Ideals and Quotient Rings

Subject: ALGEBRA-III
Semester-IV
Lesson: Ideals and Quotient Rings
Lesson Developer: Divya Bhambri
College/Department: St. Stephen’s College,
University of Delhi

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 1

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

Contents

1. Introduction ................................................................ 3
2. Ideals ......................................................................... 3
Examples of Ideals ............................................................ 3
Ideal Test ........................................................................ 5
3. Quotient Rings ............................................................. 8
4. Prime Ideals and Maximal Ideals .................................... 12
5. Principal Ideal Domain ................................................. 18
Exercises .......................................................................... 19
References........................................................................ 19
Suggested Readings ........................................................... 20

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 2

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

1. Introduction
In this chapter, we define a quotient ring in a way analogous to the way in
which we defined quotient groups. The concept of an ideal is analogue of a normal
subgroup and helps us introduce the quotient rings. A quotient ring is also known
as Residue class ring or Factor ring. Further we establish the existence and find the
conditions under which quotient rings are integral domains or fields.

2. Ideals
We start this section by defining Ideals of a ring.

Definition: A subring 𝑆𝑆 of a ring 𝑅𝑅 is called a left ideal of 𝑅𝑅 if for every 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 and

every 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝑆𝑆, we have 𝑟𝑟. 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝑆𝑆.

Definition: A subring 𝑆𝑆 of a ring 𝑅𝑅 is called a right ideal of 𝑅𝑅 if for every 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 and

every 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝑆𝑆, we have 𝑎𝑎. 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑆𝑆.

Definition: A subring 𝑆𝑆 of a ring 𝑅𝑅 is called a (two-sided) ideal of 𝑅𝑅 if for every

𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 and every 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝑆𝑆, we have both 𝑟𝑟. 𝑎𝑎, 𝑎𝑎. 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑆𝑆.

Definition: An ideal 𝑆𝑆 of a ring 𝑅𝑅 is called a proper ideal of 𝑅𝑅 if 𝑆𝑆 is a proper

subset of 𝑅𝑅.

Value Addition

As clearly mentioned in the definition of an ideal, an ideal of a ring 𝑅𝑅 is always a

subring of 𝑅𝑅, whereas a subring neednot be an ideal of the ring.
Examples:
• Consider the ring (ℚ, + , . ).
Then it can be easily checked that (ℤ, +, . ) is a subring of (ℚ, + , . ).
But (ℤ, +, . ) is not an ideal of (ℚ, + , . ) as the product of a rational number
2 4
and an integer need not be an integer such as . 2 = ∉ ℤ.
3 3
• (ℝ , +, . ) is a subring of (ℂ , + , . ) that is not an ideal of (ℂ , + , . ). (Verify!)
Since the product of a real number and a complex number need not be a real
number.

Examples of Ideals:
1. Let 𝑅𝑅 be a ring. Then {0} & 𝑅𝑅 are ideals of 𝑅𝑅 known as the trivial ideals of 𝑅𝑅.

2. Consider the ring of integers ( ℤ, +, . ) and 𝐼𝐼 be the set of even integers, then
𝐼𝐼 is an ideal of ℤ.
Indeed, let 𝑥𝑥, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 and 𝑛𝑛 ∈ ℤ be arbitrary.
Then 𝑥𝑥 = 2𝑝𝑝 and 𝑦𝑦 = 2𝑞𝑞, for some 𝑝𝑝, 𝑞𝑞 ∈ ℤ.

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 3

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

Thus, 𝑥𝑥 − 𝑦𝑦 = 2𝑝𝑝 − 2𝑞𝑞 = 2(𝑝𝑝 − 𝑞𝑞) ∈ 𝐼𝐼 as 𝑝𝑝 − 𝑞𝑞 ∈ ℤ.

Also, 𝑥𝑥. 𝑦𝑦 = 2𝑝𝑝. 2𝑞𝑞 = 4(𝑝𝑝. 𝑞𝑞) ∈ 𝐼𝐼 as 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 ∈ ℤ.
So, by subring test, 𝐼𝐼 is a subring of ℤ.
Now, 𝑛𝑛. 𝑥𝑥 = 𝑛𝑛. (2𝑝𝑝) = 2(𝑛𝑛. 𝑝𝑝) ∈ 𝐼𝐼 as 𝑛𝑛. 𝑝𝑝 ∈ ℤ.
Similarly, 𝑥𝑥. 𝑛𝑛 = (2𝑝𝑝). 𝑛𝑛 = 2(𝑝𝑝. 𝑛𝑛) ∈ 𝐼𝐼 as 𝑝𝑝. 𝑛𝑛 ∈ ℤ.
Hence, 𝐼𝐼 is an ideal of ℤ.
Infact, 𝐼𝐼 ia a non-trivial ideal of ℤ.

3. Proceeding as in Example 2, one can verify that for 𝑛𝑛 ∈ ℤ+ , the set

𝑛𝑛ℤ = {0, ±𝑛𝑛, , ±2𝑛𝑛, ±3𝑛𝑛 … … } is an ideal of ℤ .

4. Let 𝑅𝑅 be a commutative ring with unity and let 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝑅𝑅. The set
𝐼𝐼 = < 𝑎𝑎 > = {𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 | 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅}
is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
(The assumption that R is commutative is necessary in this example as will
be seen shortly).
Let 𝑥𝑥, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 and 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 be arbitrary.
Then 𝑥𝑥 = 𝑟𝑟1 𝑎𝑎 and 𝑦𝑦 = 𝑟𝑟2 𝑎𝑎 for some 𝑟𝑟1 , 𝑟𝑟2 ∈ 𝑅𝑅.
We have 𝑥𝑥 – 𝑦𝑦 = 𝑟𝑟1 𝑎𝑎 − 𝑟𝑟2 𝑎𝑎 = (𝑟𝑟1 − 𝑟𝑟2 )𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 = < 𝑎𝑎 >.
(Since, (𝑟𝑟1 − 𝑟𝑟2 ) ∈ 𝑅𝑅, 𝑅𝑅 being a ring)
Also, 𝑥𝑥 . 𝑦𝑦 = (𝑟𝑟1 𝑎𝑎). (𝑟𝑟2 𝑎𝑎) = (𝑟𝑟1 . (𝑎𝑎. 𝑟𝑟2 ). 𝑎𝑎) = (𝑟𝑟1 . (𝑟𝑟2 . 𝑎𝑎)). 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 = < 𝑎𝑎 >.
(Since, (𝑟𝑟1 . (𝑟𝑟2 . 𝑎𝑎)) ∈ 𝑅𝑅, 𝑅𝑅 being a ring) (commutative property is used here)
Thus, 𝐼𝐼 is a subring of 𝑅𝑅.
Now, consider 𝑟𝑟. 𝑥𝑥 = 𝑟𝑟. (𝑟𝑟1 𝑎𝑎) = (𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟1 ). 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝐼𝐼.
Also, 𝑥𝑥. 𝑟𝑟 = (𝑟𝑟1 𝑎𝑎). 𝑟𝑟 = 𝑟𝑟1 . (𝑎𝑎. 𝑟𝑟) = 𝑟𝑟1 . (𝑟𝑟. 𝑎𝑎) = (𝑟𝑟1 𝑟𝑟). 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝐼𝐼. (commutative property is
used here)
Hence, 𝐼𝐼 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
We call 𝐼𝐼 = < 𝑎𝑎 > the principal ideal generated by 𝒂𝒂.

