Let $R$ be a non-Noetherian local commutative ring with identity such that it is of Krull-dimension zero. I am wondering if there are conditions which will force the maximal ideal to be nilpotent.

  • $\begingroup$ What do you mean by "the only prime ideal"? There is no reason why there is only one prime ideal. $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Feb 13 '13 at 20:03
  • $\begingroup$ Martin is absolutely right: if $R$ has only one prime ideal, it is of dimension zero! (And then that prime ideal indeed consists of nilpotent elements but needn't be nilpotent) $\endgroup$ – Georges Elencwajg Feb 13 '13 at 20:23
  • $\begingroup$ Since your ring is local, did you perhaps mean to type "the only $maximal$ ideal"? I think this would make your question interesting. $\endgroup$ – user55407 Feb 13 '13 at 21:30
  • $\begingroup$ I must apologize. I was a bit confused by the definition of the dimension in a ring. Yes, it should be 0-dimensional ring. So we have a 0-dimensional local ring. Then the maximum ideal's elements are nilpotent. I was wondering if there are conditions that forces the ideal itself to be nilpotent. Thank you all for correcting me. $\endgroup$ – user62198 Feb 14 '13 at 1:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Here is a class of examples: Let $R$ be a (non-noetheran) ring, $\mathfrak{m}$ be a maximal ideal and consider $R/\mathfrak{m}^n$ $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Feb 14 '13 at 1:54

This is a broad question...

A necessary condition for the maximal ideal $\mathfrak m$ to be nilpotent is $R$ is separated for the $\mathfrak m$-adic topology: $$ \cap_{n\ge 1} \mathfrak m^n=0.$$ Now suppose moreover that $\mathfrak m/\mathfrak m^2$ is finite dimensional over $R/\mathfrak m$, then $\mathfrak m$ is nilpotent.

Proof: let $I\subseteq \mathfrak m$ be a finitely generated ideal which generates $\mathfrak m$ modulo $\mathfrak m^2$. Let $N>0$ be such that $I^N=0$ ($N$ exists because $I$ is finitely generated). For any $n>0$, we have $\mathfrak m=I+ \mathfrak m^n$ and $$\mathfrak m^{N}\subseteq I^N+\mathfrak m^n=\mathfrak m^n.$$ Therefore $\mathfrak m^{N}\subseteq \cap_n \mathfrak m^n=0$.

Of course in general, $ \mathfrak m/\mathfrak m^2$ is not finite dimensional. I don't know whether the above condition is reasonable for you.

  • $\begingroup$ Can you give a nontrivial example where $\mathfrak{m}/\mathfrak{m}^2$ is finite, but $\mathfrak{m}$ is not? $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Feb 14 '13 at 16:23
  • $\begingroup$ @MartinBrandenburg: I don't know what do you call nontrivial. In general we can have $\mathfrak m/\mathfrak m^2=0$ and $\mathfrak m$ not of finite type (e.g. continuous functions in a neighborhood of $0\in\mathbb R$), but I don't have such an example in dimension $0$. $\endgroup$ – user18119 Feb 14 '13 at 16:44
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you very much QiL'8. $\endgroup$ – user62198 Feb 15 '13 at 16:55
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @Martin: Dear Martin, Here is one example where $R$ is of dimension zero, $\mathfrak m = \mathfrak m^2$, but $\mathfrak m$ is not finitely generated: $R = k[X,X^{1/2},X^{1/3},...]/(X)$. Once you see this example, you can make many others. Regards, $\endgroup$ – Matt E Feb 15 '13 at 17:33
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. By nontrivial I meant that $\mathfrak{m}/\mathfrak{m}^2$ has a given dimension $n>0$. $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Feb 15 '13 at 18:03

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.