3
$\begingroup$

Let $R$ be a ring. If $M, N$ and $L$ are $R$-modules, with, $\ell(M), \ell(N), \ell(L) < \infty,$ and $M \times N \cong M \times L,$ it is true that $N \cong L?$

The same occurs replacing $\times$ by $\oplus$ or $\otimes?$

When the converse is true? That is, if $M \times N \cong M \times L, $$N \cong L$ and (additional hypothesis), then $\ell(M), \ell(N), \ell(L) < \infty$?

For example, we know that, if $\ell(M), \ell(N) < \infty,$ then $\ell(M \otimes N) \le \ell(M) \ell(N),$ but this is not useful in a general case.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

First, a remark: finite direct products and finite direct sums of modules are the same. Thus $M\times N = M\oplus N$.

The Krull-Schmidt Theorem states that any finite length module is isomorphic to a direct sum of finitely many indecomposable modules, and that the indecomposable modules occuring in any such decomposition are uniquely determined up to isomorphism and permutation. Thus $M\oplus N \cong M\oplus L$ implies that $N \cong L$ if $L,M$ and $N$ have finite length.

For the tensor product, things are not so well-behaved. For example, if one takes $R=\mathbb{Z}$, $M = \mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$, $N = \mathbb{Z}/3\mathbb{Z}$ and $L = \mathbb{Z}/5\mathbb{Z}$, then $M\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}} N = 0 = M\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}} L$, even though $L$ and $N$ are not isomorphic.

I don't think anything can be said for a converse statement.

$\endgroup$

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.