6
$\begingroup$

If $M$ is a module over a commutative ring $R$ and $P$, $N$ are submodules such that $P$ $\subseteq$ $N$ $\subseteq$ $M$ and $P$ $\cong M$ then it does not imply that $N \cong M$. A counterexample is given here.

So, I want to know under what conditions on $R$ or $M$ the result may be true. I have noticed a more or less trivial observation that if $R$ is a PID and $M$ is free then it is true. Because we know in this case submodules are also free. So if $P \cong M$ then $P$ and $M$ has same rank and also $rank\ P \leq rank\ N \leq rank\ M$. So we have $N \cong M$. But I can't find any other good conditions. So please help.

Thank you.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ A PID is pretty much the only condition that will help you: In a domain, which is not a PID, you always have $(a) \subset (a,b) \subset R$ with $(a) \cong R$, but $(a,b)$ is not free. $\endgroup$ – MooS Jun 30 '17 at 9:20
  • $\begingroup$ Condition that is sufficient: $M$ is finite as a set. $\endgroup$ – rschwieb Jun 30 '17 at 10:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @rschwieb: "M is Artinian (or coHopfian) as a module" uses roughly the same idea, but produces more examples. $\endgroup$ – Keith Kearnes Jun 30 '17 at 15:57
12
$\begingroup$

Let $(\dagger)$ denote the following property of a ring $R$:

If $P\leq N\leq M$ is any chain of $R$-modules, then $P\cong M$ implies $N\cong M$.

Thm. A ring satisfies $(\dagger)$ iff it is semisimple.

Proof.

[$\Rightarrow$] Assume that $R$ satisfies $(\dagger)$ and that $A$ is an $R$-module. Let $I$ be an injective $R$-module containing $A$ as a submodule. Take the direct product of each factor of the chain $\{0\}\leq A\leq I$ with $\prod_{i<\omega} I$ to get $$\{0\}\times \prod_{i<\omega} I\;\leq\; A\times \prod_{i<\omega} I\;\leq\; I\times \prod_{i<\omega} I.$$ In this chain, the first and last are isomorphic, so by $(\dagger)$ the middle factor $A\times \prod_{i<\omega} I$ must be isomorphic to them. The first and last are injective, so the middle factor must be injective. Since $A$ is a direct factor of this injective module, it too is injective. We have established that an arbitrary $R$-module $A$ is injective, so $R$ must be semisimple.

[$\Leftarrow$] Now assume that $R$ is semisimple. Every $R$-module is a direct sum of simple modules, and the multiplicity of each type of simple summand is an invariant of the module. If we have $P\leq N\leq M$, and $S$ is a simple $R$-module, then the multiplicities of $S$ in each of these modules satisfies $\mu_{S}(P)\leq \mu_{S}(N)\leq \mu_{S}(M)$. Now if $P\cong M$, then they have the same multiplicities of simple summands, so $N$ must also have these multiplicities. Thus $N\cong M$, and $(\dagger)$ holds. $\Box$

$\endgroup$

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.