5. Let ℤ[𝑥𝑥] denote the ring of all polynomials with integer coefficients and let 𝐼𝐼
be the subset of ℤ[𝑥𝑥] of all polynomials with even constant terms. Then 𝐼𝐼 is
an ideal of ℤ[𝑥𝑥].
Indeed, if 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥), 𝑔𝑔(𝑥𝑥) ∈ 𝐼𝐼 and 𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥) ∈ ℤ[𝑥𝑥] be arbitrary.
Since,
𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) − 𝑔𝑔(𝑥𝑥) = �𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥)� − �𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑔𝑔(𝑥𝑥)�
and difference of two even numbers is again an even number, so
𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) − 𝑔𝑔(𝑥𝑥) ∈ 𝐼𝐼
Similarly,
𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥). 𝑔𝑔(𝑥𝑥) = �𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑜𝑜𝑓𝑓 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥)�. �𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑔𝑔(𝑥𝑥)�
and product of two even numbers is again an even number, so
𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥). 𝑔𝑔(𝑥𝑥) ∈ 𝐼𝐼

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 4

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

So, by subring test, 𝐼𝐼 is a subring of 𝑅𝑅.

Again, note that
𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥)𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) = �𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥)��𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥)�
And as product of an even integer and any integer is again an even integer,
so 𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥)𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) ∈ 𝐼𝐼
Hence, 𝐼𝐼 is an ideal of ℤ[𝑥𝑥].

Ideal Test
The following theorem is used to check whether a non empty subset of a ring is
an ideal or not. Some of the authors also refer to it as the Ideal Test.

Theorem: Let 𝐼𝐼 be a nonempty subset of a ring 𝑅𝑅. Then 𝐼𝐼 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅 if

1. 𝑎𝑎 − 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 whenever 𝑎𝑎, 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐼𝐼, and
2. 𝑟𝑟. 𝑎𝑎, 𝑎𝑎. 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 whenever 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 and 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅.

Proof: Let 𝐼𝐼 be a non empty subset of 𝑅𝑅 satisfying conditions 1. and 2.

Then 𝐼𝐼 is closed under subtraction, by condition 1.

Also, since 𝐼𝐼 ⊂ 𝑅𝑅 and using condition 2, 𝑎𝑎. 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 for all 𝑎𝑎, 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐼𝐼.

So, 𝐼𝐼 is a subring of 𝑅𝑅.

Now, by using condition 2, 𝐼𝐼 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅. □

Illustration of ideal test:

Problem 1: Prove that intersection of two ideals of a ring 𝑅𝑅 is again an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

Proof: Let 𝐼𝐼1 and 𝐼𝐼2 be two ideals of a ring 𝑅𝑅.

Claim: 𝐼𝐼1 ∩ 𝐼𝐼2 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
Clearly, 0 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 ∩ 𝐼𝐼2 as 0 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 and 0 ∈ 𝐼𝐼2 .
So, 𝐼𝐼1 ∩ 𝐼𝐼2 ≠ 𝜙𝜙.
Now, let 𝑥𝑥, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 ∩ 𝐼𝐼2 and 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 be arbitrary, then 𝑥𝑥, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 and 𝑥𝑥, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼2 .
Since, 𝐼𝐼1 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅, so 𝑥𝑥 − 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 and 𝑟𝑟. 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 .
Also, since 𝐼𝐼2 is a subring of 𝑅𝑅, so 𝑥𝑥 − 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼2 and 𝑟𝑟. 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐼𝐼2 .
Thus, 𝑥𝑥 − 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 ∩ 𝐼𝐼2 and 𝑥𝑥 . 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 ∩ 𝐼𝐼2 .
Hence, by ideal test, 𝐼𝐼1 ∩ 𝐼𝐼2 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅. □

Remark: By using the principle of mathematical induction, the above result can be
extended to any finite number of ideals of a ring 𝑅𝑅 and it will be stated as:

Result: The intersection of any finite number of ideals of a ring will again be an
ideal of that ring.

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 5

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

Proof can be written on similar lines as we have done in case of two ideals. □

However, the union of two ideals of 𝑅𝑅 need not be an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

As union of two subrings need not be a subring, so the same example that we used
there will work here as well.
For example, if we take 𝑅𝑅 = ℤ, 𝐼𝐼1 = 2ℤ and 𝐼𝐼2 = 3ℤ, then it is easy to verify using
ideal test that 𝐼𝐼1 and 𝐼𝐼2 are ideals of 𝑅𝑅.
Let, if possible, 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 be an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
Since 2, 3 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 and 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅,
so, by ideal test, 1 = 3 − 2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 .
But neither 1 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 nor 1 ∈ 𝐼𝐼2 .
Hence, 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 is not an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

The readers are encouraged to think of at least one more example on their
own for better understanding. Now, the natural question that arises in the mind of
an observant reader is that “Under what conditions union of two ideals becomes an
ideal”? The answer to this question is given by the next Proposition.

Proposition: Prove that the union of two ideals is an ideal if and only if one of
them is contained in the other one.

Proof: Let 𝐼𝐼1 , 𝐼𝐼2 be ideals of a ring 𝑅𝑅.

Let us assume that 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
To show: either 𝐼𝐼1 ⊂ 𝐼𝐼2 or 𝐼𝐼2 ⊂ 𝐼𝐼1 .
Let, if possible, 𝐼𝐼1 ⊄ 𝐼𝐼2 and 𝐼𝐼2 ⊄ 𝐼𝐼1 .
⇒ there exist 𝑥𝑥1 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 \ 𝐼𝐼2 and 𝑥𝑥2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼2 \ 𝐼𝐼1 .
Then both 𝑥𝑥1 , 𝑥𝑥2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 .
So, 𝑥𝑥1 + 𝑥𝑥2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 as 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
But neither 𝑥𝑥1 + 𝑥𝑥2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 nor 𝑥𝑥1 + 𝑥𝑥2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼2 .
For if, 𝑥𝑥1 + 𝑥𝑥2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 , then 𝑥𝑥2 = (𝑥𝑥1 + 𝑥𝑥2 ) − 𝑥𝑥1 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 , not true.
Similarly if, 𝑥𝑥1 + 𝑥𝑥2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼2 , then 𝑥𝑥1 = (𝑥𝑥1 + 𝑥𝑥2 ) − 𝑥𝑥2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼2 , not true.
Thus, neither 𝑥𝑥1 + 𝑥𝑥2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 nor 𝑥𝑥1 + 𝑥𝑥2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼2 .
It contradicts the fact that 𝑥𝑥1 + 𝑥𝑥2 ∈ 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 .
So, our assumption that 𝐼𝐼1 ⊄ 𝐼𝐼2 and 𝐼𝐼2 ⊄ 𝐼𝐼1 is wrong.
Hence, we must have either 𝐼𝐼1 ⊂ 𝐼𝐼2 or 𝐼𝐼2 ⊂ 𝐼𝐼1 .

