Math 260Q: Noetherian Rings

Simon Rubinstein-Salzedo

Fall 2005
0.1 Introduction
These notes are based on a graduate course on noetherian rings I took from Professor
Ken Goodearl in the Fall of 2005. The textbook was An Introduction to Noncommuta-
tive Noetherian Rings by Ken Goodearl and Robert Warfield. The theorem numbers
in the notes correspond to those in the book.

0.2 Description
Although the rings that one typically first meets in an algebra course (rings of inte-
gers, polynomial rings, rings of functions) are commutative, the universe holds just
as many noncommutative rings. These often arise as rings of operators of various
kinds (think of linear transformations on a vector space). Important examples in-
clude rings of differential operators, under which heading one can place the so-called
enveloping algebras of Lie algebras; group rings (amounting to rings of operators on
vector spaces built from groups); and “twisted” versions of these, such as the strangely
named “quantum groups” which have been intensely studied in the past two decades.
Many of these examples are noetherian rings; that is, ring in which the right and left
ideals are finitely generated, and there is a rich general theory of noetherian rings
that can be applied to them.

This quarter will be mainly devoted to the basic theory of noetherian ring, although a
few quantum groups will appear as examples. One key goal will be to prove Goldie’s
Theorem, which gives necessary and sufficient conditions for a particularly useful
kind of ring of fractions to exist. Major concepts such as prime ideals will also be
studied, and in order to work effectively with concrete example of noetherian rings,
skew polynomial rings will be introduced.

1
Chapter 1

A Few Noetherian Rings

Let k be a field and R = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]. An algebraic variety V ⊆ k n is defined by

equations pi (x1 , . . . , xn ) = 0 for pi ∈ R. If we let I = {p ∈ R | p(x1 , . . . , xn ) = 0
for all (x1 , . . . , xn ) ∈ V } ⊇ hpi ’si, then I is an ideal of R generated by finitely many
polynomials q1 , . . . , qt . Then the variety corresponding to I is V = {(x1 , . . . , xn ) ∈
k n | qj (x1 , . . . , xn ) = 0 for all j = 1, . . . , t}.

Analogously, consider linear partial differential equations with polynomial coefficients.

There exists a ring R consisting of linear combinations of
∂ m1 ∂ mn
p(x1 , . . . , xn ) · · · .
∂xm
1
1
∂xm
n
n

Corresponding to R is a ring of C ∞ functions of x1 , . . . , xn on R[x1 , . . . , xn ].

Let R be a ring (which in these notes will always be assumed to have a 1). We write
RR for R viewed as a right R-module and R R for R viewed as a left R-module.

The ascending chain condition (ACC) for submodules is the following statement: For
all chains A1 ⊆ A2 ⊆ · · · for submodules of A, there exists an N so that An = AN
for all n ≥ N .

Let {Aj | j ∈ J} be a collection of submodules of A. A maximal element in the

collection is some Aj0 such that there is no j ∈ J with Aj ) Aj0 .

2
Proposition 1.1 For a module A, the following are equivalent:

(a) A satisfies the ACC on submodules.

(b) Every nonempty collection of submodules of A has a maximal element.

(c) Every submodule of A is finitely generated.

Proof Sketch. We first show that (a) implies (b). Let A be a nonempty collec-
tion of submodules. Suppose there is no maximal element in A. Then there is some
A1 ∈ A and some A2 ∈ A so that A2 ) A1 , and so forth. We end up with a sequence
A1 ( A2 ( · · · , which is a contradiction.

We now show that (b) implies (c). Suppose B is a submodule which is not finitely
generated. Pick b1 ∈ B, and let B1 be the submodule generated by b1 . Then there is
some b2 ∈ B \ B1 . Let B2 be the submodule generated by b1 and b2 . In this manner,
find submodules B1 ( B2 ( · · · . The collection {Bn | n ∈ N} has no maximal
element.

S∞ now show that (c) implies (a). Let A1 ⊆ A2 ⊆ · · · be an ascending chain. Then
We
i=1 Ai is a submodule generated by some x1 , . . . , xk . Then there is some i so that
all the xj ’s are in Ai .

Proposition 1.2 Let B ≤ A be modules. Then A is noetherian iff B and A/B are
both noetherian.

Corollary 1.3 If A1 , . . . , An are noetherian modules, so is A1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ An .

Corollary 1.4 If R is a right noetherian ring, then all finitely generated right R-
modules are noetherian.

3
Corollary 1.5 Let S be a subring of a ring R. If S is right noetherian and RS is
finitely generated, then R is noetherian.

Proposition 1.6 If R is a module-finite algebra over a commutative noetherian ring

S, then R is noetherian. (If there is a map S → Z(R), then R is an algebra over S;
R is module-finite over S means that R is a finitely generated S-module.)

In general, suppose A is a finitely generated right module over a ring R, say generated
n
by x1 , . . . , xn . Then A = x1 R + · · · + xn R. Set F = RR . There exists an epimorphism
φ : F → A given by φ(r1 , . . . , rn ) = x1 r1 + · · · + xn rn . Thus A ∼ = F/K for some
n
submodule K. If R is right noetherian, then RR is noetherian, so RR is noetherian,
n
so RR /K is noetherian.

If R is a ring, then Mn (R) is a ring.

Proposition 1.7IfR is a right

 noetherian
 ring and n ∈ N N and S is a subring of

 r 0 
 

 ..
Mn (R) and S ⊇  . r ∈ R , then S is right noetherian.


 0  
r  

        0 0
R R a b  a b a b
Consider the ring = a, b, c ∈ R . We have =
 0 0 R 0 c  0 c 0 c0
aa ab0 + bc0

.
0 cc0
   
Q Q + Qπ R R
Example. is a subring of .
0 Z 0 R

Suppose A and C are rings and B is both a left A-module and a right C-module.

4
 
A B
has the standard operations of addition and multiplication. We have
0 C
      
a 0 0 b 0 0 0 (ab)c
= ,
0 0 0 0 0 c 0 0
      
a 0 0 b 0 0 0 a(bc)
= .
0 0 0 0 0 c 0 0

Definition. Let A and C be rings. An (A, C)-bimodule is an abelian group B with

operations A × B → B and B × C → B such that

(a) B is a left A-module.

(b) B is a right C-module.

(c) (ab)c = a(bc) for all a ∈ A, b ∈ B, and c ∈ C.

 
A B
Exercise 1B. If A and C are rings and A BC is a bimodule, then the set
0 C
with formal matrix operations is a ring.

 
A B
Proposition 1.8 Let R = be a formal triangular matrix ring.
0 C

(a) R is right noetherian iff A and C are right noetherian and BC is finitely gener-
ated.

(b) R is left noetherian iff A and C are left noetherian and A B is finitely generated.

Theorem 1.9 (Hilbert Basis Theorem.) Let S = R[x] be a polynomial ring. If R is

right (left) noetherian, then so is S.

Idea. Assume R is right noetherian. Let I be a right ideal with S. Without loss of
generality, S 6= 0.

5
 (1) Set J = {leading coefficients of polynomials in I} ∪ {0}. Check that J is a right
ideal of R.

(2) J is generated by some r1 , . . . , rk . Without loss of generality, all ri 6= 0. Suppose

ri is the leading coefficient of pi ∈ I. Without loss of generality, all pi have
degree n. We’re halfway there: If p ∈ I and deg(p) = d ≥ n, then there are
a1 , . . . , ak ∈ R such that

p1 (a1 xd−n ) + · · · + pk (ak xd−n ) (∗)

has degree d and the same leading coefficient as p, so p − (∗) ∈ I and has degree
less than n.

(3) Set N = {q ∈ S | q = 0 or deg(q) < n}, a right R-submodule of S generated by

1, x, . . . , xn−1 . Thus NR is a noetherian module. Thus N ∩I is finitely generated
as a right R-module. Say N ∩ I = q1 R + · · · + qt R.

(4) p1 , . . . , pk , q1 , . . . , qt generate I.

Corollary 1.10 Let R be a commutative right which is an algebra over a field k. If

R is finitely generated as a k-algebra, then R is noetherian.

Idea. Say R is generated by r1 , . . . , rm . Let S = k[x1 , . . . , xm ] be a polynomial ring

over k in m indeterminates. Then there exists a k-algebra homomorphism φ : S → R
such that φ(xi ) = ri . Then R ∼
= S/ ker φ. The Hilbert Basis Theorem implies that R
is noetherian.

Example. Differential operators on R[x]. Let L be the set of linear differential

d
operators on R[x], an R-subring of EndR (R[x]) generated by D = dx and {µf =left
multiplication by f | f ∈ R[x]}. In fact, L = {µf0 + µf1 D + · · · + µfn Dn | fi ∈ R[x]}.
We have D(µf )(g) = (f g)0 = f 0 g + f g 0 = (µf 0 + µf D)(f ). Thus Dµf = µf D + µf 0 .
Identify each f with µf . Then Df = f D + f 0 . In particular, Dx = xD + 1. Then
L = {f0 + f1 D + · · · + fn Dn | fi ∈ R[x]} is almost the polynomial ring R[x][D].

Example. Let k be a field, G the group hx, y | xyx−1 = y −1 i, and kG the group
algebra {fm xm + fm+1 xm+1 + · · · + fn xn | fi ∈ k[y ±1 ], m ≤ n ∈ Z}. Then kG is al-
most the Laurent polynomial ring k[y ±1 ][x±1 ], Since xy = y −1 x and xf (y) = f (y −1 )x,

6
f (y) 7→ f (y −1 ) is an automorphism α of k[y ±1 ]; xf = α(f )x.

1.1 Automorphism-Twisted Skew Polynomial Rings

Let R be a ring and α ∈ Aut(R). We wish to build a “skew polynomial ring” with
“indeterminate” x such that xr = α(r)x for all r ∈ R. The elements are the usual
polynomial expressions r0 + r1 x + · · · + rn xn , where each ri ∈ R. Addition is as
usual. Multiplication will be derived from the relation xr = α(r)x, so in particular
xi r = αi (r)xi for all i ≥ 0 and r ∈ R. Hence (rxm )(sxn ) = rαm (s)xm+n .

Exercise. This builds a ring.

As an R-module, this new ring is R + Rx + Rx2 + · · · , a free R-module.

Definition. Let R be a ring and α ∈ Aut(R). The statement “S = R[x; α]” means
that

(a) S is a ring containing R as a subring.

(b) x is an element of S, and xr = α(r)x for all r ∈ R.

(c) S is a free left R-module with basis {xi | i ≥ 0}.

Such a ring exists and is unique.

Lemma. Let R be a ring and α ∈ Aut(R). Suppose S = R[x; α] and T = R[y; α].
Then S ∼ = T ; more precisely, there exists an isomorphism φ : S → T such that
φ |R = idR and φ(x) = y.

Idea. The only possibility is φ(r0 + r! x + · · · + rn xn ) = r0 + r1 y + · · · + rn y n . Check

that this works.

7
Lemma 1.11 Let S = R[x; α], φ : R → T a ring homomorphism, and y ∈ T . Assume
yφ(r) = φα(r)y for all r ∈ R. Then there is a unique ring homomorphism ψ : S → T
such that ψ |R = φ and ψ(x) = y.

Example. Let k be a field, R = k[y] a polynomial ring, and q ∈ k × (the multiplica-

tive group of k). Then there exists a unique k-algebra automorphism α of R such that
α(y)P= qy. Look at S = P R[x; α].
P The key property is that xy = qyx. The elements
are ni=0 fi xi , fi ∈ R, or ni=0 m λ
j=0 ij y j i
x , λij ∈ k.

Context. If k is a field, then k 2 is the “affine plane over k.” O(k 2 ) is the coefficient
ring of k 2 , which is the polynomial ring k[x, y]. This is a k-algebra with generators x
and y and relation xy = yx.

Definition. Let k be a field and q ∈ k × . Then corresponding quantized coordinate

ring of k 2 is
Oq (k 2 ) = khx, y | xy = qyxi.

Claim. Oq (k 2 ) is a skew polynomial ring as in the last example.

(a) Keep Oq (k 2 ) = khx, y | xy = qyxi.

(b) R = k[ŷ] (polynomial ring), α ∈ Aut R is given by p(ŷ) 7→ p(q ŷ), S = R[x̂; α].

(c) x̂ŷ = q ŷx̂ in S, so there is a unique k-algebra homomorphism φ : Oq (k 2 ) → S

such that φ(x) = x̂ and φ(y) = ŷ.

(d) There is a unique k-algebra homomorphism θ : R → Oq (k 2 ) such that θ(ŷ) = y.

