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.

I am looking for a proof of the result that appears at the end of page 418 here indicating the possibilities for equal characteristic and mixed characteristic.

I could prove the following: Let $(R,m,K=R/m)$ be a local ring.

1) If char $K=0$, then, char $R=0$. So $R$ contains a copy of $\mathbb{Z}$. Now, since $R/m$ has char $0$, none of the images of non-zero integers in $R$ can be in $m$, else their images in $R/m$ will be zero contradicting char $K=0$. Then by the universal property of localization, $R$ contains $\mathbb{Q}$.

2) If char $K=p$, then either char $R$ is $0$ or non-zero (I don't understand why it should be a prime power if it's non-zero. If char $R=p>0$ where $p$ is a prime, then, $R$ contains a copy of $\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z}$.

So I guess the proof now reduces to proving the question I raise in the paranthesis and why $R$ cannot contain a field in mixed characteristic. Any help will be appreciated.

share|improve this question
2  
It would help if you quoted the question from the book instead of linking to the book. –  Qiaochu Yuan Jun 30 '11 at 4:35

1 Answer 1

The reason the characteristic of the local ring $R$ will be a prime power if it is not equal to $0$ is that the maximal ideal must contain all zero divisors (consider the image of a zero divisor in $R/\mathfrak{m}$ since the maximal ideal in a local ring contains all nonunits). If the characteristic is $d=ab$, with $\gcd(a,b)=1$, then both $a$ and $b$ must lie in $\mathfrak{m}$, hence $1\in\mathfrak{m}$, which is impossible. Thus, the characteristic must be either $0$ or a prime power.

If $\mathrm{char}(R) = 0$ and $\mathrm{char}(K)=p\gt 0$, then $R$ cannot contain a field: if it contained one, the field would contain $1$, hence $\mathbb{Z}$, hence $\mathbb{Q}$, but then $p$ would be a unit lying in $\mathfrak{m}$, which is impossible.

If $\mathrm{char}(R) = p^m$, $m\gt 0$, and $\mathrm{char}(K)=p$, then $R$ cannot contain a field: the field would necessarily contain $1$ and be of characteristic $p$ (since the characteristic of a subring must divide the characteristic of the ring), but then the subring generated by $1$ would be $\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z}$; however, the condition that $\mathrm{char}(R)=p^m$ means that the additive order of $1$ in $R$ is $p^m$, which shows $R$ cannot contain a field.

Added. As pointed out in comments, in fact the field wold contain $1$, and hence be of the same characteristic as $R$ (since the characteristic equals the additive order of $1$).

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you, Arturo. I understand all of your answer except the paranthetical comment in the last paragraph - since the characteristic of a subring must divide the characteristic of the ring. Shouldn't the characteristic of any subring of a ring be the same as that of the ring. This would still give us the contradiction we are seeking, since if $R$ contained a field, it will have a characteristic which is $p^m$ with $m>1$ but fields can only have a characteristic which is $0$ or a prime. –  Brittany Murphy Jun 30 '11 at 11:59
    
@Brittany: There is actually a specious argument before (the reason $\mathfrak{m}$ contains all zero divisors is that it contains all non-units). As to your comment: if your subrings must include $1$, then you are correct, as the characteristic of the ring is the additive order of $1$. But if subrings need not contain $1$, the characteristic is the smallest $n$ such that $na=0$ for all $a\in R$, so if you quantify over a subring, the set of possible $n$ is potentially larger, so the characteristic could be smaller (but must divide it anyway); think $Z_3$ in $Z_3\times Z_2\cong Z_6$. –  Arturo Magidin Jun 30 '11 at 14:37

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.