Take the 2-minute tour ×
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.

$A$ is a commutative ring, and $f:M\rightarrow M$ is an endomorphism of $A$-modules which is surjective. If I know that $M$ is finitely generated, I want to prove that $f$ is also injective.

This is what I have. Let $N=\ker(f)$. Then we have that $N$ is finitely generated and moreover it is a submodule of $M$.I want to try to apply Nakayama's lemma to $N$. Meaning, I want to find an ideal $I$ of $A$ such that $I$ is contained in every maximal ideal and $IN=N$. This is where Im having trouble. For every ideal we obviously have that $IN\subset N$ ( because $f(in)=if(n)=i0=0)$, but I dont see what to make $I$ so that $N\subset IN$ and $I$ in every maximal ideal.

Thanks,

share|improve this question
2  
Sub-module of a f.g. module may fail to be finitely generated. Take $R=k[x_1,x_2,...]$ the ring of polynomials with infinitely many variable where $k$ is a field. $R$ over itself, is a f.g. module, generated by $1$, however, the ideal $I=(x_1,x_2,...)$ is not f.g. –  Ehsan M. Kermani Dec 7 '12 at 7:43

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

I would use the Cayley-Hamilton theorem for this problem. (If you are working over a Noetherian ring, then your kernel will be finitely generated. Otherwise I am not sure it has to be). I am basically going to give the argument which is Eisenbud's Commutative Algebra with a View Towards Algebraic Geometry (Corollary 4.4). You can also look at Proposition 2.4, Corollary 2.5 in Atiyah-Macdonald's Introduction to Commutative Algebra.

Let $t$ be an indeterminate. We can define an $A[t]$-module structure on $M$, by defining the action of $t$ as follows: $tm = f(m)$, where $f$ is your surjective map. Then note that because $f$ is surjective, $(t)M = M$. In particular, we can apply the Cayley-Hamilton Theorem to the $A[t]$-module $M$ with the identity map on $M$. Then there exists $a_1, \dots, a_n \in (t)$ such that $(1 + a_1 + \cdots +a_n)M = 0$. Since each $a_j = tq_j(t)$ for some $q_j(t) \in A[t]$, we get a polynomial $q(t)$ such that $(1 - q(t)t)M = 0.$ But this means that ${\rm Id}_M - q(f)f = 0$. Then $q(f)f ={\rm Id}_M$, so $f$ is injective, and hence an isomorphism.

share|improve this answer
    
My professor presented another version of Nakayama's lemma today whose proof relies on Cayley Hamilton and it is the statement that you use: If $M$ is f.g. and $I$ is an ideal of $R$ a commutative ring such that $IM=M$, then there exists an $a\in I$ such that $(1-a)M=0$. –  Daniel Montealegre Dec 8 '12 at 5:36

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.