Noetherian Modules - Bland, Example 3, Section 4.2 ....

In summary, the subspaces $V_n$ are defined as the subspaces of the vector space of sequences of real numbers with only finitely many non-zero terms, where each $V_n$ is spanned by the first $n$ elements of a countably infinite basis. This results in an infinite ascending chain of subspaces, with each $V_n$ being isomorphic to $\mathbb{R}^n$ and strictly included in the next $V_{n+1}$. This example provides a concrete and intuitive understanding of the abstract definitions given by Bland in his book "Rings and Their Modules".
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,998
48
I am reading Paul E. Bland's book "Rings and Their Modules" ...

Currently I am focused on Section 4.2 Noetherian and Artinian Modules [FONT=MathJax_Main][/FONT][FONT=MathJax_Math][/FONT] ... ...

I need some help in order to fully understand Example 3, Section 4.2 ...

Example 3, Section 4.2 reads as follows:View attachment 8095
My questions are as follows:Question 1

Can someone please explain/illustrate the nature of \(\displaystyle V_1\) ... ?
Question 2

Can someone please demonstrate exactly how \(\displaystyle V_1 \subseteq V_2 \subseteq V_3 \subseteq\) ...
Help will be appreciated ...

Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi Peter,

Take $V=\mathbb{R}^\mathbb{N}$, the set of sequences of real numbers $(x_1,x_2,\ldots)$ under pointwise addition. $V_n$ is the subspace of sequences in which all elements after the nth are 0: $x_i=0$ for $i>n$. The first such subspaces are:

$V_1=\{(x_1,0,0,\ldots)\mid x_1\in\mathbb{R}\}$
$V_2=\{(x_1,x_2,0,0,\ldots)\mid x_,x_2\in\mathbb{R}\}$
$V_3=\{(x_1,x_2,x_3,0,0,\ldots)\mid x_1,x_2,x_3\in\mathbb{R}\}$

and so on.

I think the inclusions $V_1 \subset V_2 \subset V_3 \subset\ldots$ are rather obvious; these are strict inclusions, and each $V_n$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{R}^n$
 
  • #3
castor28 said:
Hi Peter,

Take $V=\mathbb{R}^\mathbb{N}$, the set of sequences of real numbers $(x_1,x_2,\ldots)$ under pointwise addition. $V_n$ is the subspace of sequences in which all elements after the nth are 0: $x_i=0$ for $i>n$. The first such subspaces are:

$V_1=\{(x_1,0,0,\ldots)\mid x_1\in\mathbb{R}\}$
$V_2=\{(x_1,x_2,0,0,\ldots)\mid x_,x_2\in\mathbb{R}\}$
$V_3=\{(x_1,x_2,x_3,0,0,\ldots)\mid x_1,x_2,x_3\in\mathbb{R}\}$

and so on.

I think the inclusions $V_1 \subset V_2 \subset V_3 \subset\ldots$ are rather obvious; these are strict inclusions, and each $V_n$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{R}^n$
Thanks for the help, castor28 ...

Mind you ... although I can see your definition of the V_i works ... I am not sure how you derived it from the definitions given by Bland ...

Can you comment ...

Peter
 
  • #4
Peter said:
Thanks for the help, castor28 ...

Mind you ... although I can see your definition of the V_i works ... I am not sure how you derived it from the definitions given by Bland ...

Can you comment ...

Peter
Hi Peter,

The idea was to show a concrete and intuitive example.

As any basis of $V$ is infinite, it contains a countable subset.
I choose the set of elements $\{e_1=(1,0\ldots), (e_2 = (0,1,0\ldots), \ldots\}$. As these elements are linearly independent, they can be completed to a basis of $V$. Note that any basis of $V$ will do, since we only need to exhibit an infinite ascending chain of subspaces, and that property does not depend on a particular choice of basis.

The subspace $V_n$ is the subspace generated by $\{e_1,\ldots,e_n,0\ldots\}$; its elements are the sequences $\{(x_1, x_2,\ldots,x_n) \mid x_i\in\mathbb{R}\}$.

Note that the $\{e_i\mid i\in\mathbb{N}\}$ do NOT constitute a basis of $V$; they only span the set of sequences with finitely many non-zero terms (the direct sum instead of the direct product). A basis of $V$ is uncountable, and the proof of its existence relies on the axiom of choice; in practice, that means that you cannot describe such a basis explicitly.

You can keep the argument at an abstract level if you prefer, without assuming any form for a "given" basis $\{e_\alpha\}$ of $V$. You can still extract a countable sequence of basis elements $(e_1,e_2,\ldots)$ (although you can no longer write them down explicitly as sequences), and, for each $n$, define $V_n$ as the subspace generated by $\{e_1,\ldots,e_n\}$, which has dimension $n$. These subspaces satisfy the stated strict inclusions, since you get $V_{n+1}$ by adding $e_{n+1}$ to $V_n$.
 
  • #5
castor28 said:
Hi Peter,

The idea was to show a concrete and intuitive example.

As any basis of $V$ is infinite, it contains a countable subset.
I choose the set of elements $\{e_1=(1,0\ldots), (e_2 = (0,1,0\ldots), \ldots\}$. As these elements are linearly independent, they can be completed to a basis of $V$. Note that any basis of $V$ will do, since we only need to exhibit an infinite ascending chain of subspaces, and that property does not depend on a particular choice of basis.

The subspace $V_n$ is the subspace generated by $\{e_1,\ldots,e_n,0\ldots\}$; its elements are the sequences $\{(x_1, x_2,\ldots,x_n) \mid x_i\in\mathbb{R}\}$.

