Professional Documents
Culture Documents
GEUNHO GIM
Contents
1. An example of a rng with no maximal ideal
2. Rngs satisfying xn = x for all x R
3. Sums of two squares
4. An example of a PID which is not a Euclidean domain
5. Polynomial Functions
6. Classes of rings
7. Examples of diagram chasing
8. ACC and DCC
M
Y
9.
Z and
Z
i=0
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
i=0
12
19
20
Example 1.2. (Q, +), (R, +), (C, +) and any field of characteristic 0 (considered as an additive
group) are divisible. Q/Z, Zp and any vector space over a field of characteristic 0 are also
divisible. But (Z/pZ, +), (Q , ) and (R , ) are not divisible.
Proposition 1.3. Let G be a divisible abelian group. Then G does not have a maximal subgroup.
(i.e., for any proper subgroup H of G, there is a proper subgroup H 0 of G properly containing
H.)
Proof. Suppose H ( G is a maximal subgroup. By Correspondence Principle, G/H is simple
and abelian, thus isomorphic to Z/pZ for some prime p. Choose g G \ H, then there is g 0 G
such that pg 0 = g. But pg 0 H since (G : H) = p. Contradiction!
Proposition 1.4. Let G be a divisible abelian group. Define x y = 0 for all x, y G. Then G
is a rng without a maximal ideal.
Updated : Mar 14, 2014
1
Proof. Checking that G is a ring with multiplication is straightforward. Note that we have
a one-to-one correspondence between ideals of G and additive subgroups of G. Thus maximal
ideals of G correspond to maximal additive subgroups of G, which dont exist by the previous
proposition.
From now on, we let R be a rng (R doesnt have to have 1R ). Also let Z(R) be the center of
R. Note that Z(R) = {a R | ar = ra for all r R} is a subring of R.
Lemma 2.2. Suppose xn = x for all x R for some n 2. Then,
(1) if ab = 0 for a, b R, then ba = 0.
(2) if a2 = ka for a R, k Z, then ka Z(R).
(3) an1 Z(R) for all a R.
Proof. (1) ba = (ba)n = b(ab)n1 a = 0.
(2) For any x R, 0 = (ka)x a2 x = a(kx ax) and 0 = x(ka) xa2 = (kx xa)a. By (1),
we have
x(ka) axa = (kx ax)a = 0 = a(kx xa) = (ka)x axa
thus x(ka) = (ka)x.
(3) (an1 )2 = a2n2 = an an2 = a an2 = an1 . By (2), an1 Z(R).
Proof. Note that (a4 + a2 )2 = a8 + 2a6 + a4 = 2(a4 + a2 ), thus 2(a4 + a2 ) Z(R) for all a R
by 2.2(2). Also by 2.2(3), 2a2 = 2(a4 + a2 ) 2a4 Z(R) for all a R. Furthermore,
4a3 = 2(a2 + a)2 2a4 2a2 Z(R)
2a3 + a2 + 5a = (a2 + a)5 (a2 + a) 10a4 2(4a3 ) 2(2a2 ) Z(R)
for all a R. Also,
2(a2 + a)3 + (a2 + a)2 + 5(a2 + a) = 7a4 + 4a3 + 8a2 + 11a Z(R)
for all a R. Finally, we have
a = (7a4 + 4a3 + 8a2 + 11a) 7a4 3(2a2 ) 2(2a3 + a2 + 5a) Z(R)
for all a R. Thus, R is commutative.
(p 2) (p 1)
2 2
p1
p1
(2) (1)
1 2
2
2
p1
p1 2
2
1 2
(1)
2
2
p1
1 2
(mod p)
2
1 (p 1)! 1 2
n = (q11
f /2
qsfs /2 )2 + (q11
qsfs /2 )2
b 19
(2a b)2 + 19b2
b
N (a + b) = N
a
=
= a2 ab + 5b2 Z0
2
2
4
We can see that N is a multiplicative homomorphism, thus for x, y R, N (x) | N (y) in Z if
x | y in R. If N () = 1 for some R, then R since
= 1 and
R. Conversely, if
R , then there N () | N (1) = 1 in Z, thus we have N () = 1.
Write = a + b, then R if and only if N () = 1 if and only if (2a b)2 + 19b2 = 4 if
and only if a = 1, b = 0 if and only if = 1.
