While trying to look up examples of PIDs that are not Euclidean domains, I found a statement (without reference) on the Euclidean domain page of Wikipedia that


is such a ring. After a good deal of searching, I have not been able to find any other (online) reference to this ring.

Can anyone confirm this result? Is there a reference for it (paper, textbook or website)?


In P. Samuel, Anneaux factoriels, pages 36-37, it's proved that $A=\mathbb R[X,Y]/(X^2+Y^2+1)$ is a UFD.

In the following we denote by $x,y$ the residue classes of $X,Y$ modulo $(X^2+Y^2+1)$. Thus $A=\mathbb R[x,y]$ with $x^2+y^2+1=0$.

Lemma. The prime ideals of $A$ are of the form $(ax+by+c)$ with $(a,b)\neq (0,0)$.

Proof. It's not difficult to see that these elements are prime: if $p=ax+by+c$ with $(a,b)\neq (0,0)$, then $A/pA\simeq\mathbb C$.
On the other hand, let $\mathfrak p$ be a non-zero prime ideal of $A$. Since $\dim A=1$ necessarily $\mathfrak p$ is maximal, so $A/\mathfrak p$ is a field. It's enough to show that $\mathfrak p$ contains an element of the form $ax+by+c$ with $(a,b)\neq (0,0)$. Note that $A/\mathfrak p=\mathbb R[\hat x,\hat y]$ and $\hat x,\hat y$ are algebraic over $\mathbb R$. Thus we have an algebraic field extension $\mathbb R\subset A/\mathfrak p$, and therefore $[A/\mathfrak p:\mathbb R]\le2$. In particular, the elements $\hat 1,\hat x,\hat y$ of $A/\mathfrak p$ are linearly dependent over $\mathbb R$.

Let $S\subset A$ be the multiplicative set generated by all prime elements $ax+by+c$ with $(a,b)\neq (0,0)$. The ring of fractions $S^{-1}A$ has no non-zero prime ideals, and therefore $S^{-1}A$ is a field, hence a UFD. Now we can apply Nagata's criterion for factoriality to conclude that $A$ is a UFD.

It's easily seen that $A$ also a PID (use this result.)

Let's prove that $A$ is not Euclidean.

Lemma. Let $A$ be a Euclidean domain. Then there is $p\in A-\{0\}$ prime such that $\pi(A^{\times})=(A/pA)^{\times}$, where $\pi:A\to A/pA$ is the canonical surjection.

Proof. If one considers $p$ a non-zero, non-invertible element with $\delta(p)$ minimal (here $\delta$ is an Euclidean algorithm), then $p$ is prime and for $\hat a\in A/pA$ invertible there is $u\in A$ invertible such that $u-a\in pA$ (write $a=px+u$ with $\delta(u)<\delta(p)$ and notice that $u$ is not $0$ - here one uses that $\hat a$ is invertible -, and necessarily invertible), that is, $\pi(A^{\times})=(A/pA)^{\times}$.

In our case $A^{\times}=\mathbb R^{\times}$. Since $A/pA\simeq\mathbb C$ for any prime $p\in A$, we have $(A/pA)^{\times}\simeq\mathbb C^{\times}$. If we assume that $A$ is Euclidean, then we get a surjective group homomorphism $\mathbb R^{\times}\to\mathbb C^{\times}$ which is also injective (see @zcn's comment below), a contradiction.

  • $\begingroup$ Perhaps the best way to say it is that $\pi : A \to A/pA$ is such that $\pi \big|_{A^\times}$ is the identity map. In fact injective would be enough, since $\mathbb{R}^\times \not \cong \mathbb{C}^\times$ $\endgroup$ – zcn Jul 12 '14 at 18:53
  • $\begingroup$ @zcn Maybe it's worth to mention that your comment applies to the particular case we are interested in, that is, $A=\mathbb{R}[x,y]/(x^2+y^2+1)$. $\endgroup$ – user26857 Jul 12 '14 at 20:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You showed that all prime ideals of $A$ are principal. Why do you need Nagata's criterion for showing factoriality? Isn't this immediately clear? $\endgroup$ – Dune Jul 16 '14 at 15:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Dune Immediately clear, no. A different way of reasoning, yes. (For those interested in this kind of argument I recommend this topic.) $\endgroup$ – user26857 Jul 16 '14 at 16:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Arrow $A$ is noetherian. $\endgroup$ – user26857 Jul 16 '16 at 18:28

Here are some more details for those who, like me, are not so familiar with this material.

$1$) Take a non-zero prime ideal. We wish to show that it is maximal. It contains a prime element (since we are in a UFD, choose an element with a shortest factorisation). Take this to be $ax+by+c$. We will show that the ideal is maximal by showing that the quotient ring by this ideal is a field.

Using the relation $ax+by+c=0$ we can express any element as a polynomial in $x$ with coefficients in $\mathbb{R}$. With the quadratic relation we can make this a linear expression. In searching for an inverse we get two equations in two unknowns, and the determinant of the corresponding matrix is non-zero.

$2$) Non-zero, non-invertible elements exist because otherwise we would be in a field and wouldn't be trying to prove the lemma in the first place.

$3$) Suppose $p$ is not prime. Then there exist $a$ and $b$ such that $p\mid ab$ but $p\nmid a$ and $p\nmid b$. Write $a=q_a p+r_a$ with $\delta(r_a)<\delta(p)$. Then $r_a$ is invertible, with inverse $s_a$. Similarly, we have $q_b$, $r_b$, $s_b$.

Then $ab=q_a (q_b p+r_b)p +q_b r_a p +r_b r_a$, so $p\mid r_a r_b$. Then $p\mid r_a s_a r_b s_b =1$, a contradiction.

$4$) $A^{\times}=\mathbb{R}^{\times}$ follows because every element of $A$ can be uniquely represented as $p(y)+x q(y)$ for polynomials $p$ and $q$.

$5$) From $1$) we know that each element of $A/pA$ can be expressed as a linear expression in $x$, and we have one relation $x^2(a^2+b^2)+2acx+c^2+1=0$. The roots of this are non-real, so by sending $x$ to one of them we can define an isomorphism to $\mathbb{C}$.

$6$) The projection homomorphism is injective because having an invertible element in $pA$ would show that $p$ is also invertible.

$7$) $\mathbb{R}^{\times}$ and $\mathbb{C}^{\times}$ are not isomorphic because $\mathbb{C}^{\times}$ has order $4$ elements whereas $\mathbb{R}^{\times}$ does not (see linked question).


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.