Endomorphisms of Direct Sums - Berrick and Keating - Exercise 2.1.6 (i)

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

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Exercise 2.1.6 (i) from Berrick and Keating's book, which involves the properties of endomorphisms of direct sums of right R-modules. Participants explore the definitions and implications of endomorphisms, projections, and inclusions in the context of module theory, specifically focusing on how these concepts relate to matrix representations and the structure of the ring of endomorphisms.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • Peter presents the exercise and seeks assistance in understanding how to approach it.
  • Deveno provides a detailed breakdown of the mappings involved, defining $$\mu_{ij} = \pi_i \mu \sigma_j$$ and showing how $$\mu(m)$$ can be expressed in terms of these mappings.
  • Participants discuss the implications of the internal direct sum, emphasizing that each element can be uniquely expressed as a sum of elements from the component modules.
  • Clarifications are sought regarding the justification for certain steps in the proof, particularly concerning the properties of module homomorphisms and the nature of direct sums versus direct products.
  • There is a discussion about whether the notation $$m_1 + m_2$$ can be replaced with $$(m_1, m_2)$$, with participants confirming that the context of an internal direct sum does not require such a change.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the definitions and properties of the mappings involved, but there are clarifications and confirmations sought regarding specific steps in the reasoning. The discussion remains exploratory, with no consensus on a final solution yet.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the importance of understanding the nature of direct sums in module theory and the implications for endomorphisms. Participants note that the unique representation of elements in an internal direct sum is crucial for the arguments presented.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
Exercise 2.1.6 (i) of Berrick and Keating's book An Introduction to Rings and Modules reads as follows:Let $$M = M_1 \oplus M_2$$, an internal sum of right $$R$$-modules, and let $$\{ \sigma_1 , \sigma_2, \pi_1 , \pi_2 \}$$ be the corresponding set of inclusions and projections.

Given an endomorphism $$\mu$$ of $$M$$, define $$\mu_{ij} = \pi_i \mu \sigma_j$$, an $$R$$-homomorphism from $$M_j$$ to $$M_i, i,j = 1,2$$.Show that for $$m = m_1 + m_2$$, with $$m_1 \in M_1, m_2 \in M_2$$ we have:

$$\mu(m) = ( \mu_{11}m_1 + \mu_{12}m_2) + ( \mu_{21}m_1 + \mu_{22}m_2)
$$

where $$\mu_{11}m_1 + \mu_{12}m_2$$ is in $$M_1$$

and

$$\mu_{21}m_1 + \mu_{22}m_2$$ is in $$M_2$$

Viewing $$M$$ as a 'column space' $$\begin{bmatrix} M_1 \\ M_2 \end{bmatrix}$$, show that $$\mu$$ can be represented as a matrix $$\begin{bmatrix}\mu_{11} & \mu_{12} \\ \mu_{21} & \mu_{22} \end{bmatrix}.$$

Deduce that the ring of endomorphisms End($$M$$) of $$M$$ can be written as a ring of $$2 \times 2$$ matrices:

$$End(M) = \begin{bmatrix} End(M_1) & Hom(M_2, M_1) \\ Hom(M_1, M_2) & End(M_2) \end{bmatrix}$$

where $$Hom(M_1, M_2)$$ is the set of all $$R$$-Module maps from $$M_1$$ to $$M_2$$.
Can someone please help me to get started on this exercise.

Help will be appreciated!

Peter
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
Exercise 2.1.6 (i) of Berrick and Keating's book An Introduction to Rings and Modules reads as follows:Let $$M = M_1 \oplus M_2$$, an internal sum of right $$R$$-modules, and let $$\{ \sigma_1 , \sigma_2, \pi_1 , \pi_2 \}$$ be the corresponding set of inclusions and projections.

Given an endomorphism $$\mu$$ of $$M$$, define $$\mu_{ij} = \pi_i \mu \sigma_j$$, an $$R$$-homomorphism from $$M_j$$ to $$M_i, i,j = 1,2$$.Show that for $$m = m_1 + m_2$$, with $$m_1 \in M_1, m_2 \in M_2$$ we have:

$$\mu(m) = ( \mu_{11}m_1 + \mu_{12}m_2) + ( \mu_{21}m_1 + \mu_{22}m_2)
$$

where $$\mu_{11}m_1 + \mu_{12}m_2$$ is in $$M_1$$

and

$$\mu_{21}m_1 + \mu_{22}m_2$$ is in $$M_2$$

Viewing $$M$$ as a 'column space' $$\begin{bmatrix} M_1 \\ M_2 \end{bmatrix}$$, show that $$\mu$$ can be represented as a matrix $$\begin{bmatrix}\mu_{11} & \mu_{12} \\ \mu_{21} & \mu_{22} \end{bmatrix}.$$

Deduce that the ring of endomorphisms End($$M$$) of $$M$$ can be written as a ring of $$2 \times 2$$ matrices:

$$End(M) = \begin{bmatrix} End(M_1) & Hom(M_2, M_1) \\ Hom(M_1, M_2) & End(M_2) \end{bmatrix}$$

where $$Hom(M_1, M_2)$$ is the set of all $$R$$-Module maps from $$M_1$$ to $$M_2$$.
Can someone please help me to get started on this exercise.

