0
$\begingroup$

The question:

Let $R$ be a ring and $M$ be a Noetherian module. Prove there is $k \in \mathbb{N}$ such for all $n > k$, $M$ does not contain a submodule $N$ which is a direct sum of $n$ simple modules.

My thoughts: Since M is Noetherian, this means any submodule and factor module of M is Noetherian. I considered a submodule, $N$. Since N is noetherian, N satisfies the ascending chain condition. Is this where I pick my k? I am not sure about other properties on Noetherian modules.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Here's a sketch of proof (to be honest I thought it would be simpler):

(i) There's a finite number of isomorphism classes of simple modules that appear as submodules of $M$ (because $M$ is noetherian)

(ii) Given a simple module $N$, the natural numbers $n$ such that $N^n$ is (isomorphic to) a submodule of $M$ are bounded : this is the "hard" bit : consider an increasing sequence $n_i$ of such $n$'s, let $N^{n_i}\simeq L_i \subset M$ and consider $\displaystyle\sum_i L_i$, which is finitely generated, therefore there is a finite amount of $L_i$'s such that any $L_j$ is in their sum. Take $n_j > \sum_i n_i$ where the sum runs over this finite amount of $i$'s

Now by induction prove that any finite sum of submodules of $M$ isomorphic to $N$ is isomorphic to a single $N^p$ for some $p$ smaller than the number of submodules; thus for this $j$ we have an injection $N^{n_j}\to N^p$ for some $p<n_j$; and that's not possible (indeed it is represented by an $n_j\times p$ matrix over the division ring $\hom_R(N,N)$ and such a matrix necessarily has a nonzero vector $(f_1,...,f_{n_j})$ in its kernel by dimension theory, thus if you apply it to some $n\in N$ such that $(f_1(n),...,f_{n_j}(n))\neq 0$ you get a nonzero element of the kernel of $N^{n_j}\to N^p$)

(iii) You can then find $k$ to be the sum over the finite number of isomorphism classes of simple modules of the bound given by (ii)

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Would this proof be interchangeable if Noetherian is replaced with Artinian Modules? $\endgroup$ – Jim Baker Apr 29 at 4:17
  • $\begingroup$ I don't see how immediately $\endgroup$ – Max Apr 29 at 5:41

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.