Then xy = qyx, so xy i = q i y i x for all i ≥ 0, so xθ(ŷ i ) = θα(ŷ i )x, so xθ(r) =
θα(r)x for all r ∈ R. Lemma 1.11 implies that there exists a unique k-algebra
homomorphism ψ : S → Oq (k 2 ) such that ψ |R = θ and ψ(x̂) = x. Notice that
ψ(ŷ) = y.

(e) φψ(x̂) = x̂ and φψ(ŷ) = ŷ, so φψ = idS . Similarly ψφ(x) = x and ψφ(y) = y,
so ψφ = idOq (k2 ) .

8
Proposition 1.13 If k is a field and q ∈ k × , then Oq (k 2 ) is a skew polynomial ring
k[y][x; α], where k[x] is a polynomial ring and α is the k-algebra automorphism of
k[y] such that α(y) = qy.

Definition. Let R be a ring and α ∈ Aut R. “T = R[x±1 ; α]” means

(a) T is a ring with R as a subring.

(b) x is an invertible element of T , and xr = α(r)x for all r ∈ R.

(c) T is a free left R-module with basis {xi | i ∈ Z}.

Example. Let k be a field and q ∈ k × . The algebraic torus is (k × )2 . O((k × )2 ) =

k[x±1 , y ±1 ]. The quantized version is Oq ((k × )2 ) = khx, x0 , y, y 0 | xx0 = x0 x = y 0 y =
yy 0 = 1, xy = qyxi.

Exercise 1O. Oq ((k × )2 ) = k[y ±1 ][x±1 ; α], where α(y) = qy.

Theorem 1.14 Let S = R[x; α] and α ∈ Aut R. If R is right (left) noetherian, so is

S.

Idea for the right noetherian case. Let I be a nonzero right ideal of S.
(1) Let J denote the set of leading coefficients of elements of I together with 0. J
is closed under addition and subtraction. Let α ∈ J and r ∈ R. There exists
p = axn +(lower terms)∈ I. pr = aαn (r)xn +(lower terms)∈ I, so aαn (r) ∈ J.
Instead, pα−n (r) = arxn +(lower terms)∈ I, so ar ∈ J. Thus J is a right ideal
of R.

(2) J is generated by a1 , . . . , ak . There exists a pi = ai xni +(lower terms)∈ I. Thus

without loss of generality all pi have degree n.

(2’) We’re halfway. Suppose p ∈ I with deg(p) = d ≥ n. Let p = axd +(lower

terms), with a ∈ J. Then a = a1 r1 + · · · + ak rk for some ri ∈ R. Then

9
 p1 α−n (r1 ) + · · · + pk α−n (rk ) = (a1 r1 + · · · + ak rk )xn +(lower terms). Then
p1 α−n (r1 )xd−n + · · · + pk α−n (rk )xd−n = axd +(lower terms), so there is a poly-
nomial of degree less than d in I. Finish as before.

There are problems with the left noetherian case. Let I be a left ideal of S. Let
J denote the set of leading coefficients of elements of I together with 0. Suppose
a, b ∈ J. There exists a p = axm +(lower terms) and q = bxn +(lower terms)∈ I.
What if m < n? Then xn−m p = αn−m (a)xn +(lower terms). Thus we only get
αn−m (a) + b ∈ J.

Definition. Let T be a ring. The opposite ring T op has the same set as T and the
same addition as T , but a new multiplication ∗ defined by a ∗ b = ba.

Look at S = R[x; α]. Rop is a subring of S op , and x ∈ S op . Also x ∗ r = rx =

xα−1 (r) = α−1 (r) ∗ x. Check that S is a free right R-module with basis {xn | n ≥ 0}.
Then S op is a free left Rop -module with basis {xn | n ≥ 0}. Thus S op = Rop [x; α−1 ].

If R is left noetherian, then Rop is right noetherian, so Rop [x; α−1 ] = S op is right
noetherian, and so S is left noetherian.

Corollary 1.15 Let T = R[x±1 ; α] and α ∈ Aut R. If R is right (left) noetherian, so

is T .

Definition. A ring R is simple iff

(a) R 6= 0.

(b) The only ideals of R are 0 and R.

Let α ∈ Aut R. An α-ideal of R is an ideal I C R such that α(I) = I. R is α-simple

iff
(a) R 6= 0.

10
 (b) The only α-ideals are 0 and R.

Exercise 1V. Let R = k[x], where K is a field of characteristic 0, and let α be the
k-algebra automorphism such that α(y) = y + 1. Then R is α-simple.

Theorem 1.17 Let T = R[x±1 ; α], α ∈ Aut R. Then T is simple iff

(a) R is α-simple.

(b) No positive power of α is inner.

Idea for ⇒(a). If I C R is an α-ideal, then IT C T .

Idea for ⇐. Let 0 6= I C T . Let n be the minimum degree for nonzero elements
of I ∩ S (where S = R[x; α]). Let J be the set of leading coefficients of elements
of I ∩ S of degree n together with 0. Note that 0 6= I ∩ S C S, J C R, and
J 6= 0. J is an α-ideal: if 0 6= a ∈ J, then there exists some p = axn +(lower
terms)∈ I ∩ S, so xpx−1 ∈ I ∩ S and xpx−1 = α(a)xn +(lower terms), so α(a) ∈ J.
Thus α(J) ⊆ J. Use xpx−1 to see that α−1 (J) ⊆ J. Thus (a) implies that
J = R, so there is some p = xn + an−1 xn−1 + · · · + a0 ∈ I ∩ S. If a0 = 0, then
p = (xn−1 + an−1 xn−2 + · · · + a1 )x, so 0 6= px−1 ∈ I ∩ S, which is a contradic-
tion. Thus a0 6= 0. We have xpx−1 = xn + α(an−1 )xn−1 + · · · + α(a0 ) ∈ I ∩ S.
Then p − xpx−1 ∈ I ∩ S and has degree less than n, so p − xpx−1 = 0. Thus
α(ai ) = ai for all i. For all r ∈ R, pr = αn (r)xn + an−1 αn−1 (r)xn−1 + · · · + a0 r.
αn (r)p = αn (r)xn + αn (r)an−1 xn−1 + · · · + αn (r)a0 . Then pr − αn (r)p = 0 because it
has degree less than n, so ai αi (r) = αn (r)ai for all i, and a0 r = αn (r)a0 for all r ∈ R.
Continuing this way, we see that a0 is invertible in R. Thus αn (r) = a0 ra−1 0 for all
r ∈ R. (b) implies that n = 0. Thus p = 1. Finally, 1 ∈ I ∩ S ⊆ I, so I = T .

Corollary 1.18 Let k be a field, q ∈ k × , and T = Oq ((k × )2 ). Then T is simple iff q

is not a root of unity.

11
Chapter 2

Skew Polynomial Rings

d
Example. Consider R[x] with multiplication operators and dx
= D. Then Df =
f D + f 0 for all f ∈ R[x].

Definition. Let R be a ring. A map δ : R → R is a derivation iff δ(r + s) =

δ(r) + δ(s) and δ(rs) = δ(r)s + rδ(s) for all r, s ∈ R.

Definition. “S = R[x; δ]” means

(a) S is a ring containing R as a subring.

(b) x ∈ S and xr = rx + δ(r) for all r ∈ R.

(c) S is a free left R-module with basis {xj | j ≥ 0}.

We have x2 r = x(rx + δ(r)) = (rx + δ(r))x + δ(r)x + δ 2 (r) = rx2 + 2δ(r)x + δ 2 (r).
More generally, we have
n  
n
X n n−i
x r= δ (r)xi .
i=0
i

Exercise. R[x; δ] exists.

12
 d
We now look at some key examples. Let K be any ring, R = K[y], and δ = dy
.

h i
d
Weyl Algebra. A1 (K) = K[y] x; dy , so xy = yx + 1. In general,
     
d d d
An (K) = K[y1 ] x1 ; [y2 ] x2 ; · · · [yn ] xn ; .
dy1 dy2 dyn

Definition. Let R be a ring and δ a derivation on R. A δ-ideal of R is any I C R

such that δ(I) ⊆ I. R is δ-simple iff R 6= 0 and the only δ-ideals are 0 and R. δ is
inner iff there exists an a ∈ R such that δ(r) = ar − ra for all r ∈ R; otherwise δ is
outer.

Proposition 2.1 Let R be a Q-algebra and δ a derivation on R. Then R[x; δ] is

simple iff

(a) R is δ-simple.

(b) δ is outer.

Corollary 2.2 If K is a field of characteristic 0, then An (K) is simple for all n.

We wish to form a skew polynomial ring with coefficient ring R and indeterminate x.
We require the following:

• It is a ring S with R as a subring.

• x ∈ S and S is a free left R-module with basis {xi | i ≥ 0}.

• deg(st) ≤ deg s + deg t for all s, t ∈ S.

Consequences of the above wish list are that deg(x) = 1 and deg(r) = 0 for all r ∈ R.
Then xr should have degree at most 1, so xr = r0 x + r00 for some r0 , r00 ∈ R. Hence we
should have maps α, δ : R → R such that xr = α(r)x + δ(r) for all r ∈ R. We have

13
x(r + s) = xr + xs for all r, s ∈ R, so α(r + s) = α(r) + α(s), δ(r + s) = δ(r) + δ(s).
Also x1 = x so α(1) = 1 and δ(1) = 0. Furthermore, (xr)s = x(rs) = α(rs)x + δ(rs).
Thus α(rs) = α(r)α(s) and δ(rs) = α(r)δ(s) + δ(r)s. Hence α must be a ring endo-
morphism of R and δ a left α-derivation of R.

The next job is to show that there exists a ring R[x; α, δ] with some properties:

• Universal property.

• Uniqueness up to isomorphism.

• Show the Hilbert Basis Theorem if α ∈ Aut R.

2.1 Building Rings from “Operators”

Take an abelian group A (or a vector space over a field k). Label the ring E =
EndZ (A) (or algebra E = Endk (A)). Take some elements of E and form the ring
(algebra) they generate.

Proposition 2.3 Given a ring R, a ring endomorphism α or R, and an α-derivation

δ on R, there exists a ring R[x; α, δ].

Sketch.

(1) Form the ordinary polynomial ring R[z]. View it as an abelian group, and set
E = EndZ (R[z]).

(2) Consider the map R → E given by r 7→(lert multiplication by r). Identify R

with its image, a subring of E.

(3) Define x ∈ E by !
X X
x ri z i = (α(ri )z + δ(ri ))z i .
i i

Check that xr = α(r)x + δ(r) for all r ∈ R.

14
(4) Set S to be the subring of E generated by R ∪ {x}. We get that S is a ring and
R is a subring of S and x ∈ S for free.

(5) Check that S is a free left R-module with basis {xi | i ≥ 0}.

15
Chapter 3

Prime Ideals

Definition. A prime ideal in a ring R is an ideal P C R such that P 6= R and for

all ideals I, J C R, if IJ ⊆ P , then I ⊆ P or J ⊆ P .

Proposition 3.1 Let R be a ring, P C R, and P 6= R. The following are equivalent:

(a) P is a prime ideal.

(b) If I, J C R and I, J ) P , then IJ 6⊆ P .

¯ J¯ C R/P and I¯J¯ = 0, then I¯ = 0 or J¯ = 0).
(c) R/P is a prime ring (i.e. if I,

(d) If I and J are right ideals of R and IJ ⊆ P , then I ⊆ P or J ⊆ P .

(e) If I and J are left ideals of R and IJ ⊆ P , then I ⊆ P or J ⊆ P .

(f) If x, y ∈ R and xRy ⊆ P , then either x ∈ P or y ∈ P .

• If I and J are right ideals, then RI, RJ C R.

• If x, y ∈ R, then RxR, RyR C R.

Proposition 3.2 All maximal ideals are prime.

16
Exercise. In a ring R, every proper ideal is contained in a maximal ideal.

Example. In Z, h0i is the unique minimal prime. In R[x, y]/(xy 2 ), the minimal
(x) (y)
primes are (xy 2 ) and (xy 2 ) .

Proposition 3.3 Every prime ideal P in a ring R contains a minimal prime.

Proof. The idea is as follows: Let X = {prime ideals contained in P }. We work

with (X, ≤), where “≤” is “⊇.” Let Y be T a nonempty chain in X; we need to show
that it has a lower bound in X. Set Q = Y C R. We claim that Q is prime. Let
x, y ∈ R such that xRy ⊆ Q and x 6∈ Q. There is some Q0 ∈ Y such that x 6∈ Q0 .
Thus y ∈ Q0 . Look at some arbitrary Q00 ∈ Y . If Q0 ⊆ Q00 , then y ∈ Q00 . If Q0 ⊇ Q00 ,
then x 6∈ Q00 , so y ∈ Q00 . Thus y ∈ Q and Q is prime.

