MHB Free Modules, Bases and Direct Sums/Products - Bland, Proposition 2.2.3

  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bases Modules
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Paul E. Bland's book "Rings and Their Modules ...

Currently I am focused on Section 2.2 Free Modules ... ...

I need some help in order to fully understand the proof of the equivalence of (1) and (3) in Proposition 2.2.3 ...

Proposition 2.2.3 and its proof reads as follows:View attachment 5607Bland omits the proof of the equivalence of (1) and (3) ...

Can someone please help me to get started on a rigorous proof of the equivalence of (1) and (3) ... especially covering the case where $$\Delta$$ is an unaccountably infinite set ...

Peter========================================================

To help MHB members reading the above post with Bland's notation I am providing the following notes from Bland's text:View attachment 5608
https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/5609

View attachment 5610View attachment 5611
View attachment 5612
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
$\Delta$ may be finite or infinite, whatever kind of infiniteness.

Using prop 2.1.10 of Bland, $M=\bigoplus _\Delta M_\alpha$ with $M _\alpha \leq M$, means that each $x\in M$ can be written uniquely as a finite sum $x=\Sigma _\Delta x _\alpha$, where $x _\alpha \in M$ for all $\alpha \in \Delta$ (i.e. only finitely many $x _\alpha$'s are nonzero).

(3) => (1) Given $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta \subset M$
$M=\bigoplus _\Delta x _\alpha R$ means that each element $x\in M$ can be written uniquely as a finite sum $x=\Sigma _\Delta x _\alpha r _\alpha$ with $r _\alpha \in R$, where only finitely many $r _\alpha$'s are nonzero. This means that $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta$ is a basis of $M$ by definition.

(1) => (3) Given $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta$, with $x _\alpha \in M$, is a basis of $M$. So each element $x\in M$ can be written uniquely as a finite sum $x=\Sigma _\Delta x _\alpha r _\alpha$ with $r _\alpha \in R$, where only finitely many $r _\alpha$'s are nonzero. This means that $M=\bigoplus _\Delta x _\alpha R$ by prop 2.1.10.
 
steenis said:
$\Delta$ may be finite or infinite, whatever kind of infiniteness.

Using prop 2.1.10 of Bland, $M=\bigoplus _\Delta M_\alpha$ with $M _\alpha \leq M$, means that each $x\in M$ can be written uniquely as a finite sum $x=\Sigma _\Delta x _\alpha$, where $x _\alpha \in M$ for all $\alpha \in \Delta$ (i.e. only finitely many $x _\alpha$'s are nonzero).

(3) => (1) Given $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta \subset M$
$M=\bigoplus _\Delta x _\alpha R$ means that each element $x\in M$ can be written uniquely as a finite sum $x=\Sigma _\Delta x _\alpha r _\alpha$ with $r _\alpha \in R$, where only finitely many $r _\alpha$'s are nonzero. This means that $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta$ is a basis of $M$ by definition.

(1) => (3) Given $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta$, with $x _\alpha \in M$, is a basis of $M$. So each element $x\in M$ can be written uniquely as a finite sum $x=\Sigma _\Delta x _\alpha r _\alpha$ with $r _\alpha \in R$, where only finitely many $r _\alpha$'s are nonzero. This means that $M=\bigoplus _\Delta x _\alpha R$ by prop 2.1.10.

Hi Steenis,

Just reworking Section 2.2 of Bland ... and in particular Proposition 2.2.3 ...

In the above post you write:

"... ... (3) => (1) Given $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta \subset M$
$M=\bigoplus _\Delta x _\alpha R$ means that each element $x\in M$ can be written uniquely as a finite sum $x=\Sigma _\Delta x _\alpha r _\alpha$ with $r _\alpha \in R$, where only finitely many $r _\alpha$'s are nonzero. This means that $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta$ is a basis of $M$ by definition. ... ... "This argument seems to imply that the basis $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta$ could well be infinite ... is that right?Hope you can help ...

Peter
 
Last edited:
Peter said:
Hi Steenis,

Just reworking Section 2.2 of Bland ... and in particular Proposition 2.2.3 ...

In the above post you write:

"... ... (3) => (1) Given $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta \subset M$
$M=\bigoplus _\Delta x _\alpha R$ means that each element $x\in M$ can be written uniquely as a finite sum $x=\Sigma _\Delta x _\alpha r _\alpha$ with $r _\alpha \in R$, where only finitely many $r _\alpha$'s are nonzero. This means that $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta$ is a basis of $M$ by definition. ... ... "This argument seems to imply that the basis $\{x _\alpha \} _\Delta$ could well be infinite ... is that right?Hope you can help ...

Peter

My apologies steenis ... I did not read your previous post carefully enough ... and somehow (I don't quite know how ? ) missed your statement :

"... ... $\Delta$ may be finite or infinite, whatever kind of infiniteness. ... ... "

... careless of me ... sorry ...

But thanks again for your post ... your posts are enabling me to understand Bland's excellent book ...

Peter
 
No, I don't mind.

The basis may be infinite, but remember, the linear combinations $x=\Sigma _\Delta x _\alpha r _\alpha$
in which $x _\alpha$ are the basis elements, must be finite sums, thus only finitely many $r _\alpha \in R$ are nonzero.
 
steenis said:
No, I don't mind.

The basis may be infinite, but remember, the linear combinations $x=\Sigma _\Delta x _\alpha r _\alpha$
in which $x _\alpha$ are the basis elements, must be finite sums, thus only finitely many $r _\alpha \in R$ are nonzero.
THanks for your generous help, steenis...

Peter
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top