Conversely, Let 𝐼𝐼1 , 𝐼𝐼2 be ideals of a ring 𝑅𝑅 such that either 𝐼𝐼1 ⊂ 𝐼𝐼2 or 𝐼𝐼2 ⊂ 𝐼𝐼1 .
In case, 𝐼𝐼1 ⊂ 𝐼𝐼2 , we have 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 = 𝐼𝐼2 , which is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
And if 𝐼𝐼2 ⊂ 𝐼𝐼1 , we have 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 = 𝐼𝐼1 , which is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
Thus in either case, 𝐼𝐼1 ∪ 𝐼𝐼2 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅. □

Problem 2: If 𝐴𝐴 and 𝐵𝐵 are ideals of a ring 𝑅𝑅, show that the sum of 𝐴𝐴 and 𝐵𝐵,
𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵 = {𝑎𝑎 + 𝑏𝑏 |𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝐴𝐴, 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐵𝐵}

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 6

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

Proof: Let 𝑥𝑥, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵 and 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 be arbitrary.

Then 𝑥𝑥 = 𝑎𝑎1 + 𝑏𝑏1 and 𝑦𝑦 = 𝑎𝑎2 + 𝑏𝑏2 for some 𝑎𝑎1 , 𝑎𝑎2 ∈ 𝐴𝐴 and 𝑏𝑏1 , 𝑏𝑏2 ∈ 𝐵𝐵.
We have 𝑥𝑥 – 𝑦𝑦 = (𝑎𝑎1 + 𝑏𝑏1 ) – (𝑎𝑎2 + 𝑏𝑏2 ) = (𝑎𝑎1 − 𝑎𝑎2 ) + (𝑏𝑏1 − 𝑏𝑏2 ) ∈ 𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵.
( (𝑎𝑎1 − 𝑎𝑎2 ) ∈ 𝐴𝐴 and (𝑏𝑏1 − 𝑏𝑏2 ) ∈ 𝐵𝐵, as 𝐴𝐴 and 𝐵𝐵 are ideals).
Now, consider 𝑟𝑟. 𝑥𝑥 = 𝑟𝑟. (𝑎𝑎1 + 𝑏𝑏1 ) = 𝑟𝑟. 𝑎𝑎1 + 𝑟𝑟. 𝑏𝑏1 ∈ 𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵.
(𝑟𝑟. 𝑎𝑎1 ∈ 𝐴𝐴 and 𝑟𝑟. 𝑏𝑏1 ∈ 𝐵𝐵, as 𝐴𝐴 and 𝐵𝐵 are ideals).
Also, 𝑥𝑥. 𝑟𝑟 = (𝑎𝑎1 + 𝑏𝑏1 ). 𝑟𝑟 = 𝑎𝑎1 . 𝑟𝑟 + 𝑏𝑏1 . 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵.
Hence, 𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
In other words, we can say that sum of two ideals of a ring is again an ideal of that
ring. □

Problem 3: Let ℤ[𝑥𝑥] be the ring of all polynomials with integer coefficients. Let 𝐼𝐼 be
a subset of ℤ[𝑥𝑥] consisting of all polynomials with constant term 0. Then show that I
is an ideal of ℤ[x]. Further, show that 𝐼𝐼 = < 𝑥𝑥 >.

Proof: We know ℤ[𝑥𝑥] = {𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−1 + … + 𝑎𝑎1 𝑥𝑥 + 𝑎𝑎0 ∶ 𝑎𝑎𝑖𝑖 ∈ ℤ, 0 ≤ 𝑖𝑖 ≤ 𝑛𝑛, 𝑛𝑛 ∈ ℕ}

𝐼𝐼 = {𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−1 + … + 𝑎𝑎1 𝑥𝑥 ∶ 𝑎𝑎𝑖𝑖 ∈ ℤ, 1 ≤ 𝑖𝑖 ≤ 𝑛𝑛, 𝑛𝑛 ∈ ℕ}

First, we will show that 𝐼𝐼 is an ideal of ℤ[𝑥𝑥].

Let 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥), 𝑔𝑔(𝑥𝑥) ∈ 𝐼𝐼 be arbitrary.

Then 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) = 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−1 + … + 𝑎𝑎1 𝑥𝑥

and 𝑔𝑔(𝑥𝑥) = 𝑏𝑏𝑚𝑚 𝑥𝑥 𝑚𝑚 + 𝑏𝑏𝑚𝑚 −1 𝑥𝑥 𝑚𝑚 −1 + … + 𝑏𝑏1 𝑥𝑥, for some integers 𝑚𝑚 and 𝑛𝑛.

Without loss of generality let 𝑚𝑚 > 𝑛𝑛,

then 𝑔𝑔(𝑥𝑥) − 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥)

= 𝑏𝑏𝑚𝑚 𝑥𝑥 𝑚𝑚 + 𝑏𝑏𝑚𝑚 −1 𝑥𝑥 𝑚𝑚−1 + … + (𝑏𝑏𝑛𝑛 − 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 )𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛 + (𝑏𝑏𝑛𝑛−1 − 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 )𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−1 + ⋯ + (𝑏𝑏1 − 𝑎𝑎1 )𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐼𝐼

So, 𝑔𝑔(𝑥𝑥) − 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) ∈ 𝐼𝐼

Next let 𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥) ∈ ℤ[𝑥𝑥] be arbitrary, then

𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥) = 𝑏𝑏𝑚𝑚 𝑥𝑥 𝑚𝑚 + 𝑏𝑏𝑚𝑚 −1 𝑥𝑥 𝑚𝑚 −1 + … + 𝑏𝑏1 𝑥𝑥 + 𝑏𝑏0

𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥). 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) = (𝑏𝑏𝑚𝑚 𝑥𝑥 𝑚𝑚 + 𝑏𝑏𝑚𝑚 −1 𝑥𝑥 𝑚𝑚 −1 + … + 𝑏𝑏1 𝑥𝑥 + 𝑏𝑏0 ). (𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−1 + … + 𝑎𝑎1 𝑥𝑥)

= 𝑏𝑏𝑚𝑚 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 𝑥𝑥 𝑚𝑚+𝑛𝑛 + (𝑏𝑏𝑚𝑚 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 + 𝑏𝑏𝑚𝑚 −1 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 )𝑥𝑥 𝑚𝑚+𝑛𝑛−1 + ⋯ + (𝑏𝑏0 𝑎𝑎2 + 𝑏𝑏1 𝑎𝑎1 )𝑥𝑥 2 + 𝑏𝑏0 𝑎𝑎1 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐼𝐼

So, 𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥). 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) ∈ 𝐼𝐼.

