0

I was attempting to prove (one of the several versions of) Gauss' lemma, and this apparently simple question popped up:

Does every nonunit element of a ring has some irreducible factor, or better ("better" because in domains, primes are irreducible) yet, a prime factor?

Amazingly, I am at loss to even begin to answer this seemingly basic question even after having had a full course on ring theory.

Any starting point?

I know that any domain that obeys ACCP, is atomic. Thus we need to search for non-Noetherian rings.

(This is a small sigh of relief as I haven't yet studied non-Noetherian rings in any significant detail. :p)

Atom
  • 3,905
  • 1
    Yes for Noetherian rings, see here. – Dietrich Burde Apr 03 '23 at 19:18
  • 1
    Perhaps the simplest counterexamples are antimatter domains, i.e. rings with no atoms (= irreducibles), such as the ring of all algebraic integers, where every $,a = \sqrt a \sqrt a,$ is reducible. See the links here for further examples. – Bill Dubuque Apr 03 '23 at 19:18
  • @DietrichBurde Yes, we just require ACCP indeed. I will add this in my post. – Atom Apr 03 '23 at 19:24
  • Consider the monoid ring $\Bbb Z[\Bbb Q_{\ge0}],$ i.e. the quotient of the polynomial ring $\Bbb Z[{X_r\mid r\in\Bbb Q_{>0}}]$ by the ideal generated by ${X_rX_s-X_{r+s}\mid r,s\in\Bbb Q_{>0}}$. In this quotient $\Bbb Z[{\bar X_r\mid r\in\Bbb Q_{>0}}],$ the $\bar X_r$'s have no irreducible divisor. – Anne Bauval Apr 03 '23 at 19:26
  • @BillDubuque How do you keep track of so many (helpful!) links that you so often attach!? – Atom Apr 03 '23 at 19:30
  • It is definitely not true for all commutative rings. It is one reason we restrict a lot of work to Noetherian rings. – Thomas Andrews Apr 03 '23 at 19:30
  • For much more on monoid domain constructions of antimatter domains like that in @Anne's prior comment see the first paper cited by Zafrullah in the prior thread I linked. – Bill Dubuque Apr 03 '23 at 19:31
  • @BillDubuque Can you elaborate why the algebraic integers don't form a field? (I have not dabbled in this before.) – Atom Apr 03 '23 at 19:36
  • 1
    @Atom Re; keeping track of links: knowing pertinent keywords greatly helps for searching. Here these domain properties are: atomic, antimatter, factorization domain, ACCP, etc. Searching on those will locate many helpful prior posts. – Bill Dubuque Apr 03 '23 at 19:37
  • 2
    Re: $\bar{\Bbb Z}$ = ring of all algebraic integers is not a field. Unlike localizations, an essential key property of integral extensions is that they cannot invert elements, so a nonunit in the base ring remains a nonunit in the extension. In particular every nonunit in $\Bbb Z$ remains a nonunit in $\bar {\Bbb Z}$. More generally see the survival property, and related classical properties of integral extensions LO (lying-over), GO (going-up), INC (incomparability). – Bill Dubuque Apr 03 '23 at 19:57

0 Answers0