MHB Bland - Rings and their Modules 2011

  • Thread starter Thread starter steenis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Modules Rings
steenis
Messages
312
Reaction score
18
If the moderators agree, I have made a thread on the book of Bland - Rings and their Modules 2011.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I want to take you to Example 1 of section 1.5 p.33: "$\mbox{Hom} _R (M,N)$ as a left R-module.

Let $M$ and $N$ be two right R-modules. R is not necessarely commutative.
On 9th line of this example, Bland claims that $\mbox{Hom} _R (M,N)$ is a left R-module if we define $[r\bullet f](x)=f(xr)$ for $r\in R$ and $x\in M$. To prove that $\mbox{Hom} _R (M,N)$ is a left R-module, we have to prove conditions (1), (2), (3) and (4) of Definition 1.4.1 p.26 (adapted for left R-modules). Bland proves (3) as follows, $r\in R$, $s\in R$, $x\in M$:

$[s\bullet (r\bullet f)[(x)$ = $[r\bullet f](xs)$ = $[f]((xs)r)$ = $[f](x(sr))$ = $[(sr)\bullet f](x)$

To prove conditions (1), (2), and (4) is easy.

However, he omits to prove that if $f$ is an R-map then $[r\bullet f]$ is an R-map for $r\in R$, i.e., if $f\in \mbox{Hom} _R (M,N)$ then $[r\bullet f] \in \mbox{Hom} _R (M,N)$.

And that is my problem.

Given for $r\in R$, $a\in R$, and $x\in M$ is $[r\bullet f](x)=f(xr)$ and $f(xa)=f(x)a$, we have to prove that $[r\bullet f](xa)$ = $[r\bullet f](x)a$. Here is a start:

$[r\bullet f](xa)$ = $[f]((xa)r)$ = $[f](x(ar))$ = ? = $[r\bullet f](x)a$

Who can fill in the missing steps ?
 
Hi steenis,

If the given conditions are correct, then there is problem with Bland's claim here. If $R$ is commutative, then indeed $\operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)$ is a left $R$-module with the given $R$-action. However, if $R$ is non-commutative, then the result need not hold. For suppose $R$ is a non-commutative, unital ring. We may view $R$ as a right $R$-module in the usual way. Consider the element $i \in \operatorname{Hom}_R(R,R)$ given by $i(r) = r$. Then $[b\cdot i](a) = i(ab) = ab$, but $[b\cdot i](1)a = i(1b)a = i(b)a = ba\neq ab = [b\cdot i](a)$. Hence, $[b\cdot i]\notin \operatorname{Hom}_R(R,R)$.

By the way, I've noticed that you and Peter are working on issues between Bland's and Rotman's texts. I will address some of those questions if I have time.
 
steenis said:
I want to take you to Example 1 of section 1.5 p.33: "$\mbox{Hom} _R (M,N)$ as a left R-module.

Let $M$ and $N$ be two right R-modules. R is not necessarely commutative.
On 9th line of this example, Bland claims that $\mbox{Hom} _R (M,N)$ is a left R-module if we define $[r\bullet f](x)=f(xr)$ for $r\in R$ and $x\in M$. To prove that $\mbox{Hom} _R (M,N)$ is a left R-module, we have to prove conditions (1), (2), (3) and (4) of Definition 1.4.1 p.26 (adapted for left R-modules). Bland proves (3) as follows, $r\in R$, $s\in R$, $x\in M$:

$[s\bullet (r\bullet f)[(x)$ = $[r\bullet f](xs)$ = $[f]((xs)r)$ = $[f](x(sr))$ = $[(sr)\bullet f](x)$

To prove conditions (1), (2), and (4) is easy.

However, he omits to prove that if $f$ is an R-map then $[r\bullet f]$ is an R-map for $r\in R$, i.e., if $f\in \mbox{Hom} _R (M,N)$ then $[r\bullet f] \in \mbox{Hom} _R (M,N)$.

And that is my problem.

Given for $r\in R$, $a\in R$, and $x\in M$ is $[r\bullet f](x)=f(xr)$ and $f(xa)=f(x)a$, we have to prove that $[r\bullet f](xa)$ = $[r\bullet f](x)a$. Here is a start:

$[r\bullet f](xa)$ = $[f]((xa)r)$ = $[f](x(ar))$ = ? = $[r\bullet f](x)a$

Who can fill in the missing steps ?
Hi Steenis,

Just working through your post and checking Bland, Example 1 of section 1.5 p.33 ... ...

I can see why you want to prove if $f$ is an R-map then $[r\bullet f]$ is an R-map for $r\in R$ ... but I am having trouble completely following you ... ...

Perhaps you can help ...

I understand we have the given condition $[r\bullet f](x)=f(xr)$ ...

... BUT ...

where exactly does $f(xa)=f(x)a$ come from ... how does this arise exactly ... ?(presumably from $$f \in \mbox{Hom} _R (M,N)$$ ... somehow ...? )Hope you can help ...

Peter
*** EDIT ***

Oh God! it is probably one of the conditions on f being an R-module homomorphism (R-Linear map) ... is that right ... ?
 
Last edited:
Yes, you are right. By definition $f : M \longrightarrow N$ is an R-module homomorphism or R-linear map or R-map between right R-modules, if for all $x, y \in M$ and $r \in R$:
$f(x+y) = f(x) + f(y)$
and
$f(xr)=f(x)r$
 
Euge said:
Hi steenis,

If the given conditions are correct, then there is problem with Bland's claim here. If $R$ is commutative, then indeed $\operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)$ is a left $R$-module with the given $R$-action. However, if $R$ is non-commutative, then the result need not hold. For suppose $R$ is a non-commutative, unital ring. We may view $R$ as a right $R$-module in the usual way. Consider the element $i \in \operatorname{Hom}_R(R,R)$ given by $i(r) = r$. Then $[b\cdot i](a) = i(ab) = ab$, but $[b\cdot i](1)a = i(1b)a = i(b)a = ba\neq ab = [b\cdot i](a)$. Hence, $[b\cdot i]\notin \operatorname{Hom}_R(R,R)$.

By the way, I've noticed that you and Peter are working on issues between Bland's and Rotman's texts. I will address some of those questions if I have time.

Thank you, Euge, for your counterexample, very good. I am not good with examples and counterexamples. And of course, the more input the better.
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
66
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K