MHB Composition Series and Noetherian and Artinian Modules ....

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Paul E. Bland's book, "Rings and Their Modules".

I am focused on Section 4.2: Noetherian and Artinian Modules and need some help to fully understand the proof of part of Proposition 4.2.14 ... ...

Proposition 4.2.14 reads as follows:

https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/8237
https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/8235
In the above proof by Bland we read the following:

"... ... Since $$M / M_1$$ is a simple R-module, $$M / M_1$$ is artinian and noetherian ... ... Can someone please explain why $$M / M_1$$ being a simple R-module implies that $$M / M_1$$ is artinian and noetherian ... ... ?Peter
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
I am reading Paul E. Bland's book, "Rings and Their Modules".

I am focused on Section 4.2: Noetherian and Artinian Modules and need some help to fully understand the proof of part of Proposition 4.2.14 ... ...

Proposition 4.2.14 reads as follows:
In the above proof by Bland we read the following:

"... ... Since $$M / M_1$$ is a simple R-module, $$M / M_1$$ is artinian and noetherian ... ... Can someone please explain why $$M / M_1$$ being a simple R-module implies that $$M / M_1$$ is artinian and noetherian ... ... ?Peter
It now occurs to me that the answer to my question is quite straightforward ... indeed ...$$M / M_1$$ is simple $$\Longrightarrow$$ only submodules of $$M / M_1$$ are $$\{ 0 \}$$ and $$M / M_1$$$$\Longrightarrow$$ only descending and ascending chains of submodules are finite ... that is terminate in a finite number of elements$$\Longrightarrow$$ $$M / M_1$$ is artinian and noetherian ...
Is that correct ... ?

Peter
 
Yes, it is correct. It means that every simple module is fingen.

It is not true for rings, though.
 
steenis said:
Yes, it is correct. It means that every simple module is fingen.

It is not true for rings, though.
Thanks steenis ...

Appreciate your help ...

Peter
 
Thread 'Derivation of equations of stress tensor transformation'
Hello ! I derived equations of stress tensor 2D transformation. Some details: I have plane ABCD in two cases (see top on the pic) and I know tensor components for case 1 only. Only plane ABCD rotate in two cases (top of the picture) but not coordinate system. Coordinate system rotates only on the bottom of picture. I want to obtain expression that connects tensor for case 1 and tensor for case 2. My attempt: Are these equations correct? Is there more easier expression for stress tensor...
Back
Top