2
$\begingroup$

Given $R$ be commutative ring and $$ T =\begin{pmatrix} R & R \\ 0 & R \end{pmatrix} = \left\{ \left. \begin{pmatrix} a & b \\ 0 & c \end{pmatrix} \right| a,b,c \in R \right\} $$ be a ring of matrix over $R$.

In this paper https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312907984_On_Right_S-Noetherian_Rings_and_S-Noetherian_Modules on Example 1 said that if $J$ is an ideal of $T$, $J$ can be written as $$ \begin{pmatrix} I_1 & I_2 \\ 0 & I_3 \end{pmatrix}$$ where $I_1, I_2$, and $I_3$ are ideals of $R$ satisfying $ I_1 \subseteq I_2$.

I've read Proposition 1.17 in Lam T.Y, but I can't find any relation between the bold statement and those proposition.

Proposition 1.17. The right ideals of $A$ are the form $J_1 \oplus J_2$, where $J_1$ is right ideal in $R$, and $J_2$ is right $S$-submodule of $M \oplus S$ containing $J_1M$. Where $R,S$ be two rings, $M$ be an $(R,S)$-bimodule, and $$ A= \begin{pmatrix} R & M \\ 0 & S \end{pmatrix} = \left\{ \left. \begin{pmatrix} r & m \\ 0 &s \end{pmatrix} \right| r \in R, m \in M, s \in S \right\}.$$

How to find the relation between the bold statement and those Proposition?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Simply take $S = M = R$ in the Proposition 1.17. More specifically, first take $S = R$ (as a ring) and then take $M = R$ (as an $(R, R)$-bimodule). $\endgroup$ – WhatsUp Dec 27 '19 at 5:15
  • $\begingroup$ Then why $I_1 \subseteq I_2$ ? $\endgroup$ – RANGGAJAYA CIPTAWAN Dec 27 '19 at 5:18
  • $\begingroup$ You should translate the sentence "$J_2$ is right $S$-submodule of $M \oplus S$ containing $J_1M$". It's really straightforward... $\endgroup$ – WhatsUp Dec 27 '19 at 5:20
  • $\begingroup$ So you take $J_1$ is $I_1$ and $J_2$ is $I_2$? $\endgroup$ – RANGGAJAYA CIPTAWAN Dec 27 '19 at 5:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ $J_1$ is $I_1$ and $J_2$ is $I_2 \oplus I_3$. $\endgroup$ – WhatsUp Dec 27 '19 at 5:27
1
$\begingroup$

As mentioned in the comments, in your case, $R=S=M$ and $I_1=J_1$ and $I_2\oplus I_3=J_2$.

As for the converse, it is not really a trivial corollary that all ideals have this form from the characterization of left ideals that you are citing, but it is an easy extension to make.

Suppose $I$ is an ideal of $A$, and we write $E_{11}=\begin{bmatrix}1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0\end{bmatrix}$ and $E_{22}=\begin{bmatrix}0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1\end{bmatrix}$. Then with $I_1=E_{11}AE_{11}$, $I_2=E_{11}AE_{22}$ and $I_3=E_{22}AE_{22}$, you can work to show that $I_1\lhd R$, $I_3\lhd S$ and $I_2$ is a sub-bimodule of $M$ containing both $I_1M$ and $MI_3$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

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.