Direct Products of Modules ....Another Question .... ....

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Modules
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Proposition 2.1.1 from Paul E. Bland's book, "Rings and Their Modules," specifically regarding the proof involving the mapping ##g: N \rightarrow \prod_\Delta M_\alpha##. Participants clarify that the expression ##g(x) = (x_\alpha)## does not define a specific homomorphism but rather describes a general form of any homomorphism with inputs from set N. The consensus is that Bland's proof demonstrates that if ##\pi_\alpha g = f_\alpha## for all ##\alpha \in \Delta##, then indeed ##f = g## holds true.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of module theory and direct products in algebra.
  • Familiarity with homomorphisms and their properties.
  • Knowledge of the notation and terminology used in algebraic structures.
  • Basic comprehension of the concepts presented in "Rings and Their Modules" by Paul E. Bland.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the definitions and properties of direct products and direct sums in module theory.
  • Explore the implications of homomorphisms in algebraic structures.
  • Review Proposition 2.1.1 in "Rings and Their Modules" for deeper insights.
  • Learn about the relationship between mappings and their projections in module theory.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, algebraists, and students studying module theory who seek to understand the nuances of direct products and homomorphisms in the context of Bland's work.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Paul E. Bland's book: Rings and Their Modules and am currently focused on Section 2.1 Direct Products and Direct Sums ... ...

I need help with another aspect of the proof of Proposition 2.1.1 ...

Proposition 2.1.1 and its proof read as follows:
Bland - Proposition 2.1.1 ... .png
In the above proof by Paul Bland we read the following:

" ... ... suppose that ##g \ : \ N \rightarrow \prod_\Delta M_\alpha## is also an ##R##-linear mapping such that ##\pi_\alpha g = f_\alpha## for each ##\alpha \in \Delta##. If ##g(x) = ( x_\alpha )## ... ... "When Bland puts ##g(x) = ( x_\alpha )## he seems to be specifying a particular ##g## and then proves ##f = g## ... ... I thought he was proving that for any ##g## such that ##\pi_\alpha g = f_\alpha## we have ##f = g## ... can someone please clarify ... ?Help will be much appreciated ... ...Peter
======================================================================================The above post mentions but does not define ##f## ... Bland's definition of ##f## is as follows:
Bland - Defn of f in Propn 2.1.1 , page 40 ... .png
Hope that helps ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Bland - Proposition 2.1.1 ... .png
    Bland - Proposition 2.1.1 ... .png
    36.3 KB · Views: 744
  • Bland - Defn of f in Propn 2.1.1 , page 40 ... .png
    Bland - Defn of f in Propn 2.1.1 , page 40 ... .png
    14.5 KB · Views: 364
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Math Amateur said:
When Bland puts ##g(x) = ( x_\alpha )## ...
he is writing down some (any) homomorphism ##g##. It has ##x## as input and an element of the direct product as output. Those elements are of the form ##(x_\alpha )\,.## He does not specify
... a particular ##g##.
Particular only in so far, as he has only one ##g##, but this always looks as described. He did not make any assumptions on the ##x_\alpha## other than ##x_\alpha \in M_\alpha ##.

It's like saying: Consider a function ##g: \mathbb{R} \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}^2## given by ##g(x)=(x_1,x_2)##. Does it tell you how the function works? It only says ##g: \mathbb{R} \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}^2\,.##
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
fresh_42 said:
he is writing down some (any) homomorphism ##g##. It has ##x## as input and an element of the direct product as output. Those elements are of the form ##(x_\alpha )\,.## He does not specify
Particular only in so far, as he has only one ##g##, but this always looks as described. He did not make any assumptions on the ##x_\alpha## other than ##x_\alpha \in M_\alpha ##.

It's like saying: Consider a function ##g: \mathbb{R} \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}^2## given by ##g(x)=(x_1,x_2)##. Does it tell you how the function works? It only says ##g: \mathbb{R} \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}^2\,.##
Thanks fresh_42 ... that clarifies that issue ...

Appreciate your help ...

Peter
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
3K