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.

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

If $\phi : A \to B$ is a ring homomorphism, where $A$ and $B$ are commutative rings with unit but not necessarily domains. Let $P$ be a prime ideal of $A$. How do we define the ring $B_{P}$ and map $\phi_{P} : A_{P} \to B_{P}$? Thanks

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

It is natural to define $\varphi_P(a/s)=\varphi(a)/\varphi(s)$, for $a\in A$ and $s\in A-P$. This also suggest what $B_P$ should be, that is, the ring of fractions of $B$ with respect to the multiplicative system $\varphi(A-P).$ So $B_P$ is a notation for this ring of fractions which, in fact, is not a localization (at a prime ideal of $B$).

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks YACP. I got it. – Rajesh Dec 28 '12 at 23:53

A natural way is to put $B_P=A_P\otimes_A B$ and define $\phi_P: A_P\to B_P$ by tensoring $\phi$ with $A_P$: $\phi_P(a/s)=(a/s)\otimes 1$.

Edit Localization: $B_P$ is actually the localization of $B$ with respect to the multiplicative subset $\phi(A\setminus P)$ of $B$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks Qil. I am trying to write the elements of $B_{P}$ by using the definition of localization. Here $\phi(P)$ may not be a prime ideal of $B$. If not prime then $B$\ $\phi(P)$ need not be a multiplicatively closed set. Then I could not use the definition of localization. – Rajesh Dec 28 '12 at 22:54

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.