Definition. If I C R, a prime P ⊆ I is minimal over I iff P is minimal among

primes containing I. Equivalently, P/I is a minimal prime in R/I.

Theorem 3.4 Let R be a right or left noetherian ring and I C R. Then there are only
finitely many primes minimal over I, and some product of them (with repetitions) is
contained in I.

Example. R = R[x, y], I = (xy 2 ). Then P1 = (x) and P2 = (y) are the only primes
minimal over I, and P1 P22 = I.

Proof. We claim that it suffices to prove

there exist primes P1 , . . . , Pn ⊇ I such that P1 P2 · · · Pn ⊆ I. (∗)

To see this, note that each Pi contains a prime Qi minimal over I, and

Q1 Q2 · · · Qn ⊆ P1 P2 · · · Pn ⊆ I.

If Q is a prime minimal over I, then P1 · · · Pn ⊆ I ⊆ Q, so some Pj ⊆ Q. Then

I ⊆ Pj ⊆ Q, so Q = Pj . Thus {primes minimal over I} ⊆ {P1 , . . . , Pn }.

17
Now suppose (∗) fails. The noetherian condition implies that there is an ideal I¯ ⊆ I
maximal such that (∗) fails. If I¯ is prime, take P1 = I,
¯ which is a contradiction. Thus
I¯ is not prime, so there exist J, K ) I¯ such that JK ⊆ I.¯ Thus (∗) holds for J and
¯ which is a contradiction. Hence (∗) always holds.
K, so (∗) holds for I,

Definition. An ideal I C R is semiprime iff I is the intersection of prime ideals.

(This includes R, which is the empty intersection.)

Theorem 3.7 I C R is semiprime iff for all x ∈ R, xRx ⊆ I implies x ∈ I. (If R is

commutative, x2 ∈ I implies x ∈ I, so I is a radical ideal.)

T
Proof. For the forward direction, we have I = α∈A Pα , where Pα are prime ideals.
But xRx ⊆ Pα implies x ∈ Pα .

For the reverse direction, it suffices to prove that if x ∈ R \ I, there exists a prime
P ⊇ I such that x 6∈ P . Set x0 = x. Since x0 6∈ I, x0 Rx0 6⊆ I, so there exists an
x1 = x0 r0 x0 6∈ I. Then x1 6∈ I, so there is an x2 = x1 r1 x1 6∈ I, and so forth. Zorn’s
Lemma implies that there is an ideal P ⊇ I which is maximal with respect to the
condition P ∩ {x0 , x1 , x2 , . . .} = ∅. We now claim that P is prime. Suppose P is not
prime. Then there exist J, K ) P such that JK ⊆ P . The maximality of P implies
that there exist xj ∈ J and xk ∈ K. Let m = max{j, k}; note that xm ∈ J ∩ K.
Then xm+1 ∈ xm Rxm ⊆ JK ⊆ P , which is a contradiction. Thus P is prime.

Corollary 3.8 The following are equivalent for I C R:

(a) I is semiprime.

(b) If J C R and J 2 ⊆ I, then J ⊆ I.

(c) If J is a right ideal of R and J 2 ⊆ I, then J ⊆ I.

(d) If J is a left ideal of R and J 2 ⊆ I, then J ⊆ I.

(e) If J C R and J ) I, then J 2 6⊆ I.

18
Definition. A right or left ideal J in a ring is nilpotent iff there is some n ∈ N such
that J n = 0. J is a nil ideal iff every element of J is nilpotent.

Definition. The prime radical of R is the intersection of all prime ideals of R, the
smallest semiprime ideal.

mk
Example. Let R = Z/nZ, where n = pm 1 · · · pk . The prime ideals in R are pi Z/nZ.
1

The prime radical is (p1 · · · pk )Z/nZ.

Theorem 3.11 Let N be the prime radical of a right or left noetherian ring R. Then
N is nilpotent and N contains all nilpotent right or left ideals.

Definition. Let A = AR . For X ⊆ A, the annihilator of X in R is ann(X) =

annR (X) = {r ∈ R | xr = 0 for all x ∈ X}, which is a right ideal of R. For Y ⊆ R,
the annihilator of Y in A is annA (Y ) = {a ∈ A | ay = 0 for all y ∈ Y }. For X ⊆ R,
`. ann(X) = {r ∈ R | rx = 0 for all x ∈ X} and r. ann(X) = {r ∈ R | xr = 0 for all
x ∈ X}.

Example. Let R = Z and A = Z/6Z. Then annR (2 + 6Z) = 3Z C Z and

annA (2) = {3 + 6Z, 6Z} C A.

If B is a submodule of A, then annR (B) is an ideal of R. If I C R, then annA (I) is a

submodule of A.

Definition. A module AR is faithful iff annR (A) = 0. A is fully faithful iff A is

faithful and all its nonzero submodules are faithful.

L∞
Example. Let R = Z. Then nZ (n 6= 0), Z, Q, and R are fully faithful. i=1 Z/nZ
is faithful but not fully faithful.

19
If AR 6= 0 and I = annR (A) C R, then A is also an R/I-module and is faithful.
Possibly there is some 0 6= B ≤ A with annR (B) > I.

Proposition 3.12 Let AR 6= 0. Suppose there is a P C R maximal among annihi-

lators of nonzero submodules of A. Then P is a prime ideal and annA (P ) is a fully
faithful (R/P )-module.

Idea. Suppose I, J C R with I, J ) R. Then annR (A) cannot properly contain

P , so annR (A) ) I. Thus AI 6= 0. Now annR (AI) ) P , so it does not contain
J, and AIJ 6= 0. Thus IJ 6⊆ annR (A). There exists a nonzero B ≤ A such that
P = annR (B). Since I ) annR (B), BI 6= 0. Now annR (BI) 6⊇ J, so BIJ 6= 0. Thus
IJ 6⊆ P . Thus P is prime.

Suppose R is right noetherian and AR is finitely generated, and A 6= 0.

(1) Since R is right noetherian, there exists a P1 C R maximal among annihilators

of nonzero submodules of A. Proposition 3.12 implies that P1 is prime, and
A1 = annA (P1 ) is a fully faithful (R/P1 )-module.

(2) If A1 6= A, repeat for A/A1 : there exists a P2 C R and a submodule A2 ≤ A

with A2 > A1 such that A2 /A1 is a fully faithful (R/P2 )-module.

(3) Continue. Since AR is noetherian, there is some n so that An = A.

Proposition 3.13 Suppose R is right noetherian and AR is finitely generated. Then

there exist submodules
A0 = 0 < a ! < · · · < A n = A
and prime ideals P1 , . . . , Pn C R such that for all i, Ai /Ai−1 is a fully faithful (R/Pi )-
module.

Proposition 3.14 Suppose R, A, Ai , Pi are as in Proposition 3.13. Set I = annR (A).

If P is any prime minimal over I, then P is some Pj .

20
Proof. (Ai /Ai−1 )Pi = 0 implies that Ai Pi ⊆ Ai−1 . So APn Pn−1 · · · P1 = 0. Thus
Pn Pn−1 · · · P1 ⊆ I ⊆ P . Thus there exists a j such that Pj ⊆ P . But I ⊆ Pj ⊆ P . So
the minimality of P implies that P = Pj .

Definition. A module A is simple (or irreducible) iff A 6= 0 and the only submod-
ules of A are 0 and A.

If A is simple, then ann(A) is the only ideal which is an annihilator of 0 6= a ∈ A. It is

maximal and hence prime. If A = AR is simple, then annR (A) is a right primitive
ideal of R.

Proposition 3.16 In any ring R, the intersection of left primitive ideals, the in-
tersection of right primitive ideals, the intersection of maximal left ideals, and the
intersection of maximal right ideals all coincide.

Definition. This intersection is the Jacobson radical of R, denoted J(R). R is

a semiprimitive ring iff J(R) = 0. I C R is a semiprimitive ideal iff R/I is a
semiprimitive ring.

Note. Primitive ideals are prime. Thus J(R) is semiprime and contains the prime
radical.

Theorem 3.22 Let S = R[x; δ], where R is a commutative noetherian Q-algebra and
δ is a derivation.

(a) If P C S is prime, then P ∩ R is a prime δ-ideal of R.

(b) Suppose Q is a prime δ-ideal of R.

(i) QS C S, QS is prime, and QS ∩ R = Q.

(ii) If δ(R) 6⊆ Q, then QS is the unique prime of S whose intersection with R
is equal to Q.

21
 (iii) If δ(R) ⊆ Q, then there exist infinitely many primes P C S such that
P ∩ R = Q. They are inverse images of primes in K[x], where K is the
quotient field of R/Q under the map

quot S
S 7−→ = (R/Q)[x] ⊆ K[x].
QS

Example. Let k be an algebraically closed field of characteristic 0. Let R = k[y],

d
δ = (y 2 − 1) dy , and S = R[x; δ]. The prime ideals in R are 0 and hy − αi (α ∈ k).
The prime δ-ideals are 0, hy − 1i, hy + 1i. If Q = 0, then δ(R) 6⊆ Q, so only P = 0 is
in S. If Q = hy − 1i, then δ(R) ⊆ Q, so S/QS ∼ = k[x]. The primes are 0 and hx − λi
(λ ∈ k), so P = hy − 1, x − λi (λ ∈ k) or hy − 1i. The case Q = hy + 1i is similar.
Hence the prime ideals in S have the following structure:

NNN · · · hy − 1, x − λi · · · NNN · · · hy + 1, x + λi · · ·
NNN ppp NNN ppp
NNN p p ppp NNN p p ppp
NNN ppp NNN ppp
NN ppp NN ppp
hy − 1i TT hy + 1i
TTTT jj
TTTT jjjjjjj
TTTT jj
TTTT jjjj
T jjjj
0

22
Chapter 4

Semisimple Modules, Artinian

Modules, and Torsionfree Modules

Commutative domains are contained in quotient fields. The modules of these quo-
tient fields are vector spaces, which are direct sums of 1-dimensional submodules.
Noncommutative domains are contained in division rings of fractions. The modules
of these rings of fractions are direct sums of 1-dimensional submodules. We would
like to contain noetherian prime rings in some sort of quotient object whose modules
are direct sums of copies of some particular simple module.

Definition. For a module A, the socle of A is the sum of all simple submodules
of A. It is denoted by soc(A). A is semisimple (or completely reducible) iff
soc(A) = A.

Examples.

(1) Vector spaces.

(2) A ∈ Z-mod. soc(A) = {a ∈ A | the order of a is prime}. So if n =

mk
pm 1 m2
1 p2 · · · pk , where the pi are distinct primes and mi > 0, then soc(Z/nZ) =
n
p1 p2 ···pk
Z/nZ.

Say {Ai | i ∈QI} is a collection of R-modules. The direct product has theL Cartesian
product set Q i∈I Ai with natural operations. The (external) direct sum i∈I Ai is
the set of a ∈ i∈I Ai with ai = 0 for all but finitely many i. Now suppose all Ai are

23
 P S
submodules of some A. Then i∈I Ai is the L submodule
P generated by i∈I AiP
. There
exists a homomorphism (“sum map”) S : i∈I  Ai → i∈I  Ai given by a 7→ i∈I ai .
P
Check that s is injective iff for all j ∈ I, Aj ∩ i∈I Ai = 0. In this case, we say
i6=j P
{Ai | i ∈ I}L
is independent. If this happens, we identify i∈I Ai (the internal direct
sum) with i∈I Ai .

Proposition 4.1 If A is a module, soc(A) is the direct sum of some family of simple
submodules of A.

Proof. Let X = {all independent collections of simple submodules of A}. Then

∅ ∈ X. Zorn’s Lemma implies that there is a maximal P elementL Y ∈ X. Suppose
Y = {Bi | i ∈ I}, where the Bi are simple and B = i∈I Bi = i∈I Bi ≤ soc(A).
Suppose B 6= soc(A). Then there exists a simple submodule S ≤ A such that S 6⊆ B,
so S ∩ B = 0 and Y ∪ {S} is independent, which is a contradiction. Thus B = soc(A).

Proposition 4.2 A module A is semisimple iff every submodule of A is a direct

summand.

Proof. We first do the forward direction. Let B ≤ A. Zorn’s Lemma implies that
there is a submodule C ≤ A maximal with respect to B ∩C = 0. Thus B +C = B ⊕C.
Suppose B ⊕ C < a. Then there is a simple submodule S ≤ A such that S 6⊆ B ⊕ C,
so {B, C, S} is independent, so B ∩ (C ⊕ S) = 0, which is a contradiction. Thus
B ⊕ C = A.

