There are quite a few more tools to tell whether a ring is Noetherian. In this post, I’ll discuss another basic tool: integrality. I’ll discuss the application to invariant theory for finite groups.
Subrings
In general, it is not true that a subring of a Noetherian ring is Noetherian. For instance, let be the polynomial ring in infinitely many variables over a field
. Then
is not Noetherian because of the ascending chain
However, the quotient field of is Noetherian. This applies to any non-Noetherian integral domain.
There are special cases where we can conclude a subring of a Noetherian ring is Noetherian.
For instance, if integrality holds:
Theorem 1 Let
be a Noetherian ring and
a finitely generated
-algebra. Let
be a subalgebra such that
is integral over
. Then
is finitely generated, hence Noetherian.
We know that is finitely generated, say
. Then, as is well-known, to say that
is integral over
is to say that each
satisfies an integral equation
with
monic. But there are finitely many
and each has finitely many coefficients, all in
. We can take the subring
generated by all these coefficients. Then
is finitely generated over
, hence Noetherian. Also
is integral over
.
The following is also well-known:
Proposition 2 If
is an extension of rings with
integral over
and finitely generated as an
-algebra, then
is finitely generated as an
-module.
The proof is basically induction—if for
integral over
, then looking at polynomial equations one can see that
is a f.g. module. Then one inducts on the number of generators.
Back to the theorem. As above, is a f.g.
-module. But
is Noetherian, so the submodule
is a f.g.
-module too. Taking the generators of
and the
module-generators of
, we find
finitely generated.
This result provides a quick application to “invariant theory.” The idea here is that if we have a group (assumed finite in this post) acting on an algebra
by algebra automorphisms, then the subset
of fixed points is actually an algebra, so it’s of interest to check whether, say,
finitely generated implies
finitely generated.
As an example, if we fix a field , we can make the symmetric group
act on
by permuting variables; explicitly
The invariants in this case are just symmetric polynomials. There is a theorem that these are generated in the elementary symmetric functions which are the coefficients of
in
So in this case, the ring of invariants is finitely generated.
In general:
Corollary 3 If
is a Noetherian ring and
a finitely generated
-algebra acted on by
(by
-algebra automorphisms), then
is a finitely generated
-algebra too.
This follows because is integral over
; indeed,
satisfies the polynomial equation
this polynomial is -invariant, and consequently so are the coefficients of
. Now apply the previous theorem.
In general, I’m doing these commutative algebra posts from memory, but I’ll pause here to cite Bourbaki, whose elegant treatment of such matters still lingers in my mind.
So, next time: We’ll show that if each prime ideal of a ring is finitely generated., the ring is Noetherian; as David Eisenbud points out in his (excellent) book Commutative Algebra: With a View Towards Algebraic Geometry, ideals maximal to some property (e.g. not being finitely generated) tend to be prime. EGA 0 has some elaboration on these kinds of properties, which I would like to discuss.
August 11, 2009 at 11:42 pm
My class got a big kick out of these theorems. My professor wrote a handout that was a big “meta-theorem” about maximal with respect to some property being prime. It was nearly impossible to follow since there were * and ** and *** that you had to keep looking up what was each property. I particularly like the maximal with respect to not being principal is prime.
August 12, 2009 at 10:37 am
Hm, do you have a reference for this big “meta-theorem”? I learned about several special cases (like the one you mentioned about not being principal), but never a generalization of all this, which sounds interesting.