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 7

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

Similarly, one can show that 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥). 𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥) ∈ 𝐼𝐼

Hence, 𝑰𝑰 is an ideal of ℤ[𝒙𝒙].

Now, we claim that 𝐼𝐼 = < 𝑥𝑥 >.

Let 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) ∈ 𝐼𝐼 be arbitrary. Then

𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) = 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−1 + … + 𝑎𝑎1 𝑥𝑥

= (𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−1 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−2 + ⋯ + 𝑎𝑎1 ). 𝑥𝑥

= 𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥). 𝑥𝑥

where 𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥) = 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−1 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−2 + ⋯ + 𝑎𝑎1 ∈ ℤ[𝑥𝑥].

Thus, 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) ∈ < 𝑥𝑥 >.

So, 𝐼𝐼 ⊂ < 𝑥𝑥 >.

Now, let 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) ∈ < 𝑥𝑥 > be arbitrary.

Then there exist 𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥) = 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−1 + … + 𝑎𝑎1 𝑥𝑥 + 𝑎𝑎0 ∈ ℤ[𝑥𝑥] such that

𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) = 𝑟𝑟(𝑥𝑥). 𝑥𝑥

𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) = (𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛−1 + … + 𝑎𝑎1 𝑥𝑥 + 𝑎𝑎0 ). 𝑥𝑥

= 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛+1 + 𝑎𝑎𝑛𝑛−1 𝑥𝑥 𝑛𝑛 + … + 𝑎𝑎1 𝑥𝑥 2 + 𝑎𝑎0 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐼𝐼

So, we have 𝑓𝑓(𝑥𝑥) ∈ 𝐼𝐼.

Therefore, < 𝑥𝑥 > ⊂ 𝐼𝐼 and hence 𝑰𝑰 = < 𝑥𝑥 >. □

I.Q. 1 Let 𝑅𝑅 be a commutative ring with unity 1 and let 𝑎𝑎 , 𝑏𝑏 𝜖𝜖 𝑅𝑅. Then show that the
set < 𝑎𝑎 , 𝑏𝑏 > = {𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 + 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 ∶ 𝑟𝑟, 𝑠𝑠 𝜖𝜖 𝑅𝑅} is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

3. Quotient Rings
In this section, we will talk about the quotient of a ring 𝑅𝑅 and one of its ideals 𝐼𝐼
(two sided ideal).

Let (𝑅𝑅, +, . ) be a ring and 𝐼𝐼 be an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

So, for 𝑥𝑥, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼, we have 𝑥𝑥 − 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼.

⇒ ( 𝐼𝐼, +) is a subgroup of ( 𝑅𝑅, +).

Since, (𝑅𝑅, +) is an abelian group, so 𝐼𝐼 is a normal subgroup of 𝑅𝑅.

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 8

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

𝑅𝑅
So we can talk about the quotient group , where
𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
= { 𝑟𝑟 + 𝐼𝐼 ∶ 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 }
𝐼𝐼

Addition of cosets is defined by (as in quotient groups):

(𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼) + (𝑏𝑏 + 𝐼𝐼) = (𝑎𝑎 + 𝑏𝑏) + 𝐼𝐼

The zero coset is 0+I=I

and the additive inverse is given by (𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼) = −𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼

However, R also possesses multiplication.

𝑅𝑅
Now, we define multiplication in as
𝐼𝐼

(𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑏𝑏 + 𝐼𝐼) = 𝑎𝑎. 𝑏𝑏 + 𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
(In order to equip with a ring structure).
𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
In the next theorem, we prove that forms a ring with addition and
𝐼𝐼
multiplication defined above.
𝑅𝑅
Theorem: If I is a two-sided ideal in a ring R, then 𝐼𝐼 is a ring under coset addition
and multiplication as defined above.

Proof: Let us assume that I is a two-sided ideal in R.

𝑅𝑅
Then addition is well-defined in because 𝑅𝑅 is an abelian group and 𝐼𝐼 is a normal
𝐼𝐼
subgroup under addition.

Now, we just have to show that multiplication defined by

(𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑏𝑏 + 𝐼𝐼) = 𝑎𝑎. 𝑏𝑏 + 𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
is well defined in .
𝐼𝐼

Let 𝑟𝑟 + 𝐼𝐼 = 𝑟𝑟 ′ + 𝐼𝐼 and 𝑠𝑠 + 𝐼𝐼 = 𝑠𝑠 ′ + 𝐼𝐼, for 𝑟𝑟, 𝑟𝑟 ′ , 𝑠𝑠, 𝑠𝑠 ′ ∈ 𝑅𝑅.

⇒ 𝑟𝑟 − 𝑟𝑟 ′ ∈ 𝐼𝐼 and 𝑠𝑠 − 𝑠𝑠 ′ ∈ 𝐼𝐼.

⇒ 𝑟𝑟 = 𝑟𝑟 ′ + 𝑎𝑎 and 𝑠𝑠 = 𝑠𝑠 ′ + 𝑏𝑏 for some 𝑎𝑎, 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐼𝐼.

Then (𝑟𝑟 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑠𝑠 + 𝐼𝐼) = 𝑟𝑟. 𝑠𝑠 + 𝐼𝐼 = �𝑟𝑟 ′ + 𝑎𝑎�. �𝑠𝑠 ′ + 𝑏𝑏� + 𝐼𝐼

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 9

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

= 𝑟𝑟 ′ . 𝑠𝑠 ′ + 𝑎𝑎. 𝑠𝑠 ′ + 𝑟𝑟 ′ . 𝑏𝑏 + 𝑎𝑎. 𝑏𝑏 + 𝐼𝐼

= 𝑟𝑟 ′ . 𝑠𝑠 ′ + 𝐼𝐼 = �𝑟𝑟 ′ + 𝐼𝐼�. (𝑠𝑠 ′ + 𝐼𝐼)

Since, 𝐼𝐼 is an ideal, 𝑟𝑟’. 𝑏𝑏 + 𝑎𝑎. 𝑠𝑠’ + 𝑎𝑎. 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐼𝐼

and hence 𝑟𝑟’. 𝑏𝑏 + 𝑎𝑎. 𝑠𝑠’ + 𝑎𝑎. 𝑏𝑏 + 𝐼𝐼 = 𝐼𝐼.

𝑅𝑅
Thus, multiplication is well-defined in .
𝐼𝐼

Note:
It is important to mention that here we are making use of the condition that 𝐼𝐼 is an
ideal of 𝑅𝑅, if 𝐼𝐼 would have been only a subring, then multiplication would not have
been well defined.