For the reverse direction, we have A = soc(A) ⊕ B for some B ≤ A. Suppose

B 6= 0. Choose 0 6= b ∈ B and set C = bR or Rb. Zorn’s Lemma implies that
there is some submodule M ≤ C maximal with respect to b 6∈ M . Then C/M
is a simple module. The hypothesis implies that there is some N ≤ A such that
A = M ⊕ N ,so C = M ⊕ (N ∩ C). (This follows from the Modular Law, which
states that if M ≤ C ≤ A and N ≤ A, then C ∩ (N + M ) = (C ∩ N ) + M .) Now
N ∩C ∼ = C/M is simple. But N ∩ C ≤ soc(A), which is a contradiction. Thus B = 0
and A = soc(A).

24
Corollary 4.3 Any submodule of a semisimple module is semisimple.

For which R are all modules semisimple?

Theorem 4.4 For a ring R, the following are equivalent.

(a) All right R-modules are semisimple.

(b) All left R-modules are semisimple.

(c) RR is semisimple.

(d) RR is semisimple.

(e) R = 0 or R ∼
= Mn1 (D1 )⊕Mn2 (D2 )⊕· · ·⊕Mnk (Dk ) for some ni ∈ N and division
rings Di .

Proof. We first show that (c) implies (a). Let A = AR . There exists a free module
FR with a basis {xa | a ∈ A}. There is a unique homomorphism f : F → A such that
= a for all a ∈ A. So if K = ker(f ), A ∼
f (xa )L = F/K. Since RR is semisimple and
F = a∈A πa R is isomorphic to a direct sum of copies of RR , F is semisimple, and
so A is semisimple.

It now suffices to show that (c) and (e) are equivalent. We outline the proof that (c)
implies (e) first. Without loss of generality, R 6= 0.
L
(1) Since RR is semisimple, RR = i∈I Si , where Si are simple right ideals. RR is
cyclic, so I is finite.

(2) Group the Si by isomorphism class and relabel. Then

ni
k M
M
RR = Sij
i=1 j=1

such that Sij are simple right ideals, k, ni ∈ N. Furthermore, Sij ∼

= Stn iff i = t.

(3) HomR (Sij , Stn ) = 0 for i 6= t.

25
 Lni
(4) RR = R1 ⊕· · ·⊕Rk , where Ri = j=1 Sij is a right ideal. By (3), HomR (Ri , Rt ) =
0 for i 6= t, so Ri C R for all i.

(5) Now each RiLis a ring, and R ∼ = R1 × · · · × Rk . Thus without loss of generality,
∼
R = R1 = n1
T , all T ∼ T (as right ideals). Thus RR ∼ = T1n . Write
 j=1 j  j = 1
1 
 x 
 

n  .
T1 =  .. xi ∈ T1 . Then D1 = EndR (T1 ), a division ring (by Schur’s

 xn 
 

Lemma). There is a map θ : Mn1 (D1 ) → EndR (T1n ). Then
   
x1 x1
 ..   .. 
[fij ] 7→  .  7→ [fij ] ·  .  .
xn1 xn1

= EndR (T1n ) ∼
Exercise: θ is a ring isomorphism. Thus Mn1 (D1 ) ∼ = EndR (RR ) ∼
=
R.

We now outline the proof that (e) implies (c).

(1) R = 0 is easy, so without loss of generality assume R 6= 0. Without loss of

generality, R = R1 × · · · × Rk , where Ri = Mni (Di ), ni ∈ N, and Di is a division
ring.

(2) soc(RR ) = soc(R1 ) × · · · × soc(Rk ). Thus without loss of generality, R = R1 =

Mn1 (D1 ).

(3) For i = 1, . . . , ni , set Si = {x ∈ R | all nonzero entries in x are in row i}. Exer-
cise: Si is a simple right ideal of R. Since RR = S1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Sn , RR is semisimple.

Such rings are called semisimple rings (or semisimple artinian rings).

Definition. A module A is artinian if it satisfies the descending chain condition

(DCC), i.e. there is no infinite descending chain of proper submodules A0 > A1 >
A2 > · · · . A ring R is right (left) artinian if RR (R R) is artinian.

26
Proposition. Every semisimple ring R is artinian and noetherian.

Proof. RR = S1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Sn , where the Si are simple right ideals. But Si is artinian

and noetherian for all i. Thus RR is artinian and noetherian. So is R R.

Theorem. (Noether.) Let R be a ring. The following are equivalent.

(a) R ∼
= Mn (D) for some n ∈ N and division ring D.
(b) R is semisimple and simple.
(c) R is simple and right artinian.
(d) R is simple and left artinian.

We call these rings simple artinian rings.

Proof. We first show that (b) implies (a). Let R 6= 0. Then R ∼ = Mn1 (D1 ) × · · · ×
Mnk (Dk ). 0 × Mn2 (D2 ) × · · · × Mnk (Dk ) is a proper ideal and hence 0. Thus k = 1.
Now we show that (a) implies (b). R is semisimple. We leave it as an exercise to
show that if D is a simple ring, then Mn (D) is also simple.

(b) implies (c) is clear. To see that (c) implies (b), let R 6= 0. Since R is right
artinian, there is a right ideal S minimal among nonzero right ideals, so S is simple.
Thus soc(RR ) 6= 0. We leave it as an exercise to show that soc(RR ) C R. Thus
soc(RR ) = R.

A commutative domain R is embedded in its quotient field F . Then torsionfree R-

modules extend to vector spaces over F .

Definition. If A is an R-module, there is a torsion submodule T (A) = {a ∈ A | ra =

0 for some nonzero r ∈ R}.

27
Then A/T (A) is torsionfree.

L
Let R = Z and A be a torsion Z-module. Then A = p prime Tp (A), where Tp (A) =
{a ∈ A | pn a = 0 for some n ∈ N}.

If a, b ∈ T (A), there are nonzero r, s ∈ R so that ra = sb = 0. Then since R is a

domain, rs 6= 0, so (rs)(a + b) = 0, so a + b ∈ T (A).

Definition. A multiplicative set in a ring R is any X ⊆ R such that 1 ∈ X and

X is closed under multiplication. An R-module A is X-torsion iff every element of
A is annihilated by an element of X. A is X-torsionfree iff no nonzero element of
A is annihilated by a nonzero element of X.

Question. Let A = AR , X ⊆ R a multiplicative set, and tX (A) = {a ∈ A | ax = 0

for some x ∈ X}. Is (when is) this a submodule of A?

Example. Let A = R/xR, where x ∈ X. Then 1̄x = 0, so 1̄ ∈ tX (A). So if tX (A)

is a submodule, it equals A. So for all r ∈ R, we need r̄y = 0 for some y ∈ X, so
ry ∈ xR, so ry = xs for some s ∈ R.

Definition. Let R be a ring and X ⊆ R a multiplicative set. X satisfies the right

Ore condition iff for all r ∈ R and x ∈ X, there exists s ∈ R and y ∈ X such that
ry = xs. Then X is a right Ore set.

Lemma 4.21 Let X ⊆ R be right Ore.

(a) For all x1 , . . . , xn ∈ X, there exists s1 , . . . , sn ∈ R such that x1 s1 = · · · = xn sn ∈

X.

(b) For all AR , tX (A) is a submodule of A.

Proof.

28
 (a) It is enough to do n = 2. Given x1 , x2 ∈ X, the right Ore condition implies
that there exist s ∈ R and y ∈ X such that x1 y = x2 s.
(b) Let a1 , a2 ∈ tX (A). There exist x1 , x2 ∈ X such that ai xi = 0. There ex-
ist s1 , s2 ∈ R such that x1 s1 = x2 s2 = y ∈ X. Thus ai y = ai xi si = 0, so
(a1 ± a2 )y = 0. If r ∈ R, there exist s ∈ R and z ∈ X such that rz = x1 s. Thus
(a1 r)z = a1 x1 s = 0.

Lemma 4.22 Let R be a ring, X ⊆ R a right Ore set, and A = AR .

(a) tX (A) is an X-torsion module, and A/tX (A) is X-torsionfree.
(b) Submodules, factor modules, and sums of X-torsion modules are X-torsion.
(c) If B ≤ A, and B and B/A are both X-torsion or both X-torsionfree, then the
same is true for A.
(d) Submodules and direct products of X-torsionfree modules are X-torsionfree.

Proposition 4.23 Suppose X ⊆ R is a multiplicative set, A = AR is a noetherian

X-torsionfree module, and f ∈ EndR (A). If A/f (A) is X-torsion, then f is injective.

Proof. ker(f ) ≤ ker(f 2 ) ≤ · · · . Since A is noetherian, there is some n such that

ker(f n ) = ker(f n+1 ). For all i ∈ N, A/f (A)  f i (A)/f i+1 (A). Thus f i (A)/f i+1 (A)
is X-torsion. This implies that A/f n (A) is X-torsion. Look at a ∈ ker(f ). There
is some x ∈ X such that āx = 0 in A/f n (A), so ax = f n (b) for some b ∈ A.
f n+1 (b) = f (a)x = 0, so f n (b) = 0. Thus ax = 0, and so a = 0.

Corollary. If A = AR is noetherian and f ∈ EndR (A) is epic, then f ∈ AutR (A).

Proof. X = {1}.

Corollary. If R is right noetherian and x, y ∈ R with xy = 1, then yx = 1.

29
Proof. Let f ∈ EndR (RR ) be left multiplication by x. If xy = 1, then f is epic, so
f is an automorphism. Thus r. annR (x) = ker(f ) = 0. x(yx − 1) = 0, so yx − 1 = 0.

30
Chapter 5

Injective Hulls

A commutative domain R is contained in its quotient field F . Torsionfree R-modules

become vector spaces over F .

For every vector v and 0 6= r ∈ R, there is a vector 1r v so that r 1

r
v = v.

Definition. Let R be a commutative domain. A = R A is divisible iff for all a ∈ A

and 0 6= r ∈ R, there is some b ∈ A such that rb = a.

Exercise. Let R be a commutative domain with quotient field F . A = R A is the

R-module of a vector space over F iff A is torsionfree and divisible.

Say A = R A, a ∈ A, and 0 6= r ∈ R.

Question. When can we solve r·? = a inside A?

If ra0 = a, then sra0 = sa for all s ∈ R. We get a homomorphism f : (r) → A such

that f (sr) = sa for all s ∈ R. This is defined irrespective of whether there is such an
a0 . If there is such such an a0 , then there is a homomorphism f : R → A such that
g(s) = sa0 for all s ∈ R. g(sr) = sra0 = sa = f (sr), so g |(r) = f .

31
Proposition. Let R be a commutative domain and A = R A. Then A is divisible
iff for every principal ideal I C R and every homomorphism f : I → A, there is an
extension g : R → A.

Proof. We show only the forward direction; the reverse direction is similar. If I CR is
principal, say I = (r), then r = 0 implies that f is the zero map R → A. Thus with-
out loss of generality, r 6= 0. Let f : I → A be a homomorphism, f (r) = a ∈ A. By
divisibility, there is an a0 ∈ A such that ra0 = a. Define a homomorphism g : R → A
such that g(s) = sa0 for all s ∈ R. g(sr) = sra0 = sa = sf (r) = f (sr) for all s ∈ R,
so g extends f .

Definition. A = AR is injective iff for every right R-modules B ≤ C, all homomor-

phisms B → A extend to homomorphisms C → A.
⊆
B /C
~
~
~
 ~ ∃
A

(Note that C → A is not necessarily unique.)

Corollary. Over a commutative domain, all injective modules are divisible.

Example. Z Z is not injective.

⊆
2Z /Z
}
}
2n7→n }
 ~} 6∃
Z

Z (Z/nZ) is not injective.

Proposition 5.1 (Baer’s Criterion.) A = AR is injective iff for any right ideal I of
R, all homomorphism I → A extend to homomorphisms R → A.

