This set of questions refers to the proof of the Krull-Akizuki theorem given in Matsumura's Commutative Ring Theory, pages 84-85. For those who don't have the text, i will provide the details.

The Krull-Akizuki theorem reads as follows: Let $A$ be a one-dimensional Noetherian integral domain with field of fractions $K$, let $L$ be a finite algebraic extension of $K$, and $B$ a ring with $A \subset B \subset L$; then $B$ is a Noetherian ring of dimension at most 1, and if $J$ is a non-zero ideal of $B$ then $B/J$ is an $A$-module of finite length.

The proof starts by proving the following Lemma: Let $A$ and $K$ be as in the theorem, and let $M$ be a torsion-free $A$-module of finite rank $r$. Then for nonzero $a \in A$ we have $l(M/aM) \le r \cdot l(A/aA)$, where $l(\cdot)$ is the length function.

Proof of Lemma: First assume that $M$ is finitely generated. Choose elements $\xi_1,\cdots,\xi_r \in M$ linearly independent over $A$ and set $E=\sum A\xi_i$; then for any $\eta \in M$ there exists $t \in A$ with $t\neq0$ such that $t \eta \in E$...

...If we set $C=M/E$ then from the assumption on $M$ we see that $C$ is also finitely generated, so that $t C=0$ for suitable nonzero $t \in A$...we can find $C=C_0 \supset C_1 \supset \cdots \supset C_m=0$, such that $C_i/C_{i+1} \cong A/p_i$ with $p_i \in SpecA$. Now $t \in p_i$, and since $A$ is one-dimensional each $p_i$ is maximal, so that $l(C)=m < \infty$...

Question 1: What exactly is the role of $t$ in showing that $l(C) < \infty$? It seems to me that since $A$ Noetherian and $C$ is finitely generated by construction, we obtain directly the chain $C=C_0 \supset \cdots \supset C_m=0$, with $C_i/C_{i+1} \cong A/pi, pi \in SpecA$ (this is essentially theorem 6.4). From this chain and the fact that each $A/p_i$ is a field, we get that the length of $C$ is finite. What am i missing?

Question 2:Further down in the proof of the theorem, the proof shows the existence of an element $a_0 \in J \cap A$. How do we deduce from this that $l(B/J) \le l(B/a_0B)$? If $B,J$ are finite, then i can see that $l(B/J)=l(B)-l(J) \le l(B) - l(a_0B)=l(B/a_0B)$. But we don't know a priori this finiteness condition.


Q1. Think about extreme case $C=\mathbb{Z}^2$, $A=\mathbb{Z}$. In this case, you won't have such finite sequence of modules. The existence of such $t$ means $C$ is a torsion module, and being a torsion module ensures the existence of such finite sequence.

Q2. Finiteness of $B$, $J$ cannot be assumed. I think this is just because $a_0 B \subset J$.

  • $\begingroup$ I don't have Matsumura's book, so I don't know about Theorem 6.4, but this torsion thing seems to be the only difference between my example and the module $C$ in the proof. $\endgroup$ – Sungjin Kim May 23 '13 at 23:08
  • $\begingroup$ it took me a while, but i now see that your argument in $Q1$ is not correct. In fact, for your "counterexample" $C=\mathbb{Z}^2,A=\mathbb{Z}$ we have the sequence $\mathbb{Z}^2 \supset (1,0)\mathbb{Z} \supset 0$. Now each quotient in the above sequence is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z} \cong \mathbb{Z} / 0$ and $0 \in Spec(\mathbb{Z})$. Could you please reconsider your answer? $\endgroup$ – Manos Jun 7 '13 at 18:09
  • $\begingroup$ Another requirement of the sequence $C_i$, is that the quotient should be $A/p_i$ and each $p_i$ is maximal($0$ is not a maximal ideal in $\mathbb{Z}$). For my example such sequence is not obtained. $\endgroup$ – Sungjin Kim Jun 7 '13 at 21:16

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.