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 trying to prove the following implication, and can't seem to find my way around all the equivalent definitions of Dedekind domains and DVRs:

I have a ring $R$ with the following properties:

1) $R$ is Noetherian.

2) $R$ is integrally closed.

3) Every nonzero prime ideal in $R$ is maximal.

I wish to show that every localization of $R$ at a maximal ideal is a principal ideal domain.

Does anyone know a direct argument proving this (i.e. not passing through the myriad of equivalent definitions of Dedekind domains and DVRs)? Alternatively, I would be thankful if someone could provide me with a "road map" to proving this claim in a a way which would convince someone (namely, me) without knowledge of Dedekind domains and DVRs.

Thanks a lot!

Roy

share|improve this question
1  
I‘m not sure whether the proofs I have in mind would satisfy you. It seems to me that you quickly get to the statement “an integrally closed Noetherian domain with a unique non-zero prime ideal is in fact principal” and from there you have to do some real work, and you would be proving one direction of an equivalence between definitions. I think Serre does this in a very low-tech way at the beginning of his Local Fields, although I don't like that proof very much. Are willing to use some commutative algebra? Basic dimension theory really helps. –  Dylan Moreland Aug 29 '12 at 23:59
1  
Related question: math.stackexchange.com/questions/183467/… may only be edited for 5 minutes(click on this box to dismiss) –  Makoto Kato Aug 30 '12 at 0:33
add comment

5 Answers 5

In my previous answer, we used a fact that an invertible ideal is projective and a fact that a finitely generated projective module over a local ring is free. Here is a proof without using these facts.

Lemma 1 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \{x \in K; x\mathfrak{m} ⊂ A\}$. Then $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \neq A$.

Proof: Let $a \neq 0$ be an element of $\mathfrak{m}$. By the assumption, Supp$(A/aA) = \{\mathfrak{m}\}$. Since Ass$(A/aA) \subset$ Supp($A/aA)$, Ass$(A/aA) = \{\mathfrak{m}\}$. Hence there exists $b \in A$ such that $b \in A - aA$ and $\mathfrak{m}b \subset aA$. Since $\mathfrak{m}(b/a) \subset A$, $b/a \in \mathfrak{m}^{-1}$. Since $b \in A - aA$, $b/a \in K - A$. QED

Lemma 1.5 Let $A$ be an integral domain. Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $M \neq 0$ be a finitely generated $A$-submodule of $K$. Let $x \in K$ be such that $xM \subset M$. Then $x$ is integral over $A$.

Proof: Let $\omega_1,\dots,\omega_n$ be generators of $M$ over $A$. Let $x\omega_i = \sum_j a_{i,j} \omega_j$. Then $x$ is a root of the characteristic polynomial of the matrix $(a_{ij})$. QED

Lemma 2 Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertible.

Proof: Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $a \neq 0$ be an element of $\mathfrak{m}$. Let $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \{x \in K; x\mathfrak{m} \subset A\}$. Since $\mathfrak{m} \subset \mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$, $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \mathfrak{m}$ or $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = A$. Suppose $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \mathfrak{m}$. Since $\mathfrak{m}$ is finitely generated, every element of $\mathfrak{m}^{-1}$ is integral over $A$ by Lemma 1.5. Since $A$ is integrally closed, $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$. This is a contradiction by Lemma 1. Hence $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = A$. QED

Lemma 3 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $\bigcap_n \mathfrak{m}^n = 0$.

Proof: Let $I = \bigcap_n \mathfrak{m}^n$. Suppose $I \neq 0$. Since dim$(A/I) = 0$, $A/I$ is an Artinian ring. Hence there exists $n$ such that $\mathfrak{m}^n \subset I$. Since $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^n$, $I = \mathfrak{m}^n$. Since $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$, $\mathfrak{m}^n = \mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$. By Nakayama's lemma, $\mathfrak{m}^n = 0$. Hence $I = 0$. This is a contradiction. QED

Lemma 4 Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Let $I$ be a non-zero ideal of $A$ such that $I \neq A$. Then $I = \mathfrak{m}^n$ for some integer $n > 0$.