32
Proof. The forward direction is obvious. For the reverse direction, let B ≤ C be right
R-modules and f : B → A a homomorphism. Let X = {(D, g) | B ≤ D ≤ C, g ∈
HomR (D, A), g extends f }. Then (B, f ) ∈ X. Define ≤ on X: (D1 , g1 ) ≤ (D2 , g2 ) iff
D1 ≤ D2 and g@ extends g1 . Check that ≤ is a partial order, and S nonempty S chains

have upper bounds: A chain {(Di , gi ) | i ∈ I} has an upper bound i∈I Di , i∈I Bi .
Zorn’s Lemma implies that there is a maximal element (D∗ , g ∗ ) ∈ X. If D∗ = C,
we’re done. Suppose D∗ 6= C, and choose c ∈ C \ D∗ . Set D0 = D∗ + cR. Let
I = {r ∈ R | cr ∈ D∗ }, a right ideal of R. Define h : I → A by h(r) = g ∗ (cr). Check
that h is a homomorphism. By hypothesis, h extends to a homomorphism h0 : R → A.
Set x = h0 (1) so that xr = h0 (r) = g ∗ (cr) for all r ∈ I. We claim that there is a
well-defined homomorphism g 0 : D∗ + cR → A given by g 0 (d + cr) = g ∗ (d) + xr for all
d ∈ D∗ and r ∈ R.

Corollary. Let R be a commutative PID. Then an R-module A is injective iff it is

divisible.

Example. The Z-modules Q and Q/Z are injective. So is

"∞ #
[ 1
Z(p∞ ) = n
Z /Z,
n=0
p

the p-primary part of Q/Z.

Proposition. If R is a commutative PID, every R-module A is a submodule of an

injective R-module.

Proof. Write A ∼ = F/K for some free R-module F and some K ≤ F . F is a direct
sum of copies of R R. Set D to be the direct sum of the quotient field (over some
index set). Then D is a divisible R-module. F ⊆ D. Now A ∼ = F/K ≤ D/K, and
D/K is divisible. Identify A with its image in D/K.

General Problem. Let P be some property of modules. Suppose A = AR and we

know that A is isomorphic to a submodule of an R-module B satisfying P . Why is
A equal to a submodule of such a module?
(1) We are given a monomorphism f : A → B.

33
 (2) Choose a set B1 such that B1 ∩ A = ∅ and there is a bijection β : B → B1 .
Use β to transfer the R-module operations from B to B1 : for all x, y ∈ B1 ,
define x + y = β(β −1 (x) + β −1 (y)), and for all r ∈ R, define xr = β(β −1 (x)r).
Now B1 is an R-module, and β : B → B1 is a module isomorphism. Also
g = βf : A → B1 is monic.
(3) Define B2 = A t (B1 \ g(A)). There is a bijection γ : B1 → B2 such that
(
γ(g(a)) = a for all a ∈ A,
γ(b) = b for all b ∈ B1 \ g(A).
Use γ to make B2 into an R-module; now γ is a module isomorphism. γg : A →
B2 is a monomorphism, and γg(a) = a for all a ∈ A. Thus A is a submodule of
B2 . B ∼
= B1 ∼
= B2 , so B2 has P .

Analogue. Constructing an algebraic closure of a field k.

(1) Given p ∈ k[x], p 6∈ k, there is a field k 0 ⊇ k in which p has a root.
(2) Likewise for any set of polynomials.
(3) Thus there is a field k1 ⊇ k such that all nonconstant polynomials of k[x] have
roots in k1 .
(4) Repeat: There exist fields k ⊆ k1 ⊆ k2 ⊆ · · · such that all nonconstant polyno-
mials in ki [x] have roots in ki+1 .
(5) Thus k̃ = ∞
S
n=1 kn is a field containing k and is algebraically closed.

(6) Set k̄ = {α ∈ k̃ | α is algebraic over k}, which is an algebraic closure of k.

Lemma. Let A and B ≤ C be R-modules and f ∈ HomR (B, A). Then there is a
module F ≥ A such that f extends to a homomorphism C → F .

Proof. The aim is to fill in the diagram

⊆
B /C

f

  ∃
⊆
A _ _ _/ F

34
as follows:
⊆
B /C

f πir
  ir
πi` A⊕C
A /
D cHH
HH π
HH
HH
H 
i` +
A⊕C
Define D = {(f (b), −b) | b ∈ B}, a submodule of A ⊕ C. If a ∈ ker(πi` ), then
(a, 0) ∈ ker π, so (a, 0) = (f (b), −b) for some b ∈ B, so a = 0. Thus πi` is monic.
Identify A with the image of πi` .

Lemma. Let A and Ci (i ∈ I) be R-modules, Bi ≤ Ci , and fi ∈ HomR (Bi , A) for all

i. Then there is an R-module F ≥ A such that for all i, fi extends to a homomor-
phism Ci → F .

L L P
Proof. Set B = i∈I Bi ≤ C = i∈I Ci . Define f = i∈I fi : B → A. Label
natural injections ji : Bi → B and qi : Ci → C. The previous Lemma implies that
there is an R-module F ≥ A and a homomorphism g : C → F which extends f .
⊆
Bi @ / Ci
@@ ji ~~
@@ qi ~
@@ ~~~
⊆ ~~
B /C
fi gqi
f g
  ⊆  
A /F

Corollary. For any A = AR , there is a module F1 (A) ≥ A such that for any right
ideal I of R, all homomorphisms I → A extend to homomorphisms R → F1 (A).

So we make A ≤ F1 (A) ≤ F2 (A) such that I → Fn (A) extends to R → Fn+1 (A).

of R and f a homomorphism I → ∞
S
Suppose I is a right ideal P n=1 Fn (A). If I is
finitely generated, say I = tj=1 xj R, then there is some n such that f (xj ) ∈ Fn (A)

35
 f (I) ≤ Fn (A), so f extends to R → Fn+1 (A) ≤ U . Thus if R is right
for all j, so S
noetherian, ∞ n=1 Fn (A) is injective.

Theorem 5.4 Any A = AR is contained in an injective module.

Proof. Let ℵ = card(R), and let γ be the first infinite ordinal such that card(γ) > ℵ.
Build a transfinite sequence of modules Aα for all α ≤ γ such that A ≤ A1 = F1 (A).
When Aα is defined,
S set Aα+1 = F1 (Aα ). When β is a limit ordinal less than or equal
to γ, set Aβ = α<β Aα .

We claim that Aγ is injective. By Baer’s Criterion, we only need to show that for
any right ideal I of R, any f ∈ HomR (I, Aγ ) extends to a homomorphism
S R → Aγ .
f (I) ≤ Aγ , and card(f (I)) ≤ ℵ. γ is a limit ordinal, so Aγ = α<γ Aα . Thus for
all x ∈ I, there is an αx < γ such that f (x) ∈ Aαx and card({αx | x ∈ I}) ≤ ℵ, so
sup{αx | x ∈ I} = σ has cardinality at most γ, so σ < γ. Thus f (I) ≤ Aσ , so f
extends to a homomorphism R → Aσ+1 ≤ Aγ .

Corollary 5.5 A module A is injective iff A is a direct summand of every overmodule.

Proof. We first do the forward direction. Given A ≤ B, id : A → A extends to a

homomorphism f : B → A.
⊆
A /B
~
~
id ~
 ~ ∃f
A
Thus B = A ⊕ ker(f ).

For the reverse direction, by Theorem 5.4, there is an injective module B ≥ A. Then
B = A ⊕ A0 for some A0 ≤ B. We observe that A1 ⊕ A2 is injective iff A1 and A2 are
both injective.

Definition. A submodule A ≤ B is essential iff for every nonzero submodule C of

36
B, A ∩ C 6= 0. We write A ≤e B. A homomorphism f : A → B is an essential
monomorphism iff f is monic and f (A) ≤e B.

Given A ≤ B, A ≤e B iff A ∩ C 6= 0 for all 0 6= C ≤ B iff A ∩ C 6= 0 for all nonzero

cyclic submodules C of B iff A ∩ bR 6= 0 for all 0 6= b ∈ B iff for all 0 6= b ∈ B, there
is some r ∈ R such that 0 6= br ∈ A.

Proposition 5.6
(a) Let A ≤ B ≤ C. Then A ≤e C iff A ≤e B ≤e C.
(b) If Ai ≤e Bi ≤e C (i = 1, 2), then A1 ∩ A2 ≤e B1 ∩ B2 .

If A ≤ C is not essential, there is some 0 6= B ≤ C such that A ∩ B = 0. Thus

⊆ quot
A /C 2/ C/B.
monic

Proposition 5.7 Let A, B ≤ C. Assume B is maximal with respect to A ∩ B = 0.

Then
A+B C
≤e ,
B B
and A ⊕ B ≤e C.

Proof. Suppose D/B ≤ C/B and A+B B

∩D
B
= 0. Then D ≥ B and (A + B) ∩ D = B,
so A ∩ D ≤ A ∩ B = 0. Maximality of B implies that D = B, so D/B = 0. Thus
A+B C
B
≤e B . The other part is similar.

Corollary 5.8 If A ≤ C, then A is a direct summand of some essential submodule

of C.

Proof. Zorn’s Lemma implies that there is a submodule B ≤ C maximal with re-
spect to A ∩ B = 0. Thus A ⊕ B ≤e C by Proposition 5.7.

37
Corollary 5.9 A module C is semisimple iff the only essential submodule of C is C.

Proof. For the forward direction, let A ≤e C. By semisimplicity, C = A⊕B for some
B. Now A ∩ B = 0, so B = 0, so A = C. For the reverse direction, if A ≤ C, then
Corollary 5.8 implies that there is some B ≤ C so that A ⊕ B ≤e C. The hypothesis
implies that A ⊕ B = C.

Definition. An essential extension of a module A is any module B such that

A ≤e B. It is a proper essential extension iff B > A.

Proposition 5.10 A module A is injective iff A has no proper essential extensions.

Proof. For the forward direction, let A ≤e B. Injectivity implies that B = A ⊕ A0

for some A0 . Then A ∩ A0 = 0, so A0 = 0, so B = A.

Now we do the reverse direction. By Corollary 5.5, it is enough to show that A is

a direct summand of any C ≥ A. Zorn’s Lemma implies that there is some B ≤ C
maximal with respect to A ∩ B = 0. Proposition 5.7 implies that A⊕B
B
C
≤e B . Thus
⊆ quot
f : A → C → C/B is an essential monomorphism. There is an injective module
E ≥ A.
⊆
A _ /E
z=
z
f z ∃g
 z
C/B
Then ker(g) ∩ f (A) = 0, so ker g = 0. Now g maps C/B isomorphically into E, so
A = gf (A) ≤e g(C/B). The hypothesis implies that A = g(C/B), so f (A) = C/B,
so A⊕B
B
=BC
, so A ⊕ B = C.

Example. Let 0 6= n ∈ Z. Then Z/nZ ∼

= nZ/n2 Z ≤e Z/n2 Z, so Z/nZ is not injec-
tive as a Z-module.

38
Definition. A submodule A ≤ C is essentially closed iff A ≤e B ≤ C iff A = B.

Exercise 5E If C = A ⊕ A0 , then A is essentially closed in C.

Proposition 5.11 Let A ≤ E with E injective. Then A is essentially closed in E iff

A is injective.

Proof. We leave the reverse direction as an exercise. For the forward direction, it is
enough to show that A has no proper essential extensions. So suppose A ≤e B.
⊆
A /B
~
~
⊆ ~
 ~~ ∃f
E

As before, A ≤e B implies that ker f = 0, so A = f (A) ≤e f (B) ≤ E. Thus A is

essentially closed in E, so f (B) = A = f (A), so B = A.

Theorem 5.12 Let A ≤ F with F injective. Then there is some E ≤ F such that E
is injective and A ≤e E.

Proof. Zorn’s Lemma implies that there is a submodule E ≤ F maximal with re-
spect to A ≤e E. If E ≤e E 0 ≤ F , then A ≤e E 0 , so E 0 = E by maximality of E.
Thus E is essentially closed in F , so Proposition 5.11 implies that E is injective.

Definition. An injective hull (or injective envelope) for a module A is any in-
jective module E such that A ≤e E.

Injective hulls exist b Theorem 5.4 and 5.12.

Proposition 5.13 Suppose E and E 0 are injective hulls for A and A0 . If there is an

39
isomorphism f : A → A0 , then f extends to an isomorphism E → E 0 .
∃∼
EO _ _ _/ CO 0
=

⊆ ⊆
f
A / A0
∼
=

Notation. E(A) is an injective hull for a module A.

Suppose A is a torsionfree Z-module. A embeds in a vector space V over Q. V is

divisible as a Z-module and hence injective. Look at E, the subspace of V spanned
by A. The elements of E are st11 a1 + · · · + stkk ak = 1t a, where si , ti ∈ Z, ti 6= 0, ai ∈ A,
t = t1 · · · tk 6= 0 ∈ Z, and a ∈ A. Thus E = {1/t a | 0 6= t ∈ Z, a ∈ A}, which is
divisible and hence injective. If 0 6= x ∈ E, then x = 1t a, a 6= 0, so tx = a ∈ A. Thus
A ≤e E, the injective hull of A. dimQ (E) is a measure of size. Thus the measure of
the size of A is the rank of A.