Now we will verify associativity of multiplication. For 𝑟𝑟, 𝑠𝑠, 𝑡𝑡 ∈ 𝑅𝑅,

�(𝑟𝑟 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑠𝑠 + 𝐼𝐼)�. (𝑡𝑡 + 𝐼𝐼) = (𝑟𝑟. 𝑠𝑠 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑡𝑡 + 𝐼𝐼)

= (𝑟𝑟. 𝑠𝑠). 𝑡𝑡 + 𝐼𝐼

= 𝑟𝑟. (𝑠𝑠. 𝑡𝑡) + 𝐼𝐼

= (𝑟𝑟 + 𝐼𝐼). �(𝑠𝑠. 𝑡𝑡) + 𝐼𝐼�

= (𝑟𝑟 + 𝐼𝐼). ((𝑠𝑠 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑡𝑡 + 𝐼𝐼))

So, multiplication is associative.

Now, we will verify the distribution of . over +

Consider (𝑟𝑟 + 𝐼𝐼). �(𝑠𝑠 + 𝐼𝐼) + (𝑡𝑡 + 𝐼𝐼)� = (𝑟𝑟 + 𝐼𝐼). �(𝑠𝑠 + 𝑡𝑡) + 𝐼𝐼�

= (𝑟𝑟. (𝑠𝑠 + 𝑡𝑡) + 𝐼𝐼)

= (𝑟𝑟. 𝑠𝑠 + 𝐼𝐼) + (𝑟𝑟. 𝑡𝑡 + 𝐼𝐼)

= (𝑟𝑟 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑠𝑠 + 𝐼𝐼) + (𝑟𝑟 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑡𝑡 + 𝐼𝐼)

Thus, multiplication is distributive over addition from left.

Similarly, we can show that multiplication is distributive over addition from right as
well.
𝑅𝑅
Hence, is a ring. □
𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
This ring called the quotient ring or residue class ring of 𝑅𝑅 by 𝐼𝐼.
𝐼𝐼

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 10

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

𝑅𝑅
In general, a quotient ring is a set of equivalence classes �[𝑥𝑥]: 𝑥𝑥 ∈ �,
𝐼𝐼
where [𝑥𝑥] = [𝑦𝑦] 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑥𝑥 − 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼.
ℤ
Example: Let ℤ be the ring and 6ℤ be the ideal, then is the quotient ring.
6ℤ

ℤ
Here = { 0 + 6ℤ , 1 + 6ℤ , 2 + 6ℤ , 3 + 6ℤ , 4 + 6ℤ , 5 + 6ℤ }
6ℤ

ℤ
Let us see how + and . work in .
6ℤ

ℤ
(4 + 6ℤ ) + (3 + 6ℤ ) = (4 + 3) + 6ℤ = 1 + 6ℤ ∈
6ℤ
ℤ
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 (4 + 6ℤ ). (3 + 6ℤ ) = (4.3) + 6ℤ = 12 + 6ℤ = 6ℤ ∈
6ℤ

This example can also be used to verify that “the quotient ring of an integral
domain need not be an integral domain”.

Indeed,
ℤ
(2 + 6ℤ ). (3 + 6ℤ ) = (2.3) + 6ℤ = 6 + 6ℤ = 0 + 6ℤ = 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜
6ℤ
ℤ ℤ
where neither (2 + 6ℤ ) = 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 nor (3 + 6ℤ ) = 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 .
6ℤ 6ℤ

ℤ
Hence, is not an integral domain, whereas (ℤ, +, . ) is an integral domain.
6ℤ

Proposition: If 𝑅𝑅 is a ring and 𝐼𝐼 is an ideal, then the following statements hold:

𝑅𝑅
1) If 𝑅𝑅 is a commutative ring, then so is .
𝐼𝐼
𝑅𝑅
2) If 𝑅𝑅 is a ring with unity 1, then 1 + 𝐼𝐼 is the unity of .
𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
Proof: 1) Let 𝑅𝑅 be a commutative ring and 𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼, 𝑏𝑏 + 𝐼𝐼 ∈ be arbitrary. Then
𝐼𝐼

(𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑏𝑏 + 𝐼𝐼) = 𝑎𝑎. 𝑏𝑏 + 𝐼𝐼

= 𝑏𝑏. 𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼

= (𝑏𝑏 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼)

𝑅𝑅
Hence, is a commutative ring.
𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
2) Let 1 be the unity of 𝑅𝑅 and 𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼 ∈ be arbitrary.
𝐼𝐼

Then (𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼). (1 + 𝐼𝐼) = 𝑎𝑎. 1 + 𝐼𝐼 = 𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 11

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

Also, (1 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼) = 1. 𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼 = 𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
Therefore, 1 + 𝐼𝐼 is the unity of . □
𝐼𝐼

Converse of these two propositions is not true, in general.

𝑅𝑅
1. Let 𝑅𝑅 be a ring and 𝐼𝐼 be an ideal of 𝑅𝑅 such that is commutative, then 𝑅𝑅
𝐼𝐼
need not be commutative.
Example: Let 𝑅𝑅 = {0, 𝑎𝑎, 𝑏𝑏, 𝑐𝑐} with + and . defined as follows:

+ 0 a b c . 0 a b c
0 0 a b c 0 0 0 0 0
a a 0 c b a 0 a 0 a
b b c 0 a b 0 b 0 b
c c b a 0 c 0 c 0 c

Then one can easily verify that (𝑅𝑅, +, . ) is a ring.

Consider the ideal 𝐼𝐼 = < 𝑏𝑏 > = {0, 𝑏𝑏}
𝑅𝑅
and the quotient ring = {0 + 𝐼𝐼, 𝑎𝑎 + 𝐼𝐼 }.
𝐼𝐼
𝑅𝑅
Clearly, is commutative but 𝑅𝑅 is not. (as . 𝑎𝑎 = 𝑏𝑏 ≠ 0 = 𝑎𝑎. 𝑏𝑏 )
𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
2. Let 𝑅𝑅 be a ring and 𝐼𝐼 be an ideal of 𝑅𝑅 such that has unity, then 𝑅𝑅 need
𝐼𝐼
not have a unity.
2ℤ
Example: Consider the ring . It can easily be verified that 4 + 6ℤ is the
6ℤ
2ℤ
unity of , but 2ℤ does not have a unity.
6ℤ

4. Prime Ideals and Maximal Ideals

Definition: A proper ideal 𝐴𝐴 of a commutative ring 𝑅𝑅 is said to be a prime ideal of
𝑅𝑅 if for 𝑎𝑎, 𝑏𝑏 𝜖𝜖 𝑅𝑅 whenever 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝜖𝜖 𝐴𝐴 we have either 𝑎𝑎 𝜖𝜖𝜖𝜖 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑏𝑏 𝜖𝜖𝜖𝜖.

Definition: A proper ideal 𝐴𝐴 of 𝑅𝑅 is said to be a maximal ideal of 𝑅𝑅 if whenever

there exist an ideal 𝐵𝐵 of 𝑅𝑅 such that 𝐴𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵𝐵 ⊆ 𝑅𝑅 then either 𝐵𝐵 = 𝐴𝐴 or 𝐵𝐵 = 𝑅𝑅.

