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.

If $A$ is a Dedekind domain and $a,b$ are ideals, then why does $aA_p⊂bA_p$ for every prime ideal $p$ imply that $a\subset b$?

I read it in Milne's notes but it alludes to DVR's and I'm not familiar with that concept.

share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers

Let $x$ lie in the first ideal. Consider the set $I$ of elements $a$ of $A$ such that $ax$ is in the second ideal. Check that $I$ is an ideal and that the hypothesis implies that $I$ is not contained in any nonzero prime ideal of $A$. Hence $I=A$, and so $1$ is in $I$.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Factor $a$ and $b$ into its finite product of prime ideals. If say $$b=(p_1) \cdots (p_n),$$ $b_{p_i} = (p_i)_p$, so you have that $a$ also have $$(p_1) \cdots (p_n)$$ in its factorization. Thus, it must be contained in $b$.

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.