L
Suppose V is a vector space over a field k. Then V = i∈I Vi , dimk (Vi ) = 1.
dimk (V ) = card(I). The Vi are simple k-modules; they are also not the direct sum of
two nonzero subspaces.

Definition. A module A is indecomposable iff A is not the direct sum of two

nonzero submodules.

Definition. A module A is uniform iff A 6= 0 and B1 ∩ B2 6= 0 for all nonzero

submodule B1 , B2 ≤ A (i.e. all nonzero submodules of A are essential).

Examples. Q, Z, Z/pn Z, and Z(p∞ ) (p prime) are uniform Z-modules.

Lemma 5.14 A nonzero module A is uniform iff E(A) is indecomposable.

40
Proof. For the forward direction, suppose E(A) = E1 ⊕E2 . Then (E1 ∩A)∩(E2 ∩A) =
0, implies that some Ei ∩ A = 0, so Ei = 0.

For the reverse direction, let 0 6= B ≤ A. Then B ≤ A ≤ E(A), so there is a sub-

module F ≤ E(A) which is an injective hull for B. F is injective, so E(A) = F ⊕ F 0
for some F 0 . Indecomposability of E(A) implies that F 0 = 0, so F = E(A), so
B ≤e E(A), so B ≤e A. Thus A is uniform.

Corollary. The nonzero indecomposables are exactly the uniform injectives.

Definition. A module A has finite rank iff E(A) is a finite direct sum of uniform
submodules.

Proposition 5.15 A module A has finite rank iff there is a finite direct sum of uni-
form submodules which is an essential submodule of A.

Lemma 5.16 Suppose E = E1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ En with all Ei uniform. Then E does not

contain a direct sum of n + 1 nonzero submodules.

Proof. We proceed by induction on n. The case n = 0 is clear, and the case n = 1

follows because then E is uniform. Suppose n > 1 and A1 ⊕ An+1 ≤ E, where each
Aj 6= 0. Set A = A1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ An . By induction, A does not embed in a direct sum of
n − 1 uniform modules. Thus A does not embed in
n
M
E`
`=1
`6=i

for all i = 1, . . . , n, so A ∩ Ei 6= 0 for all i, so A ∩ Ei ≤ Ei for all i.

Definition. The rank of a module A is a nonnegative integer n if there is a direct

sum of n nonzero submodules in A but not a direct sum of n + 1 nonzero submodules,
and it is infinite otherwise.

41
Proposition 5.20 tells us that the rank of A is n < ∞ iff E(A) is the direct sum of n
uniforms.

Example. If A is a torsionfree Z-module, then E(A) is a vector space over Q, and

the rank of A is equal to dimQ E(A).

Theorem 5.17 (Goldie.) For a module A, the rank of A is finite iff there is no infinite
direct sum of nonzero submodules in A.

Proof. The reverse direction is clear. For the forward direction, suppose A 6= 0, and
E(A) is not a finite direct sum of indecomposable submodules.

(1) E(A) = C0 is not indecomposable. Thus E(A) = M ⊕ N with M, N 6= 0. At

least one of M and N is not a finite direct sum of indecomposables. Now C0 =
C1 ⊕ B1 such that B1 6= 0 and C1 is not a finite direct sum of indecomposables.

(2) Repeat: C1 = C2 ⊕ B2 such that B2 6= 0 and C2 is not a finite direct sum of

indecomposables. Continue this process.
L∞
Check
L∞ that B1 , B2 , . . . are independent. Thus we have n=1 Bn ≤ E(A). Thus
n=1 (Bn ∩ A) ≤ A, and all Bn ∩ A 6= 0.

Corollary 5.18 Every noetherian module has finite rank.

Proof. Suppose that the rankLof A is infinite. Then Theorem 5.17 implies that
there is an infinite direct sum ∞
n=1 Bn ≤ A with all Bn 6= 0. So B1 < B1 ⊕ B2 <
B1 ⊕ B2 ⊕ B3 < · · · .

Corollary 5.19 Every nonzero noetherian module contains a uniform submodule.

Proof. If A 6= 0 is noetherian, Corollary 5.18 implies that the rank of A is n < ∞

and is nonzero. Proposition 5.20 implies that there is some A1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ An ≤e A, and

42
all Ai are uniform.

Corollary 5.21 Let B ≤ A.

(a) rank(B) ≤ rank(A).

(b) Suppose rank(A) < ∞. Then rank(B) = rank(A) iff B ≤e A.

(c) rank(A) ≤ rank(B) + rank(A/B).

Corollary 5.22 Suppose rank(A) < ∞, f ∈ EndR (A), and f is monic. Then
f (A) ≤e A.

Proof. f (A) ∼
= A, so they have the same rank.

Q
Observation. If (Ei )i∈I is an infinite collection of injective modules, then i∈I Ei is
injective.
⊆
B /
vA
v
v
v
Q  {v
i∈I Ei .

Theorem 5.23 (Papp, Bass.) A ring R is right noetherian iff any direct sum of
injective right modules is injective.

Proof. ForLthe forward direction, let (Ei )i∈I be a family of injective right R-modules
and E = i∈I Ei . Let J ≤ RR and f ∈ HomR (J, E). J is finitelyL generated, so
fL(J) is finitely
Q generated, so there is a finite K ⊆ J such that f (J) ⊆ k∈K Ek . But
k∈K Ek = k∈K| Ek is injective, so f extends to a homomorphism

M M
R→ Ek ≤ Ei .
k∈K i∈I

43
 L
Thus by Baer’s Criterion, i∈I Ei is injective.

For Sthe reverse direction, let I1 ≤ I2 ≤ · · · be

La∞ chain of right ideals of R, so
∞
I = n=1 In is a right ideal. By hypothesis, E = n=1 E(R/In ) is injective. For any
n, there is a homomorphism
⊆ quot ⊆
I → T → R/In → E(R/In ).
These induce a homomorphism f : I → ∞
Q
n=1 E(R/In ). Observe Lt that f (I) ≤ E.
Thus f extends to a homomorphism g : R → E. Let z = g(1) ∈ n=1 E(R/In ). For
all x ∈ I, f (x) = g(x) = zx, so f (x)n = zn x = 0 for all n > t, so x ∈ In for all n > t.
Thus I = It+1 , so our chain stops.

Corollary 5.24 If R is right noetherian, then every injective right R-module is a

direct sum of uniform submodules.

Proof. Let E = ER be injective. Zorn’s Lemma implies that there is an independent

L
family (Ai )i∈i of uniform submodules, maximal among such families. Thus i∈I Ai ≤
E. For all i ∈ I, E contains an injective hull Ei for Ai . Since {Ai } is independent,
{Ei } is independent, so M M
Ai ≤e Ei ≤ E.
i∈I i∈I
L
Since R is right noetherian, i∈I Ei is injective, so
!
M
E= Ei ⊕ E 0
i∈I

for some E 0 . If E 0 6= 0, there is a uniform B ≤ E 0 . But thenL{Ai | i ∈ I} ∪ {B} is

0
independent, which is a contradiction. Thus E = 0 and E = i∈I Ei .

Example. Let R = Z. Let E be a uniform injective Z-module. Pick 0 6= x ∈ E.

• If x has infinite order, Zx ∼
= Z. But Zx ≤e E, so E = E(Zx) ∼
= E(Z) ∼
= Q.
• If x has order m < ∞, m = m0 p with p prime and y = m0 x has order p.
Zy ∼= Z/pZ. Thus E ∼ = E(Z/pZ) ∼ = Z(p∞ ). Thus all injective Z-modules are
direct sums of copies of Q, Z(2∞ ), Z(3∞ ), Z(5∞ ), and so forth.

44
Chapter 6

Semisimple Rings of Fractions

We know that commutative domains embed in quotient fields. We want noncommu-

tative domains to embed in quotient division rings, prime rings to embed in quotient
simple artinian rings, and semiprime rings to embed in quotient semisimple rings.

Suppose R ⊆ S are rings, and X ⊆ R is such that elements of S are fractions with
numerators from R and denominators from X.
r
(1) x
is the product of r and x1 . We have two choices: r · 1
x
or 1
x
· r.
r
(a) x
is ambiguous when S is noncommutative.
(b) Therefore we instead use rx−1 or x−1 r.
(c) We make a choice — for example, assume all elements of S are fractions
rx−1 for r ∈ R and x ∈ X.
(2) For x ∈ X, x−1 = 1x−1 ∈ S, so if ax = 0 in R, then a = axx−1 = 0 in S. Thus
a = 0 in R. Thus we need all elements of X to be non-zero-divisors.
(3) For x, y ∈ X, we have x−1 y −1 ∈ S. So it is helpful to have X closed under
multiplication and 1 ∈ X.
(4) Suppose a, b ∈ R and x, y ∈ X. Look at (ax−1 )(by −1 ). We need x−1 b to be some
fraction with a right denominator: x−1 b = cz −1 for some c ∈ R and z ∈ X.
Thus bz = xc. Thus we need to have X be a right Ore set.
(5) To add ax−1 + by −1 , we need common denominators. This is okay if the Ore
condition is satisfied.

45
Definition. A regular element in a ring R is any non-zero-divisor: r. annR (x) =
`. annR (x) = 0.

Let R be a ring and X ⊆ R a multiplicative set of regular elements. A right ring of

fractions with respect to X is a ring S ⊇ R such that all elements of X are invertible
in S and every element of S can be written as rx−1 for some r ∈ R and x ∈ X.

Lemma 6.1 Suppose there is a right ring of fractions S for R with respect to X.

(a) X is a right Ore set.

(b) Given s1 , . . . , sn ∈ S, there exist ai ∈ R and x ∈ X such that si = ai x−1 for all
i.

(c) Let a, b ∈ R and x, y ∈ X. Then ax−1 = by −1 iff there exist c, d ∈ R such that
ac = bd and xc = yd ∈ X.

Proof.

(a) Done.

(b) Suppose si = bi x−1 i for some bi ∈ R and xi ∈ X. By Lemma 4.21, there exist
c1 , . . . , cn ∈ R such that x1 c1 = · · · = xn cn = x ∈ X. xi and x are invertible in
S, so ci is invertible, and si = bi x−1 −1 −1 −1
i = bi ci ci xi = (bi ci )x .

(c) First assume that ax−1 = by −1 . By Lemma 4.21, there exist c, d ∈ R such that
xc = yd ∈ X. Then

bd(yd)−1 = by −1 = ax−1 = ac(xc)−1 = ac(yd)−1 ,

so ac = bd. For the converse, suppose ac = bc. Then xc = yd ∈ X for some

c, d ∈ R. Then
ax−1 = (ac)(xc)−1 = (bd)(yd)−1 = by −1 .

Grunge Method. Assume R is a ring and X ⊆ R a right Ore set of regular elements.

46
 (1) Define ∼ on R × X by (c) of Lemma 6.1. Check that ∼ is an equivalence
relation.

(2) Set [a, x] to be the equivalence class of (a, x). Let S = {[a, x] | (a, x) ∈ R × X}.

(3) Define an addition on S with common denominators:

[a, x] + [b, y] = [a0 , z] + [b0 , z] = [a0 + b0 , z].

Check well-definedness, associativity, and so forth. Then R ∼

= {[a, 1] | a ∈ R},
and x = [x, 1] with inverse [1, x].

Suppose R is a domain, A = AR , a ∈ A, and 0 6= x ∈ R. We wish to “divide a by

x.” If A is contained in a module with an element b such that bx = a, then there is
a homomorphism R → L given by r 7→ br, x 7→ a, and xr 7→ ar ∈ A. Start with
a homomorphism f : xR → A, f (xr) = ar. This is well-defined: if xr = xr0 , then
r = r0 , so ar = ar0 . f extends to g : R → E(A), g(1)x = g(x) = f (x) = a. We just
need x to be not a left zero divisor.

Summary. Suppose x ∈ R is regular, A = AR , and a ∈ A. Then there is a b ∈ E(A)

such that bx = a. If A = RR , we get b ∈ E(RR ) such that bx = 1. Furthermore,
suppose X ⊆ R is a multiplicative set of regular elements and B = {b ∈ E(RR ) |
bx ∈ R for some x ∈ X}.

(1) For all a ∈ R, there exist b ∈ B and x ∈ X such that bx = a.

(2) If X is right Ore, then B/R = tX (E(RR )/R), a submodule. Thus B ≤ E(RR ).

We have R ∼
= EndR (RR ). We would like B ∼
= EndB (BB ) ⊆ EndR (BR ).

