ProofComplete

Proof of Hilbert's Nullstellensatz

We prove the strong Nullstellensatz: for k=kˉk = \bar{k} and any ideal a⊆k[x1,…,xn]\mathfrak{a} \subseteq k[x_1,\ldots,x_n],

I(V(a))=a.I(V(\mathfrak{a})) = \sqrt{\mathfrak{a}}.

The proof proceeds in three steps: (1) the weak Nullstellensatz via Zariski's lemma, (2) the ideal form as an immediate corollary, and (3) the strong form via the Rabinowitsch trick.


Step 1: Zariski's Lemma

TheoremP.1Zariski's Lemma

Let kk be a field and KK a finitely generated kk-algebra that is also a field. Then KK is a finite algebraic extension of kk.

Proof

Suppose K=k[α1,…,αm]K = k[\alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_m] as a kk-algebra. We want to show all αi\alpha_i are algebraic over kk.

Suppose not. After reordering, let α1,…,αr\alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_r be a transcendence basis of K/kK/k (so r≥1r \geq 1), and αr+1,…,αm\alpha_{r+1}, \ldots, \alpha_m are algebraic over k(α1,…,αr)k(\alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_r).

Then KK is a finite extension of k(α1,…,αr)=k(x1,…,xr)k(\alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_r) = k(x_1, \ldots, x_r) (the rational function field). So KK is a finitely generated k[x1,…,xr]k[x_1,\ldots,x_r]-module. Say K=k[x1,…,xr][β1,…,βs]K = k[x_1,\ldots,x_r][\beta_1,\ldots,\beta_s] where each βj\beta_j satisfies a monic polynomial over k(x1,…,xr)k(x_1,\ldots,x_r).

Clearing denominators: there exists 0≠d∈k[x1,…,xr]0 \neq d \in k[x_1,\ldots,x_r] such that each βj\beta_j is integral over k[x1,…,xr][1/d]k[x_1,\ldots,x_r][1/d]. Hence KK is integral over k[x1,…,xr][1/d]k[x_1,\ldots,x_r][1/d].

But KK is a field, so k[x1,…,xr][1/d]k[x_1,\ldots,x_r][1/d] must also be a field (a subring of a field that is integral over it is a field if the field is integral over it — by the lying-over theorem). But k[x1,…,xr][1/d]k[x_1,\ldots,x_r][1/d] is a localization of k[x1,…,xr]k[x_1,\ldots,x_r], which is not a field when r≥1r \geq 1 (e.g., the element x1+1x_1 + 1 is not a unit unless dd has infinitely many factors, which is impossible).

Contradiction. So r=0r = 0, and all αi\alpha_i are algebraic over kk.

■

Step 2: Weak Nullstellensatz

TheoremP.2Weak Nullstellensatz

Let k=kˉk = \bar{k}. Every maximal ideal of k[x1,…,xn]k[x_1,\ldots,x_n] is of the form (x1−a1,…,xn−an)(x_1 - a_1, \ldots, x_n - a_n) for some ai∈ka_i \in k.

Proof

Let m\mathfrak{m} be a maximal ideal. Then K=k[x1,…,xn]/mK = k[x_1,\ldots,x_n]/\mathfrak{m} is a field that is a finitely generated kk-algebra.

By Zariski's Lemma, K/kK/k is algebraic. Since k=kˉk = \bar{k}, we have K=kK = k.

The projection k[x1,…,xn]↠K=kk[x_1,\ldots,x_n] \twoheadrightarrow K = k sends xi↦aix_i \mapsto a_i for some ai∈ka_i \in k. The kernel of this map is (x1−a1,…,xn−an)(x_1 - a_1, \ldots, x_n - a_n), which is contained in m\mathfrak{m}. But (x1−a1,…,xn−an)(x_1 - a_1, \ldots, x_n - a_n) is already maximal, so m=(x1−a1,…,xn−an)\mathfrak{m} = (x_1 - a_1, \ldots, x_n - a_n).

■

Corollary (Ideal form). If a\mathfrak{a} is a proper ideal, then a⊆m\mathfrak{a} \subseteq \mathfrak{m} for some maximal ideal m=(x1−a1,…,xn−an)\mathfrak{m} = (x_1 - a_1, \ldots, x_n - a_n), so (a1,…,an)∈V(a)(a_1, \ldots, a_n) \in V(\mathfrak{a}). In particular, V(a)≠∅V(\mathfrak{a}) \neq \varnothing.


Step 3: Strong Nullstellensatz (Rabinowitsch trick)

TheoremP.3Strong Nullstellensatz

I(V(a))=aI(V(\mathfrak{a})) = \sqrt{\mathfrak{a}}.

Proof

Easy inclusion (⊇\supseteq): If fr∈af^r \in \mathfrak{a}, then for any P∈V(a)P \in V(\mathfrak{a}), f(P)r=0f(P)^r = 0 in kk, so f(P)=0f(P) = 0. Thus f∈I(V(a))f \in I(V(\mathfrak{a})).

Hard inclusion (⊆\subseteq, the Rabinowitsch trick): Let f∈I(V(a))f \in I(V(\mathfrak{a})). We need to show fr∈af^r \in \mathfrak{a} for some rr.

Introduce a new variable tt and consider the ideal

b=a+(1−tf)⊆k[x1,…,xn,t].\mathfrak{b} = \mathfrak{a} + (1 - tf) \subseteq k[x_1, \ldots, x_n, t].

Claim: V(b)=∅V(\mathfrak{b}) = \varnothing in An+1\mathbb{A}^{n+1}.

