- #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
- 3,998
- 48
I am reading Paul E. Bland's book: Rings and Their Modules and am currently focused on Section 2.2 Free Modules ... ...
I need help with some aspects of the proof of Proposition 2.2.6 ...
Proposition 2.2.6 and its proof read as follows:
View attachment 8221
View attachment 8222
Near the end of Bland's proof we read the following:
" ... ... If \(\displaystyle x \in M\), then \(\displaystyle x\) can be written as \(\displaystyle x = \sum_{ \Delta } x_\alpha a_\alpha\), where \(\displaystyle a_\alpha = 0\) for almost all \(\displaystyle \alpha \in \Delta\). It follows that \(\displaystyle ( a_\alpha ) \in R_{ ( \Delta ) }\), so \(\displaystyle f (( a_\alpha )) = \sum_{ \Delta } x_\alpha a_\alpha\) and \(\displaystyle f\) is an epimorphism. ... ... "My questions are as follows:Question 1
Why/how exactly does it follow from \(\displaystyle x \in M\) and \(\displaystyle x = \sum_{ \Delta } x_\alpha a_\alpha\) that \(\displaystyle ( a_\alpha ) \in R_{ ( \Delta ) }\) ... ?
Question 2
In the above quote Bland writes \(\displaystyle f (( a_\alpha )) = \sum_{ \Delta } x_\alpha a_\alpha\) ... but what is going on ... ? At the start of the proof he defined \(\displaystyle f\) this way ... but if he is not relying on this definition how does he calculate/formulate \(\displaystyle f\) ...Question 3
Why/how exactly is \(\displaystyle f\) an epimorphism ...Help will be appreciated ...
Peter
I need help with some aspects of the proof of Proposition 2.2.6 ...
Proposition 2.2.6 and its proof read as follows:
View attachment 8221
View attachment 8222
Near the end of Bland's proof we read the following:
" ... ... If \(\displaystyle x \in M\), then \(\displaystyle x\) can be written as \(\displaystyle x = \sum_{ \Delta } x_\alpha a_\alpha\), where \(\displaystyle a_\alpha = 0\) for almost all \(\displaystyle \alpha \in \Delta\). It follows that \(\displaystyle ( a_\alpha ) \in R_{ ( \Delta ) }\), so \(\displaystyle f (( a_\alpha )) = \sum_{ \Delta } x_\alpha a_\alpha\) and \(\displaystyle f\) is an epimorphism. ... ... "My questions are as follows:Question 1
Why/how exactly does it follow from \(\displaystyle x \in M\) and \(\displaystyle x = \sum_{ \Delta } x_\alpha a_\alpha\) that \(\displaystyle ( a_\alpha ) \in R_{ ( \Delta ) }\) ... ?
Question 2
In the above quote Bland writes \(\displaystyle f (( a_\alpha )) = \sum_{ \Delta } x_\alpha a_\alpha\) ... but what is going on ... ? At the start of the proof he defined \(\displaystyle f\) this way ... but if he is not relying on this definition how does he calculate/formulate \(\displaystyle f\) ...Question 3
Why/how exactly is \(\displaystyle f\) an epimorphism ...Help will be appreciated ...
Peter