Theorem 6.2 (Ore, Asano.) Let R be a ring and X ⊆ R a multiplicative set of

regular elements. Then there is a right ring of fractions for R with respect to X iff
X is right Ore.

Proof. The forward direction is done. For the reverse direction, pick E = E(RR ).
Then tX (E/R) is a submodule of E/R, or A/R for some A ≤ E. Then A = {a ∈ E |
ax ∈ R for some x ∈ X}. Observe that tX (E) ∩ R = tX (R) = 0, so tX (E) = 0. Thus

47
E and A are X-torsionfree. Set S = EndR (A).

We claim that for all a ∈ A and x ∈ X, there is a b ∈ A such that bx = a. There

is a homomorphism f : xR → A such that f (xr) = ar for all r ∈ R. f extends to
g : R → E, so b = g(1) satisfies bx = a. Since bx ∈ A, there is a y ∈ X such that
bxy ∈ R, so b ∈ A.

We now claim that for all r ∈ R, there is a unique φr ∈ S such that φr (1) = r. (So
φr (r0 ) = rr0 for all r0 ∈ R.) There is a homomorphism f : RR → RR given by left
multiplication by r. This extends to a homomorphism g : E → E. For all a ∈ A,
there is an x ∈ X such that ax ∈ R, so
g(a)x = g(ax) = f (ax) = r(ax) ∈ R,
so g(a) ∈ A. Thus g(A) ⊆ A, so define φr = g |A ∈ S. Suppose also that φ0 ∈ S such
that φ0 (1) = r. So h = φ0 − φr ∈ S has h(1) = 0. For a ∈ A, there is an x ∈ X such
that ax ∈ R and h(a)x = h(ax) = h(1)ax = 0, so h(a) = 0. Thus h = 0, so φ0 = φr .

Proposition 6.5 Let X ⊆ R be a right and left Ore set of regular elements. Then
RX −1 = X −1 R.

Proof. Look at S = RX −1 . Then R is a subring of S. Elements of X are invertible

in S. Let s ∈ S. Then s = ax−1 for some a ∈ R and x ∈ X. Since X is left Ore, there
is a b ∈ R and a y ∈ X such that ya = bx. Then s = ax−1 = yb−1 . Thus S = X −1 R.
The other way is symmetric.

Definition. A classical right (left) quotient ring for a ring R is a right (left)
ring of fractions with respect to the set of regular elements of R.

Definition. A right (left) Ore domain is a domain R such that R \ {0} is a right
(left) Ore set.

For all a, x ∈ R, x 6= 0, there exist b, y ∈ R, y 6= 0, such that ay = xb iff for all

nonzero u, v ⊆ R, there are nonzero elements r, s ∈ R such that ur = vx 6= 0.

48
Lemma 6.6 Let R be a nonzero domain. The following are equivalent.

(a) R is a right Ore domain.

(b) RR is a uniform module.

(c) RR has finite rank.

Proof. The equivalence of (a) and (b) is done, as is (b) implies (c). We need only show
(c) implies (b). Suppose 0 < rank(RR ) < ∞. Then there is a uniform U ⊆ RR . Pick
0 6= u ∈ U . The map RR → uR given by r 7→ ur is an isomorphism. 0 6= uR ≤ U , so
uR is uniform, so RR is uniform.

Corollary 6.7 Any right (left) noetherian domain is a right (left) Ore domain.

Corollary 5.18 tells us that RR has finite rank.

Theorem 6.8 (Ore’s Theorem.) Let R be a ring. The following are equivalent.

(a) There is a right Ore set X ⊆ R of regular elements such that RX −1 is a division
ring.

(b) R has a classical right quotient ring D, and D is a division ring.

(c) R is a right Ore domain.

Proof. We first show that (a) implies (b). R is a subring of RX −1 . Now RX −1 is a

division ring, so R is a domain. Look at 0 6= u ∈ R. There is a u−1 ∈ RX −1 because
RX −1 is a division ring. All elements of RX −1 have the form ax−1 for some a, x ∈ R,
x 6= 0. Thus RX −1 is a classical right quotient ring of R. We have already shown (b)
implies (a).

49
For (b) implies (c), note that R is a domain, so the set of regular elements is R \ {0}.
For (c) implies (b), there is a ring D = RX −1 , X = R \ {0}, so D is a classical right
quotient ring of R. If 0 6= d ∈ D, d = ax−1 for some a, x ∈ R, a, x 6= 0. So there is
some e = xa−1 ∈ D and de = ed = 1. Thus D is a division ring.

The Weyl algebra A1 (C) is contained in its quotient division ring D1 (C). The center
of D1 (C) is C, and D1 (C) is transcendental over C.

Definition. A right annihilator in a ring R is any right ideal I = r. annR (X) for
some X ⊆ R.

Observe that if I = r. ann(X), then XI = 0, so X ⊆ `. ann(I), so r. ann(`. ann(I)) ⊆

r. ann(X) = I, so I = r. ann(`. ann(I)).

Proposition 6.9 Suppose R has a classical right quotient ring Q.

(a) If Q is right noetherian, then RR is finite rank.

(b) If Q is right noetherian, then R satisfies the ACC on right annihilators.

(c) If Q is semisimple, then R is semiprime.

Proof.
L∞
(a) If rank(RR ) = ∞, then there is some n=1 An ≤ RR for some nonzero right
ideals
P∞ A n . Choose 0 6
= a n ∈ A n for all n. Look at the right ideals an Q in Q.
n=1 an Q is not direct because Q is right noetherian, so there are q1 , . . . , qk ∈ Q
such that a1 q1 + · · · + ak qk = 0 but ak qk 6= 0. There exist b1 , . . . , bk , x ∈
R, x regular, such that qi = bi x−1 . Then a1 b1 x−1 + · · · + ak bk x−1 = 0, so
a1 b1 + · · · + ak bk = 0 (in R). ai bi ∈ A and the Ai are independent, so ai bi = 0
for i = 1, . . . , k. Thus ak qk = ak bk x−1 = 0, which is a contradiction. Thus
rank(RR ) < ∞.

(b) Let I1 ≤ I2 ≤ · · · be a chain of right annihilators in R. Set Jn = `. ann(In ) so

that In = r. annR (Jn ). Then J1 ≥ J2 ≥ · · · . Now r. annQ (J1 ) ≤ r. annQ (J2 ) ≤
· · · . These are right ideals of Q, and Q is right noetherian. Thus there is some m

50
 such that r. annQ (Jn ) = r. annQ (Jm ) for all n ≥ m. Note that r. annQ (Jn ) ∩ R =
r. annR (Jn ) = In . Thus In = Im for all n ≥ m.

(c) Assume Q is semisimple. Suppose N C R and N 2 = 0. Let L = `. annR (N ).

Exercise 5ZA implies that LR ≤e RR . We claim that LQ ≤e QQ . Let 0 6= q ∈ Q.
Write q = ax−1 , where a, x ∈ R and x is regular. Then qx = a 6= 0. There is
some r ∈ R such that 0 6= ar ∈ L. Thus 0 6= q(xr) ∈ LQ. Thus LQ ≤e QQ .
Now QQ is semisimple, so LQ = Q. Thus 1 = `1 q1 + · · · + `n qn for some `i ∈ L
and qi ∈ Q. There exist ai , x ∈ R with x regular such that qi = ai x−1 , so
x = `1 a1 + · · · + `n an ∈ L, so xN = 0, so N = 0. Thus R is semiprime.

Definition. A ring R is a right Goldie ring iff rank(RR ) < ∞ and R satisfies the
ACC on right annihilators.

A ring which has a semisimple classical right quotient ring is a semiprime right Goldie
ring.

Suppose R is a semiprime right Goldie ring and X is the set of regular elements
of R. We want the right Ore condition: given a ∈ R and x ∈ X, there should
be some b ∈ R and y ∈ X such that ay = xb, or equivalently, ay ∈ xR, or
y ∈ J := {r ∈ R | ar ∈ xR}, a right ideal of R. Since x is regular, xR ∼ = RR ,
so rank(xR) = rank(RR ) < ∞, so xR ≤e RR , so J ≤e RR .

Our new goal is to show that every essential right ideal of R contains a regular ele-
ment.

Ideas.

• Show r. annR (x) = 0 so that x is regular.

• We get this from xR ≤e RR by proving that `. annR (I) = 0 for all I ≤e RR .

• If J ≤e RR , we want x ∈ J such that r. annR (x) = 0, so we try for r. annR (x)

as small as possible.

51
 • We need the DCC on right annihilators.

Proposition 6.10 If R is semiprime right Goldie and K ≤e RR , then `. annR (K) = 0.

Proof. Set [
J= `. annR (I).
I≤e RR

We leave it as an exercise to show that J C R. Then we are done if J is nilpotent.

We have J ≥ J 2 ≥ J 3 ≥ · · · , so r. annR (J) ≤ r. annR (J 2 ) ≤ · · · , so there is some k so
that r. annR (J k ) = r. annR (J k+1 ).

We claim that J k = 0. Suppose not; then J k 6= 0. Then r. annR (J k ) 6= R. Among

x ∈ R \ r. annR (J k ), pick x with r. annR (x) maximal. If a ∈ J, then a ∈ `. annR (I),
and I ≤e RR . There is some r ∈ R such that 0 6= xr ∈ I, so axr = 0, so
r. annR (x) < r. annR (ax). Maximality of r. annR (x) implies that ax ∈ r. annR (J k ),
so J k ax = 0. Thus J k+1 x = 0, so x ∈ r. annR (J k+1 ) = r. annR (J k ), which is a contra-
diction. Thus J k = 0. Since R is semiprime, J = 0.

Lemma 6.11 Let R be semiprime right Goldie. Then the following are equivalent.

(a) x is regular.

(b) r. annR (x) = 0.

(c) xR ≤e RR .

Proof. (a) implies (b) is clear, and (b) implies (c) follows from Corollary 5.22 (RR
has finite rank). We therefore need only show that (c) implies (a). By Proposition
6.10, `. annR (xR) = 0, so `. annR (x) = 0. Look at I = r. annR (x). Proposition 5.7
tells us that there is some J ≤ RR such that I ∩ J = 0 and I ⊕ J ≤e RR .

We claim that xJ ≤e RR . If 0 6= a ∈ xR, then a = xr for some r ∈ R. Set

K = {k ∈ R | rk ∈ I ⊕ J}. Then K ≤e RR . By Proposition 6.10, `. annR (K) = 0,

52
so aK 6= 0. Then aK = xrK ≤ x(I ⊕ J) = xJ, so 0 6= aK ≤ aR ∩ xJ. Now
xJ ≤e RR Because of the finite rank condition, rank(xJ) = rank(xR) = rank(RR ).
Then J ∩ r. annR (x) = J ∩ I = 0, so J ∼
= xJ, so rank(J) = rank(RR ), so J ≤e RR , so
I = 0.

Lemma 6.12 If R is semiprime right Goldie, then R satisfies the DCC on right an-
nihilators.

Proof. Let I1 ≥ I2 ≥ · · · be a descending chain of right annihilators. Suppose

In = r. annR (Xn ) for some Xn ⊆ R. Then rank(I1 ) ≥ rank(I2 ) ≥ · · · , so there is
some m so that rank(In ) = rank(Im ) for all n ≥ m. Then In ≤e Im for all n ≥ m.

We claim that In = Im for all n ≥ m. Let n ≥ m and x ∈ Im . Then J = {r ∈ R |

xr ∈ In } ≤e RR . Then Xn xJ ⊆ Xn In = 0. Proposition 6.10 tells us that Xn x = 0,
so x ∈ In . Thus In = Im .

Proposition 6.13 (Goldie’s Regular Element Lemma.) Let R be semiprime right

Goldie. Then I ≤e RR iff there is a regular element in I.

Proof. The reverse direction is Lemma 6.11. For the forward direction, we use the
DCC on right annihilators. There is some x ∈ I so that A = r. annR (x) is minimal
among right annihilators of single elements of I.

We claim that xR ≤e I. Then we’re done, because this implies that xR ≤e RR ; use
Lemma 6.11. Let B ≤ I be such that B ∩ xR = 0. We must show that B = 0.

Our first goal is to show that BA = 0. If b ∈ B, then bR ∩ xR = 0, so r. annR (b +

x) = r. annR (b) ∩ r. annR (x). [If (b + x)r = 0, then br = −xr, so br = xr = 0.]
b + x ∈ B + xR ≤ I, so minimality implies that r. annR (b + x) = A, so A ≤ r. annR (b),
so bA = 0.

Our next goal is to show that RB ∩ A = 0. We have (RB ∩ A)2 ≤ (RB)A = 0. By

53
semiprimeness, RB ∩ A = 0.