Proof of claim: If (a1,…,an,b)∈V(b)(a_1,\ldots,a_n, b) \in V(\mathfrak{b}), then (a1,…,an)∈V(a)(a_1,\ldots,a_n) \in V(\mathfrak{a}), so f(a1,…,an)=0f(a_1,\ldots,a_n) = 0 (since f∈I(V(a))f \in I(V(\mathfrak{a}))). But also 1−bf(a1,…,an)=1−0=1≠01 - bf(a_1,\ldots,a_n) = 1 - 0 = 1 \neq 0. Contradiction. So V(b)=∅V(\mathfrak{b}) = \varnothing.

By the ideal form of the Nullstellensatz, b=(1)\mathfrak{b} = (1). So there exist g1,…,gs∈ag_1, \ldots, g_s \in \mathfrak{a} and polynomials hi,q∈k[x1,…,xn,t]h_i, q \in k[x_1,\ldots,x_n,t] such that

1=h1g1+⋯+hsgs+q⋅(1−tf).1 = h_1 g_1 + \cdots + h_s g_s + q \cdot (1 - tf).

Now substitute t=1/ft = 1/f (formally, work in k[x1,…,xn][1/f]k[x_1,\ldots,x_n][1/f], i.e., localize at ff):

1=h1(x,1/f)g1+⋯+hs(x,1/f)gs+0.1 = h_1(x, 1/f) g_1 + \cdots + h_s(x, 1/f) g_s + 0.

Multiply both sides by fNf^N for large enough NN to clear all denominators:

fN=H1g1+⋯+Hsgs∈af^N = H_1 g_1 + \cdots + H_s g_s \in \mathfrak{a}

where Hi∈k[x1,…,xn]H_i \in k[x_1,\ldots,x_n]. So fN∈af^N \in \mathfrak{a}, i.e., f∈af \in \sqrt{\mathfrak{a}}.

■

Commentary

RemarkThe beauty of the Rabinowitsch trick

The trick of introducing the auxiliary variable tt with the relation tf=1tf = 1 is a stroke of genius. It converts the statement "ff vanishes wherever a\mathfrak{a} vanishes" into the statement "a\mathfrak{a} and 1−tf1 - tf have no common zero," which is exactly what the weak Nullstellensatz can handle.

This is a prototype of a ubiquitous technique in algebraic geometry: to study the complement of V(f)V(f), adjoin f−1f^{-1} (pass to a localization).

RemarkAlternative proofs

There are several other proofs of the Nullstellensatz:

  1. Via Noether normalization: Show that k[x1,…,xn]/pk[x_1,\ldots,x_n]/\mathfrak{p} is a finite extension of a polynomial ring, then use the weak form.
  2. Model-theoretic proof: Use quantifier elimination for algebraically closed fields.
  3. Proof using resultants: For n=2n = 2, the resultant Resx(f,g)=0\mathrm{Res}_x(f, g) = 0 iff ff and gg share a root.
  4. Artin–Tate lemma: A more general algebraic statement that implies Zariski's lemma directly.

The Rabinowitsch trick proof is the most elementary and is the one given in Hartshorne (Theorem I.1.3A) and Atiyah–Macdonald (Exercise 7.14).

ExampleTracing the proof: a concrete example

Let a=(x2,xy)⊆k[x,y]\mathfrak{a} = (x^2, xy) \subseteq k[x,y] and f=xf = x.

V(a)=V(x2,xy)=V(x)={(0,b)∣b∈k}V(\mathfrak{a}) = V(x^2, xy) = V(x) = \{(0, b) \mid b \in k\} (the yy-axis).

f=xf = x vanishes on all of V(a)V(\mathfrak{a}), so f∈I(V(a))f \in I(V(\mathfrak{a})).

Rabinowitsch: Consider b=(x2,xy,1−tx)⊆k[x,y,t]\mathfrak{b} = (x^2, xy, 1 - tx) \subseteq k[x,y,t].

From 1−tx1 - tx: x=1/tx = 1/t (heuristically). Then x2=1/t2x^2 = 1/t^2 and xy=y/txy = y/t. In the quotient, 1=tx1 = tx, so xx is a unit, and (x2,xy)=(x)(x^2, xy) = (x) becomes (1)(1). Formally:

x⋅(1−tx)+t⋅x2=x−tx2+tx2=xx \cdot (1-tx) + t \cdot x^2 = x - tx^2 + tx^2 = x, so x∈bx \in \mathfrak{b}. Then 1=(1−tx)+tx=(1−tx)+t⋅x∈b1 = (1-tx) + tx = (1-tx) + t \cdot x \in \mathfrak{b}. So b=(1)\mathfrak{b} = (1).

Now: 1=1⋅(1−tx)+t⋅x1 = 1 \cdot (1 - tx) + t \cdot x. Substituting t=1/xt = 1/x and multiplying by xx:

x=x⋅(1−1x⋅x)+1⋅x=0+x.x = x \cdot (1 - \frac{1}{x} \cdot x) + 1 \cdot x = 0 + x.

Hmm, this is trivial. Let's be more careful. We had x∈bx \in \mathfrak{b}, and x2∈ax^2 \in \mathfrak{a}. So f2=x2∈af^2 = x^2 \in \mathfrak{a}, giving f∈af \in \sqrt{\mathfrak{a}}.

Indeed: (x2,xy)=(x)⋅(x,y)=(x)\sqrt{(x^2, xy)} = \sqrt{(x) \cdot (x, y)} = (x), and f=x∈(x)=af = x \in (x) = \sqrt{\mathfrak{a}}. ✓