Composition Series and Noetherian and Artinian Modules ....

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Proposition 4.2.14 from Paul E. Bland's book "Rings and Their Modules," specifically regarding Noetherian and Artinian modules. Participants clarify that if \( M / M_1 \) is a simple R-module, it is both Artinian and Noetherian due to the finite nature of its submodules, which consist solely of \( \{ 0 \} \) and \( M / M_1 \). This finite structure ensures that any ascending or descending chain of submodules terminates, confirming that \( M / M_1 \) is indeed Artinian and Noetherian. The conclusion emphasizes the relationship between simplicity and finiteness in module theory.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of R-modules and their properties
  • Familiarity with Noetherian and Artinian concepts in module theory
  • Knowledge of ascending and descending chain conditions
  • Basic comprehension of simple modules and their characteristics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the ascending and descending chain conditions in module theory
  • Explore the definitions and examples of Noetherian and Artinian rings
  • Investigate the properties of simple R-modules in greater detail
  • Review additional propositions in Bland's "Rings and Their Modules" for deeper insights
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for graduate students in mathematics, algebraists, and anyone studying module theory, particularly those focusing on Noetherian and Artinian properties in R-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
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K