11

Given a Noetherian ring $R$ and a proper ideal $I$ of it. Is it true that $$\bigcap_{n\ge 1} I^n=0$$ as $n$ varies over all natural numbers?

If not, is it true if $I$ is a maximal ideal? If not, is it true if $I$ is the maximal ideal of a local ring $R$? If not, is it true under additional assumptions on $R$ (like $R$ is regular)?

user26857
  • 52,094
Dev Bappa
  • 419
  • 1
    Dear Dev, it is true if $I$ is the maximal ideal of a noetherian local ring $R$. This is the Krull intersection theorem, and follows quickly from a combination of the Artin-Rees lemma and Nakayama's lemma. – Akhil Mathew Jan 25 '11 at 02:48
  • @Akhil: Thanks a lot. That helps. Do you know if it's true in the regular case if $R$ is not local. – Dev Bappa Jan 25 '11 at 03:11
  • 1
    A ring of the form $k \times k$ is certainly regular. – Pete L. Clark Jan 25 '11 at 03:46
  • You might be interested in https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4454616/is-bigcap-n-1-infty-in-contained-in-a-minimal-prime-ideal – strat May 22 '22 at 06:39

2 Answers2

16

It is not true in general: the ideal may well be idempotent!

For an example, consider a direct product of two fields: there are two ideals, both maximal and both idempotent.

12

See the Section on the Krull Intersection Theorem (currently Section 8.12) in these notes.

A version of the theorem valid for any ideal $I$ in a Noetherian ring $R$ is as follows: if there exists $x \in \bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty} I^n$, then $x \in xI$. From this one easily deduces that $\bigcap_{n=1}^{\infty} I^n = \{0\}$ under either of the following additional hypotheses:

$\bullet$ $R$ is a domain and $I$ is a proper ideal, or
$\bullet$ $I$ is contained in the Jacobson radical $J(R)$ of $R$ (i.e., the intersection of all maximal ideals).

In particular the second condition holds for any proper ideal in a Noetherian local ring.

As Mariano remarks, some hypothesis beyond Noetherianity is needed in order to guarantee $\bigcap_n I^n = \{0\}$. I should probably add his counterexample to my notes!

user26857
  • 52,094
Pete L. Clark
  • 97,892