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 Noetherian integral domain, $B$ a ring extension of $A$ that is an integral domain, $P \in \operatorname{Spec} B, \, p = P \cap A$. Denote by $\kappa(p),\ \kappa(P)$ the residue fields of the two prime ideals. Then we see that there is a field extension $\kappa(p) \hookrightarrow \kappa(P)$. Let $t$ be a non-negative integer such that $t \le {\rm tr}.\deg_{\kappa(p)} \kappa(P)$.

Matsumura in his Commutative Ring Theory, proof of Theorem 15.5, says "let $c_1,\dots,c_t \in B$ such that their images modulo $P$ are algebraically independent over $A/p$."

Question: Why would such elements exist?


Remark: Matsumura wants to prove that $\operatorname{ht}(P)+\operatorname{tr.deg}_{\kappa(p)} \kappa(P) \le \operatorname{ht}(p)+ \operatorname{tr.deg}_A B$ and he starts by proving that we can assume that $B$ is a finitely generated $A$-algebra. Specifically, he is showing that we can construct a subring $C$ of $B$ that is a finitely-generated $A$-algebra, and that if the theorem is true for $C$, then it is true of $B$. My question relates to his argument of "why we can assume that". Consequently, in answering my question, we can not make the assumption that $B$ is a finitely generated $A$-algebra.

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Take $x_1,\dots,x_t$ to be algebraically independent over $k(p)$ in $k(P)$. Then, write each $x_i$ as a fraction. Then, you get $2t$ elements of $B/P$. I claim that there are $t$ algebraically independent among the $2t$ elements. Why? What happens if there is only $m<t$. Then, there are $m$ elements $(y_1,\dots,y_m)$ of $B/P$ such that the numerators and denominators are algebraic over $k(p)[y_1,\dots,y_m]$. But, then $B/P$ is of transcendence degree $m$ over $k(p)$. So $m=t$, and done.

share|cite|improve this answer

First of all your problem reduces easily to the following:

Let $A\subset B$ be an extension of integral domains, $K=Q(A)$ and $L=Q(B)$ their fields of fractions. If ${\rm tr}.\deg L/K\ge t$, then there exist $t$ elements in $B$ which are algebraically independent over $A$.

Hint. Let $x\in L$ algebraically independent over $K$. Then write $x=b/b'$ with $b,b'\in B$, $b'\neq 0$. If both $b$ and $b'$ are algebraic over $A$, then they are algebraic over $K$, so $K\subset K(b,b')$ is an algebraic extension of fields. Since $x\in K(b,b')$ we got a contradiction.

(The general case I'll leave it to you.)

share|cite|improve this answer
is this what you have in mind about the reduction step? Suppose $c_1,\cdots,c_t$ are algebraically independent elements of $\kappa(P)$ over $\kappa(p)$. Write $c_i = \bar{b}_i/\bar{s}_i$. Suppose that there are at most $t-1$ elements among the $\left\{\bar{b}_i,\bar{s}_i\right\}$ that are algebraically independent over $A/p$. This implies that there will be at most $t-1$ elements among the $\left\{\bar{b}_i,\bar{s}_i\right\}$ that are algebraically independent over the field of fractions of $A/p$, which is $\kappa(p)$. Call these elements $y_1,\cdots,y_m, m<t$... – Manos Oct 3 '13 at 15:06
...Then $tr.deg_{\kappa(p)} \kappa(p)(y_1,\cdots,y_m) <t$, which is a contradiction, since $\kappa(p)(y_1,\cdots,y_m)$ contains the $c_1,\cdots,c_t$. – Manos Oct 3 '13 at 15:07
@Manos Sure. Denote $A/p$ by $A$ and $B/P$ by $B$. – user26857 Oct 3 '13 at 20:59

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.