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

Maybe this exercise comes from some textbook, but I do not know.

It said that this ring extension $k[x(x-1),x^2(x-1),z]\subset k[x,z]$ does not have the Going-Down property.

I observe that $k[x(x-1),x^2(x-1)]=\{f(x)\in k[x]|f(0)=f(1)\}$, and $k[x(x-1),x^2(x-1),z]$ is isomorphic to $k[x,y,z]/(y^2-xy-x^3)$. We have a morphism from $\mathrm{Spec}\ k[x,y,z]/(y^2-xy-x^3)$ to $\mathbb{A}^2$.

But I still have not solved the exercise. And I do not know how one found this counterexample. Why did he consider this?

Thanks.

share|cite|improve this question
    
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/150295/… – user26857 Nov 11 '15 at 14:57
up vote 9 down vote accepted

HINT $\ $ Put $T = k[x],\ x_1 = x(x-1),\ R = k[x_1,xx_1].$ Note that $T[z]$ is the integral closure of $R[z]$ since $T$ is the integral closure of $R.$ To show that GD fails for $R[z]\subset T[z]$ consider the prime ideals $P = x_1\:(z-x)\ \subset R[z]$ and $Q = (x-1,z)\subset T[z].$ Note that $Q$ lies over the prime $Q\cap R[z] = (x_1,xx_1,z)\supseteq P$ but $T[z]$ has no prime in $Q$ lying over $P.$

Note that the GD theorem doesn't apply since $R$ is not integrally closed. Below is further discussion from Matsumura's Commutative Algebra, p. 32. enter image description here enter image description here

share|cite|improve this answer
    
I don't understand how you define $P$. – user26857 Nov 14 '15 at 22:49

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.