(2) Suppose 2 = for , R. We have 4 = N (2) = N ()N (). Note that no element in R
has norm 2 because (2a b)2 + 19b2 = 8 has no integer solution. Thus, N () = 1 or N () = 1,
i.e., R or R . Therefore, 2 is irreducible. Similarly, so is 3.
Theorem 4.2. R is not a Euclidean domain.
Proof. Suppose R has a Euclidean function : R \ {0} Z0 satisfying the division algorithm.
Choose m R \ (R {0}) with minimal (m).
There are q, r R such that 2 = mq + r with r = 0 or (r) < (m). By the choice of m, we
have either r = 0 or r R = {1}. If r = 0, then we have 2 = mq. Since 2 is irreducible and
m is not a unit, we have q = 1 and m = 2. If r = 1, then we have 3 = mq. By the similar
argument, we have q = 1 and m = 3. If r = 1, then 1 = mq, which cannot happen since m
is not a unit. Therefore, m {2, 3}.
Now we apply the division algorithm for . There are q0 , r0 R such that = mq0 + r0 ,
and similarly, r = 0, 1, 1. We have mq = + r. The norm of the left-hand side is N (mq) =
N (m)N (q), thus divisible either by 4 = N (2) or by 9 = N (3). On the other hand, we have
N () = N ( + 1) = 5 and N ( 1) = 7 on the right-hand side. Contradiction!
Theorem 4.3. R is a PID.
Proof. Let a be an ideal of R and choose 0 6= a a with minimal N (a). Choose b a. We will
show that b (a). Since Im f = 219 , there is an integer m Z such that |Im( ab + m)| 419 .
3
Case 2 : 2 Im( ab + m) 419
We have
3 3
3
19
b
< 3
< 3
Im 2
+ m + 0
2
2
2
a
1
There is n Z such that |Re( 2b
a + 2m + + n)| 2 . By the same argument with Case 1, we
have N (2b + a(2m + + n)) < N (a) and b am = a(+n)
a. If n is even, then a
2
2 a
a
a
and 2 = ( 2 ) 2a a, which is a contradiction since 0 < N ( a2 ) < N (a). If n is odd, then
a(+1)
a and a2 = ( a(+1)
) + 1 2a a, which is also a contradiction.
2
2
3
2
5
5. Polynomial Functions
Let R be a ring and Func(R, R) = {f : R R | f is a function} (we dont assume any
property of f ) be the ring of functions from R to R. The ring structure of Func(R, R) is given
pointwise: (f + g)(a) = f (a) + g(a), (f g)(a) = f (a)g(a). We consider the map
= R : R[t]
f (t)
Func(R, R)
((f ) : a 7 f (a))
Note that |F
q | is a multiplicative group of order q 1. Thus for any a Fq , we have a
q
q
This means t t Fq [t] has all the elements of Fq as its roots, so (t t) ker . Suppose
g(t) ker . By euclidean algorithm, there are q(t), r(t) Fq [t] such that g(t) = (tq t)q(t)+r(t)
and r = 0 or deg r < deg(tq t) = q. Since g(a) = 0 = aq a for all a Fq , we get r(a) = 0 for
all a Fq by evaluating t = a to the above equation. If r 6= 0, then r can only have deg r(< q)
distinct roots in Fq . Thus we have r = 0 and g (tq t).
By the first isomorphism theorem, we have
Fq [t]/(tq t)
= Im Func(Fq , Fq )
Now we can compare two sides by counting the number of elements. Note that for any f (t)
Fq [t], we can find r(t) Fq [t] such that f (t) = r(t) in Fq [t]/(tq t) and deg r < q by euclidean
algorithm. Also any r1 (t) 6= r2 (t) Fq [t] with deg r1 < q and deg r2 < q, we have r1 (t) 6= r2 (t)
in Fq [t]/(tq t) because the difference r1 r2 has degree less than q, thus cannot be in (tq t).
|Fq [t]/(tq t)| = # of polynomials of degree less than q over Fq
= |{a0 + a1 t + + aq1 tq1 | ai Fq }| = q q
On the other hand, we have
|Fq [t]/(tq t)| = |Im | |Func(Fq , Fq )| = q q = |Fq [t]/(tq t)|
6
k
X
i=0
interpolation.
