I've been doing some old exam problems and I've come across a problem that I've answered, but my gut is telling me that there's something I'm glossing over.

Let $R$ be a commutative ring with identity and let $U$ be an ideal that is maximal among non-finitely generated ideals of $R$. I wish to show that $U$ is a prime ideal.

Assume that $U$ is not prime. Let $x, y\not\in U$ be such that $xy\in U$. $U$ is contained in a maximal ideal $M$ and $xy\in M$, so either $x$ or $y$ is in $M$; assume $x\in M$. The condition $U\subset M$ then implies that there is a ring homomorphism $$\varphi: R/M\to R/U$$

Since $R/M$ is a field, $\varphi$ is injective. Hence, $\varphi(x)\in U$. This is a contradiction, so $U$ must be prime.

The thing that worries me is that I never explicitly used the hypothesis that $U$ was not finitely generated or the result that $M$ must be finitely generated.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Do you want the map to go the other way? You can't "un-mod out" :) $\endgroup$ – Dylan Moreland May 19 '12 at 1:06
  • $\begingroup$ Ah, you're right; the map's not well-defined this way. I'll have to try to see what falls out of the reverse map being a surjection now, if that's the right way to go about this problem. $\endgroup$ – Connor May 19 '12 at 1:09
  • $\begingroup$ You also meant, I suppose, "R/M is a field", not U $\endgroup$ – DonAntonio May 19 '12 at 1:21
  • $\begingroup$ Correct as well. I've changed it, though it's not of much importance now. $\endgroup$ – Connor May 19 '12 at 1:22
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ @acoustician By the way a corollary of this result is a result due to I.S. Cohen that if every prime ideal in a ring $A$ is finitely generated then $A$ is Noetherian. $\endgroup$ – user38268 May 19 '12 at 4:47

I propose the following: suppose $\,U\,$ is not prime, thus there exist $$\,x,y\in R \text{ such that }x,y\notin U\,,\,xy\in U\,.$$ Define now $B:=U+\langle y\rangle$.

By maximality of $\,U\,$ we have that $\,B\,$ is f.g., say $$\,B=\Bigl\langle u_i+r_iy\,,\,1\leq i\leq k\,,\,k\in\mathbb{N}\,\,;\,\,u_i\in U\,,\,r_i\in R\Bigr\rangle$$ and let now $$U_y:=\{s\in R\,\,;\,\,sy\in U\}.$$ (1) Check that $\,U_y\,$ is a proper ideal in $\,R\,$.

(2) Show that $\,U_y\,$ is f.g.

Put $\,U_y=\langle s_1,\ldots,s_m\rangle\,$, and take $\,u\in U\Longrightarrow\,\exists v_1,\ldots,v_k, t_1,\ldots,t_k\in R\,\,s.t.$$$u=\sum_{n=1}^kv_nu_n+\sum_{n=1}^kt_nr_ny.$$ (3) Show that $\displaystyle{\sum_{n=1}^kt_nr_n}\in U_y.$

(4) Putting $\,\Omega:=\{u_i,\ldots,u_k,ys_1,\ldots,ys_m\}\,$, derive the contradiction $\,U=\langle\Omega\rangle$.

  • $\begingroup$ Would you please clear it to me @DonAntonio as to why $U_y$ is finitely generated? $\endgroup$ – Dbchatto67 Mar 1 at 15:41
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah I have understood the fact because $U_y \supseteq U+Rx \supsetneq U$ and $U$ is a maximal element of the collection of all ideals of $R$ which are not finitely generated. $\endgroup$ – Dbchatto67 Mar 1 at 16:36

I don't know how excited you might be about deeper results along these lines, and the question is completely answered already, but I can't resist mentioning some deeper results.

It turns out there are a lot of results of "maximal-implies-prime" flavor (like "ideal maximal among non-principal ideals", "ideal maximal among non-countably generated", "maximal among point annihilators of a module", "ideal maximal among ideals disjoint from a multiplicative set").

For a long time, these were proven on an ad hoc basis, but Lam and Reyes managed to get them all (and apparently new ones!) in one fell swoop. In another paper their approach is used to generalize some classical results of Kaplansky and Cohen about properties of prime ideals propagating to all ideals.

They are really fantastic papers, that I think anyone would enjoy. Here are several related papers by Reyes at arXiv:

A prime ideal principle for two-sided ideals

Noncommutative generalizations of theorems of Cohen and Kaplansky

A one-sided Prime Ideal Principle for noncommutative rings


  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the extra results! I'm actually a student at UCSD, so this is a pretty cool to discover. $\endgroup$ – Connor May 19 '12 at 2:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @acoustician See also my answer here. $\endgroup$ – Bill Dubuque May 19 '12 at 2:54
  • $\begingroup$ +1: I was about to start looking for links to the Lam-Reyes paper. $\endgroup$ – Arturo Magidin May 19 '12 at 3:46
  • $\begingroup$ The links seem to be broken. $\endgroup$ – Emolga Jan 13 '16 at 22:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Leullame Thanks: I was able to restore some with arXiv, but I could only find three of four. Perhaps I had two versions of the same thing previously... $\endgroup$ – rschwieb Jan 14 '16 at 14:13

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.