Proof: By Lemma 3, there exists $n > 0$ such that $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^n$ and I is not contained in $\mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$. By Lemma 2, $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertible. Since $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^n$, $I\mathfrak{m}^{-n} \subset A$. Suppose $I\mathfrak{m}^{-n} \neq A$. Then $I\mathfrak{m}^{-n} \subset \mathfrak{m}$. Hence $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$. This is a contradiction. Hence $I\mathfrak{m}^{-n} = A$. Hence $I = \mathfrak{m}^n$. QED

Theorem Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $A$ is a discrete valuation ring.

Proof: By Nakayama's lemma, $\mathfrak{m} \neq \mathfrak{m}^2$. Let $x \in \mathfrak{m} - \mathfrak{m}^2$. By Lemma 4, $xA = \mathfrak{m}$. Let $I$ be a non-zero ideal of $A$ such that $I \neq A$. By Lemma 4, $I = \mathfrak{m}^n$. Hence $I$ is principal. Hence $A$ is a discrete valuation ring. QED

share|improve this answer
add comment

Lemma 1 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Let $K$ be the ring of fractions of $A$. Let $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \{x \in K; x\mathfrak{m} ⊂ A\}$. Then $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \neq A$.

Proof: Let $a \neq 0$ be an element of $\mathfrak{m}$. By the assumption, Supp$(A/aA) = \{\mathfrak{m}\}$. Since Ass$(A/aA) \subset$ Supp($A/aA)$, Ass$(A/aA) = \{\mathfrak{m}\}$. Hence there exists $b \in A$ such that $b \in A - aA$ and $\mathfrak{m}b \subset aA$. Since $\mathfrak{m}(b/a) \subset A$, $b/a \in \mathfrak{m}^{-1}$. Since $b \in A - aA$, $b/a \in K - A$. QED

Lemma 1.5 Let $A$ be an integral domain. Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $M \neq 0$ be a finitely generated $A$-submodule of $K$. Let $x \in K$ be such that $xM \subset M$. Then $x$ is integral over $A$.

Proof: Let $\omega_1,\dots,\omega_n$ be generators of $M$ over $A$. Let $x\omega_i = \sum_j a_{i,j} \omega_j$. Then $x$ is a root of the characteristic polynomial of the matrix $(a_{ij})$. QED

Lemma 2 Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $\mathfrak{m}$ is principal.

Proof: Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $a \neq 0$ be an element of $\mathfrak{m}$. Let $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \{x \in K; x\mathfrak{m} \subset A\}$. Since $\mathfrak{m} \subset \mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$, $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \mathfrak{m}$ or $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = A$. Suppose $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \mathfrak{m}$. Since $\mathfrak{m}$ is finitely generated, every element of $\mathfrak{m}^{-1}$ is integral over $A$ by Lemma 1.5. Since $A$ is integrally closed, $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$. This is a contradiction by Lemma 1. Hence $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = A$ and therefore $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertible. Hence $\mathfrak{m}$ is a projective $A$-module. Since $A$ is a local ring, $\mathfrak{m}$ is free $A$-module. Hence $\mathfrak{m}$ is principal. QED

Lemma 3 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $\bigcap_n \mathfrak{m}^n = 0$.

Proof: Let $I = \bigcap_n \mathfrak{m}^n$. Suppose $I \neq 0$. Since dim$(A/I) = 0$, $A/I$ is an Artinian ring. Hence there exists $n$ such that $\mathfrak{m}^n \subset I$. Since $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^n$, $I = \mathfrak{m}^n$. Since $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$, $\mathfrak{m}^n = \mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$. By Nakayama's lemma, $\mathfrak{m}^n = 0$. Hence $I = 0$. This is a contradiction. QED

Theorem Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $A$ is a discrete valuation ring.

Proof: Let $I$ be a non-zero ideal of $A$ such that $I \neq A$. By Lemma 3, there exists $n > 0$ such that $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^n$ and $I$ is not contained in $\mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$. By Lemma 2, $\mathfrak{m}$ is principal. Hence $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertible. Since $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^n$, $I\mathfrak{m}^{-n} \subset A$. Suppose $I\mathfrak{m}^{-n} \neq A$. Then $I\mathfrak{m}^{-n} \subset \mathfrak{m}$. Hence $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$. This is a contradiction. Hence $I\mathfrak{m}^{-n} = A$. Hence $I = \mathfrak{m}^n$. Since $I$ is principal, $I$ is also principal. QED

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you very, very much! –  Roy Ben-Abraham Aug 30 '12 at 13:11
add comment

Lemma 1 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain which is not a field. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is principal. Then $\bigcap_n \mathfrak{m}^n = 0$.

