MHB Proof Noetherian Ring: $M^2 \ne M$

  • Thread starter Thread starter Amer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ring
Amer
Messages
259
Reaction score
0
Can you check my Work or mention a link for a proof.
Let $R$ be Noetherian ring. Then if $M$ is a maximal ideal in $R$. Prove that $M^2 \ne M$.

Proof:
Since $R$ is Noetherian ring then $M$ is finitely generated. Thus $M = (a_1, a_2 , \cdots, a_k)$ we can choose the $a_i's $ which are minimal in the sense that $M$ can't be generated if we ignore one of the $a_i's$. Also that means one $a_i$ can be generated by other $a's $.

Suppose on the contrary that $M^2 = M$. Hence $a_1 \in M^2 $. But elements of $M^2$ has the form $\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{n} k_i a_j a_h$ for some $n$
Therefore
$\displaystyle a_1 = \sum_{i=1}^{n} k_i a_j a_h $ the right hand side is divisible by $a_1$ since the left hand side is. and since $a_1$ can't be generated by other $a_i's$ that means $a_1$ should appear on terms of the right hand side moving these terms to the left and factoring $a_1$ we will get someone like this

$\displaystyle a_1 ( 1 - \sum_{i=1}^{n} c_i a_i) = \sum_{i=1}^{m} k_i a_j a_h ,~~~ i, j \ne 1$
I think the right hand side is equal to zero if it is then we will get $1 = \sum_{i=1}^{n} c_i a_i $, it follows that $1 \in M$ a contradiction. But is it zero ?. if it is not then how i can prove it.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Amer, is it assumed that $R$ is a commutative?
 
Euge said:
Hi Amer, is it assumed that $R$ is a commutative?

yea commutative with 1
 
Ok. The proof you've provided is incorrect. Here's something to keep in mind. If $M^2 = M$, then since $M$ is finitely generated, Nakayama's lemma gives an $e \in M$ for which $m = em$ for all $m \in M$. In particular, $e^2 = e$, i.e., $e$ is idempotent. Furthermore, $M = (e)$.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
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...
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...
Back
Top