Finitely Generated Modules and Maximal Submodules

  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
1,082
48
I am reading Paul E. Bland's book, "Rings and Their Modules".

I am focused on Section 6.1 The Jacobson Radical ... ...

I need help with an aspect of Proposition 6.1.2 ... ...

Proposition 6.1.2 relies on Zorn's Lemma and the notion of inductive sets ... ... so I am providing a short note from Bland on Zorn's Lemma and inductive sets ... ... as follows:



?temp_hash=9ae88151a81f41f5b8cb4e744b816927.png




NOTE: My apologies for the poor quality of the above image - due to some over-enthusiastic highlighting of Bland's text
frown.png




Now, Proposition 6.1.2 reads as follows:




?temp_hash=9ae88151a81f41f5b8cb4e744b816927.png




Now ... in the above proof of Proposition 6.1.2, Bland writes the following:


"... ... If ##\mathscr{C}## is a chain of submodules of ##\mathscr{S}##, then ##x_1 \notin \bigcup_\mathscr{C}## , so ##\bigcup_\mathscr{C}## is a proper submodule of ##M## and contains ##N##. Hence ##\mathscr{S}## is inductive ... ...


My question is as follows: Why does Bland bother to show that ## \bigcup_\mathscr{C}## is a proper submodule of ##M## that contains ##N## ... presumably he is showing that any chain of submodules in ##\mathscr{S}## has an upper bound ... is that right?
... ... but why does he need to do this as the largest submodule in the chain would be an upper bound ... ... ?


Hope someone can help ... ...

Peter


NOTE: My apologies for not being able to exactly reproduce Bland's embellished S in the above text ...
 

Attachments

  • Bland - Zorn's Lemma and Inductive Sets.png
    Bland - Zorn's Lemma and Inductive Sets.png
    121.1 KB · Views: 717
  • Bland - Prposition 6.1.2.png
    Bland - Prposition 6.1.2.png
    122 KB · Views: 650
Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
micromass
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
22,129
3,301
... ... but why does he need to do this as the largest submodule in the chain would be an upper bound ... ... ?

Why would there be a largest one?
 
  • Like
Likes Math Amateur
  • #3
Math Amateur
Gold Member
1,082
48
Why would there be a largest one?


Well I was thinking of the finite case ... e.g. where for example, \mathcal{C} might be

##N'_1 \subseteq N'_2 \subseteq N'_3##

so ... ##N'_3## in this case is an upper bound on the chain ##\mathcal{C}## ...


BUT ... your question me me think that my thinking does not cover the case of an infinite chain ...

In the case of an infinite chain there may be no largest submodule and so we need to have ##\bigcup_\mathcal{C} N'## as an upper bound ...


Can you confirm that my thinking is now correct ...

Peter
 
  • #4
59
18
Yes.

The upper bound of ##\mathscr{C}## need not be in ##\mathscr{C}##, but is has to be in ##\mathscr{S}##.
 

Related Threads on Finitely Generated Modules and Maximal Submodules

Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
993
Replies
10
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
970
  • Last Post
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Top