Bourbaki

Proposition 1

Tag 0CWB, permanent. Cite it as [Bourbaki, Tag 0CWB].

Commutative Algebra, chapter IX, § 2. Anneaux de Cohen

Let CC be a pp-ring.

a) The ring CC is local, with maximal ideal pCpC.

b) Suppose p1Cp1_C nilpotent. Let dd be the smallest positive integer such that pd1C=0p^d1_C = 0. The ideals of CC are of the form pkCp^kC with 0≤k≤d0 \leq k \leq d, and one has pkC≠plCp^kC \neq p^lC when kk and ll are two distinct integers satisfying 0≤k≤d,0≤l≤d0 \leq k \leq d, 0 \leq l \leq d. The CC-module CC is of length dd.

c) Suppose that p1Cp1_C is not nilpotent. Then CC is a discrete valuation ring whose residue field is of characteristic pp, and whose field of fractions is of characteristic 00. The ideals of the form pnCp^nC, with n∈Nn \in \mathbf{N}, are pairwise distinct; they form all the non-zero ideals of CC. The CC-module CC is not of finite length.

Assertion a) follows from prop. 19 of III, §2§ 2, no. 13.

By hypothesis, one has ⋂n⩾0pnC={0}\bigcap_{n \geqslant 0} p^n C = \{0\}. Let x≠0x \neq 0 in CC; there exists an integer n⩾0n \geqslant 0 such that x∈pnCx \in p^n C, x∉pn+1Cx \notin p^{n+1} C; therefore there exists an element yy of CC such that x=pnyx = p^n y; since yy does not belong to pCpC, yy is invertible.

Suppose that p1Cp 1_C is not nilpotent. If xx and x′x' are two non-zero elements of CC, there exist two integers n⩾0n \geqslant 0, n′⩾0n' \geqslant 0 and two invertible elements yy, y′y' of CC such that x=pnyx = p^n y, x′=pn′y′x' = p^{n'} y'. We then have xx′=pn+n′yy′≠0xx' = p^{n+n'} yy' \neq 0, hence CC is an integral domain. Since CC is a local ring, but is not a field, and since the maximal ideal mC=pCm_C = pC of CC is principal, CC is a discrete valuation ring (VI, §3§ 3, no 6, prop. 9). The non-zero ideals of CC are then of the form pnCp^n C by loc. cit., prop. 8, and are pairwise distinct. In particular, the ring CC is not artinian, hence the CC-module CC is not of finite length. The residue field C/pCC/pC of CC is of characteristic pp. Let qq be the characteristic of the field of fractions of CC. We have p1C≠0p 1_C \neq 0, whence p≠qp \neq q. Moreover, if qq were non-zero, we should have q1C=0q 1_C = 0 hence C/pCC/pC would be of characteristic q≠pq \neq p, which is absurd. This proves c).

Suppose that p1Cp 1_C is nilpotent. Let dd be the smallest positive integer such that pd1C=0p^d 1_C = 0. We have a sequence of ideals

(E)

C⊃pC⊃p2C⊃...⊃pd−1C⊃pdC={0}. C \supset pC \supset p^2 C \supset ... \supset p^{d-1} C \supset p^d C = \{0\} .

If kk is an integer such that 0⩽k<d0 \leqslant k < d and pkC=pk+1Cp^k C = p^{k+1} C, we deduce

pd−k−1pkC=pd−k−1pk+1C={0} p^{d-k-1} p^k C = p^{d-k-1} p^{k+1} C = \{0\}

contrary to the hypothesis pd−11C≠0p^{d-1} 1_C \neq 0. Therefore the elements of the sequence (E) are pairwise distinct. Let aa be an ideal of CC and let kk be the smallest positive integer such that a⊃pkCa \supset p^k C. Let xx be a nonzero element of aa; we have seen that xx is of the form pmup^m u with m⩾0m \geqslant 0 and uu invertible in CC. Hence pmC⊂ap^m C \subset a, whence m⩾km \geqslant k, and finally x∈pkCx \in p^k C. In conclusion, one has a=pkCa = p^k C. The sequence (E) is then a Jordan-Hölder sequence of the CC-module CC, which is of length dd.

Bourbaki puts the proof directly after the statement, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.

Cited by

Nothing.

Cites

Nothing.

Translated with machine help, not yet reviewed by a person.