Proposition 1
Tag 0CWB, permanent. Cite it as [Bourbaki, Tag 0CWB].
Commutative Algebra, chapter IX, § 2. Anneaux de Cohen
Let be a -ring.
a) The ring is local, with maximal ideal .
b) Suppose nilpotent. Let be the smallest positive integer such that . The ideals of are of the form with , and one has when and are two distinct integers satisfying . The -module is of length .
c) Suppose that is not nilpotent. Then is a discrete valuation ring whose residue field is of characteristic , and whose field of fractions is of characteristic . The ideals of the form , with , are pairwise distinct; they form all the non-zero ideals of . The -module is not of finite length.
Assertion a) follows from prop. 19 of III, , no. 13.
By hypothesis, one has . Let in ; there exists an integer such that , ; therefore there exists an element of such that ; since does not belong to , is invertible.
Suppose that is not nilpotent. If and are two non-zero elements of , there exist two integers , and two invertible elements , of such that , . We then have , hence is an integral domain. Since is a local ring, but is not a field, and since the maximal ideal of is principal, is a discrete valuation ring (VI, , no 6, prop. 9). The non-zero ideals of are then of the form by loc. cit., prop. 8, and are pairwise distinct. In particular, the ring is not artinian, hence the -module is not of finite length. The residue field of is of characteristic . Let be the characteristic of the field of fractions of . We have , whence . Moreover, if were non-zero, we should have hence would be of characteristic , which is absurd. This proves c).
Suppose that is nilpotent. Let be the smallest positive integer such that . We have a sequence of ideals
(E)
If is an integer such that and , we deduce
contrary to the hypothesis . Therefore the elements of the sequence (E) are pairwise distinct. Let be an ideal of and let be the smallest positive integer such that . Let be a nonzero element of ; we have seen that is of the form with and invertible in . Hence , whence , and finally . In conclusion, one has . The sequence (E) is then a Jordan-Hölder sequence of the -module , which is of length .
Bourbaki puts the proof directly after the statement, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.
Cited by
Nothing.
Cites
Nothing.