How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
A Zariski-closed subset is irreducible exactly when its radical defining ideal is prime, and then it has a unique generic point
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice.
Let be a commutative ring and let be a nonempty Zariski-closed subset. Write for its unique radical defining ideal. Then the following are equivalent:
- is irreducible. 2. is a prime ideal.
When these conditions hold, has the unique generic point .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A commutative ring , a nonempty Zariski-closed subset , and the Axiom of Choice.
Every Zariski-closed subset has a unique radical defining ideal; in particular for the radical ideal (Every Zariski-closed subset has a unique radical defining ideal).
Vanishing sets satisfy and (Vanishing-set identities).
The closure of is (The closure of a prime is its vanishing set).
Distinct primes have distinct closures in a spectrum (Distinct primes have distinct closures, so the spectrum is T0).
Proof
Suppose first that is irreducible. By [L1], write with radical. Let . Then by [L2]. Since is irreducible, is contained in or in . By [L1], this means or . Therefore is prime.
Suppose conversely that is prime. If with closed subsets of , then each is closed in the ambient spectrum, so [L1] gives radical ideals with . Using and [L2], one has . Since [L1] identifies as the radical defining ideal of , one has . Primality of then gives or , so or . Hence or , and is irreducible.
Under either condition, steps 1.1 and 1.2 show that is prime and . By [L3], the closure of is , so is a generic point of in the sense of Specialisations, generalisations, and generic points.
If is another generic point of , then [L3] gives . Fact [L4] now forces . Thus the generic point is unique.
Therefore a nonempty Zariski-closed subset is irreducible exactly when its radical defining ideal is prime, and in that case it has the unique generic point .
Depends on
- Irreducible topological spaces and irreducible subsets in the subspace topology
- Specialisations, generalisations, and generic points
- Prime ideals and maximal ideals in a commutative ring
- Every Zariski-closed subset has a unique radical defining ideal
- The closure of a prime is its vanishing set
- Distinct primes have distinct closures, so the spectrum is T0
- Vanishing-set identities
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
19 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- J. S. Milne, A Primer of Commutative Algebra, v4.03, Definition 14.5 and Proposition 14.6 (standard reference, not scraped)
- A. Altman and S. Kleiman, A Term of Commutative Algebra, 13th ed., Exercise (13.18) (standard reference, not scraped)
- The Stacks Project, Section 10.26: Irreducible components of spectra (standard reference, not scraped)