Help will be appreciated!

Peter

Suppose $\mu(m) = \mu(m_1 + m_2) = n_1 + n_2$ with $n_1 \in M_1,n_2 \in M_2$.

Now $\mu_{11}(m_1) = \pi_1\mu\sigma_1(m_1) = \pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0)$

$\mu_{12}(m_2) = \pi_1\mu\sigma_2(m_2) = \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2)$

$\mu_{21}(m_1) = \pi_2\mu\sigma_1(m_1) = \pi_2\mu(m_1 + 0)$

$\mu_{22}(m_2) = \pi_2\mu\sigma_2(m_2) = \pi_2\mu(0+m_2)$.

Thus:

$(\mu_{11}(m_1) + \mu_{12}(m_2)) + (\mu_{21}(m_1) + \mu_{22}(m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_2\mu(0+m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m_1 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu(m_1 + m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m)) + (\pi_2\mu(m)) = \pi_1(n_1+n_2) + \pi_2(n_1 + n_2)$

$ = n_1 + n_2 = \mu(m)$.

Can you take it from here?
 
Deveno said:
Suppose $\mu(m) = \mu(m_1 + m_2) = n_1 + n_2$ with $n_1 \in M_1,n_2 \in M_2$.

Now $\mu_{11}(m_1) = \pi_1\mu\sigma_1(m_1) = \pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0)$

$\mu_{12}(m_2) = \pi_1\mu\sigma_2(m_2) = \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2)$

$\mu_{21}(m_1) = \pi_2\mu\sigma_1(m_1) = \pi_2\mu(m_1 + 0)$

$\mu_{22}(m_2) = \pi_2\mu\sigma_2(m_2) = \pi_2\mu(0+m_2)$.

Thus:

$(\mu_{11}(m_1) + \mu_{12}(m_2)) + (\mu_{21}(m_1) + \mu_{22}(m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_2\mu(0+m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m_1 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu(m_1 + m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m)) + (\pi_2\mu(m)) = \pi_1(n_1+n_2) + \pi_2(n_1 + n_2)$

$ = n_1 + n_2 = \mu(m)$.

Can you take it from here?
Thanks for the start Deveno ... gives me confidence to continue ...

Will try to progress the solution a bit ...

Peter
 
Deveno said:
Suppose $\mu(m) = \mu(m_1 + m_2) = n_1 + n_2$ with $n_1 \in M_1,n_2 \in M_2$.

Now $\mu_{11}(m_1) = \pi_1\mu\sigma_1(m_1) = \pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0)$

$\mu_{12}(m_2) = \pi_1\mu\sigma_2(m_2) = \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2)$

$\mu_{21}(m_1) = \pi_2\mu\sigma_1(m_1) = \pi_2\mu(m_1 + 0)$

$\mu_{22}(m_2) = \pi_2\mu\sigma_2(m_2) = \pi_2\mu(0+m_2)$.

Thus:

$(\mu_{11}(m_1) + \mu_{12}(m_2)) + (\mu_{21}(m_1) + \mu_{22}(m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_2\mu(0+m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m_1 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu(m_1 + m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m)) + (\pi_2\mu(m)) = \pi_1(n_1+n_2) + \pi_2(n_1 + n_2)$

$ = n_1 + n_2 = \mu(m)$.

Can you take it from here?
Hi Deveno ... just a minor clarification:

You write:

" ... ... Suppose $\mu(m) = \mu(m_1 + m_2) = n_1 + n_2$ with $n_1 \in M_1,n_2 \in M_2$. ... ... "

How can we be sure that $$m$$ mapped under $$\mu$$ gives us (neatly) one element from $$M_1$$ and one element from $$M_2$$?

Is it because $$\mu (m) = n$$ for some $$n \in M$$ and given the nature of the direct sum we have $$n = n_1 + n_2$$ where $$n_1 \in M_1$$ and $$n_2 \in M_2$$? Can you confirm that this is the reason?

Second clarification:

If we replaced $$(m_1 + m_2)$$ by $$(m_1, m_2)$$ in the proof/solution , would everything still hold? [I am thinking that given the nature of direct sums this would be OK.]

Peter
 
Deveno said:
Suppose $\mu(m) = \mu(m_1 + m_2) = n_1 + n_2$ with $n_1 \in M_1,n_2 \in M_2$.

Now $\mu_{11}(m_1) = \pi_1\mu\sigma_1(m_1) = \pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0)$

$\mu_{12}(m_2) = \pi_1\mu\sigma_2(m_2) = \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2)$

$\mu_{21}(m_1) = \pi_2\mu\sigma_1(m_1) = \pi_2\mu(m_1 + 0)$

$\mu_{22}(m_2) = \pi_2\mu\sigma_2(m_2) = \pi_2\mu(0+m_2)$.

Thus:

$(\mu_{11}(m_1) + \mu_{12}(m_2)) + (\mu_{21}(m_1) + \mu_{22}(m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_2\mu(0+m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m_1 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu(m_1 + m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m)) + (\pi_2\mu(m)) = \pi_1(n_1+n_2) + \pi_2(n_1 + n_2)$

$ = n_1 + n_2 = \mu(m)$.

