Theorem on the Lengths of Modules - Cohn, Theorem 2.5

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Modules Theorem
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Theorem 2.5 from "Introduction to Ring Theory" by P. M. Cohn, which addresses the lengths of modules within the context of linear algebras and Artinian rings. The theorem establishes relationships between the lengths of modules through the equation $\ell(M) - \ell(\text{ker }f) = \ell(N) - \ell(\text{coker}f)$. Participants clarify that if the function $f$ is injective, surjective, or an isomorphism, specific inequalities and equalities regarding the lengths of modules can be derived. The theorem's proof is deemed trivial by Cohn, yet some readers seek assistance in formulating a formal proof.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of module theory and its properties
  • Familiarity with the concepts of kernels and cokernels in linear algebra
  • Knowledge of injective, surjective, and isomorphic functions
  • Basic grasp of Artinian rings and their characteristics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the proof techniques for module length inequalities
  • Explore the implications of injective and surjective mappings in module theory
  • Investigate the properties of Artinian rings in greater detail
  • Learn about the converse of Theorem 2.5 and its proof
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in algebra, graduate students studying ring theory, and anyone interested in deepening their understanding of module lengths and their proofs.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading "Introduction to Ring Theory" by P. M. Cohn (Springer Undergraduate Mathematics Series)

In Chapter 2: Linear Algebras and Artinian Rings, on Page 61, Cohn presents Theorem 2,5 concerning the lengths of modules.

Cohn indicates that the proof of this theorem is obvious/trivial ... BUT ... I am having trouble even getting started in formulating an explicit and formal proof ... can someone please help ...

The text of Theorem 2.5 is as follows:
View attachment 3325 Help will be appreciated,

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
I am reading "Introduction to Ring Theory" by P. M. Cohn (Springer Undergraduate Mathematics Series)

In Chapter 2: Linear Algebras and Artinian Rings, on Page 61, Cohn presents Theorem 2,5 concerning the lengths of modules.

Cohn indicates that the proof of this theorem is obvious/trivial ... BUT ... I am having trouble even getting started in formulating an explicit and formal proof ... can someone please help ...

The text of Theorem 2.5 is as follows:
View attachment 3325 Help will be appreciated,

Peter

Hi Peter,

Recall the equation

$$\ell(M) - \ell(\text{ker }f) = \ell(N) - \ell(\text{coker}f) \quad (*)$$

If $f$ is injective, then $\text{ker }f = 0$ and thus $\ell(\text{ker }f) = 0$. So $(*)$ becomes $\ell(M) = \ell(N) - \ell(\text{coker }f)$, which shows that $\ell(M) \le \ell(N)$. If $f$ is surjective, then $\text{coker }f = 0$ and thus $\ell(\text{coker }f) = 0$. The equation $(*)$ reduces to $\ell(M) - \ell(\text{ker }f) = \ell(N)$, which shows that $\ell(M) \ge \ell(N)$.

Finally, suppose $f$ is an isomorphism. Then $f$ is both injective and surjective, so by the previous results, $\ell(M) \le \ell(N)$ and $\ell(M) \ge \ell(N)$. Consequently, $\ell(M) = \ell(N)$. Try proving the converse.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K