldots\}$ that may be invertible. Take the case of $\mathbb{Z}$, with $g=22$. Then $121$ is invertible, even though $121\neq 22^k$ for any $k$, since $\frac{1}{121} = \frac{4}{(121)(4)} = \frac{4}{22^2}$. –  Arturo Magidin May 10 '12 at 4:27
Thanks man I learned something from you! That example was really good. –  fpqc May 10 '12 at 4:34
add comment

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.