What is the Proof for the Nonempty Intersection of Submodules Being a Submodule?

  • MHB
  • Thread starter Math Amateur
  • Start date
In summary, in the above conversation, Bland's book "Rings and Their Modules" is referenced and a statement is presented about submodules and their generators. The individual seeking help is trying to prove this statement but is unsure how to start. Another user provides a detailed explanation and proof of the statement. The conversation concludes with a final thank you.
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,998
48
In Paul Bland's book: Rings and Their Modules, we read the following text at the start of Section 2.2 Free Modules:View attachment 3385In the above text we read the following:

" ... ... if \(\displaystyle N\) is generated by \(\displaystyle X\) and if \(\displaystyle \{ N_\alpha \}_\Delta\) is the family of submodules of \(\displaystyle M\) that contain \(\displaystyle X\), ... ...

then

... ... \(\displaystyle N = \ \bigcap \nolimits_\Delta N_\alpha \ = \ \sum \nolimits_X xR\) ... ... "In order to fully understand this statement I would like to prove it ... but I am unable to get started on a proof ...

Can someone please help ...

Peter***NOTE***

To ensure that MHB members reading this post can follow Bland's notation I am providing the relevant text from page 1 of his text, as follows:View attachment 3386
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
What Bland is saying is that $N$ is the smallest submodule of $M$ that contains $X$ (which is $\cap_{\Delta} N_\alpha$). Let $N' := \cap_\Delta N_\alpha$. Since $N$ is a submodule of $N$ that contains $X$ and $N'$ is the smallest such submodule, $N \supseteq N'$. On the other hand, since $X \subseteq N'$, $xR \in N'$ for all $x \in X$ and hence $\sum_X xR \subseteq N'$, i.e., $N \subseteq N'$. So $N = N'$.
 
  • #3
Euge said:
What Bland is saying is that $N$ is the smallest submodule of $M$ that contains $X$ (which is $\cap_{\Delta} N_\alpha$). Let $N' := \cap_\Delta N_\alpha$. Since $N$ is a submodule of $N$ that contains $X$ and $N'$ is the smallest such submodule, $N \supseteq N'$. On the other hand, since $X \subseteq N'$, $xR \in N'$ for all $x \in X$ and hence $\sum_X xR \subseteq N'$, i.e., $N \subseteq N'$. So $N = N'$.
Thanks Euge ... that post was VERY helpful ... BUT reflecting on it ...

You write:

" ... ... Let $N' := \cap_\Delta N_\alpha$. ... ..."

How do we know that N' is actually a submodule?

Peter
 
  • #4
Peter said:
How do we know that N' is actually a submodule?

Nonempty intersection of submodules is always a submodule. As $0 \in N_\alpha$, $0 \in \cap N_\alpha$. For $x, y \in \cap N_\alpha$, $x + ry \in N_\alpha$ (submodules) for $r \in R$, which implies $x + ry \in \cap N_\alpha$. As $\cap N_\alpha \subseteq N$, this completes the proof.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
mathbalarka said:
Nonempty intersection of submodules is always a submodule. As $0 \in N_\alpha$, $0 \in \cap N_\alpha$. For $x, y \in \cap N_\alpha$, $x + ry \in N_\alpha$ (submodules) for $r \in R$, which implies $x + ry \in \cap N_\alpha$. As $\cap N_\alpha \subseteq N$, this completes the proof.
Thanks Mathbalarka ... Appreciate your help!

Peter
 

FAQ: What is the Proof for the Nonempty Intersection of Submodules Being a Submodule?

What is a finitely generated submodule?

A finitely generated submodule is a subset of a module that can be generated by a finite set of elements. This means that every element in the submodule can be written as a linear combination of the finite set of elements.

How is a finitely generated submodule different from a submodule?

A submodule can be generated by an infinite set of elements, while a finitely generated submodule is generated by a finite set of elements. This means that a finitely generated submodule is a more specific type of submodule.

What are some applications of finitely generated submodules?

Finitely generated submodules are used in various fields of mathematics and physics, such as in the study of group theory, ring theory, and vector spaces. They are also used in applications such as coding theory and error-correcting codes.

How are finitely generated submodules related to linear independence?

A set of elements is linearly independent if none of the elements can be written as a linear combination of the other elements. In a finitely generated submodule, the generators are linearly independent, meaning that they cannot be written as a linear combination of each other. This is because if they could, the submodule would not be finitely generated.

Can a submodule be both finitely generated and infinite?

No, a submodule can only be either finitely generated or infinite. It cannot be both at the same time. If a submodule is infinite, it cannot be generated by a finite set of elements. Similarly, if a submodule is finitely generated, it cannot be infinite as it has a finite number of generators.

Similar threads

Back
Top