6
$\begingroup$

Is there a direct proof that any (right) Artinian ring has stable range 1? More precisely, let $R$ be a right Artinian ring and $a,b\in R$ be such that $aR+bR=R$. Can we prove that $(a-bt)R=R$ for some $t\in R$ directly from first principles? I'm aware of proofs that prove this for all semilocal rings (say, in T.Y. Lam's A First Course in Noncommutative Rings), but this feels like a statement that can be proven without those machineries. I was thinking along the lines of using the fact that every element of $a\in R$ would either have $ar=0$ or $ar=1$ for some $r\in R$, which follows from considering the chain $ aR\supseteq a^2R \supseteq\cdots $, but that seems to be getting us nowhere.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

Let me first prove that $R$ has stable range $1$ if $R$ is semisimple (by which I mean Artinian and Jacobson radical zero.)

Because $R$ is semisimple, we can do the following. We can write $bR=(aR\cap bR)\oplus K$ for some right ideal $K$, and you can check that $R=aR\oplus K$. On the other hand, $R\cong aR\oplus ann_r(a)$ where $ann_r(a)$ is the right annihilator of $a$. By the Krull-Schmidt theorem we have that $ann_r(a)\cong K$ via some isomorphism $\theta:ann_r(a)\to K$.

Here's where the surgery happens. Let $h$ be the splitting map for the inclusion of $ann_r(a)$ in the split exact sequence

$$0\longrightarrow ann_r(a)\longrightarrow R\longrightarrow aR\overset{\ell_a}\longrightarrow 0$$ where $\ell_a$ is left multiplication by $a$. It's well known that this creates an isomorphism $(\ell_a, h):R\to aR\oplus ann_r(a)$ given by $r\mapsto (\ell_a(r),h(r))$ which we'll compose with another isomorphism that maps $(x,y)\mapsto x+ \theta(y)$ to get an automorphism of $R$. This automorphism sends $1\mapsto a+\theta(h(1))$

Now, every automorphism in $End(R_R)$ is given by multiplication on the left by a unit, so in particular there is some unit $u\in R$ such that $u=a+\theta(h(1))$. By design, $\theta(h(1))\in K\subset bR$. Thus we have shown every semisimple ring is stable range 1.

Now, the other interesting thing is that $R$ is stable range 1 if $R/J(R)$ is stable range 1 owing to unit-lifting properties of the Jacobson radical. I'll use overlines for images of elements of $R$ in $R/J(R)$.

First, notice that if $\overline{r}\overline{s}=\overline{1}$, $rs-1\in J(R)$. But if $rs=j+1$, we know that $j+1$ is a unit (a property of elements of the Jacobson radical). The same is true of $sr$, and therefore $r$ and $s$ are units of $R$.

Now if you begin with $ax+b=1$ in $R$, there exists $y$ such that $\bar{a}+\bar{b}\bar{y}$ is a unit in $R/J(R)$. But by what we just saw in the last paragraph, that means $a+by$ is a unit of $R$.

Now, in your original question you required $R$ to be Artinian, in which case of course $R/J(R)$ will be semisimple, and now I hope it's clear how all the pieces fit together.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I could not see a way around "the surgery." It seems you really need to gain control of what you're mapping in order to arrange things to find $y$ such that $a+by$ is a unit. This is adapted from an argument I saw Lam give, but using the Artinian condition makes a few things a little easier. $\endgroup$
    – rschwieb
    Jul 26 at 18:59

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.