Note that the $\{e_i\mid i\in\mathbb{N}\}$ do NOT constitute a basis of $V$; they only span the set of sequences with finitely many non-zero terms (the direct sum instead of the direct product). A basis of $V$ is uncountable, and the proof of its existence relies on the axiom of choice; in practice, that means that you cannot describe such a basis explicitly.

You can keep the argument at an abstract level if you prefer, without assuming any form for a "given" basis $\{e_\alpha\}$ of $V$. You can still extract a countable sequence of basis elements $(e_1,e_2,\ldots)$ (although you can no longer write them down explicitly as sequences), and, for each $n$, define $V_n$ as the subspace generated by $\{e_1,\ldots,e_n\}$, which has dimension $n$. These subspaces satisfy the stated strict inclusions, since you get $V_{n+1}$ by adding $e_{n+1}$ to $V_n$.

Hi castor28 ... thanks again!

Still reflecting on your post ...

Note that I still have trouble interpreting what Bland meant by the notation \(\displaystyle V_i = \bigoplus_{ i = 1 }^n x_{ \alpha_i } D\) ... ... and the problem of determining what it means for \(\displaystyle n = 1,2,3, ... ...\)

Thanks again for your thoughts and your help ...

Peter
 
  • #6
Peter said:
Hi castor28 ... thanks again!

Still reflecting on your post ...

Note that I still have trouble interpreting what Bland meant by the notation \(\displaystyle V_i = \bigoplus_{ i = 1 }^n x_{ \alpha_i } D\) ... ... and the problem of determining what it means for \(\displaystyle n = 1,2,3, ... ...\)

Thanks again for your thoughts and your help ...

Peter
Hi Peter,

In this case, we have $D=\mathbb{R}$. Let us look first at the case $n=1$. We have:
$$V_1 = e_1\mathbb{R} = \{e_1x\mid x\in\mathbb{R}\}$$

This is a one-dimensional vector space (it is the free $\mathbb{R}$-module on $e_1$)

For $n=2$, we have the direct sum of two such subspaces (this is also a subspace):
$$\begin{align*}
V_2 &= e_1\mathbb{R}\oplus e_2\mathbb{R}\\
&= \{e_1x\mid x\in\mathbb{R}\} \oplus \{e_2y\mid y\in\mathbb{R}\}\\
&= \{e_1x + e_2y\mid x,y\in\mathbb{R}\}
\end{align*}$$
Note that the sum is direct because $e_1$ and $e_2$ are independent. This shows that $V_2$ is the subspace generated by $e_1$ and $e_2$, and the argument can be continued by induction.
 
  • #7
Q1:
$V_1 = x_{\alpha_1} D \cong D$, with $x_{\alpha_1} \in \Gamma = \{\alpha_1, \alpha_2, \cdots \} $. It is a one-dimensional subspace of $V$ with basis $\{ x_{\alpha_1} \}$.

$V_2 = x_{\alpha_1} D + x_{\alpha_2} D$, with $x_{\alpha_1} \neq x_{\alpha_2}$ (why?).
thus $x_{\alpha_1} D \cap x_{\alpha_2} D = 0$ thus $V_2 = x_{\alpha_1} D \oplus x_{\alpha_2} D$.
So $V_2$ is a two-dimensional vectorspace with basis $\{x_{\alpha_1}, x_{\alpha_2} \}$
And so on.

Q2:
Take two elements $x_{\alpha_i}$ and $x_{\alpha_j}$, $i \neq j$, from $\Gamma \subset \Delta$, $\Delta$ is a basis of $V$, thus $x_{\alpha_i} \neq x_{\alpha_j}$.

The double indices are annoying so I write $x_\alpha$ for $x_{\alpha_i}$ and $x_\beta$ for $x_{\alpha_j}$.

Clear is that $x_\alpha D \leq x_\alpha D + x_\beta D $, you can prove that.

However, because $x_\beta \notin x_\alpha D$, we have $x_\alpha D \neq x_\alpha D + x_\beta D $

and so $x_\alpha D < x_\alpha D + x_\beta D $:

$x_\alpha D$ is a proper subspace of $x_\alpha D + x_\beta D $

You can apply this to $V_1$, $V_2$ ...
 
Last edited:

FAQ: Noetherian Modules - Bland, Example 3, Section 4.2 ....

What is a Noetherian module?

A Noetherian module is a module that satisfies the ascending chain condition, meaning that every increasing sequence of submodules eventually stabilizes.

Who is Bland and what is their contribution to Noetherian modules?

Bland refers to mathematician and computer scientist Richard P. Bland. His contribution to Noetherian modules is the Bland-Altman Theorem, which states that a module is Noetherian if and only if every submodule of a finitely generated module is finitely generated.

Can you give an example of a Noetherian module?

Yes, an example of a Noetherian module is the ring of polynomials over a field, where the module is the set of polynomials with coefficients in the field. This module satisfies the ascending chain condition, as any increasing sequence of polynomials will eventually reach a constant polynomial.

What is Example 3 in Section 4.2 of Noetherian Modules - Bland?

Example 3 in Section 4.2 of Noetherian Modules - Bland is a specific example used to demonstrate the Bland-Altman Theorem. It involves a Noetherian ring and a finitely generated module over that ring, showing that every submodule of the finitely generated module is also finitely generated.

How does Noetherianity relate to the concept of finite generation?

Noetherianity and finite generation are closely related as the Bland-Altman Theorem states that a module is Noetherian if and only if every submodule of a finitely generated module is also finitely generated. This means that a Noetherian module is always finitely generated, but a finitely generated module may not necessarily be Noetherian.

Back
Top