The next goal is to show that xRB ≤e (RB)R . RB C R, so xRB ⊆ RB. Left
multiplication by x defines a homomorphism f : (RB)R → (RB)R . ker(f ) =
RB ∩ r. annR (x) = RB ∩ A = 0, so xRB ∼ = (RB)R , so they have the same finite
rank, so xRB ≤e (RB)R .

Finally we are ready to show that B = 0. B ∩ xRB ≤ B ∩ xR = 0 and B ≤ RB.

Thus xRB ≤e (RB)R , so B = 0. Thus xR ≤e I ≤e RR , so Lemma 6.11 implies that
x is regular.

Corollary 6.14 If R is prime right Goldie and 0 6= I C R, then there is a regular

element in I.

Proof. By Exercise 5A, IR ≤e RR .

Theorem 6.15 (Goldie’s Theorem.) R has a semisimple classical right quotient ring
iff R is semiprime right Goldie.

Proof. The forward direction is Proposition 6.9. For the reverse direction, let X
denote the set of regular elements of R. Let a ∈ R and x ∈ X. Since x is regular,
xR ≤e RR (by Lemma 6.11), so

I = {r ∈ R | ar ∈ xR} ≤e RR .

Proposition 5.6 implies that there is some y ∈ X ∩ I, so ay = xb for some b ∈ R.

Thus X is right Ore. Thus there is a classical right quotient ring Q = RX −1 .

We claim that the only I ≤e QQ is I = Q. The goal is to show that I ∩ R ≤e RR .

Let 0 6= b ∈ R. IF I ≤e QQ , then there is some q ∈ Q such that 0 6= bq ∈ I. Suppose
q = ax−1 , a ∈ R and x ∈ X. Then 0 6= bax−1 ∈ I, so 0 6= ba ∈ I ∩ R. Proposition
6.13 implies that there is some y ∈ (I ∩ R) ∩ X. Then y ∈ I and y −1 ∈ Q, so 1 ∈ I,
so I = Q. Corollary 5.9 then tells us that QQ is semisimple.

54
Corollary 6.16 If R is semiprime right noetherian, then R has a semisimple classical
right quotient ring.

Proposition 6.20 If R is a semiprime right and left Goldie ring, then every right
(left) Goldie quotient ring of R is also a left (right) Goldie quotient ring.

Lemma 6.17 Let R be semiprime right Goldie, and let Q be the right Goldie quotient
ring of R. Then Q is simple iff R is prime.

Proof. Observe that RR ≤e QR . If 0 6= q ∈ Q, then q = ax−1 for 0 6= a ∈ R and

x ∈ R regular, so 0 6= qx = a ∈ R. For the reverse direction, let 0 6= I C Q. Then
RR ≤e QR , so I ∩ R 6= 0; also I ∩ R C R. Exercise 5A tells us that (I ∩ Q)Q ≤e RR .
By Proposition 6.13, there is a regular element x ∈ I ∩ R, so 1 ∈ I, so I = Q.

For the forward direction, suppose A, B C R such that AB = 0 and Q 6= 0. Then

0 6= QAQ C Q, so QAQ = Q, so 1 = p1 a1 q1 + · · · + pn an qn for some pi , qi ∈ Q
and ai ∈ A. There exist bi ∈ R and x ∈ R regular such that all qi = bi x−1 . Thus
x = p1 a1 b1 + · · · + pn an bn ∈ QA. Then xB ⊆ QAB = 0 in R, so B = 0.

Theorem 6.18 R has a simple artinian classical right quotient ring iff R is prime
right Goldie.

55
Chapter 7

Modules over Semiprime Goldie

Rings

Proposition 7.19 Let R be a semiprime right and left Goldie ring. Then every
finitely generated torsionfree right R-module A is isomorphic to a submodule of a
finitely generated free module.

Proof. We claim that every nonzero submodule B ≤ A contains a uniform submod-

ule isomorphic to a right ideal of R. Pick 0 6= b ∈ B, and let I = r. annR (b) ≤ RR .
Since A is torsionfree, there is no regular element in I, so I 6≤e RR , so there is some
0 6= J ≤ RR such that J ∩ I = 0. Now J ∼ = bJ ≤ B. rank(K) < rank(RR ) < ∞, so
there is some uniform U ≤ J. Thus bU ∼ = U is a uniform submodule of B.

L
Zorn’s Lemma and the claim imply that there is some i∈I Ui ≤e A such that Ui is
uniform and isomorphic to Vi ≤ RR . Let Q be the right Goldie quotient ring of R.
Let Qi be a copy of QR for all i ∈ I. There exists a monomorphism
M ∼
=
M M
f: Ui → Vi ≤ Qi ,
i∈I i∈I i∈I
L L
i.e. i∈I Ui is isomorphic to a submodule of a free right Q-module. Then i∈I Qi is
torsionfree and divisible as a right R-module and isLtherefore injective (Proposition
7.11). Thus f extends to a homomorphism g : A → i∈I Qi . Then
!
M
(ker g) ∩ Ui = ker f = 0,
i∈I

56
L ker g = 0. Since A is finitely generated, g(A) is finitely generated, so
so g(A) ⊆
n
i∈I0 Qi for some finite I0 ⊆ I. Thus A is isomorphic to a submodule of QR for some
n ∈ N. Thus without loss of generality, A ≤ QnR . Choose generators a1 , . . . , am for A
and write ai = (ai1 , . . . , ain ) for some aij ∈ Q. There exist bij ∈ R and a regular x ∈ R
such that aij = x−1 bij for all i, j. Set bi = (bi1 , . . . , bin ) ∈ Rn for all i. Notice that
xai = bi for all i, so xA ≤ Rn . Thus left multiplication by x defines a homomorphism
h : A → Rn . Since x is regular, h is monic.

57
Chapter 8

Bimodules and Affiliated Prime Ideals

Example. Let  
Z Q
R= ,
0 Q
the subring of M2 (Q). R is right noetherian but not left noetherian. Let
 
0 Q
I= C R.
0 0

Then IR is simple (artinian and noetherian), but R I is not noetherian.

Lemmas 8.10 and 8.11 Let R AS be a bimodule such that

(a) AS is finitely generated.

(b) RA is artinian and noetherian.

(c) S is semiprime right noetherian.

(d) AS is torsionfree and faithful.

Then AS is semisimple and artinian.

Proof. We first claim that Ac = A for all regular c ∈ S. A ≥ Ac ≥ Ac2 ≥ · · · are

left submodules of A. By (b), there is some m ∈ N such that Acm = Acm+1 . If a ∈ A,
then acm = bcm+1 for some b ∈ A. (d) implies that a = bc.

58
We now claim that the right Goldie quotient ring Q of S is noetherian as a right
S-module. By (b), A = Ra1 + · · · + Ram for some ai ∈ A. (d) implies that
0 = r. annS (A) = r. annS ({a1 , . . . , am }), so the homomorphism f : SS → Am S given by
s 7→ (a1 s, . . . , am s) is monic. (d) and the first claim imply that AS is injective, so f
extends to a homomorphism g : QS → Am S . SS ≤e QS , so g is monic. Now (a) and
(c) imply that Am S is noetherian, so Q S is noetherian.

Finally, we claim that Q = S. Let c be a regular element of S. S ≤ c−1 S ≤ c−2 S ≤ · · ·

are right S-submodules of Q. The second claim implies that there is some k so that
c−k S = c−k−1 S, so c−1 ∈ S.

Now AS is a finitely generated module over a semisimple ring.

Theorem 8.12 (Lenagan’s Theorem.) Let R AS be a bimodule such that

(a) AS is finitely generated.
(b) RA is artinian and noetherian.
(c) S is right noetherian.
Then AS is artinian.

Corollary. Suppose R is right and left noetherian, I C R, and R I is artinian. Then

IR is artinian.

Proof. Suppose not. (a) and (c) imply that AS is noetherian, so it satisfies the ACC
on sub-bimodules. Use noetherian induction: without loss of generality, (A/B)S is
artinian for all nonzero sub-bimodules B. Choose P C S maximal among annihilators
of nonzero submodules of AS . Proposition 3.12 implies that P is a prime ideal and
B = `. annA (P ) is a fully faithful (S/P )-module.

Observe that B is a nonzero sub-bimodule of A. Then (A/B)S is artinian. Look at

B = R BS/P .
• BS/P is finitely generated and faithful.

59
 • RB is artinian and noetherian.

• S/P is semiprime right noetherian.

Let T be the torsion submodule of BS/P . Observe that T is a sub-bimodule of B and

a left R-module. Thus T = Rt1 + · · · + Rtn for some ti . There exists a regular x ∈ S
such that ti x = 0 for all i, so T x = 0, so TS/P is not faithful, so T = 0. Thus BS/P is
torsionfree. The Lemma implies that BS is artinian. Thus AS is artinian.

60
Chapter 9

Problems

(1) Let A be the algebra over a field k presented by two elements x and y and
the relation yx − xy = x. Show that A = k[y][x; α], where α is the k-algebra
automorphism of the polynomial ring k[y] such that α(y) = y − 1.

(2) Here is another way to obtain Corollary 1.15 from Theorem 1.14. Let S =
R[x; α] and T = [x±1 ; α], where α is an automorphism of R. Show that the
rule β(s) = x−1 sx defines an automorphism β of S, and then use the universal
mapping property of S[y; β] to show that the inclusion map S → T extends to
a ring homomorphism φ : S[y; β] → T such that φ(y) = x−1 . Conclude that
T ∼= S[y; β]/ ker(φ). Thus, if R is, say, right noetherian, then two applications
of Theorem 1.14 show that S[y; β] is right noetherian, and therefore T is right
noetherian.

(3) Let S be the algebra over a field k presented by two generators x and y and one
relation xy − yx = y. Show that S = k[y][x; δ], where k[y] is a polynomial ring
over k and δ = y(d/dy).

(4) (a) Let R = k[t] be a polynomial ring over a field k, and let α be the k-algebra
endomorphism of R given by the rule α(f (t)) = f (t2 ). Show that R[x; α]
is neither right nor left noetherian.
(b) Now let R = k(t) be the quotient field of k[t] and extend α to the k-
algebra endomorphism of R given by the same rule α(f (t)) = f (t2 ). Show
that R[x; α] is not right noetherian. In this case, however, R[x; α] is left
noetherian, as will follow from Theorem 2.8.

(5) Let R[x; α.δ] be a skew polynomial ring, and assume that α is an automorphism
of R. Show that α−1 is an automorphism of the opposite ring Rop , that −δα−1
is an α−1 -derivation of Rop , and that R[x; α, δ]op = Rop [x; α−1 , −δα−1 ].

61
 (6) Let S = R[x; α, δ] be a skew polynomial ring and I an ideal of R such that
α(I) ⊆ I and δ(I) ⊆ I. Let α̂ and δ̂ denote the ring endomorphism and skew
derivation on R/I induced by α and δ. Show that IS is a two-sided ideal of S
such that IS ∩ R = I, and that IS = SI in case α is an automorphism and
α(I) = I. Then show that S/IS ∼= (R/I)[x̂; α̂, δ̂].
(7) Let R = Oq (k 2 ), where k is a field and q ∈ k × is not a root of unity. Show that
R/R(xy − 1) is a faithful simple left R-module.

(8) Let R be a semiprime ring.

(a) Show that any simple right or left ideal of R is generated by an idempotent.
(b) Given an idempotent e ∈ R, show that eR is a simple right ideal if and
only if Re is a simple left ideal, if and only if eRe is a division ring.
(c) Show that soc(RR ) = soc(R R).

(9) Let R be a right noetherian domain.

(a) Show that the intersection of any two nonzero right ideals of R is nonzero.
(b) Show that R \ {0} is a right Ore set in R.

(10) If I is a nonzero ideal in a prime ring R, show that I is both an essential right
ideal and an essential left ideal of R.

(11) If A is a right module over a ring R, show that the set

Z(A) = {x ∈ A | xI = 0 for some I ≤e RR } = {x ∈ A | annR (x) ≤e RR }

is a submodule of A. It is called the singular submodule of A.

(12) Let S = k[x, y] be a polynomial ring over a field k, and let R be the ring
S/hx, yi2 . Show that RR has finite rank but is not a direct sum of uniform
submodules.

(13) If N is a nilpotent ideal in a ring R, show that `. annR (N ) is an essential right

ideal of R.

(14) If R is a ring such that RR has finite rank, show that any right or left invertible
element in R is invertible.

(15) Let R be a ring and X ⊆ R a right Ore set of regular elements. If R is right
noetherian, show that RX −1 is right noetherian.

62