5
$\begingroup$

Does there exist a UFD (which is not a field) having only finitely many irreducible elements?

Definition of a UFD is: $R$ is an integral domain ($R$ is a commutative ring having unity and no zero-divisors) such that each $a\in R \setminus (R^* \cup {0})$ factors into a product of irreducible elements.

I've tried to look for one, but without luck so far.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Nice question. None spring to mind immediately. (You forgot the word "uniquely" in your definition btw). $\endgroup$ – Tobias Kildetoft Sep 10 '14 at 17:50
4
$\begingroup$

If you localize $\mathbb Z$ at the multiplicative set $S=\mathbb Z-\bigcup_{i=1}^n p_i\mathbb Z$, where $p_i$ are distinct primes, then you get a UFD having exactly $n$ prime elements.

Edit. (To answer some questions raised in the comments.)

There are no UFDs (excepting fields) having only finitely many distinct primes.

Say $q_1,\dots,q_m$ are all primes. Set $a=q_1\cdots q_m$ and consider $a+1,a^2+1,\dots$. Since all these elements are invertible there exist $i\ne j$ such that $a^i=a^j$, a contradiction.

As a side note, a UFD having finitely many primes is necessarily a PID.

$\endgroup$
16
  • $\begingroup$ I'm not sure this is precisely true. For example, if you localize $\mathbb{Z}$ away from $(3)$, the ring you get contains infinitely many distinct units, and each of them times $3$ is a distinct irreducible element. $\endgroup$ – exitmouse Sep 10 '14 at 18:02
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @exitmouse As far as I know, elements which are associates are considered as not being distinct from arithmetical point of view. $\endgroup$ – user26857 Sep 10 '14 at 18:05
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ On the other hand, if the ring has finitely many units and finitely many irreducible elements and all elements factor, then it is finite and thus a field, so no ring with this stricter version of distinctness exists. $\endgroup$ – Tobias Kildetoft Sep 10 '14 at 18:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ There are two questions here, but now we have the answer to both. $\endgroup$ – exitmouse Sep 10 '14 at 18:09
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ For those not familiar with localization, one can also describe the ring in the answer as consisting of all rationals with numerator not divisible by a fixed finite set of primes. $\endgroup$ – Tobias Kildetoft Sep 10 '14 at 18:10

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.