Before giving examples of prime ideals and maximal ideals in a ring, we give
a very important and basic result in the form of a Lemma, which will be used quite
frequently.

Lemma: Let 𝐼𝐼 be an ideal of a ring 𝑅𝑅 such that 1 ∈ 𝐼𝐼, then show that 𝐼𝐼 = 𝑅𝑅.

Proof: We know that 𝐼𝐼 ⊂ 𝑅𝑅.

Now we will show that 𝑅𝑅 ⊂ 𝐼𝐼.

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 12

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

Let 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 be arbitrary. Since 1 ∈ 𝐼𝐼, therefore, 𝑥𝑥 = 𝑥𝑥. 1 ∈ 𝐼𝐼.

So, 𝑅𝑅 ⊂ 𝐼𝐼. Hence, 𝐼𝐼 = 𝑅𝑅. □

I.Q. 2 Let 𝐼𝐼 be an ideal of a ring 𝑅𝑅 such that 𝑢𝑢 ∈ 𝐼𝐼, where 𝑢𝑢 is a unit in 𝑅𝑅, then show
that 𝐼𝐼 = 𝑅𝑅. (Hint: Use Lemma).

Examples:

1) {0} is a prime ideal in ℤ.

Indeed, for 𝑥𝑥, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ ℤ, 𝑥𝑥. 𝑦𝑦 ∈ {0}

⇒ 𝑥𝑥. 𝑦𝑦 = 0

⇒ 𝑥𝑥 = 0 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑦𝑦 = 0 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 ℤ 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑

⇒ 𝑥𝑥 ∈ {0} 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑦𝑦 ∈ {0}.

So, {0} is a prime ideal in ℤ.

2) {0} is not a maximal ideal in ℤ.

Indeed, 2ℤ is an ideal of ℤ such that {0} ⊂ 2ℤ ⊂ ℤ.
So, {0} is not a maximal ideal in ℤ.

3) If 𝑝𝑝 is a prime number, then 𝑝𝑝ℤ is a prime ideal in ℤ.

Let 𝑥𝑥, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ ℤ 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠ℎ 𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑥𝑥. 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝑝𝑝ℤ

⇒ 𝑥𝑥. 𝑦𝑦 = 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑘𝑘 ∈ ℤ

⇒ 𝑝𝑝 | 𝑥𝑥. 𝑦𝑦

⇒ 𝑝𝑝 | 𝑥𝑥 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑝𝑝 | 𝑦𝑦

⇒ 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝑝𝑝ℤ 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝑝𝑝ℤ

So, 𝑝𝑝ℤ is a prime ideal in ℤ.

4) Both 2ℤ and 3ℤ are maximal ideals in ℤ.

We will show that 2ℤ is a maximal ideal in ℤ and 3ℤ is a maximal ideal in ℤ can be

shown similarly.

Let 𝐵𝐵 be an ideal of ℤ such that 2ℤ ⊊ 𝐵𝐵 ⊂ ℤ.

Let 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐵𝐵\2ℤ, i.e., 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐵𝐵 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑏𝑏 ∉ 2ℤ.

By division algorithm, there exist integers 𝑞𝑞 and 𝑟𝑟 such that

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 13

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

𝑏𝑏 = 2𝑞𝑞 + 𝑟𝑟, 𝑤𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 0 ≤ 𝑟𝑟 < 2

But 𝑟𝑟 ≠ 0. For if, 𝑟𝑟 = 0 then 𝑏𝑏 = 2𝑞𝑞 ∈ 2ℤ, not true.

Therefore, 𝑟𝑟 = 1.

So, 𝑏𝑏 = 2𝑞𝑞 + 1. This gives 1 = 𝑏𝑏 − 2𝑞𝑞 ∈ 𝐵𝐵.

Thus, by using the Lemma before Examples in this section, 𝐵𝐵 = 𝑅𝑅.

Hence, 2ℤ is a maximal ideal in ℤ.

Tracing similar steps we can show that 3ℤ is a maximal ideal in ℤ.

I.Q. 3 Let 𝐷𝐷 be a division ring. Then show that {0} is a maximal ideal in 𝐷𝐷.

Now we give a characterization for the quotient ring to be integral domain in

terms of prime ideals in a ring.

Theorem: Let 𝑅𝑅 be a commutative ring with unity 1 and 𝐼𝐼 be a proper ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
𝑅𝑅
Then is an integral domain if and only if 𝐼𝐼 is a prime ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
𝐼𝐼

Proof: Let 𝑅𝑅 be a commutative ring with 1 and 𝐼𝐼 be a proper ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

𝑅𝑅
Let us assume is an integral domain.
𝐼𝐼

We assert 𝐼𝐼 is a prime ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

So, let 𝑥𝑥, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 be such that 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 𝜖𝜖 𝐼𝐼

⇒ 𝑥𝑥. 𝑦𝑦 + 𝐼𝐼 = 𝐼𝐼

⇒ (𝑥𝑥 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑦𝑦 + 𝐼𝐼) = 0 + 𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
Now, since is an integral domain, we have
𝐼𝐼

𝑥𝑥 + 𝐼𝐼 = 𝐼𝐼 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑦𝑦 + 𝐼𝐼 = 𝐼𝐼

⇒ 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼

This proves that 𝐼𝐼 is a prime ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

Conversely, let 𝐼𝐼 be a prime ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

𝑅𝑅
We assert is an integral domain.
𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
One can easily observe that is a commutative ring with unity 1 + 𝐼𝐼 as 𝑅𝑅 is a
𝐼𝐼
commutative ring with unity 1.

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 14

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

𝑅𝑅
Now, we just have to show that contains no zero divisors.
𝐼𝐼

𝑅𝑅
Let (𝑥𝑥 + 𝐼𝐼), (𝑦𝑦 + 𝐼𝐼) ∈ be such that (𝑥𝑥 + 𝐼𝐼). (𝑦𝑦 + 𝐼𝐼) = 0 + 𝐼𝐼
𝐼𝐼

⇒ 𝑥𝑥. 𝑦𝑦 + 𝐼𝐼 = 𝐼𝐼

⇒ 𝑥𝑥. 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼

Since 𝐼𝐼 is a prime ideal of 𝑅𝑅, we have either 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 or 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼

⇒ 𝑥𝑥 + 𝐼𝐼 = 𝐼𝐼 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑦𝑦 + 𝐼𝐼 = 𝐼𝐼
𝑅𝑅
Hence, is an integral domain. □
𝐼𝐼

Next, we give a characterization for the quotient ring to be a field in terms of

maximal ideals in a ring.

Theorem: Let 𝑅𝑅 be a commutative ring with unity and 𝑀𝑀 be a proper ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
𝑅𝑅
Then is a field if and only if 𝑀𝑀 is a maximal ideal of 𝑅𝑅.
𝑀𝑀

Proof: Let 𝑅𝑅 be a commutative ring with 1 and 𝑀𝑀 be a proper ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

𝑅𝑅
Let us assume is a field.
𝑀𝑀

We assert 𝑀𝑀 is a maximal ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

So, let 𝐵𝐵 be an ideal of 𝑅𝑅 such that 𝑀𝑀 ⊊ 𝐵𝐵 ⊂ 𝑅𝑅.

