MHB Noetherian Modules: ACC, Finite Ascending Chain Definition - Bland

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 trying to understand Chapter 4, Section 4.2 on Noetherian and Artinian modules and need help with the definition of a noetherian module - in particular I need help with the nature of an ascending chain of submodule ...

Definition 4.2.1 reads as follows:

View attachment 3668

As I mentioned above, my question relates to the nature of an ascending chain - in particular, how do we regard a finite ascending chain ... indeed, is there such a thing as a finite ascending chain of submodules? (Note that the definition reads as if every ascending chain is unending or infinite?)For example, if we have a chain consisting of two submodules:

$$M_1 \subseteq M_2 $$ (1)

How to we regard this? Is it a terminating ascending chain?

Do we in fact regard (1) as an infinite ascending chain, as shown:

$$M_1 \subseteq M_2 \subseteq M_3 \subseteq M_4 \subseteq \ ... \ ... \ ...$$

where $$M_2 = M_3 = M_4 = \ ... \ ... \ ... $$So, the (essentially finite) ascending chain terminates at $$M_2$$ ... ...

Can someone clarify the above? Is this the right way to think about a finite ascending chain of submodules?

Hope someone can help ... ...

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Peter,

You can certainly speak of finite chains, and we have actually discussed this in the subject of modules of finite length. In any case, if in $(1)$, $M_1$ and $M_2$ are submodules of a module $M$, then the chain $M_1 \subset M_2$ can be viewed as the infinite ascending chain $M_1 \subset M_2 \subset M \subset M \subset \cdot$. You cannot always "reverse" this process, i.e., an infinite ascending chain may not be considered a finite chain. However, if you can always reverse this process in a module $M$, then $M$ is Noetherian.
 
Euge said:
Hi Peter,

You can certainly speak of finite chains, and we have actually discussed this in the subject of modules of finite length. In any case, if in $(1)$, $M_1$ and $M_2$ are submodules of a module $M$, then the chain $M_1 \subset M_2$ can be viewed as the infinite ascending chain $M_1 \subset M_2 \subset M \subset M \subset \cdot$. You cannot always "reverse" this process, i.e., an infinite ascending chain may not be considered a finite chain. However, if you can always reverse this process in a module $M$, then $M$ is Noetherian.
Most helpful, Euge .. ...

Thank you,

Peter
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K