Quotient vs Localization
Taking the quotient and localization
are two sides of the same coin when we look at
.
- Quotient removes the “small” prime ideals in
– it only keeps the prime ideals containing
.
- Localization removes the “large” prime ideals in
– it only keeps prime ideals disjoint from S.
It turns out these two operations commute.
Proposition 1.
Let
be an ideal and
a multiplicative subset.
- Let
, a multiplicative subset of
.
- Let
, an ideal of
.
Then we have an isomorphism
.
Proof
We will use the universal properties here.
The canonical homomorphism gives us
. Thus we get a ring homomorphism
which takes
. This map takes every element of
to a unit so it factors through
. The latter map takes
and thus
.
The reverse map is left as an exercise. [Hint: start with .] ♦
Definition.
Let
be a prime ideal. The residue field
is defined equivalently as:
- the field of fractions of
, or
- the quotient of local ring
by its unique maximal ideal.
Thanks to proposition 1, the definition is sensible (let and
).
Question to Ponder
If is the coordinate ring of a variety over algebraically closed k, what do elements of
correspond to?
Localization of Modules
Let M be an A-module and S a multiplicative subset of A.
Proposition 2.
The localized module
is defined as
with
and
under the equivalence
Now
becomes an
-module via:
Proof
Easy exercise (but tedious!). ♦
Proposition 3.
The
-module
satisfies the following universal property. We have the pair
where
is an
-module,
is A-linear, such that for any pair
where
is an
-module and
is A-linear, there is a unique
-linear map
such that
.
Note
Universal property thus says we get a bijection for any -module N:
Proof
Existence: given , we define
by
. It is well-defined: if
then
for some
, and so
, which gives
since t acts bijectively on N. It is easy to check f is
-linear and
.
Uniqueness: suppose is
-linear and
for every
. Then
so . ♦
Functoriality
Definition.
Suppose
is an A-linear map. We have an
-linear map
Proof
Let us check the map is well-defined. If then
for some
. Applying f gives
and hence
. Linearity is an easy exercise. ♦
Clearly and
for any
and
. Thus localization gives a functor
Furthermore, the functor is A-linear, i.e. for A-modules M and N,
In particular, it is additive.
Generalization
One can generalize the localization functor.
Definition.
Let
be an
-algebra and
an
-module. The B-module induced from M comprises of a pair
where
is a B-module,
is A-linear, such that for any pair
where
is a B-module and
is A-linear, there is a unique B-linear
such that
.
Note
Again universal property says the following is a bijection for any B-module N:
Exercise A
1. Prove uniqueneess of f in the above example.
2. Prove that for an ideal and
, the B-module induced from M is
. This explains what we meant when we said the construction is canonical.
Question to Ponder
Does give an additive functor from the category of A-modules to the category of B-modules? Can all the necessary constructions and properties be deduced just from the universal property of induced modules?
In later articles, we will give an explicit construction of the induced module.
Exactness
This result is of paramount importance.
Theorem 1.
The localization functor is exact, i.e. if
is exact, so is
.
Proof
For any we have
and so
.
Conversely suppose . Then there exists
,
so
and
. We thus have
for some
which gives us
. ♦
Now all the properties we proved about exact additive functors can be ported over here.
1. If is injective, so is
. Hence for A-submodule
we may regard
as an
-submodule of
.
2. If is surjective, so is
.
3. For A-submodule , we have
.
4. For an A-linear map we have
5. For A-submodules we have, as submodules of
,
Exercise B
Prove that for an ideal ,
- the localized module
is the ideal
we saw earlier,
- for any A-module M we have
as
-submodules of
.
Do we not require that the ideal
does not intersect
in Proposition 1?
If they intersect, we get a trivial ring on both sides so it works out.