R-module homomorphisms isomorphic to codomain

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kreizhn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Homomorphisms
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves demonstrating an isomorphism between the set of R-module homomorphisms from a commutative ring R to an R-module M and the module M itself.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the mapping from homomorphisms to elements of M, questioning how to establish surjectivity and the role of commutativity in the proof.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered guidance on defining a function to demonstrate surjectivity, while others are exploring the implications of the properties of R-modules and the nature of the mappings involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants are considering the constraints of defining functions that satisfy the properties of R-module homomorphisms and the implications of the commutativity of the ring R.

Kreizhn
Messages
714
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Let R be a commutative ring, and M be an R-module. Show that
[tex]\text{Hom}_{\text{R-mod}}(R,M) \cong M[/tex]
as R-modules, where the homomorphisms are R-module homomorphisms.

The Attempt at a Solution



This should hopefully be quick and easy. The most natural mapping to consider is
[itex]\phi: \text{Hom}_{\text{R-mod}}(R,M) \to M[/itex] sending [itex]f \to f(1_R)[/itex]. It is simple to show that this is a R-mod homomorphism, and that it is injective. Where I am stuck is surjectivity.

The first thing that comes to mind is that I want to use constant maps; however, these are not R-mod homs. Secondly, I've realized that I have not yet used the fact that the ring is commutative. I'm wondering if somehow f(rs) = rf(s) = sf(r) comes into play.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Kreizhn! :smile:

To prove surjectivity, you must prove that every m in M is in the image of the isomorphism. So you need to find a function f such that [itex]f(1_R)=m[/itex]. Can you extend this equation to fully define f? (hint: [itex]f(r)=f(r.1_R)[/itex].
 
Ah, I think I see what you're saying. We can just define the function in such a way that it forces it to be an R-module homomorphism by demanding that
[tex]f(r) = rf(1) = rm[/tex]
Then the function is a homomorphism since M is an R-module.
 
Kreizhn said:
Ah, I think I see what you're saying. We can just define the function in such a way that it forces it to be an R-module homomorphism by demanding that
[tex]f(r) = rf(1) = rm[/tex]
Then the function is a homomorphism since M is an R-module.

Yes, that's it!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K