Jacobson Radical and Right Annihilator Ideals ....

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Radical
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
1 reply · 2K views
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
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 the proof of Proposition 6.1.7 ...Proposition 6.1.7 and its proof read as follows:
?temp_hash=57814fcc0e503006e7153e48b9211c10.png

?temp_hash=57814fcc0e503006e7153e48b9211c10.png

In the above text from Bland ... in the proof of (1) we read the following:" ... ... we see that ##\text{ann}_r( R / \mathfrak{m} ) = \text{ann}_r(S)##. But ##a \in \text{ann}_r( R / \mathfrak{m} )## implies that ##a + \mathfrak{m} = ( 1 + \mathfrak{m} ) a = 0## , so ##a \in \mathfrak{m}##.

So, it follows that ##\bigcap_\mathcal{S} \text{ann}_r(S) \subseteq J(R)## ... ... "
Could someone please explain why it follows that ##\bigcap_\mathcal{S} \text{ann}_r(S) \subseteq J(R)## ... ... ?Hope someone can help ...

Peter
 

Attachments

  • Bland - 1 - Proposition 6.1.7 ... ... PART 1.png
    Bland - 1 - Proposition 6.1.7 ... ... PART 1.png
    79.8 KB · Views: 803
  • Bland - 2 - Proposition 6.1.7 ... ... PART 2.png
    Bland - 2 - Proposition 6.1.7 ... ... PART 2.png
    42.9 KB · Views: 823
Physics news on Phys.org
Math Amateur said:
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 the proof of Proposition 6.1.7 ...Proposition 6.1.7 and its proof read as follows:
?temp_hash=57814fcc0e503006e7153e48b9211c10.png

?temp_hash=57814fcc0e503006e7153e48b9211c10.png

In the above text from Bland ... in the proof of (1) we read the following:" ... ... we see that ##\text{ann}_r( R / \mathfrak{m} ) = \text{ann}_r(S)##. But ##a \in \text{ann}_r( R / \mathfrak{m} )## implies that ##a + \mathfrak{m} = ( 1 + \mathfrak{m} ) a = 0## , so ##a \in \mathfrak{m}##.

So, it follows that ##\bigcap_\mathcal{S} \text{ann}_r(S) \subseteq J(R)## ... ... "
Could someone please explain why it follows that ##\bigcap_\mathcal{S} \text{ann}_r(S) \subseteq J(R)## ... ... ?Hope someone can help ...

Peter
Just some thoughts on my own question ... ...Just some thoughts ...

Since ##\text{ann}_r( R / \mathfrak{m} ) = \text{ann}_r(S)##

we have ##a \in \text{ann}_r( R / \mathfrak{m} )## means ##a \in \text{ann}_r(S)## ...

thus ##a \in \bigcap_\mathscr{S} \text{ann}_r(S)## ... ...

But ... we also have that ##a \in \text{ann}_r( R / \mathfrak{m} )## implies that ##a \in \mathfrak{m}## ... ...

But this means that ##a \in J(R)## ...

Thus ##a \in \bigcap_\mathscr{S} \text{ann}_r(S) \Longrightarrow a \in J(R)## ... ...

So ##\bigcap_\mathscr{S} \text{ann}_r(S) \subseteq J(R)## ...Is that correct?Peter