Example 5.8. Consider k + 1 points on the xy-plane whose x-coordinates are distinct. Then
there exists a polynomial in R[t] with degree at most k whose graph passes through those k + 1
points.
Example 5.9. Consider the function f : Z/5Z Z/5Z defined by f (0) = 3, f (1) = 0, f (2) =
1, f (3) = 1, f (4) = 0. We apply the method above to find a polynomial in Lf (t) Z/5Z[t]
defining f . Firstly, we have
l0 (t) =
Similarly, we can get l2 (t) = (t3 t)(t + 2) and l3 (t) = (t3 t)(t 2). Therefore,
Lf (t) = 3l0 (t) + l2 (t) + l3 (t) = 2t2 + 3
We can easily check that we have indeed Lf (a) = f (a) for all a Z/5Z.
A more general thing also holds, and the proof is similar (count the number of elements!).
Theorem 5.10. Define n : Fq [t1 , , tn ] Func(Fnq , Fq ) similarly. Then n is surjective
and ker n = (tq1 t1 , tq2 t2 , , tqn tn ). Thus we have
Fq [t1 , t2 , , tn ]/(tq t1 , tq t2 , , tq tn )
= Func(Fn , Fq )
1
6. Classes of rings
Consider the following classes of rings.
(1) Field ( (2) Euclidean domain ( (3) PID (
(4a) Noetherian domain, (4b) UFD
( (5) Integral domain ( (6) Commutative ring ( (7) All rings
7
is not a
UFD because 1 + 5 Z[ 5] is irreducible, but not prime. (1 + 5 | 6 = 2 3
but 1 + 5 - 2, 3)
(4b) ; (4a) Z[t1 , t2 , , tn ] is a UFD because any polynomial has only finitely many variables and Z[t1 , t2 , , tn ] is a UFD for all n by induction. But it is not Noetherian because we
have a strictly increasing sequence of ideals (t1 ) ( (t1 , t2 ) ( .
(5) ; (4a), (5) ; (4b) The examples above work.
(6) ; (5) Z/4Z
(7) ; (6) M2 (R)
y 1
y 2
f0
y 3
g0
y 4
y 5
i0
h0
A0 B 0 C 0 D0 E 0
Then the following holds.
(1) If 2 , 4 are surjective and 5 is injective, then 3 is surjective.
(2) If 2 , 4 are injective and 1 is surjective, then 3 is injective.
(3) If 2 , 4 are bijective, 5 is injective and 1 is surjective, then 3 is bijective.
Proof. Diagram chasing!
Theorem 7.2 (Nine lemma). Suppose we have the following commutative diagram of Rmodules.
0
0
0
y
y
y
0 A1
B1
C1 0
0 A2
B2
C2 0
0 A3
B3
C3 0
0
8
If all columns and two bottom rows are exact, then so is the top row. If all columns and two
top rows are exact, then so is the bottom row.
Proof. Another diagram chasing!
Theorem 7.3 (Snake lemma). Suppose we have the following commutative diagram of Rmodules with exact rows.
f
f0
C 0
g0
0 A0 B 0 C 0
Then, we have the following exact sequence of R-modules.
f
f0
g0
id
gf
y
B coker f 0
y
y
0 C C C
0
Proof. Suppose M has a composition series of lengh n. If either chain condition fails to hold,
then one can find a chain of submodules with length n + 1. The two series have an equivalent
refinement which has length at least n + 1, but the composition series does not have a proper
refinement. Contradiction!
Conversely, suppose that M satisfies both ACC and DCC. Since M is Noetherian, the set of
proper submodules of M has a maximal element, say M1 . Also the set of proper submodules
of M1 has a maximal element M2 . In this way, we can construct a strictly decreasing chain of
submodules of M
M ) M1 ) M2 )
with simple factors. Since M also satiesfies DCC, this chain has to stabilize, which gives a finite
composition series of M .
9.
