Let f∈B be a series whose reduced series is non-zero. Let s denote its reduced order and M the sub-A-module of B with basis {1,X,…,Xs−1}. Then B is the direct sum of M and f is not a divisor of zero in B.
(a) We show that f∣B∩M=(0). Suppose that there is a relation:
(i=0∑∞biXi)f=r0+r1X+⋯+rs−1Xs−1(bi∈A,rj∈A). We show that the
bi (and hence the
rj) are all zero, which will prove in particular that
f is not a divisor of zero in
B. Since
A is Hausdorff, it suffices to show that
bi∈mn for all
i≥0 and all
n≥0. It is obvious for
n=0. We shall argue by double induction: we shall assume that
bi∈mn−1 for all
i and
bi∈mn for
i<k and show that this implies that
bk∈mn. For this, we write
f=∑i=1∞aiXi and compare the coefficients of
Xs+k in (3); then:
(b0as+k+⋯+bk−1as+1)+bkas+(bk+1as−1+⋯+bk+sa0)=0. The terms in the first bracket belong to
mn since the
bi∈mn for
i<k; similarly for those in the second, since the
bi∈mn−1 for all
i and the
ai∈m for
i≤s−1. Hence
bkas∈mn and, as
as is an invertible element of
A,
bk∈mn.
(b) We show that f∣B+M=B. We write
g=as+as+1X+as+2X2+⋯; it is an invertible element of
B. Then
f−Xsg=a0+a1X+⋯+as−1Xs−1; if therefore we write
fg−1−Xs=(f−Xsg)g−1=−h, the coefficients of
h belong to
m. Then let
r be an element of
B. By induction on
n we define a sequence
(q(n)) of elements of B: we take
q(0) to be the unique series satisfying:
r≡Xsq(0)(modM); writing
h=∑i=0mhiXi and
q(n)=∑i=0∞qi(n)Xi, the
qi(n) are defined by:
qi(n)=j=0∑i+shjqi+s−j(n−1) It follows immediately from (6) that:
Xsq(n)≡hq(n−1)(modM). As
hj∈m for all
j, it also follows from (6), by induction on
n, that
qi(n)∈mn for all
i and all
n. As A is complete, it follows that the series
q(0)+q(1)+…+q(n)+… converges to an element
q of B. By (5) and (7),
Xs(q(0)+q(1)+…+q(n))≡r+h(q(0)+…+q(n−1))(modM). As M is closed, at the limit (8) gives
r≡(Xs−h)q(modM), that is
r∈fg−1q+M⊂fB+M. We may also use the results of Chapter III, § 2 to show the relation
B=fB+M (cf. Exercise 12). The method followed here has the advantage of being applicable to convergent series.
Bourbaki puts the proof directly after the statement, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.