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.

An ideal is irreducible if it can not be written as the finite intersection of strictly larger ideals. In a Noetherian ring every irreducible ideal is primary, but the converse doesn't hold. I wonder about the situation in a Dedekind Domain. In a Dedekind Domain every ideal can be factored uniquely into a product of prime ideals. And every primary ideal is a power of a prime ideal. Hence in a Dedekind domain every irreducible ideal is a power of a prime ideal. Furthermore, a prime ideal is always irreducible.

Let $R$ be a Dedekind Domain.

If $A$ and $B$ are ideals in a Dedekind domain then $B$ is said to divide $A$ if there exists an ideal $C$ such that $A=BC$. We have that $A\subseteq B$ iff $B$ divides $A$.

  1. Define $M$ as the set of ideals of $R$ that is such that if $P$ divides $AB$ then this implies that $P$ divides $A$ or $B$.

  2. Let $K$ be those ideals in $R$ that do not have any non-trivial factorization.

In the notation of the book I am using (Mollin) the set $M$ is defined as the set of prime ideals of a number field and the set $K$ is defined as the set of irreducible ideals in a Dedekind domain. Furthermore it is stated that an ideal $A$ belongs to $K$ if and only if $A$ belongs to $M$.

So my natural question are: Is the set of prime ideals in a Dedekind Domain equal to $M$? Is the set of irreducible ideals in a Dedekind Domain equal to $K$? I.e, by proving that $A$ belongs to $K$ if and only if $A$ belongs to $M$ do we prove that an ideal in a Dedekind domain is irreducible if and only if it is prime?

share|improve this question
    
If you write 1) as "$AB\subseteq P$ implies $A\subseteq P$ or $B\subseteq P$" then that is exactly the general definition of a prime ideal of a ring (which is equivalent to the commutative version in commutative rings.) –  rschwieb May 20 '13 at 17:51
add comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

You ask about three different classes of nonzero ideals in a Dedekind domain $R$:
(a) Prime ideals.
(b) Unfactorable ideals: if $\mathfrak{p} = IJ$ then $I = R$ or $J = R$.
(c) Irreducible ideals: If $\mathfrak{p} = I \cap J$ then $I = \mathfrak{p}$ or $J = \mathfrak{p}$.

Classes (a) and (b) are the same: their equivalence follows easily from the fact that every nonzero ideal in a Dedekind domain factors uniquely as a product of primes.

Class(c) consists precisely of the prime powers $\mathfrak{p}^a$ for $a \in \mathbb{N}$. This follows from the following more general result about intersections of ideals in a Dedekind domain:

Lemma. Let $I = \mathfrak{p}_1^{a_1} \cdots \mathfrak{p}_r^{a_r}$, $J = \mathfrak{p}_1^{b_1} \cdots \mathfrak{p}_r^{b_r}$ be nonzero ideals in a Dedekind domain: here $a_i, b_i$ are non-negative integers. Then $I \cap J = \mathfrak{p}_1^{\max (a_1, b_1)} \cdots \mathfrak{p}_r^{\max (a_r, b_r)}$.

Let me know if you need help in proving this. If you know about localizations, this allows for a very easy proof: you can reduce to the case in which $R$ has exactly one nonzero prime ideal, and in this case the result is trivial.

Finally, one has the following simple result.

Lemma. If $\mathfrak{p}$ is an ideal in a commutative ring $R$, the following are equivalent:

(i) For any ideals $I$, $J$ in $R$, if $\mathfrak{p} \supset IJ$, then $\mathfrak{p} \supset I$ or $\mathfrak{p} \supset J$.
(ii) $\mathfrak{p}$ is prime.

Proof: $\neg$ (i) $\implies$ $\neg$ (ii): The hypotheses give the existence of $x \in I \setminus \mathfrak{p}$ and $y \in J \setminus \mathfrak{p}$ such that $xy \in \mathfrak{p}$. Thus $\mathfrak{p}$ is not prime.

$\neg$ (ii) $\implies$ $\neg$ (i): If $\mathfrak{p}$ is not prime, then there are $x,y \in R \setminus \mathfrak{p}$ with $xy \in \mathfrak{p}$. Take $I = (x)$, $J = (y)$.

I believe this answers all of your questions, but let me know if I missed something.

share|improve this answer
1  
I am not to sure about this. If $I=P^n$ for some prime $P$ why can $I$ not be irreducible. $I$ is clearly factorable which by the argument above should imply $I$ not irreducible. If the equivalence stated would be true every ideal in a Dedekind domain would have a factorization into distinct prime ideals, which I doubt to be true...? –  harajm Jun 1 '13 at 16:58
    
@harajm: Yes, you're right. I have corrected my answer. –  Pete L. Clark Jun 2 '13 at 15:44
    
Yes, this I agree with. One last remark, it seems like you are saying that every primary ideal is an irreducible ideal in a Dedekind domain. (you state that Class (c)/the irreducible ideals consists precisely of the prime powers and these are precisly the primary ideals) Something that is not true in general Noetherian rings. I can not see that the argument you are presenting is proving this however, only the converse which was stated to be true already in the question. –  harajm Jun 2 '13 at 19:43
1  
@harajm: That a prime power ideal in a Dedekind domain cannot be an intersection of two strictly larger ideals follows from the first boxed lemma. Otherwise put, the only ideals strictly containing $\mathfrak{p}^a$ are those of the form $\mathfrak{p}^b$ for $b < a$, and it is clear that $\mathfrak{p}^{b_1} \cap \mathfrak{p}^{b_2} = \mathfrak{p}^{\max b_1,b_2} \neq \mathfrak{p}^a$. –  Pete L. Clark Jun 3 '13 at 5:28
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.