Can you take it from here?
Just another minor clarification, Deveno ... ...

In your working above, you put

$$\pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2) $$

equal to

$$ \pi_1\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2)) $$

Is the justification for this that $$\pi_1$$ is a module homomorphism, $$\mu$$ is also and so their composition is a module homomorphism?

Peter
Peter
 
Peter said:
Hi Deveno ... just a minor clarification:

You write:

" ... ... Suppose $\mu(m) = \mu(m_1 + m_2) = n_1 + n_2$ with $n_1 \in M_1,n_2 \in M_2$. ... ... "

How can we be sure that $$m$$ mapped under $$\mu$$ gives us (neatly) one element from $$M_1$$ and one element from $$M_2$$?

Is it because $$\mu (m) = n$$ for some $$n \in M$$ and given the nature of the direct sum we have $$n = n_1 + n_2$$ where $$n_1 \in M_1$$ and $$n_2 \in M_2$$? Can you confirm that this is the reason?

Second clarification:

If we replaced $$(m_1 + m_2)$$ by $$(m_1, m_2)$$ in the proof/solution , would everything still hold? [I am thinking that given the nature of direct sums this would be OK.]

Peter

We have an INTERNAL direct sum so any element $m \in M$ has a UNIQUE expression as $m_1 + m_2$. This also holds for the element $\mu(m) \in M$.

So, yes, you are correct.

The "side by side" writing of $m_1 + m_2$ as $(m_1,m_2)$ is for an EXTERNAL direct product. We don't need to do that, here.
Peter said:
Just another minor clarification, Deveno ... ...

In your working above, you put

$$\pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2) $$

equal to

$$ \pi_1\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2)) $$

Is the justification for this that $$\pi_1$$ is a module homomorphism, $$\mu$$ is also and so their composition is a module homomorphism?

Peter
Peter

Yep.
 
Deveno said:
We have an INTERNAL direct sum so any element $m \in M$ has a UNIQUE expression as $m_1 + m_2$. This also holds for the element $\mu(m) \in M$.

So, yes, you are correct.

The "side by side" writing of $m_1 + m_2$ as $(m_1,m_2)$ is for an EXTERNAL direct product. We don't need to do that, here.

Yep.

Thanks Deveno ... hmmm ... missed the 'unique' bit ... thanks for the reminder ...

Peter
 
Deveno said:
Suppose $\mu(m) = \mu(m_1 + m_2) = n_1 + n_2$ with $n_1 \in M_1,n_2 \in M_2$.

Now $\mu_{11}(m_1) = \pi_1\mu\sigma_1(m_1) = \pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0)$

$\mu_{12}(m_2) = \pi_1\mu\sigma_2(m_2) = \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2)$

$\mu_{21}(m_1) = \pi_2\mu\sigma_1(m_1) = \pi_2\mu(m_1 + 0)$

$\mu_{22}(m_2) = \pi_2\mu\sigma_2(m_2) = \pi_2\mu(0+m_2)$.

Thus:

$(\mu_{11}(m_1) + \mu_{12}(m_2)) + (\mu_{21}(m_1) + \mu_{22}(m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_1\mu(0 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu(m_1 + 0) + \pi_2\mu(0+m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu((m_1 + 0) + (0 + m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m_1 + m_2)) + (\pi_2\mu(m_1 + m_2))$

$= (\pi_1\mu(m)) + (\pi_2\mu(m)) = \pi_1(n_1+n_2) + \pi_2(n_1 + n_2)$

$ = n_1 + n_2 = \mu(m)$.

Can you take it from here?

You write:

" ... ... Can you take it from here? ... ..."

Well, the second part of the exercise looks pretty straightforward ... unless I am misinterpreting it ...

The second part of the exercise states:

"Viewing $$M$$ as a 'column space' $$\begin{bmatrix} M_1 \\ M_2 \end{bmatrix}$$, show that $$\mu$$ can be represented as a matrix $$\begin{bmatrix}\mu_{11} & \mu_{12} \\ \mu_{21} & \mu_{22} \end{bmatrix}.$$"

If we take $$m = \begin{bmatrix} m_1 \\ m_2 \end{bmatrix} $$

where $$m_1 \in M_1$$ and $$m_2 \in M_2$$

then we can represent $$\mu(m_1)$$ as follows:

$$\mu (m_1) = \begin{bmatrix}\mu_{11} & \mu_{12} \\ \mu_{21} & \mu_{22} \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} m_1 \\ m_2 \end{bmatrix} $$

$$= \begin{bmatrix} \mu_{11}m_1 + \mu_{12}m_2 \\ \mu_{21}m_1 + \mu_{22}m_2 \end{bmatrix}$$

where $$\mu_{11}m_1 + \mu_{12}m_2 \in M_1$$ and $$\mu_{21}m_1 + \mu_{22}m_2 \in M_2$$

Can you confirm that this is a satisfactory answer to this part of the exercise.

Peter
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K