Proof: Let $\mathfrak{m} = tA$. Let $x \in \bigcap_n \mathfrak{m}^n$. Suppose $x \neq 0$. There exists $y_n \in A$ for every $n$ such that $x = t^ny_n$. Then $t^ny_n = t^{n+1}y_{n+1}$. Hence $y_n = ty_{n+1}$. Hence $y_nA \subset y_{n+1}A$. Since $A$ is Noetherian, there exists $k$ such that $y_kA = y_{k+1}A$. Hence there exists $u \in A$ such that $y_{k+1} = uy_k$. Since $y_k = ty_{k+1}$, $y_k = uty_k$. Hence $(1 - ut)y_k = 0$. Since $t \in \mathfrak{m}$, $1 - ut$ is invertible. Hence $y_k = 0$. Hence $x = t^ky_k = 0$. This is a contradiction. QED

Lemma 2 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain which is not a field. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is principal. Then $A$ is a discrete valuation ring.

Proof: Suppose $\mathfrak{m} = tA$. By Lemma 1, $\bigcap_n \mathfrak{m}^n = 0$. Let $I$ be a non-zero ideal of $A$. There exists $n$ such that $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^n$ but not $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$. Since $\mathfrak{m}^n = t^nA$, $It^{-n} \subset A$. Suppose $It^{-n} \neq A$. Then $It^{-n} \subset \mathfrak{m}$. Hence $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$. This is a contradictin. Hence $I = t^nA$. QED

Lemma 3 Let $A$ be an integral domain. Let $I$ be an ideal of $A$. Suppose $I$ is invertble. Then $I$ is a finitely generated projective $A$-module.

Proof: Since $II^{-1} = A$, there exist $a_1,\dots,a_n \in I$ and $b_1,\dots,b_n \in I^{-1}$ such that $\sum_i a_ib_i = 1$. Let $f_i:I\rightarrow A$ be the $A$-linear map defined by $f_i(x) = b_ix$. Let $L$ be a free $A$-module with a basis $e_1,\dots,e_n$. Let $g:L \rightarrow I$ be the $A$-linear map defined by $g(e_i) = a_i$. Let $f:I \rightarrow L$ be the $A$-linear map defined by $f(x) = \sum_i f_i(x)e_i = \sum_i b_ixe_i$. Since $gf(x) = \sum_i g(b_ixe_i) = \sum_i b_ia_ix = x$ for every $x \in I$, $gf = 1$. Hence $I$ is isomorphic to a direct summand of $L$. Hence $I$ is a finitely generated projective $A$-module. QED

Lemma 4 Let $A$ be a local ring. Let $M$ be a finitely generated projective $A$-module. Then $M$ is a finitely generated free $A$-module.

Proof: Let $\mathfrak{m}$ be the maximal ideal of $A$. Let $k = A/\mathfrak{m}$. Since $M$ is finitely generated, dim$_k M\otimes_A k$ is finite. Let $a_1,\dots,a_n$ be elements of $M$ such that $\{a_1\otimes 1,\dots,a_n\otimes 1\}$ is a basis of $M\otimes_A k$ over $k$. By Nakayama's lemma, $a_1,\dots,a_n$ generates $M$ over $A$. Let $L$ be a free $A$-module with a basis $\{e_1,\dots,e_n\}$. Let $f:L\rightarrow M$ be the $A$-linear map such that $f(e_i) = a_i (i = 1,\dots,n)$. Let $K$ be the kernel of $f$. Then we get the following exact sequence.

$0 \rightarrow K \rightarrow L \rightarrow M \rightarrow 0$

Then the following sequence is exact by the well known theorem of homological algebra.

