Tell me more ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In Etingof's notes entitled "Introduction to Representation Theory," he asks the reader to produce an example of an indecomposable module which is not cyclic (Problem 1.25(c)). The exercise even comes with a hint: if $A = k[x,y]/(x^2,xy,y^2)$, then he suggests $A^*$ with the standard $A$-action. But this seems unnecessarily complicated: why not simply use $(x,y) \subset k[x,y]$? Am I correct in thinking that this is an indecomposable ideal? Why would Etingof suggest the first example instead of this one?

share|improve this question
2  
Dear Justin, He probably suggests the example you mention because it is finite dimensional over the ground field $k$, and so closer to the world of group rings and Lie algebras than your example, which is infinite dimensional over $k$. Regards, – Matt E May 4 '12 at 0:17
Thanks Matt, I believe you're right. He says "representation" when he means "finite-dimensional representation" elsewhere in these notes. – Justin Campbell May 4 '12 at 0:28

1 Answer

Perhaps he just wants to use the complicated example later on, too? It might also be some weird difference between modules and representations.

What you say looks right to me. Any nonzero ideal of $k[x,y]$ will intersect any other nonzero ideal nontrivially since the ring is a commutative domain, and it's pretty clear $(x,y)$ isn't a cyclic module...

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.