⇒ there exists 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐵𝐵 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠ℎ 𝑡𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑏𝑏 ∉ 𝑀𝑀.

𝑅𝑅
⇒ (𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀) ≠ 0 + 𝑀𝑀, i.e., (𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀) is a non zero element of .
𝑀𝑀

𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅
Now, since is a field, so there exists 𝑐𝑐 + 𝑀𝑀 ∈ such that
𝑀𝑀 𝑀𝑀

(𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀). (𝑐𝑐 + 𝑀𝑀) = 1 + 𝑀𝑀

⇒ 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀 = 1 + 𝑀𝑀 ⇒ 1 − 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝑀𝑀 ⊂ 𝐵𝐵

Also, since 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐵𝐵 and 𝑐𝑐 ∈ 𝑅𝑅, therefore 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐵𝐵.

Thus, we have 1 = (1 − 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏) + 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐵𝐵.

So, 𝑟𝑟 = 𝑟𝑟. 1 ∈ 𝐵𝐵 for every 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅.

This gives 𝑅𝑅 ⊂ 𝐵𝐵 and hence 𝐵𝐵 = 𝑅𝑅.

Therefore, M is a maximal ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 15

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

Conversely, let us assume M be a maximal ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

𝑅𝑅
We assert is a field.
𝑀𝑀

𝑅𝑅
One can easily observe that is a commutative ring with unity 1 + 𝑀𝑀 as 𝑅𝑅 is a
𝑀𝑀
commutative ring with unity 1.
𝑅𝑅
Now, we just have to show that every non zero element of is a unit.
𝑀𝑀

𝑅𝑅
Let 𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀 ∈ be such that 𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀 ≠ 0 + 𝑀𝑀, i.e., 𝑏𝑏 ∉ 𝑀𝑀.
𝑀𝑀

𝑅𝑅
We assert 𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀 is a unit, i.e., (𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀) has multiplicative inverse in .
𝑀𝑀

Consider the set 𝐵𝐵 = {𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 + 𝑚𝑚 ∶ 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑚𝑚 ∈ 𝑀𝑀}.

Taking 𝑟𝑟 = 0, we get 𝑚𝑚 ∈ 𝐵𝐵 ⇒ 𝑀𝑀 ⊊ 𝐵𝐵. (as 𝑏𝑏 = 𝑏𝑏. 1 + 0 ∈ 𝐵𝐵 but 𝑏𝑏 ∉ 𝑀𝑀 )

Now we show that 𝐵𝐵 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅.

Let 𝑥𝑥, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐵𝐵. Then 𝑥𝑥 = 𝑏𝑏𝑟𝑟1 + 𝑚𝑚1 and 𝑦𝑦 = 𝑏𝑏𝑟𝑟2 + 𝑚𝑚2 .

Consider 𝑥𝑥 − 𝑦𝑦 = 𝑏𝑏. (𝑟𝑟1 − 𝑟𝑟2 ) + (𝑚𝑚1 − 𝑚𝑚2 ) ∈ 𝐵𝐵 as 𝑟𝑟1 − 𝑟𝑟2 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑚𝑚1 − 𝑚𝑚2 ∈ 𝑀𝑀.

For any 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅, 𝑟𝑟. 𝑥𝑥 = 𝑟𝑟. (𝑏𝑏𝑟𝑟1 + 𝑚𝑚1 ) = 𝑟𝑟. 𝑏𝑏𝑟𝑟1 + 𝑟𝑟. 𝑚𝑚1

= 𝑏𝑏. 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟1 + 𝑟𝑟. 𝑚𝑚1 ∈ 𝐵𝐵

Similarly, 𝑥𝑥. 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝐵𝐵. Therefore, 𝐵𝐵 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅 that strictly contains 𝑀𝑀.

Since 𝑀𝑀 is a maximal ideal of 𝑅𝑅, so we must have 𝐵𝐵 = 𝑅𝑅.

⇒ 1 ∈ 𝐵𝐵 . Therefore, 1 = 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 + 𝑚𝑚 for some 𝑟𝑟 ∈ 𝑅𝑅 and 𝑚𝑚 ∈ 𝑀𝑀.

This gives 1 + 𝑀𝑀 = (𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 + 𝑚𝑚) + 𝑀𝑀 = 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀 = (𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀). (𝑟𝑟 + 𝑀𝑀).

⇒ (𝑟𝑟 + 𝑀𝑀) is multiplicative inverse of (𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀).

𝑅𝑅
⇒ (𝑏𝑏 + 𝑀𝑀) is a unit and hence is a field. □
𝑀𝑀

Value Addition

 If 𝑅𝑅 is a commutative ring without unity and 𝑀𝑀 is a maximal ideal of 𝑅𝑅, then

𝑅𝑅
may not be a field. For example, 2ℤ is a commutative ring without unity
𝑀𝑀
2ℤ
and 4ℤ is a maximal ideal of 2ℤ, but is not a field.
4ℤ
2ℤ
Since (2 + 4ℤ)−1 does not exist in .
4ℤ

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 16

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

 One can observe here that in a commutative ring with unity, every maximal
ideal is a prime ideal. Indeed, if 𝑀𝑀 is a maximal ideal in a commutative ring 𝑅𝑅
with unity 1.
𝑅𝑅
Then by above theorem, is a field and so is an integral domain.
𝑀𝑀
Hence, 𝑀𝑀 is a prime ideal of 𝑅𝑅 by theorem before the previous theorem.
However, if 𝑅𝑅 is a commutative ring without unity, then a maximal ideal need
not be prime. For example, 2ℤ is a commutative ring without unity and 4ℤ is
a maximal ideal in 2ℤ, but not a prime ideal.
 But every prime ideal need not be a maximal ideal. It is easy to verify that
{0} is a prime ideal in ℤ, but not a maximal ideal as {0} ⊂ 2ℤ ⊂ ℤ.
However, if 𝑅𝑅 is a finite commutative ring with unity, then every prime ideal
is a maximal ideal.
𝑅𝑅
Indeed, if 𝑃𝑃 is a prime ideal in a finite commutative ring with unity, then 𝑃𝑃
is
a finite integral domain and hence a field. So, 𝑃𝑃 is a maximal ideal in 𝑅𝑅.

Problem 4: Show that in a Boolean ring 𝑅𝑅 every prime ideal 𝐼𝐼 is a maximal ideal.

Proof: Let 𝐼𝐼 be a prime ideal of 𝑅𝑅 and 𝐴𝐴 be any ideal of 𝑅𝑅 such that

𝐼𝐼 ⊊ 𝐴𝐴 ⊆ 𝑅𝑅

We will show that 𝐴𝐴 = 𝑅𝑅.