Tor$_1(M, k) \rightarrow K\otimes_A k \rightarrow L\otimes_A k \rightarrow M\otimes_A k \rightarrow 0$

Since $M$ is projective, Tor$_1(M, k) = 0$. Since $L\otimes_A k \rightarrow M\otimes_A k$ is an isomorphism, $K\otimes_A k = 0$. Since $M$ is projective, $K$ is a direct summand of $L$. Hence $K$ is finitely generated. Hence $K = 0$ by Nakayama's lemma. QED

Lemma 5 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \{x \in K; x\mathfrak{m} ⊂ A\}$. Then $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \neq A$.

Proof: Let $a \neq 0$ be an element of $\mathfrak{m}$. By the assumption, Supp$(A/aA) = \{\mathfrak{m}\}$. Since Ass$(A/aA) \subset$ Supp($A/aA)$, Ass$(A/aA) = \{\mathfrak{m}\}$. Hence there exists $b \in A$ such that $b \in A - aA$ and $\mathfrak{m}b \subset aA$. Since $\mathfrak{m}(b/a) \subset A$, $b/a \in \mathfrak{m}^{-1}$. Since $b \in A - aA$, $b/a \in K - A$. QED

Lemma 6 Let $A$ be an integral domain. Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $M \neq 0$ be a finitely generated $A$-submodule of $K$. Let $x \in K$ be such that $xM \subset M$. Then $x$ is integral over $A$.

Proof: Let $\omega_1,\dots,\omega_n$ be generators of $M$ over $A$. Let $x\omega_i = \sum_j a_{i,j} \omega_j$. Then $x$ is a root of the characteristic polynomial of the matrix $(a_{ij})$. QED

Lemma 7 Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertible.

Proof: Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $a \neq 0$ be an element of $\mathfrak{m}$. Let $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \{x \in K; x\mathfrak{m} \subset A\}$. Since $\mathfrak{m} \subset \mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$, $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \mathfrak{m}$ or $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = A$. Suppose $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \mathfrak{m}$. Since $\mathfrak{m}$ is finitely generated, every element of $\mathfrak{m}^{-1}$ is integral over $A$ by Lemma 6. Since $A$ is integrally closed, $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$. This is a contradiction by Lemma 5. Hence $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = A$ and therefore $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertible. QED

Lemma 8 Let $A$ be an integral domain. Let $L$ be a finitely generated free A-module. Let $M$ be a finitely generated free A-submodule of L. Then rank$_A M \le$ rank$_A L$.

Proof: Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Since $K$ is a flat $A$-module, the canonical homomorphism $M\otimes_A K \rightarrow L\otimes_A K$ is injective. Hence we are done. QED

Theorem Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $A$ is a discrete valuation ring.

Proof: By Lemma 7, $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertible. By Lemma 3, $\mathfrak{m}$ is projective over A. By Lemma 4, $\mathfrak{m}$ is a finitely generated free module $A$. By Lemma 8, $\mathfrak{m}$ is principal. Hence $A$ is a discrete valuation ring by Lemma 2. QED

share|improve this answer
add comment

The following proof is similar to the previous ones but we only assume very basic knowledge of commutative algebra.

Lemma 0 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Let $I$ be a non-zero ideal of $A$. Then there exists $n > 0$ such that $\mathfrak{m}^n \subset I$.

Proof: Suppose the assertion is false. Let $\mathfrak{I}$ be the set of non-zero ideal of $A$ such that the statement is false. Let $I$ be a maximal element of $\mathfrak{I}$. Since $I$ is not a prime ideal, there exists $a, b \in A$ such that $ab \in I$ and $a \in A - I, b \in A - I$. Let $J_1 = I + aA, J_2 = I + bA$. Since $I$ is a maximal element of $\mathfrak{I}$, there exists $n_1, n_2 > 0$ such that $\mathfrak{m}^{n_1} \subset J_1$, $\mathfrak{m}^{n_2} \subset J_2$, Since $J_1J_2 \subset I$, this is a contradiction. QED

Lemma 1 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \{x \in K; x\mathfrak{m} ⊂ A\}$. Then $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \neq A$.

