Proof.
Let us first prove I_1 \cap \ldots \cap I_ r = I_1 \ldots I_ r as this will also imply the injectivity of the induced ring homomorphism R/(I_1 \ldots I_ r) \rightarrow R/I_1 \times \ldots \times R/I_ r. The inclusion I_1 \cap \ldots \cap I_ r \supset I_1 \ldots I_ r is always fulfilled since ideals are closed under multiplication with arbitrary ring elements. To prove the other inclusion, we claim that the ideals
I_1 \ldots \hat I_ i \ldots I_ r,\quad i = 1, \ldots , r
generate the ring R. We prove this by induction on r. It holds when r = 2. If r > 2, then we see that R is the sum of the ideals I_1 \ldots \hat I_ i \ldots I_{r - 1}, i = 1, \ldots , r - 1. Hence I_ r is the sum of the ideals I_1 \ldots \hat I_ i \ldots I_ r, i = 1, \ldots , r - 1. Applying the same argument with the reverse ordering on the ideals we see that I_1 is the sum of the ideals I_1 \ldots \hat I_ i \ldots I_ r, i = 2, \ldots , r. Since R = I_1 + I_ r by assumption we see that R is the sum of the ideals displayed above. Therefore we can find elements a_ i \in I_1 \ldots \hat I_ i \ldots I_ r such that their sum is one. Multiplying this equation by an element of I_1 \cap \ldots \cap I_ r gives the other inclusion. It remains to show that the canonical map R/(I_1 \ldots I_ r) \rightarrow R/I_1 \times \ldots \times R/I_ r is surjective. For this, consider its action on the equation 1 = \sum _{i=1}^ r a_ i we derived above. On the one hand, a ring morphism sends 1 to 1 and on the other hand, the image of any a_ i is zero in R/I_ j for j \neq i. Therefore, the image of a_ i in R/I_ i is the identity. So given any element (\bar{b_1}, \ldots , \bar{b_ r}) \in R/I_1 \times \ldots \times R/I_ r, the element \sum _{i=1}^ r a_ i \cdot b_ i is an inverse image in R.
To see (2), by the very definition of being distinct maximal ideals, we have \mathfrak {m}_ a + \mathfrak {m}_ b = R for a \neq b and so the above applies.
\square
Comments (0)
There are also: