ProofComplete

Proof of Zariski's Lemma

Zariski's lemma is a key ingredient in the proof of the Hilbert Nullstellensatz, showing that finitely generated field extensions of algebraically closed fields are trivial.


Statement

Theorem5.7Zariski's lemma

If KK is a field that is a finitely generated algebra over a field kk (i.e., K=k[a1,,an]K = k[a_1, \ldots, a_n] for some aiKa_i \in K), then KK is a finite (algebraic) extension of kk. If kk is algebraically closed, then K=kK = k.


Proof

Proof

We prove that each aia_i is algebraic over kk. Suppose not; after reordering, let a1,,ama_1, \ldots, a_m be algebraically independent over kk and am+1,,ana_{m+1}, \ldots, a_n algebraic over k(a1,,am)k(a_1, \ldots, a_m), with m1m \geq 1.

Then KK is a finite algebraic extension of k(a1,,am)k(a_1, \ldots, a_m), the field of rational functions. So K=k(a1,,am)[am+1,,an]K = k(a_1, \ldots, a_m)[a_{m+1}, \ldots, a_n] and each aja_j (j>mj > m) satisfies a polynomial equation over k(a1,,am)k(a_1, \ldots, a_m).

Since K=k[a1,,an]K = k[a_1, \ldots, a_n], every element of KK is a polynomial in a1,,ana_1, \ldots, a_n over kk. In particular, the coefficients of the minimal polynomials of am+1,,ana_{m+1}, \ldots, a_n over k(a1,,am)k(a_1,\ldots,a_m) are rational functions in a1,,ama_1, \ldots, a_m.

Let dd be the product of all denominators appearing in these minimal polynomial coefficients. Then dk[a1,,am]{0}d \in k[a_1, \ldots, a_m] \setminus \{0\} and K=k[a1,,an,1/d1,]K = k[a_1, \ldots, a_n, 1/d_1, \ldots] for finitely many elements.

Now we reach a contradiction: KK is a finitely generated kk-algebra containing k(a1,,am)k(a_1, \ldots, a_m), but k(a1,,am)k(a_1, \ldots, a_m) is not a finitely generated kk-algebra (since k[a1,,am]k[a_1, \ldots, a_m] has infinitely many non-associate irreducible elements, and we cannot invert them all with finitely many generators).

More precisely: if 1/dk[a1,,an]1/d \in k[a_1, \ldots, a_n] for some nonzero dk[a1,,am]d \in k[a_1, \ldots, a_m], this means dd divides 11 in some polynomial extension, which forces dk×d \in k^\times. But rational function coefficients may have non-constant denominators.

Formal argument (Noether normalization style): Since KK is a finitely generated kk-algebra that is a field, the Noether normalization lemma gives k[y1,,ym]Kk[y_1, \ldots, y_m] \hookrightarrow K with KK integral (finite) over k[y1,,ym]k[y_1, \ldots, y_m] and yiy_i algebraically independent. If m1m \geq 1, then k[y1,,ym]k[y_1, \ldots, y_m] is not a field, but KK is a field, so the map k[y1,,ym]Kk[y_1, \ldots, y_m] \to K is an integral extension of a non-field into a field. By the going-up theorem, this means k[y1,,ym]k[y_1, \ldots, y_m] is also a field -- contradiction. So m=0m = 0, and KK is integral (algebraic) over kk. \blacksquare


Applications

ExampleDeriving the weak Nullstellensatz

If m\mathfrak{m} is a maximal ideal of k[x1,,xn]k[x_1,\ldots,x_n] with kk algebraically closed, then K=k[x1,,xn]/mK = k[x_1,\ldots,x_n]/\mathfrak{m} is a field that is a finitely generated kk-algebra (generated by xˉi\bar{x}_i). By Zariski's lemma, K=kK = k. So each xˉi=aik\bar{x}_i = a_i \in k, giving m=(x1a1,,xnan)\mathfrak{m} = (x_1 - a_1, \ldots, x_n - a_n).

RemarkGeneralizations

Zariski's lemma generalizes to: if ABA \subseteq B are integral domains with BB a finitely generated AA-algebra and BB a field, then AA is also a field and BB is a finite extension of AA. This is a special case of the going-up and going-down theorems in commutative algebra.