Z and
i=0
i=0
Y
i=0
Z = {(a0 , a1 , a2 , ) | ai Z}
Z = {(a0 , a1 , a2 , ) | ai Z, ai = 0 for all but finitely many i}
i=0
i=0
Z
= Z[t], and
i=0
Z
= Z[[t]] by (ai ) 7
i=0
i=0
Z because (1, 1, 1, )
/ h{ei }i.
i=0
Z Z be a Z-module homomorphism. If
i=0
Z ker f , then f = 0.
i=0
k1
X
X
ai 2i ei +
ai 2i ei
f ((ai 2i )
i=0 ) = f
i=0
k1
X
ik
X
X
ai 2ik ei = 2k f
ai 2ik ei
ai 2i f (ei ) + 2k f
i=0
ik
ik
since ei ker f for all i. So 2k | f ((ai 2i )i ) Z for all k, which means f ((ai 2i )i ) = 0. Similarly
we have f ((bi 3i )i ) = 0 and f (x) = f ((ai 2i )i ) + f ((bi 3i )i ) = 0.
10
P
P
Remark 9.4. We cannot prove that f ( xi ) =
f (xi ) for infinite sums! Note that we have
this for finite sums by repeatedly using the fact that f is an additive homomorphism.
Theorem 9.5.
i=0
Q
Q
Q
Proof. Suppose that Z is free with a basis B. Note that Z is uncountable ( Z contains
Q
L
{1}, which has cardinality 1 ), thus B is also uncountable. Since L
each element in
Z
can be written as a finite Z-linear combination
of
elements
in
B,
and
Z
is
countable,
we
L
have a countable subset
B
(
B
such
that
Z hBQ
0 i. Choose b B \ B0 and consider
0
Q
the projection b : Z Z which maps an element
of
Z to its coefficient of b. Then b is
L
a well-defined Z-module homomorphism, and
Z hB0 i ker b . By 9.3, we should have
b = 0, but we have b (b) = 1. Contradiction!
Q
Remark 9.6.
Z is an example of a torsion-free Z-module which is not free. This doesnt
happen in the category of finitely generated modules over Z.
!
Y
Theorem 9.7. Let R = EndZ
Z , then Rm
= Rn as free R-modules for all m, n N.
i=0
=
=
=
=
(a0 , a2 , a4 , )
(a1 , a3 , a5 , )
(a0 , 0, a1 , 0, a2 , 0, )
(0, a0 , 0, a1 , 0, a2 , )
M
Y
Y
M
i=0
i=0
i=0
M
Z, Z
(f (ei ))
i=0
Therefore is injective.
Q
L
P
P
For any ((ni )
Z, we define g :
Z Z by g( i ai eL
i) =
i=0 )
i ai ni . Then g is welldefined (only finitely many ai s are nonzero) and g HomZ ( Z, Z). Also we can see that
(g) = ((g(ei ))i ) = ((ni )i ), thus is surjective.
(2) We define
Y
M
: HomZ
Z, Z
Z
(f (ei ))
i=0
Q
We first check well-definedness of . Given f HomZ ( Z, Z), we choose integers 0 < n1 <
k1
X
Q
n2 < satisfying
2ni |f (ei )| < 2nk 1 for each k. Consider x = ((2ni )i ) Z, then
f
i=0
f (x) = f
k1
X
2ni ei +
i=0
k1
X
2ni ei
ik
i=0
2ni nk ei
ik
{z
call this bk
nk
> 2 |bk | 2
for all k, and f (x) Z, we have bk = 0 for sufficiently large k. Since we have 2nk bk =
2nk f (ek ) + 2nk+1 bk+1 , f (ek ) = 0 for sufficiently large k. Thus, f is well-defined.
We can easily check that f is a Z-module homomorphism
from definition.
L
If (f ) = 0, then we have f (ei ) = 0 for all i. Thus,
Z ker f , and f = 0 by 9.3. Therefore
is injective.
L
Q
P
P
For any ((mi )i )
Z, we define g :
Z Z by g( ai eiQ
) =
ai mi . Then g is welldefined (only finitely many mi s are nonzero) and g HomZ ( Z, Z). Also we can see that
(g) = (g(ei )i ) = ((mi )i ), thus is surjective.
t
X
rs bs E11 =
s=1
t
X
rs E1,is Bs Ejs ,1 B
s=1
P
Thus A = aij Eij B by a similar argument.
If R is simple, then the only ideals of Mn (R) are Mn ({0}) = {0n } and Mn (R), thus Mn (R) is
simple.
P
For n 2, consider E11 Mn (R). Suppose E11 A = In . If A = i,j aij Eij , then
n
X
Eii = In = E11 A =
i=1
n
X
a1j E1j
j=1
which is not possible because E22 does not appear in the right-hand side. Therefore, E11 is not
invertible, and Mn (R) is not a division ring.
