Lemma 10.123.2. Let R be a ring. Let \varphi : R[x] \to S be a ring map. Let t \in S. Assume that (a) t is integral over R[x], and (b) there exists a monic p \in R[x] such that t \varphi (p) \in \mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(\varphi ). Then there exists a q \in R[x] such that t - \varphi (q) is integral over R.
Proof. Write t \varphi (p) = \varphi (r) for some r \in R[x]. Using euclidean division, write r = qp + r' with q, r' \in R[x] and \deg (r') < \deg (p). We may replace t by t - \varphi (q) which is still integral over R[x], so that we obtain t \varphi (p) = \varphi (r'). In the ring S_ t we may write this as \varphi (p) - (1/t) \varphi (r') = 0. This implies that \varphi (x) gives an element of the localization S_ t which is integral over \varphi (R)[1/t] \subset S_ t. On the other hand, t is integral over the subring \varphi (R)[\varphi (x)] \subset S. Combined we conclude that t is integral over the subring \varphi (R)[1/t] \subset S_ t, see Lemma 10.36.6. In other words there exists an equation of the form
in S_ t with r_{i, j} \in R. This means that t^{d + N} + \sum _{i < d} \sum _{j = 0, \ldots , n_ i} \varphi (r_{i, j}) t^{i + N - j} = 0 in S for some N large enough. In other words t is integral over R. \square
Comments (4)
Comment #3630 by Brian Conrad on
Comment #3646 by Pieter Belmans on
Comment #3959 by Manuel Hoff on
Comment #4097 by Johan on
There are also: