Let $k$ be a field of characteristic zero and let $E=E(x,y) \in k[x,y]$.
Define $t_x(E)$ to be the maximum among $0$ and the $x$-degree of $E(x,0)$.
Similarly, define $t_y(E)$ to be the maximum among $0$ and the $y$-degree of $E(0,y)$.

The following nice result appears in several places, see for example,[Proposition 2.1][1] (or [Lemma 1.14][2] or [Proposition 10.2.6][3]).

> **Nice result:** Let $A,B \in k[x,y]$ satisfy $\operatorname{Jac}(A,B) \in k-\{0\}$
(such $A,B$ is called a Jacobian pair).
Assume that the $(1,1)$-degree of $A$, $\deg(A)$, is $>1$ and the $(1,1)$-degree
of $B$, $\deg(B)$, is $>1$.
Then the numbers $t_x(A),t_y(A),t_x(B),t_y(B)$ are all positive.
> 
> **My question:** Is the same result holds in the first Weyl algebra over $k$, $A_1(k)$? where instead of the Jacobian we take the commutator.

**My answer:**
Of course, we must first define $t_x(A),t_y(A),t_x(B),t_y(B)$ in $A_1(k)$; it seems to me that the same definition holds for $A_1(k)$, or am I missing something? Perhaps it is not possible to consider $E(x,0)$, where $E \in A_1(k)$?

If I am not wrong, the proof of [Proposition 2.1][1] can be adjusted to the non-commutative case: 

**(i)** It is easy to see that [Lemma 1.3][1] has a non-commutative analog. 

**(ii)** Replacing the Jacobian by the commutator yields a similar result (use $[ab,c]=a[b,c]+[a,c]b$),
and then the same conclusion follows.

One has to be careful what exactly is the similar result, since, for example,
$[y^3,B]=y^2c+ycy+cy^2$, where $c:=[y,B]$.
Then $[y^3,B]=3cy^2+\epsilon$, where $\epsilon \in A_1$ has degree $<\deg(c)+2$.
We can consider the highest $(0,1)$-degree terms.

Indeed, suppose that $t_x(A)=0$. Then $A$ is divisible by $y$, so $A=\tilde{A}y^t$, where $t \geq 1$ and $\tilde{A}$ is an element of $A_1$ not divisible by $y$.

We have,
$1=[A,B]=[\tilde{A}y^t,B]=\tilde{A}[y^t,B]+[\tilde{A},B]y^t
=\tilde{A}(t[y,B]y^{t-1}+\epsilon)+[\tilde{A},B]y^t
=\tilde{A}t[y,B]y^{t-1}+\tilde{A}\epsilon+[\tilde{A},B]y^t$.
 
One cannot just take $y=0$ and get a contradiction, I guess (we are working in $A_1$ not in $k[x,y]$).
So we should probably reach the conclusion by considerations of degrees.





*********************************************************************
I have asked this question [here][4].

Thank you very much!


  [1]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265368034_On_Appelgate-Onishi's_Lemmas
  [2]: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-015-8555-2_10
  [3]: https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783764363505
  [4]: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/3275302/a-non-commutative-analog-of-a-known-result-concerning-a-jacobian-pair