MathOverflow will be down for maintenance for approximately 3 hours, starting Monday evening (06/24/2013) at approximately 9:00 PM Eastern time (UTC-4).

## A Non-Commutative Nullstellensatz

In studying presentations of pro-$p$-groups via generators and relations, one is led (via the so-called Magnus embedding) to questions involving power series in non-commuting variables. Results from local algebraic geometry occasionally shed some insight on how to make progress, but more often that not, I find myself lacking appropriate analogs of major theorems from the commutative case. I haven't had much luck in books on non-commutative ring theory or non-commutative algebraic geometry -- the focus seems to be on completely different ideas (though I'll happily stand corrected). In any case, here's an important and seemingly basic question that I don't know how to answer.

Let $\mathbb{F}_p\langle\langle x,y\rangle\rangle$ be the ring of formal power series over $\mathbb{F}_p$ in two non-commuting variables $x$ and $y$. This ring has a unique two-sided maximal ideal $I=(x,y)$. Suppose $f,g\in I$. Can anything be said about the smallest $n$, if one exists, such that $I^n\subset (f,g)$? Namely, when does this quantity exist? Is this quantity computable? Boundable?

It's trivial to come up with examples for which there is no $n$, e.g., $(xy,yx)$, since no $x^n$ is contained in this ideal. I'm not sure how exactly to quantify this observation. Is there some kind of non-commutative resultant at play here?

Edit: I think it might be helpful for me to update with some examples as we go along. Here's one that I thing captures at least some of the interesting parts of this question.

Take $p=3$, $f=x+y$, and $g=x^3$. Then the inclusion $I^3\subset (f,g)$ can be seen by taking each of the 8 monomials in $I^3$ verifying that they are in $(f,g)$, e.g., $yxy=yfy-f^3+g\in (f,g)$. The same argument applies with the same $f$ and taking $g=x+y+x^3$. This seems to me evidence that this question can't be answered only by looking at the leading monomials (though admittedly it might be easy enough to exclude these trivial counter-examples).

-
 There is an easy way to undestand your new example that applies more generally to any $f(x,y)=x+h(y)$: in order to find the quotient $A=k\langle x,y/(f,g)\rangle$ you simply need to substitute $x=-h(y)$, so that $A=k[y]/(g(-h(y),y)$ and it's easy to find the nilpotency index $n$: it's just the dimension of $A$. – Victor Protsak May 21 2010 at 3:05 The leading monomials are relevant because of a noncommutative Grobner basis approach to computing the quotient. If what you are really interested in is an $\textit{algorithm}$ for determining whether or not the ideal $(f,g)$ contains $I^n$ (and the minimum $n$ if it does), I suggest that you tighten your question and repost. – Victor Protsak May 21 2010 at 3:07 No, I'm more interested in a formula than an algorithm. If the answer turns out to be "No, except in simple cases there's no nice formula, but there's a Grobner basis algorithm that might work," the lack of a nice clean formula would be of interest to me as well. But, and forgive me if I'm being obtuse, it seems as if your answers are providing solutions on a case-by-case basis. If I was given two more random-looking power series (e.g., not monomials, not starting with $x+...$ or $y+...$), it's still unclear to me how to proceed. – Cam McLeman May 21 2010 at 5:04 No problem! You've summarized the situation well: there is no nice formula except in special cases, etc. I can't really provide "solutions", since your question is vague and I've had hard time understanding what kind of answer do you expect, but one thing that $\textit{can}$ be said is that $f$ and $g$ have leading monomials of a special kind, which suggests looking for a noncommutative Groebner basis algorithm. – Victor Protsak May 21 2010 at 5:38

Suppose that $f$ and $g$ are monomials and that $(f,g)$ contains a power of $I$. Then every word of sufficient length must contain $f$ or $g$ as a subword (and conversely). Thus your argument with $x^n$ shows that either $f$ or $g$ is a power of $x$, and likewise, one of them is a power of $y$. If $f=x^k, g=y^m, k,m\geq 2$ then the word $(x^{k-1}y)^N$ can be arbitrarily long and doesn't contain $f$ or $g$ — contradiction. Thus up to relabelling, $f=x^k, g=y$ and $n=k$ is minimal with the property that $I^n\subset (f,g)$.

I recommend Algebraic Combinatorics on Words by M. Lothaire (google it) for related ideas.

-
Hmm. Okay, sure, though the restriction that $f$ and $g$ are monomials is pretty, well, restrictive... – Cam McLeman May 18 2010 at 23:26
On the contrary, I think that it's the heart of the matter, since you can always deform to the leading monomial term. What this shows is that such $f, g$ are very special. – Victor Protsak May 18 2010 at 23:53
Interesting. So what makes a monomial term "leading"? By lexicographical ordering? – Cam McLeman May 19 2010 at 2:38
You can use any subword-compatible ordering. BTW, ideals of $k<x,y>$ containing $I^n$ are studied under the nomenclature "noncommutative Hilbert scheme". It is just rare for them to be 2-generated. – Victor Protsak May 19 2010 at 4:23
I think I'm still confused by this deformation idea. For a trivial non-monomial example, take $p=2$, $f=x+y$, and $g=y^2$. Then $I^2\subset (f,g)$ since $x^2=f^2-g$, $xy=xf-x^2$, and $yx=fx=x^2$. So we get $n=2$. But if we take an ordering where $y<x$, then the leading terms are $y$ and $y^2$, which gives $n=1$. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but it seems unlikely to me that you'll be able to give an answer that depends only on the leading terms, no? – Cam McLeman May 19 2010 at 8:08
show 1 more comment