Problem (21.20.13). Let a1 , , an be ideals in R, at least n 2 of which are prime. Let
S R be a subrng (it does not have to have 1) contained in a1 a2 an . Then one of
the aj s contains S. In particular, if p1 , , pn are prime ideals in R and b is an ideal properly
contained in S satisfying S \ b p1 pn , then S lies in one of the pi s.
Proof. Let m( n) be the minimal number of ai s whose union
[ contains S. By reindexing if
necessary, we can assume that S a1 am and S *
aj if |J| < m. Note that
jJ{1,2, ,n}
S=
m
[
(S ai ) and 6= S ai *
i=1
j6=i
1jm
aj .
j6=i
1jm
g
= 2. If N (g) = 16, then we have N ( 2+2i
) = 2. If N (g) = 32, then
in Z. If N (g) = 8, then
8
N ( g ) = 2. In all cases we end up getting elements in R with norms equal to 2, which is not
possible. Therefore, a and b do not have a gcd in R.
Problem (25.21.14). Prove that a domain in which every prime ideal is principal is a PID.
13
+
m
.
Note
that
g
1 is
1
n
i
nilpotent in R[t] by
!M
n
X
X
a
i
(g 1)M =
ti
br1 r2 rn ari i tiri = 0 (br1 r2 rn Z)
= aM
0
a0
i=1
r1 +r2 ++rn =M
This implies ai p for all i > 0 and all prime ideals p. Therefore
\
ai
p = nil(R)
p, prime
Problem (29.19.2). Let R be a nontrivial commutative ring and f a zero divisor in R[t].
Show that there exists a nonzero element b in R so that bf = 0.
Proof. Write f (t) = a0 + a1 t + + an tn . Let g(t) = b0 + b1 t + + bm tm be a nonzero
polynomial of minimal degree satisfying gf = 0. Suppose m > 0. If gai = 0 for all 0 i n,
then bm ai = 0 for all i and we get bm f = 0 which is a contradiction. Thus we can assume that
there is a maximal j 0 such that gaj 6= 0. Now we have
0 = gf
This means aj bm = 0 and (aj g)f = aj (gf ) = 0. But deg aj g < deg g contradicts the minimality
of deg g. Therefore we have m = 0.
Problem (38.23.6). Let f : Zn Zm be a Zmodule homomorphism. Let Sl be the standard
is n and f is epic if and
basis for Zl . Prove that f is monic if and only if the rank of [f ]SSm
n
is
1.
only if a gcd of the mth ordered minors of [f ]SSm
n
Proof. (Solution 1) We first prove this by using the following theorem.
(Theorem) Let R be a PID and A Mm,n (R). Then there are matrices P GLm (R), Q
GLn (R) such that P AQ = diag(a1 , a2 , , ar , 0, , 0) (called a Smith Normal Form of A) for
ai 6= 0, a1 | a2 | | ar . Furthermore, the ideals (a1 ) (a2 ) (ar ) completely determine
a Smith Normal Form of A and al l /l1 where l = l,A is a gcd of all l l minors of A.
Let A = [f ]SSm
. Then by the theorem above, we can find P GLm (Z), Q GLn (Z) such that
n
P AQ = diag(a1 , a2 , , ar , 0, , 0). Clearly we have r min(m, n). We write P = [idZm ]Sm
and Q = [idZn ]Sn where = {v1 , v2 , vn } and = {w1 , w2 , , wm } are basis of Zn and Zm
respectively. Now we have
P AQ = [idZm ]Sm [f ]SSm
[idZn ]Sn = [idZm f idZn ] = [f ] = diag(a1 , , ar , 0, , 0)
n
We can easily see that
(
Zvr+1 + + Zvn
ker f =
0
if n > r
if n = r
m,[f ]Sm = 1
Sn
because m = a1 a2 am and l of similar matrices are associates for all l by Lemma 37.6.
15
n
X
i=1
for some ui1 i2 im Z. We used the facts that the determinant of a matrix with two identical
columns is zero, and that changing the order of columns only affects the sign of the determinant.
The m m minors of A look like ([A]i1 [A]im ), thus the above equation says that 1 is a Zlinear combination of the determinants of m m minors of A, i.e., m = 1.
Finally, we prove that if m = 1, then f is epic. Since a gcd of the determinants of m m
minors of A is 1, we can find integers ri1 i2 im Z such that
X
1=
ri1 i2 im det([A]i1 , [A]i2 , , [A]im )
1i1 <i2 <<im n
[A]
)
Im = Im
i1 i2 im
i1 i2 im
is surjective, so is A = [f ]SSm
.
n
Problem (38.23.7). Let R be a commutative ring. Let En (R) be the subgroup of GLn (R)
generated by all matrices of the form I + where is a matrix with precisely one non-zero
entry and this entry does not occur on the diagonal. Suppose that R is a euclidean ring. Show
that SLn (R) = En (R).
16
( is an equivalence relation!) We will show that A T for some T En (R), which implies
that A En (R). We can also easily see that multiplying I + Eij on the left is equivalent to
adding times j-th row to i-th row, and multiplying I + Eij on the right is equivalent to
adding times i-th column to j-th column.
Since A = (aij ) 6= 0, we can find a nonzero component aij 6= 0. We want to have aij | aik , alj
for all 1 k, l n. If this is not the case, pick aik (or alj ) which is not divisible by aij . Since
R is a euclidean ring, we can find elements q, r R such that aik (or alj )= qaij + r with
r 6= 0, (r) < (aij ) where is a euclidean function on R. Now A(I qEjk )(or (I qEli )A) has
r as one of its entries. If r divides all entries on the same row/column, were good. Otherwise
repeat the same process. This process has to stop after finite number of steps because we will
have strictly decreasing values of , which is defined on Z0 .
Therefore we can assume that A B = (bij ) for some B SLn (R) satisfying bij | bik , blj for
some i, j and 1 k, l n. Let bik = ek bij , blj = fl bij (ek , fl R) and
Y
B
(I
f
E
)
(I ek Ejk )
C=
l
li
l6=i
1ln
k6=j
1kn
then
AC=
0
..
.
..
.
0
0 bij
0
..
.
0
Also note that bij | det C = det A = 1, thus bij R . Let
and
11
(I + E1i )C(I + 1c
bij Ej1 )
C(I + 1c11 E )
j1
b1j
D=
1c11
(I + bi1 E1i )C
C
17
then
A D = (dij ) =
(I dl1 El1 ) D
2ln
=
0
(I d1k E1k )
2kn
A1
for some A1 SLn1 (R). By inductive hypothesis, A1 En1 (R), i.e., there are matrices
U1 , U2 , , Ur such that Uk = In1 + k Eik jk for some k R, 1 ik , jk n 1 and
A1 = U1 U2 Ur . Define
0
1
= In + k Ei +1,j +1 En (R)
Vk =
k
k
0
Uk
then
A1
= V1 V2 Vr En (R)
A = Hom(A, C )
(a : b 7 nab )
2i
where n = e n . is a well-defined (a A for all a A) group homomorphism. (a+b = a b )
If a = 1A , then 1 = a (1) = na , i.e., a = 0. Thus, is injective.
1 = (0) = (1)n . So (1) = k for some k, and = k because (1) completely
For any A,
n
determines . Thus, is surjective.
L
For a general finite abelian group A, we know that A
= i Ai where Ai s are cyclic groups.
Therefore, we have
M
\ Y Y
A
Ai =
Ai =
Ai
=
=A
L
Note that the second isomorphism comes from a more generalL
fact that HomR ( iI Ai , B)
=
Q
Hom
(A
,
B)
(defined
by
f
7
(f
)
where
:
A
,
A
)
for
R-modules
A
,
B
and
i
i
i
i
i
i
R
iI
18
aA
aA
(a + b)
aA
Thus,
aA (a)
(a) = 0
aA
= 0.
References
[1] K. Conrad, Expository Papers, http://www.math.uconn.edu/kconrad/blurbs/
[2] R. Elman, Lectures in Algebra Course Note, http://www.math.ucla.edu/rse/
[3] T. Hungerford, Algebra, Springer, 1974
[4] N. Jacobson, Structure theory for algebraic algebras of bounded degree, Annals of Mathematics, Vol. 46 (1945),
pp. 695-707
[5] J. Milne, Class Field Theory, http://www.jmilne.org/math/CourseNotes/CFT.pdf
[6] R. Wilson, An example of a PID which is not a Euclidean domain, http://www.maths.qmul.ac.uk/
raw/MTH5100/PIDnotED.pdf
20