Simple Modules and Right Annihilator Ideals ....

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Modules
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
3 replies · 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=7f07df23b94ee18b2335eb75acdc280b.png

?temp_hash=7f07df23b94ee18b2335eb75acdc280b.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}##. "Can someone please explain exactly why ##a \in \text{ann}_r( R / \mathfrak{m} )## implies that ##a + \mathfrak{m} = ( 1 + \mathfrak{m} ) a = 0## ... ... ?

Can someone also explain how this then implies that ##a \in \mathfrak{m}## ... ?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: 706
  • Bland - 2 - Proposition 6.1.7 ... ... PART 2.png
    Bland - 2 - Proposition 6.1.7 ... ... PART 2.png
    42.9 KB · Views: 677
Physics news on Phys.org
Assume ##a \in \text{ann}_r( R / \mathfrak{m} )##. That means that, for any element of ##R/\mathfrak m##, say ##s+\mathfrak m##, we have
$$(s+\mathfrak m)a=0_{R/\mathfrak m}\ \ \ \ \ (1)$$
Hence, in particular, we have
$$(1+\mathfrak m)a=0_{R/\mathfrak m}\ \ \ \ (2)$$
(I assume, since the proof refers to ##1##, that ##R## is assumed to contain a multiplicative identity, ie it is a 'unitary ring')

Now by definition of multiplication in a quotient:
$$(1+\mathfrak m)a=1\times a+\mathfrak m=a+\mathfrak m\ \ \ \ (3)$$
and by (2) this is equal to ##0_{R/\mathfrak m}##, which is ##\mathfrak m##.

Thus
$$a+\mathfrak m=\mathfrak m\ \ \ \ (4)$$
which means that ##a\in\mathfrak m##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Math Amateur
Thanks Andrew ... most clear and very helpful ...

Appreciate your help...

Peter
 
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=7f07df23b94ee18b2335eb75acdc280b.png

?temp_hash=7f07df23b94ee18b2335eb75acdc280b.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}##. "Can someone please explain exactly why ##a \in \text{ann}_r( R / \mathfrak{m} )## implies that ##a + \mathfrak{m} = ( 1 + \mathfrak{m} ) a = 0## ... ... ?

Can someone also explain how this then implies that ##a \in \mathfrak{m}## ... ?Hope someone can help ...

Peter