Proof: Let $a \neq 0$ be an element of $\mathfrak{m}$. By Lemma 1, there exists n > 0 such that $\mathfrak{m}^n \subset aA$. Let $n$ be minimal satisfying this condition. Let $b \in \mathfrak{m}^{n-1} - aA$. Then $\mathfrak{m}b \subset aA$. Since $\mathfrak{m}(b/a) \subset A$, $b/a \in \mathfrak{m}^{-1}$. Since $b \in A - aA$, $b/a \in K - A$. QED

Lemma 1.5 Let $A$ be an integral domain. Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $M \neq 0$ be a finitely generated $A$-submodule of $K$. Let $x \in K$ be such that $xM \subset M$. Then $x$ is integral over $A$.

Proof: Let $\omega_1,\dots,\omega_n$ be generators of $M$ over $A$. Let $x\omega_i = \sum_j a_{i,j} \omega_j$. Then $x$ is a root of the characteristic polynomial of the matrix $(a_{ij})$. QED

Lemma 2 Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertible.

Proof: Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $a \neq 0$ be an element of $\mathfrak{m}$. Let $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \{x \in K; x\mathfrak{m} \subset A\}$. Since $\mathfrak{m} \subset \mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$, $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \mathfrak{m}$ or $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = A$. Suppose $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \mathfrak{m}$. Since $\mathfrak{m}$ is finitely generated, every element of $\mathfrak{m}^{-1}$ is integral over $A$ by Lemma 1.5. Since $A$ is integrally closed, $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$. This is a contradiction by Lemma 1. Hence $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = A$. QED

Lemma 3 Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then every non-zero ideal is invertible.

Proof: Suppose the assertionis is false. Let $I$ be a maximal non-zero non-invertible ideal. Then $I \subset \mathfrak{m}$. Hence $I \subset I\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$. Suppose $I = I\mathfrak{m}^{-1}$. Then every element of $\mathfrak{m}^{-1}$ is integral over $A$ by Lemma 1.5. Since $A$ is integrally closed, $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$. By Lemma 1, this is a contradiction. Hence $I \neq I\mathfrak{m}^{-1}$. Hence $I\mathfrak{m}^{-1}$ is invertible. Hence $I$ is invertible. This is a contradiction. QED

Lemma 4 Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Let $I$ be a non-zero ideal of $A$ such that $I \neq A$. Then $I = \mathfrak{m}^n$ for some integer $n > 0$.

Proof: Suppose the assertionis is false. Let $I \neq A$ be a maximal non-zero ideal which is not power of $\mathfrak{m}$. Since $I \subset \mathfrak{m}$, $I \subset I\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$. $I \neq I\mathfrak{m}^{-1}$ by the same argument of the proof of Lemma 3. Hence $I\mathfrak{m}^{-1}$ is a power of $\mathfrak{m}$. Hence $I$ is a power of $\mathfrak{m}$. This is a contradiction. QED

Theorem Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $A$ is a discrete valuation ring.

Proof: Suppose $\mathfrak{m} \neq \mathfrak{m}^2$. Since $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertble. $\mathfrak{m} = A$. This is a contradiction. Hence $\mathfrak{m} \neq \mathfrak{m}^2$. Let $x \in \mathfrak{m} - \mathfrak{m}^2$. By Lemma 4, $xA = \mathfrak{m}$. Let $I$ be a non-zero ideal of $A$ such that $I \neq A$. By Lemma 4, $I = \mathfrak{m}^n$. Hence $I$ is principal. Hence $A$ is a discrete valuation ring. QED

share|improve this answer
add comment

Lemma 1 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain which is not a field. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is principal. Then $\bigcap_n \mathfrak{m}^n = 0$.

Proof: Let $\mathfrak{m} = tA$. Let $x \in \bigcap_n \mathfrak{m}^n$. Suppose $x \neq 0$. There exists $y_n \in A$ for every $n$ such that $x = t^ny_n$. Then $t^ny_n = t^{n+1}y_{n+1}$. Hence $y_n = ty_{n+1}$. Hence $y_nA \subset y_{n+1}A$. Since $A$ is Noetherian, there exists $k$ such that $y_kA = y_{k+1}A$. Hence there exists $u \in A$ such that $y_{k+1} = uy_k$. Since $y_k = ty_{k+1}$, $y_k = uty_k$. Hence $(1 - ut)y_k = 0$. Since $t \in \mathfrak{m}$, $1 - ut$ is invertible. Hence $y_k = 0$. Hence $x = t^ky_k = 0$. This is a contradiction. QED

Lemma 2 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain which is not a field. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is principal. Then $A$ is a discrete valuation ring.