Since 𝐼𝐼 ⊊ 𝐴𝐴, so there exist some 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐴𝐴 such that 𝑥𝑥 ∉ 𝐼𝐼.

Now since, 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐴𝐴 ⊂ 𝑅𝑅 and 𝑅𝑅 is a Boolean ring, we have 𝑥𝑥 2 = 𝑥𝑥.

So, for any 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝑅𝑅, 𝑥𝑥 2 𝑦𝑦 = 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥

⇒ 𝑥𝑥 2 𝑦𝑦 − 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 = 0

⇒ 𝑥𝑥(𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 − 𝑦𝑦) = 0 ∈ 𝐼𝐼

⇒ 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 − 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑥𝑥 ∉ 𝐼𝐼 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝐼𝐼 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑎𝑎 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖

⇒ 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 − 𝑦𝑦 = 𝑧𝑧 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑧𝑧 ∈ 𝐼𝐼

As 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐴𝐴, 𝑦𝑦 ∈ 𝑅𝑅, so 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐴𝐴 and also 𝑧𝑧 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 ⊂ 𝐴𝐴, so

𝑦𝑦 = 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 − 𝑧𝑧 ∈ 𝐴𝐴

Thus, 𝑅𝑅 ⊂ 𝐴𝐴 and hence 𝐴𝐴 = 𝑅𝑅.

Therefore, 𝐼𝐼 is a maximal ideal of 𝑅𝑅. □

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 17

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

5. Principal Ideal Domain

Definition: A principal ideal domain is an integral domain in which every ideal is a
principal ideal,

i.e., if 𝐼𝐼 is an ideal of a principal ideal domain then there exist 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 such that
𝐼𝐼 = < 𝑎𝑎 >.

We finish this chapter by giving an example of a Principal ideal domain.

Example: The ring of integers (ℤ, +, . ) is a principal ideal domain.

We know that ℤ is an integral domain.

Let 𝐼𝐼 be any ideal of ℤ. Then we have the following two cases:

Case I: If 𝐼𝐼 = {0}, then 𝐼𝐼 =< 0 > and we are done.

Case II: let 𝐼𝐼 ≠ {0}. Then there exist a non zero element in 𝐼𝐼.

Clearly, there exists a positive element in 𝐼𝐼 (since if there exist a negative element,
we will consider the negative of this element which will be an element of 𝐼𝐼 and will
be positive).

Let 𝑎𝑎 be the least positive element of 𝐼𝐼.

We assert 𝐼𝐼 = < 𝑎𝑎 >

As 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 , < 𝑎𝑎 > ⊆ 𝐼𝐼

Now let 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 be arbitrary.

By division algorithm, there exist 𝑚𝑚, 𝑛𝑛 𝜖𝜖 ℤ such that

𝑥𝑥 = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 + 𝑛𝑛, where 0 ≤ 𝑛𝑛 < 𝑎𝑎.

Now 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 and 𝑚𝑚 ∈ ℤ , we have 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ∈ 𝐼𝐼.

Also, 𝑥𝑥 ∈ 𝐼𝐼 and so we have 𝑛𝑛 = 𝑥𝑥 − 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ∈ 𝐼𝐼.

If 0 < 𝑛𝑛 < 𝑎𝑎, it would contradict that 𝑎𝑎 is least positive element of 𝐼𝐼.

So, we must have 𝑛𝑛 = 0.

Therefore, 𝑥𝑥 = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ∈ < 𝑎𝑎 >.

𝐼𝐼 ⊂ < 𝑎𝑎 > . Thus 𝐼𝐼 = < 𝑎𝑎 >.

Hence, ℤ is a principal ideal domain.

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 18

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

Exercises
1) Give an example of:
i) A left ideal of a ring which is not a right ideal.
ii) A right ideal which is not a left ideal.
iii) A subring which is neither a left ideal nor a right ideal.

2) If 𝐴𝐴 and 𝐵𝐵 are ideals of a ring 𝑅𝑅, the sum 𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵 of 𝐴𝐴 and 𝐵𝐵 is defined by

𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵 = {𝑎𝑎 + 𝑏𝑏 ∶ 𝑎𝑎 ∈ 𝐴𝐴 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑏𝑏 ∈ 𝐵𝐵}. Show that 𝐴𝐴 + 𝐵𝐵 is an ideal of 𝑅𝑅 containing
both 𝐴𝐴 and 𝐵𝐵.

3) Let 𝐴𝐴 and 𝐵𝐵 be ideals of a ring 𝑅𝑅, the product 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 of 𝐴𝐴 and 𝐵𝐵 is defined by
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 = {∑𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖=1 𝑎𝑎𝑖𝑖 𝑏𝑏𝑖𝑖 ∶ 𝑎𝑎𝑖𝑖 ∈ 𝐴𝐴 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑏𝑏𝑖𝑖 ∈ 𝐵𝐵, 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑖𝑖 = 1,2, … , 𝑛𝑛, 𝑛𝑛 ∈ ℤ+}. Show that:
i) 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 is an ideal in 𝑅𝑅.
ii) 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ⊂ 𝐴𝐴 ∩ 𝐵𝐵.
4) Let ℤ[𝑥𝑥] be the ring of all polynomials with integer coefficients. Let 𝐼𝐼 be a subset
of ℤ[𝑥𝑥] consisting of all polynomials with even constant term. Then show that I is
an ideal of ℤ[𝑥𝑥]. Further, show that 𝐼𝐼 = < 𝑥𝑥, 2 >.

5) Let 𝑆𝑆 = {𝑎𝑎 + 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 ∶ 𝑎𝑎, 𝑏𝑏 ∈ ℤ 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑏𝑏 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 }. Show that 𝑆𝑆 is a subring of ℤ[𝑖𝑖] but is not
an ideal of ℤ[𝑖𝑖].
6) In the ring (ℤ , +, . ), show that every ideal is generated by some integer.
7) Show that an ideal in the ring (ℤ , +, . ) is maximal if and only if it is generated by
a prime number.
8) Show that intersection of two prime ideals need not be a prime ideal.
ℤ12
9) Show that 𝐼𝐼 = {0, 3, 6, 9} 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 12 is a maximal ideal in the ring ℤ12 . Hence, 𝐼𝐼
is a
field.
10) Show that 𝐼𝐼 = {0, 6} 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 12 is a maximal ideal in the ring
𝑅𝑅 = { 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 } 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 12.

References
1. Joseph A. Gallian, Contemporary Abstract Algebra (4th Edition), Narosa
Publishing House.
2. David S. Dummit and Richard M. Foote, Abstract Algebra (3rd Edition), John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 19

 Ideals and Quotient Rings

Suggested Readings
1. John B. Fraleigh, A First Course in Abstract Algebra (7th Edition), Pearson.
2. Joseph A. Gallian, Contemporary Abstract Algebra (7th Edition), Narosa
Publishing House.
3. Serge Lang, Algebra, (3rd Edition), Graduate Text in Mathematics, Springer.

Institute of Life Long Learning, University of Delhi Page 20