Lemma 10.20.3. Let $R$ be a ring. For each $U \subset \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R)$ which is open and closed there exists a unique idempotent $e \in R$ such that $U = D(e)$. This induces a 1-1 correspondence between open and closed subsets $U \subset \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R)$ and idempotents $e \in R$.

**Proof.**
Let $U \subset \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R)$ be open and closed. Since $U$ is closed it is quasi-compact by Lemma 10.16.10, and similarly for its complement. Write $U = \bigcup _{i = 1}^ n D(f_ i)$ as a finite union of standard opens. Similarly, write $\mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R) \setminus U = \bigcup _{j = 1}^ m D(g_ j)$ as a finite union of standard opens. Since $\emptyset = D(f_ i) \cap D(g_ j) = D(f_ i g_ j)$ we see that $f_ i g_ j$ is nilpotent by Lemma 10.16.2. Let $I = (f_1, \ldots , f_ n) \subset R$ and let $J = (g_1, \ldots , g_ m) \subset R$. Note that $V(J)$ equals $U$, that $V(I)$ equals the complement of $U$, so $\mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R) = V(I) \amalg V(J)$. By the remark on nilpotency above, we see that $(IJ)^ N = (0)$ for some sufficiently large integer $N$. Since $\bigcup D(f_ i) \cup \bigcup D(g_ j) = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R)$ we see that $I + J = R$, see Lemma 10.16.2. By raising this equation to the $2N$th power we conclude that $I^ N + J^ N = R$. Write $1 = x + y$ with $x \in I^ N$ and $y \in J^ N$. Then $0 = xy = x(1 - x)$ as $I^ N J^ N = (0)$. Thus $x = x^2$ is idempotent and contained in $I^ N \subset I$. The idempotent $y = 1 - x$ is contained in $J^ N \subset J$. This shows that the idempotent $x$ maps to $1$ in every residue field $\kappa (\mathfrak p)$ for $\mathfrak p \in V(J)$ and that $x$ maps to $0$ in $\kappa (\mathfrak p)$ for every $\mathfrak p \in V(I)$.

To see uniqueness suppose that $e_1, e_2$ are distinct idempotents in $R$. We have to show there exists a prime $\mathfrak p$ such that $e_1 \in \mathfrak p$ and $e_2 \not\in \mathfrak p$, or conversely. Write $e_ i' = 1 - e_ i$. If $e_1 \not= e_2$, then $0 \not= e_1 - e_2 = e_1(e_2 + e_2') - (e_1 + e_1')e_2 = e_1 e_2' - e_1' e_2$. Hence either the idempotent $e_1 e_2' \not= 0$ or $e_1' e_2 \not= 0$. An idempotent is not nilpotent, and hence we find a prime $\mathfrak p$ such that either $e_1e_2' \not\in \mathfrak p$ or $e_1'e_2 \not\in \mathfrak p$, by Lemma 10.16.2. It is easy to see this gives the desired prime. $\square$

## Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like `$\pi$`

). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.

## Comments (2)

Comment #2242 by Hari Rau-Murthy on

Comment #2278 by Johan on