3
$\begingroup$

I'm going through some notes, and have the following definition:

Let $K$ be a number field. Then $ \mathfrak{a} \subset K$ is a fractional ideal if there exists a non-zero $c \in K$ such that $c\mathfrak{a} \subset \mathcal O_K$ is an ideal.

I'm concerned that this is unclearly stated; specifically, shouldn't it specify that $\mathfrak{a}$ is an ideal of $K$? If $\mathfrak{a}$ is just any subset of $K$, then I can't prove the lemma that gives the correspondence between fractional ideals and finitely generated $\mathcal O_K$ modules.

Thanks

  • 0
    Just to be concrete: Let $K=\mathbb{Q}$. Then $\mathcal{O}_K=\mathbb{Z}$. Then the $\mathbb{Z}$-module (=abelian group) generated by (1/2) is a fractional ideal, because if you multiply it by 2, you get an ideal.2012-02-28

4 Answers 4

6

Well, no. $K$ is a field, so it has no non-trivial ideals. But $\mathfrak{a}$ is an $\mathcal{O}_K$-submodule of $K$ (this follows from the fact that $c \mathfrak{a}$ is an ideal).

3

Just as a complement to the other answers: the field $K$ is a ring, and hence a module over itself. Thus it is also an $\mathcal O_K$-module in a natural way (just using the inclusion of $\mathcal O_K$ in $K$). A fractional ideal is a certain kind of $\mathcal O_K$-submodule of $K$, namely one that is finitely generated over $\mathcal O_K$. (Note that $K$ itself doesn't have this property).

Now, one can prove that an $\mathcal O_K$ submodule $\mathfrak a$ of $K$ is finitely generated if and only if $c\mathfrak a \subset \mathcal O_K$ for some non-zero $c \in K$.

Also, one can prove that a subset $\mathfrak a$ of $K$ is an $\mathcal O_K$-submodule and only if $c \mathfrak a$ is an $\mathcal O_K$-submodule of $K$ for some (equivalently, any) non-zero $c \in K$.

Finally, the $\mathcal O_K$-submodules of $\mathcal O_K$ itself are precisely the ideals in $\mathcal O_K$.

Putting these last three conditions together, one obtains the alternative characterization of fractional ideals given in your question.

2

$K$ is a field. One of the basic facts about fields is that they only have two ideals: $(0)$ and the whole ring $K$. (Exericse: if you haven't seen this before, prove it!).

So $\mathfrak{a}$ is not, in general, an ideal of $K$. It is not closed under multiplication by elements of $K$. It is also not an ideal of $\mathcal{O}_K$ because it may contain elements of $K$ that are not in $\mathcal{O}_K$. However, it is closed under addition and multiplication by elements of $\mathcal{O}_K$, so it is an $\mathcal{O}_K$-module.

1

Let $R$ be a Dedekind domain and $K$ its field of fractions. Let $M$ be an $R$ - submodule of $K$. Then the following conditions are equivalent

  1. $M$ is a finitely generated $R$ - submodule of $K$.
  2. There exists $z \in R$ such that $zM$ is an integral ideal of $R$.
  3. $M = \alpha I$ for some $\alpha \in K$ and $I$ an integral ideal of $R$.

$1 \implies 2 : $ Suppose $M$ is generated by $x_1,\ldots,x_n \in K$. Then if we let $z$ to be equal to the product of the denominators of the $x_i$ we have $zx_i = y_i$ for some $y_i \in R$. It now follows that $zM = I$

where $I = (y_1,\ldots,y_n)$.

$2 \implies 3:$ If there is $z \in R$ so that $zM$ is an integral ideal $I$ of $R$ then considering $z$ now as an element of $K$ we have $M = z^{-1}I$.

$3 \implies 1:$ This comes from the more general fact that because $R$ is Noetherian, $M$ must be finitely generated.