A little problem on exact sequences, part 2.

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter steenis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sequences
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the formulation and proof of the dual statement related to exact sequences in the context of left R-modules. The key assertion is that for two R-maps, $f: A \to B$ and $g: B \to C$, the sequence $S: 0 \to A \xrightarrow{f} B \xrightarrow{g} C$ is left-exact, which implies that $\text{im } f = \ker g$ and that $f$ is injective. The proof involves establishing an isomorphism $\overline{f}: A \to \ker g$ induced by $f$, demonstrating that $\text{im } f \subset \ker g$, and confirming the injectivity of $f$. The discussion clarifies the use of the term "dual" in relation to the concepts of kernel and cokernel.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of left R-modules and R-maps.
  • Familiarity with the concepts of kernel and cokernel in module theory.
  • Knowledge of exact sequences in algebra.
  • Ability to work with isomorphisms in the context of modules.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of exact sequences in module theory.
  • Learn about dual modules and their applications in algebra.
  • Explore the concept of cokernel and its relationship with exact sequences.
  • Investigate the implications of injectivity in module homomorphisms.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in algebra, module theory, and anyone interested in the properties of exact sequences and duality in linear algebra.

steenis
Messages
312
Reaction score
18
Part 1 of this little problem is here: http://mathhelpboards.com/linear-abstract-algebra-14/little-problem-exact-sequences-19368.html.

This is part 2: who can formulate and prove the dual statement?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You should clarify what you mean by "dual", which might mean:

a) The statement obtained by "reversing all the arrows", or

b) the statement obtained by considering the "dual modules" $\text{Hom}_R(-,R)$.
 
I am afraid it is neither a) nor b), so I doubt if I used the term "dual" correctly. But it is about the dual notions ker and coker. This is what I know of the solution:We have two R-maps $f:A\to B$ and $g:B\to C$ of left R-modules.
And we have an isomorphism $A\cong \ker g$ "induced by f" .
Then prove that the sequence $S:0\to A\to _f B\to _g C$ is left-exact, i.e.,
$\mbox{im} f = \ker g$ and $f$ is injective.Proof:
Let $\overline f : A\to \ker g : a\mapsto f(a)$ be the isomorphism between $A$ and $\ker g$ induced by f. This implies that $\mbox{im }f \subset \ker g$ and the well-definition of $\overline f$ (because $f$ is well-defined).
Subsequently, we have:
$x\in \ker g \Leftrightarrow \exists (a\in A) \mbox{ } \overline f (a) = f(a) = x \Leftrightarrow x\in \mbox{im }f$, i.e., $\mbox{im }f = \ker g$.
And:
$x\in \ker f \Rightarrow x\in \ker \overline f \Rightarrow x=0$, i.e., $f$ is injective. $\Box$

Your comments, please.
 
Last edited:
steenis said:
I am afraid it is neither a) nor b), so I doubt if I used the term "dual" correctly. But it is about the dual notions ker and coker. This is what I know of the solution:We have two R-maps $f:A\to B$ and $g:B\to C$ of left R-modules.
And we have an isomorphism $A\cong \ker g$ "induced by f" .
Then prove that the sequence $S:0\to A\to _f B\to _g C$ is left-exact, i.e.,
$\mbox{im} f = \ker g$ and $f$ is injective.Proof:
Let $\overline f : A\to \ker g : a\mapsto f(a)$ be the isomorphism between $A$ and $\ker g$ induced by f. This implies that $\mbox{im }f \subset \ker g$ and the well-definition of $\overline f$ (because $f$ is well-defined).
Subsequently, we have:
$x\in \ker g \Leftrightarrow \exists (a\in A) \mbox{ } \overline f (a) = f(a) = x \Leftrightarrow x\in \mbox{im }f$, i.e., $\mbox{im }f = \ker g$.
And:
$x\in \ker f \Rightarrow x\in \ker \overline f \Rightarrow x=0$, i.e., $f$ is injective. $\Box$

Your comments, please.
That is "dual" as in a) of my previous post. Note that in part 1), $B/(\text{im }f)$ *is* $\text{coker }f$, so that the dual of the diagram:

$A \stackrel{f}{\to}B \stackrel{g}{\to}C \cong \text{coker }f \to 0$ is:

$0 \to C\cong \text{ker }k\stackrel{h}{\to}B\stackrel{k}{\to}A$

(I have labelled the reverse arrows $C \to B$ and $B \to A$ by $h$ and $k$ to avoid thinking of them as "inverse functions"), with the isomorphisms *induced* by the arrow just before on part 1), and just after in part 2).
 
Thank you, Deveno, very clear.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K