In all of the following let $A$ be a commutative unital ring, let any object represented with an $M$ or $N$ be an $A-$module, and let $\mathrm{Hom}(M,N)$ be the set of all homomorphisms with domain $M$ and target $N$, viewed as an $A-$module.

  1. I would like to prove that:

The sequence $$M_1 \xrightarrow{f_1} M_2 \xrightarrow{f_2} M_3 \xrightarrow{f} 0 \tag{1} $$ is exact iff $$0 \xrightarrow{g} \mathrm{Hom}(M_3,N) \xrightarrow{\overline{f_2}} \mathrm{Hom}(M_2,N) \xrightarrow{\overline{f_1}} \mathrm{Hom}(M_1,N) \tag{2}$$ is exact for all modules $N$, where $\overline{f_1}(g) = g \circ f_1.$

Taking as a definition of exact that the image of each map is equal to the kernel of the next, and the characterization of injection and surjection that follow from them when appropriate.

I am beginning by assuming (1) and trying to show (2). First to show that $\overline{f_2}$ is injective. Let $g \in \mathrm{ker}(\overline{f_2}),$ then $\overline{f_2}(g) = g(f_2) = 0$. Since by hypothesis (1) is exact, then $f_2$ is surjective so that $g(M_3) = 0$ thus $g = 0_{\mathrm{Hom(M_3,N)}}$ and the map is injective as desired.

I am having trouble showing that $\mathrm{Im}(\overline{f_2}) = \mathrm{ker}(\overline{f_1})$ to finish the proof (at least one direction). I wrote out everything I could think of regarding what it means to be in $\mathrm{Im}(\overline{f_2})$ and $\mathrm{ker}(\overline{f_1})$ and looked for where I could use the hypothesis, but no such luck.

  1. My text had me show

$\mathrm{Hom}(A,M) \approx M.$ I was able to show this, using the map $\Phi (g) = g(1)$, but even after proving it I am still not sure I understand how to use this fact, or how to interpret it? Any advice on the meaning of this?

edit------- One thing I was overlooking in question 1 was power over $N$, maybe this will help.


If $\overline{f}_1(g)=0$, then $g \circ f_1=0$. We must show that there exists $h: M_3 \to N$ such that $\overline{f}_2(h)=g$.

Note that this will imply that $h \circ f_2=g$. Therefore, we must have that $h(f_2(x))=g(x)$ for all $x$.

Hence, we are suggested to define $h(m)=g(m_2),$ where $m_2 \in M_2$ is such that $f_2(m_2)=m$. We must show that this is well defined. Having done that, it will be clear that $h \circ f_2=g$, that $h$ is a homomorphism etc.

Well, first note that there is, indeed, $m_2$ such that $f_2(m_2)=m$, since $f_2$ is surjective by exactness of the first line. Now, let $m_2'$ be another element going to $m$ by $f_2$. Then $m_2-m_2'$ go to zero by $f_2$, and hence $m_2-m_2'$ is the image of some $m_1 \in M_1$ by $f_1$ due to exactness. Therefore, $g(m_2-m_2')=g(f_1(m_1))=0$ (since $g \circ f_1=0$), and hence we conclude that $g(m_2)=g(m_2')$.

With respect to your second question, I would suggest for you to wait a little. The isomorphism in question is very useful.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your answer, that certainly works and helps. I will take your advice regarding the second questions, after proving the isomorphism I just couldn't interpret what it meant, on the surface it just seems to tell me that every homomorphism A to M can be identified by where it sends the 1. I was actually having trouble proving the splitting lemma earlier and I thought if I understood this iso better it would clear things up. $\endgroup$ – Prince M Feb 19 '17 at 5:59
  • $\begingroup$ Also, after posting my question I think I came up with a proof of the claim here. It is different than yours, if I post it as an answer would you mind commenting and telling me if it is valid? $\endgroup$ – Prince M Feb 19 '17 at 6:00

After considering Aliozio's proof that shows $\mathrm{Ker}(\overline{f_1}) \subseteq \mathrm{Im}(\overline{f_2})$, to complete the proof we need to show $\mathrm{Im}(\overline{f_2}) \subseteq \mathrm{Ker}(\overline{f_1})$. This is equivalent to $$\overline{f_1}\circ \overline{f_2} = 0_{\mathrm{Hom}(M_1,N)}.$$

Let $g \in \mathrm{Hom}(M_3,N)$ and consider $$\overline{f_1}(\overline{f_2}(g)) = g(f_2(f_1(M_1))). \hspace{2mm} (1)$$

Thus for each $g$, $$\overline{f_1}(\overline{f_2}(g)): M_1 \to N$$

and we need to show that for all $m_1 \in M_1$, $$g(f_2(f_1(m_1))) = 0_N.$$

By the hypothesis that the original sequence is exact we know $f_1(M_1) = \mathrm{Im}(f_1) = \mathrm{Ker}(f_2)$, so that the equality (1) becomes

$$\overline{f_1}(\overline{f_2}(g)) = g(f_2(f_1(M_1))) = g(f_2(\mathrm{Im}(f_1)) = g(f_2(\mathrm{Ker}(f_2)) = g(0_{M_3}).$$

But since $g$ is a morphism $g : M_3 \to N$ we know that $$g(0_{M_3}) = g(0_{A} \cdot m_3) = 0_A \cdot g(m_3) = 0_N.$$

Thus $$\overline{f_1}(\overline{f_2}(g)) = 0_N$$

so that $$\overline{f_1}\circ \overline{f_2} = 0_{\mathrm{Hom}(M_1,N)}.$$

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Switching back and forth between the functions between homs and the functions between mods is confusing me towards the end, so I just want to make sure I am not naively and falsely interpreting something to mean what I want it to mean. $\endgroup$ – Prince M Feb 19 '17 at 6:18
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hello. Your proof shows the part that I omitted, which I thought was the the "other direction" you were refering. The problem with this is that this only shows that $\mathrm{Im}(\overline{f}_2) \subset \ker (\overline{f}_1)$. $\endgroup$ – Aloizio Macedo Feb 19 '17 at 15:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ More explicitly, the assertion that "See that this is if and only if (...)" is wrong. $\endgroup$ – Aloizio Macedo Feb 19 '17 at 15:21
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, of course. Not sure what I was thinking. What I actually meant in the OP when I said "(at least one direction)" was because the actual problem was an iff statement, so if I showed $\mathrm{Im}(\overline{f_2})=\mathrm{ker}(\overline{f_1})$ I would have completed one direction of the entire proof. But I see how you interpreted it. I am going to edit my answer, and thank you for your help. $\endgroup$ – Prince M Feb 20 '17 at 0:54

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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