Proof: Suppose $\mathfrak{m} = tA$. By Lemma 1, $\bigcap_n \mathfrak{m}^n = 0$. Let $I$ be a non-zero ideal of $A$. There exists $n$ such that $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^n$ but not $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$. Since $\mathfrak{m}^n = t^nA$, $It^{-n} \subset A$. Suppose $It^{-n} \neq A$. Then $It^{-n} \subset \mathfrak{m}$. Hence $I \subset \mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$. This is a contradictin. Hence $I = t^nA$. QED

Lemma 3 Let $A$ be a local domain. Let $\mathfrak{m}$ be its maximal ideal. Suppose $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertble. Then $\mathfrak{m}$ is principal.

Proof(Serre's Local fields): $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = A$, there exist $a_1,\dots,a_n \in \mathfrak{m}$ and $b_1,\dots,b_n \in \mathfrak{m}^{-1}$ such that $\sum_i a_ib_i = 1$. If $a_ib_i \in \mathfrak{m}$ for all $i$, $1 \in \mathfrak{m}$. This is a contradiction. Hence there exists $k$ such that $a_kb_k \in K - \mathfrak{m}$. Since $b_k \in \mathfrak{m}^{-1}$, $a_kb_k \in A$. Hence $a_kb_k = u$ is invertible. Hence $a_ku^{-1}b_k = 1$. Let $a = a_ku^{-1}$. Then $a \in \mathfrak{m}$ and $ab_k = 1$. Let $x \in \mathfrak{m}$. $x = xab_k$. Since $b_k \in \mathfrak{m}^{-1}$, $xb_k \in A$. Hence $x \in aA$. Hence $\mathfrak{m} = aA$. QED

Lemma 4 Let $A$ be a Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \{x \in K; x\mathfrak{m} ⊂ A\}$. Then $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \neq A$.

Proof: Let $a \neq 0$ be an element of $\mathfrak{m}$. By the assumption, Supp$(A/aA) = \{\mathfrak{m}\}$. Since Ass$(A/aA) \subset$ Supp($A/aA)$, Ass$(A/aA) = \{\mathfrak{m}\}$. Hence there exists $b \in A$ such that $b \in A - aA$ and $\mathfrak{m}b \subset aA$. Since $\mathfrak{m}(b/a) \subset A$, $b/a \in \mathfrak{m}^{-1}$. Since $b \in A - aA$, $b/a \in K - A$. QED

Lemma 5 Let $A$ be an integral domain. Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $M \neq 0$ be a finitely generated $A$-submodule of $K$. Let $x \in K$ be such that $xM \subset M$. Then $x$ is integral over $A$.

Proof: Let $\omega_1,\dots,\omega_n$ be generators of $M$ over $A$. Let $x\omega_i = \sum_j a_{i,j} \omega_j$. Then $x$ is a root of the characteristic polynomial of the matrix $(a_{ij})$. QED

Lemma 6 Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local domain. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertible.

Proof: Let $K$ be the field of fractions of $A$. Let $a \neq 0$ be an element of $\mathfrak{m}$. Let $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \{x \in K; x\mathfrak{m} \subset A\}$. Since $\mathfrak{m} \subset \mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$, $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \mathfrak{m}$ or $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = A$. Suppose $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = \mathfrak{m}$. Since $\mathfrak{m}$ is finitely generated, every element of $\mathfrak{m}^{-1}$ is integral over $A$ by Lemma 5. Since $A$ is integrally closed, $\mathfrak{m}^{-1} \subset A$. This is a contradiction by Lemma 4. Hence $\mathfrak{m}\mathfrak{m}^{-1} = A$ and therefore $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertible. QED

Theorem Let $A$ be an integrally closed Noetherian local. Suppose its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ is the unique non-zero-prime ideal. Then $A$ is a discrete valuation ring.

Proof: By Lemma 6, $\mathfrak{m}$ is invertible. By Lemma 3, $\mathfrak{m}$ is principal. Hence $A$ is a discrete valuation ring by Lemma 2. QED

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

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.