I'll start with correct proofs of each of the claims (assuming I didn't make a mistake), and then comment on each section of your question.
I'm putting my answers first because that's the order in which I wrote this answer. It's hard to review stuff without trying to solve it yourself first.
My answers
Lemma 51: $p \in A$ if and only if the constant term and linear term of $p$ are zero.
Suppose $p$ is in $A$. Then $p(0) = 0$; thus the constant term is $0$. Suppose that $p'(0)$ is $0$, this means that the linear term of $p$ is now the constant term of $p'$ and must also be $0$.
Suppose $p$ has zero constant term and zero linear term. Thus $p(0) = 0$. Thus $p'(0) = 0$.
End of proof of Lemma 51.
Part 1
Let $f$ be an element of $A$ and $r$ an arbitrary element of $\mathbb{Q}[x]$.
- $(rf)(0) = 0$
- $(rf)'(0) = (rf')(0) + (r'f)(0) = 0 + 0 = 0$
Thus $A$ is closed under multiplication by an arbitrary ring element.
- $(f+g)(0) = f(0)+g(0) = 0 + 0 = 0$
- $(f+g)'(0) = f'(0) + g'(0) = 0 + 0 = 0$
Thus $A$ is closed under addition.
Thus $A$ is an ideal.
Part 2
I choose $x^2$ as my generator. By multiplying by a monomial $kx^n$, I can produce monomials of the form $kx^{(n+2)}$ and by adding monomials of this form together, I can produce an arbitrary $\sum_i a_ix^i$ where $a_0 = a_1 = 0$. By Lemma 51, the elements of $A$ are precisely the elements of $\mathbb{Q}[x]$ of that form.
Part 3
Yes. It is generated by $x^2$.
Part 4
No. An ideal is prime if and only if its complement is multiplicatively closed.
$A^c$ is not multiplicatively closed.
For example, $x$ is in $A^c$, but $xx = x^2$ is not in $A^c$.
Review of question
Part 1
Your argument about the shape of an element of $A$ is correct. It is a bit too abbreviated in my opinion. Feel free to ignore this if you're relying on a previously proven lemma.
Your argument about $A$ being a subgroup and multiplicatively closed, in my opinion, skips too much. You did not demonstrate that $a+b$ or $aq$ satisfy either the initial conditions $f(0) = f'(0) = 0$ or lack linear and constant terms. You did correctly assert that they're in the ideal, though, and that's the condition you need to check.
Part 2
First, as an aside, there's a theorem you can invoke to show that every ideal is principal. $\mathbb{Q}$ is a field and thus a principal ideal domain. Therefore $\mathbb{Q}[x]$ is a principal ideal domain. Therefore any ideal of $\mathbb{Q}[x]$ is principal. See this answer for an example.
You are exploiting the structure theorem that you have about elements of $A$ to get a generating set for $A$.
Your generating set is $\{x^2, x^3, x^4 \cdots\}$.
This set does indeed generate $A$.
However, it is not minimal.
For example, $x^3$ is $x\,x^2$. $x$ is not in $A$, but $x$ is in $\mathbb{Q}[x]$, so we're allowed to multiply by it when trying to build elements of $A$ from our generator.
Remember that an ideal is not a subring. It is closed under multiplication by arbitrary ring elements, not just those inside the ideal.
Part 3
Part 3 is wrong. A principal ideal is defined as one that is generated by a single element, not one that contains a single element.
Interestingly, there is exactly one ideal that has a single element. The ideal $(0) = \{0\}$. Also, this prime if and only if there are no zero divisors, which is kinda fun.
Part 4
Your argument is correct. $ax$ is outside the ideal, $bx^2$ is inside the ideal. Since all nonzero coefficients are units (because $\mathbb{Q}$ is a field) it doesn't matter what the coefficient is.
{, you can escape it with a backslash. For example\{ x : x^2 = 7 \}makes ${x : x^2 = 7}$. – Greg Nisbet Mar 14 '23 at 23:32\midgives a vertical bar with good horizontal spacing around it, and\dotsproduces good ellipses (either resolving to\ldotsor\cdotsfrom context: $1 + \dots + n$ vs $1, \dots, n$. – Sammy Black Mar 14 '23 at 23:39solution-verificationquestion to be on topic you must specify precisely which step in the proof you question, and why so. This site is not meant to be a proof checking machine. – Bill Dubuque Mar 15 '23 at 01:51