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

This page contains a result which it refers to as the UFD field lemma. I was wondering if anybody knew of any other references which discuss this result--this page is the only place I've seen it.

The UFD field lemma appears to assert that if $R$ is a unique factorization domain containing infinitely many prime elements, if $F$ is the field of fractions of $R$, and if $A$ is a finitely generated $R$-algebra which is a field and is algebraic over $F$, then $A$ does not contain $F$.

I'm looking for other sources because I find the exposition on that page a little hard to follow.

share|cite|improve this question
See Proposition 7.8 in Atiyah-Macdonald, where in their notation, A=R, B=F, and C=A (your A). – user641 Sep 12 '10 at 10:03
If you are interested in the Nullstellensatz you might like to see Dan Bernstein's take on it at . – Robin Chapman Sep 12 '10 at 10:49
Thanks very much for the references! – Zach Conn Sep 13 '10 at 7:39
up vote 2 down vote accepted

I think you might find it helpful to first comprehend the essence of the matter in a slightly simpler context, e.g. see the proof I gave on sci.math on 22 Apr 2009. The key ideas are already there. Generally, I recommend Kaplansky, Commutative Rings, for the circle of ideas around the generalized Nullstellensatz (Goldman, Krull, Zariski).

share|cite|improve this answer

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.