Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $A$ be a commutative ring with 1, set $V(\frak a)=$ the set of prime ideals of $A$ that contains $\mathfrak a$, and write Supp$(M)$ for the support of the $A$-module $M$. We always have Supp$(M)\subseteq V($ann$M)$; if $M$ is finitely generated then the other inclusion also holds. Assume now $M$ is finitely generated.

It is ok to show that if $M_{\frak p}=0$ then ann$M\cap A\setminus\frak p\ne\varnothing$, I was just wondering if the following procedure for showing this inclusion is flawed:

Suppose $\frak p$ contains ann$M$. Since $M$ is finitely generated we have the equality (ann$M)_{\frak p}=$ ann$(M_p)$, hence the annihilator of $M_{\frak p}$ is contained in maximal ideal of $A_{\frak p}$ and is therefore different from (1), so $M_{\frak p}\ne0$.

share|cite|improve this question

Your Answer


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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.