$\newcommand{\p}{\mathfrak{p}}$$\newcommand{\m}{\mathfrak{m}}$$\DeclareMathOperator{im}{\mathrm{im}}$I was a bit unhappy with the proof I read which shows if $A$ is Dedekind and $\mathfrak{p}$ is a (non-zero) prime ideal then $A/\mathfrak{p}^n \simeq A_\mathfrak{p}/\mathfrak{p}^nA_\mathfrak{p}$. Can someone check my proof of the claim? I hope I'm not over simplyifying.

Consider first the natural map $\phi: A \to A_\p/\p^nA_\p$, given by $a \mapsto \ell(a) + \p^nA_\p$, where $\ell: A \to A_\p$ denotes the localization map (i.e., the canonical $a \mapsto a/1$). This map is the composition of two surjections, hence $\im(\phi) = A_\p/\p^nA_\p$. If we can show that $\ker \phi = \p^n$, then one of the isomorphism theorems tells us that $A/\p^n \simeq A_\p/\p^nA_\p$.

Now consider $\ker \phi = \{a \in A : \ell(a) \in \p^nA_\p\}$. Note that $\ell(a) \in \p^n A_\p$ if and only if $sa \in \p^n$ for some $s \not \in \p$. Hence the image of $sa$ in $A/\p^n$ is $0$.

Note however that $s \not \in \p/\p^n$, which is the unique maximal ideal in the local ring $A/\p^n$. This is because a maximal ideal in $A/\p^n$ corresponds to $\m \supset \p^n$ where $\m$ is maximal in $A$. But then $\m \supset \p$, since for $p \in \p$, $p^n \in \m$ means $p \in \m$ by induction on $n$. But also $\p$ is maximal so $\p \supset \m$, which means $\p = \m$, and thus in the quotient $\p/\p^n$.

Since $s$ is not in the unique maximal ideal of a local ring it must be a unit, and thus $a = 0$ in $A/\p^n$, which means $a \in \p^n$. Thus, $\ker \phi = \p^n$, as desired.

I was a bit pedantic above, but I hope this is correct.

  • $\begingroup$ Which two surjections is that map the composition of? $\endgroup$ – MCT Feb 26 '18 at 20:45
  • $\begingroup$ @MCT Let $\psi: A_\p \to A_\p/\p^n A_\p$. Isn't $\phi = \psi \circ \ell$, where $\ell$ as given above is the localization map? $\endgroup$ – Drew Brady Feb 26 '18 at 20:47
  • $\begingroup$ Sure, but why is the localization map surjective? $\endgroup$ – MCT Feb 26 '18 at 20:48
  • $\begingroup$ Hm. I think you have found an error in the proof. In general it is probably not surjective, since for $A \to A_\p$ to be surjective means that every $a \in A$ and any $s \not \in \p$, there is some $r \in A$ such that $rs = a$, i.e., that $A \setminus \p$ are all units, which may not hold if $A$ is not local. $\endgroup$ – Drew Brady Feb 26 '18 at 21:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yea I think this looks okay! Using the fact that localization and quotients commute, one can also reduced it to showing that anything in $A/\mathfrak{p}^n$ which is not in $\mathfrak{p}$ (i.e. image is not zero under the reduction modulo $\mathfrak{p}$ map) is invertible. $\endgroup$ – MCT Feb 26 '18 at 22:32

I think your proof works (with the addendum in the comments).

One can also approach it this way: localization commutes with quotients (since localization is exact), and so it suffices to show that $A/\mathfrak{p}^n \cong (A/\mathfrak{p}^n)_{\mathfrak{p}}$. This amounts to showing that everything not in $\mathfrak{p}$ is invertible in $A/\mathfrak{p}^n$. If $s \in A \setminus \mathfrak{p}$, then $(s) + \mathfrak{p}^n = A$: if it were a strictly smaller ideal, it would be contained in a maximal ideal, which must be $\mathfrak{p}$ since $\mathfrak{p}^n + \mathfrak{q}^s = A$ in a Dedekind when $\mathfrak{p}, \mathfrak{q}$ are distinct non-zero primes. Thus the image of the ideal $(s)$ in $A/\mathfrak{p}^n$ is the whole ring, so there exists $x \in A$ such that $sx \equiv 1 \pmod {\mathfrak{p}^n}$, as desired.


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.