Direct Products of Modules .... Bland Proposition 2.1.1 .... ....

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

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the proof of Proposition 2.1.1 from Paul E. Bland's book on modules, specifically focusing on the properties of the mapping \( f: N \rightarrow \prod_\Delta M_\alpha \) and its relationship to the family of mappings \( \{ f_\alpha: N \rightarrow M_\alpha \}_\Delta \). Participants seek clarification on the necessity of these mappings being \( R \)-linear and how to demonstrate that \( f \) is also \( R \)-linear.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Peter expresses confusion about where the \( R \)-linearity of the mappings \( f_\alpha \) is utilized in the proof of Proposition 2.1.1.
  • Some participants suggest that the \( R \)-linearity of \( f \) must be shown using the properties of \( f_\alpha \) and the projections \( \pi_\alpha \).
  • It is noted that \( f \) is defined as the product of the family of mappings \( f_\alpha \), and this definition is central to proving \( f \) is \( R \)-linear.
  • One participant outlines the steps to show that \( f \) satisfies the conditions for being an \( R \)-linear map, specifically addressing the addition and scalar multiplication properties.
  • Another participant clarifies that the question is not about proving \( f \) is \( R \)-linear, but rather why it must be \( R \)-linear given the conditions stated.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need to establish the \( R \)-linearity of \( f \) but express differing views on how to approach the proof and the implications of the mappings being \( R \)-linear. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the most straightforward method to demonstrate this property.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the mappings and the definitions used, which may affect the clarity of the proof steps. The dependence on the properties of the projections and the family of mappings is also noted but not fully resolved.

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 some aspects of the proof of Proposition 2.1.1 ...

Proposition 2.1.1 and its proof read as follows:
View attachment 8030

In the statement of the above proposition we read the following:

" ... ... for every $$R$$-module $$N$$ and every family $$\{ f_\alpha \ : \ N \rightarrow M_\alpha \}_\Delta$$ of $$R$$-linear mappings there is a unique $$R$$-linear mapping $$f \ : \ N \rightarrow \prod_\Delta M_\alpha$$ ... ... "The proposition declares the family of mappings $$\{ f_\alpha \ : \ N \rightarrow M_\alpha \}_\Delta$$ as $$R$$-linear mappings and also declares that $$f$$ (see below for definition of $$f$$!) is an $$R$$-linear mapping ...

... BUT ...

I cannot see where in the proof the fact that they are $$R$$-linear mappings is used ...

Can someone please explain where in the proof the fact that the family of mappings $$\{ f_\alpha \ : \ N \rightarrow M_\alpha \}_\Delta$$ and $$f$$ are $$R$$-linear mappings is used ... basically ... why do these mappings have to be $$R$$-linear ... ?
Help will be much appreciated ...

Peter======================================================================================The above post mentions but does not define $$f$$ ... Bland's definition of $$f$$ is as follows:
View attachment 8031Hope that helps ...

Peter***EDIT***

In respect of $$f$$ it seems we have to prove $$f$$ is an $$R$$-linear mapping ... but then ... where is this done ...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Bland defines the map $f:N \longrightarrow \prod_\Delta M_\alpha$ by saying that $f$ is product of the family of mappings $f_\alpha:N \longrightarrow M_\alpha$. YOU have to fill in the proof that $f$ is an R-linear map, by using the fact that $f_\alpha$ is a R-linear maps for all $\alpha \in \Delta$.

The mappings $f_\alpha:N \longrightarrow M_\alpha$ have to be R-maps, because $f$ has to become an R-map and because $\pi_\alpha \circ f = f_\alpha$ for all α∈Δ.
 
Last edited:
steenis said:
Bland defines the map $f:N \longrightarrow \prod_\Delta M_\alpha$ by saying that $f$ is product of the family of mappings $f_\alpha:N \longrightarrow M_\alpha$. YOU have to fill in the proof that $f$ is an R-linear map, by using the fact that $f_\alpha$ is a R-linear maps for all $\alpha \in \Delta$.

The mappings $f_\alpha:N \longrightarrow M_\alpha$ have to be R-maps, because $f$ has to become an R-map and because $\pi_\alpha \circ f = f_\alpha$ for all α∈Δ.
Hi Steenis ... thanks for your help ...

You write:

" ... ... YOU have to fill in the proof that $f$ is an R-linear map, by using the fact that $f_\alpha$ is a R-linear maps for all $\alpha \in \Delta$. ... ... "

Yes ... of course you're right ...

BUT ... need some help ...We need to show $$f$$ is an $$R$$-linear map (homomorphism) ...

We are given that the $$f_\alpha$$ are $$R$$-linear maps, and we know that the projections $$\pi_\alpha$$ are $$R$$-linear maps ...

We also know that $$\pi_\alpha f = f_\alpha$$ for each $$\alpha \in \Delta$$ ... ... ... ... ... (1)

Now ... we know that if $$f$$ is an $$R$$-linear mapping then (1) holds true but ...

... how do you prove that f must necessarily be an $$R$$-linear map ... ...... can you help ... ... ?

Peter
 
To show that $f:N \longrightarrow \prod_\Delta M_\alpha$ is an R-linear map, use the definition of R-linear map. So you have to show that:

$f(x+y) = f(x) + f(y)$ for $x, y \in N$ and
$f(xr) = f(x)r$ for $x \in N$ and $r \in R$ (in case of a right R-module).

$f$ is defined as the product of the family of mappings $f_\alpha:N \longrightarrow M_\alpha$. So $f(x)=(f_\alpha(x))_{\alpha \in \Delta}$ and $f(y)=(f_\alpha(y))_{\alpha \in \Delta}$ for $x, y \in N$ by definition.

Thus $f(x+y) = (f_\alpha(x+y))=(f_\alpha(x)+f_\alpha(y))=(f_\alpha(x))+(f_\alpha(y))=f(x)+f(y)$.

You can do the second part.
 
I am sorry, Peter, did NOT ask me to prove that $f$ is R-linear, you DID ask me why $f$ is necessarily R-linear, given that $\pi_\alpha \circ f = f_\alpha$ in which $\pi_\alpha$ and $f_\alpha$ are R-linear.

I think this is why, take $x, y \in N$ then $\pi_\alpha f(x+y) = \pi_\alpha (f_\alpha(x+y)) = f_\alpha(x+y) = f_\alpha(x) + f_\alpha(y)$.

From this it follows $(f_\alpha(x+y)) = (f_\alpha(x)) + (f_\alpha(y))$ and $f(x+y)=f(x)+f(y)$. (you can do the second rule).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K