This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

# Section 10.1.

Homework #1

Masaya Sato

Let R be a ring with 1 and M a left (unital) R-module. 1. Prove that 0R m = 0M and (−1)m = −m for all m ∈ M . Proof. Since 0R is the additive identity of the ring R, 0R = 0R + 0R . So for all m ∈ M 0R m = (0R + 0R )m ⇒ 0R m = 0R m + 0R m ⇒ 0R m + (−0R m) = 0R m + 0R m + (−0R m) ⇒ 0M = 0R m. Next for all m ∈ M 0M = 0R m = ((−1) + 1)m = (−1)m + 1m = (−1)m + m since M is a unital R-module and thus 0M + (−m) = (−1)m + m + (−m) ⇒ −m = (−1)m as desired. 3. Prove that R× and M satisfy the two axioms in Section 1.7 for a group action of the multiplicative group R× on the set M . Proof. Recall that R is a unital ring and thus M is a unital R-module. Therefore, according to the deﬁnition of a module discussed on page 337 of the textbook, for all r, s ∈ R× and m∈M (rs)m = r(sm) by part (b) of (2) and 1m = m part (d) of (2) as desired. 4. Let M be the module Rn described in Example 3 and let I1 , I2 , · · · , In be left ideals of R. Prove that the following are submodules of M : (a) A = {(x1 , x2 , · · · , xn )|xi ∈ Ii } (b) B = {(x1 , x2 , · · · , xn )|xi ∈ R and x1 + x2 + · · · + xn = 0}. Proof. (a) We ﬁrst claim that {(x1 , x2 , · · · , xn )|xi ∈ Ii } is a subgroup of M = Rn . Then for all (x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ) and (y1 , y2 , · · · , yn ) in A (x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ) + (y1 , y2 , · · · , yn ) = (x1 + y1 , x2 + y2 , · · · , xn + yn ) is included in A since each Ii is an ideal of R, i.e. xi + yi ∈ Ii . In addition 0 ∈ Ii and (0, 0, · · · , 0) ∈ A, and associativity of the operation is inherited from the one of M . Moreover for all (x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ) ∈ A and r ∈ R r(x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ) = (rx1 , rx2 , · · · , rxn ) ∈ A Abstract Algebra by Dummit and Foote 1

Section 10.1.

Homework #1

Masaya Sato

again because each Ii is a left ideal, i.e. rxi ∈ Ii . Therefore {(x1 , x2 , · · · , xn )|xi ∈ Ii } is an R-submodule of M . (b) Similarly observe that B is a subgroup of M . For all (x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ) and (y1 , y2 , · · · , yn ) in B (x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ) + (y1 , y2 , · · · , yn ) = (x1 + y1 , x2 + y2 , · · · , xn + yn ) ∈ B since (x1 + y1 ) + (x2 + y2 ) + · · · + (xn + yn ) = (x1 + x2 + · · · + xn ) + (y1 + y2 + · · · + yn ) = 0 + 0 = 0, and 0 ∈ B since 0 ∈ R and 0 + 0 + · · · + 0 = 0. Associativity of the binary operation + : B × B → B is inherited from the one of M . Moreover for all (x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ) ∈ B and r∈R r(x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ) = (rx1 , rx2 , · · · , rxn ) ∈ B because rxi ∈ R and rx1 + rx2 + · · · + rxn = r(x1 + x2 + · · · + xn ) = r0 = 0. Therefore {(x1 , x2 , · · · , xn )|xi ∈ R and x1 + x2 + · · · + xn = 0} is an R-submodule of M . 5. For any left ideal I of R deﬁne IM =

f inite

ai mi |ai ∈ I, mi ∈ M

to be the collection of all ﬁnite sums of elements of the form am where a ∈ I and m ∈ M . Prove that IM is a submodule of M . Proof. First observe the IM is nonempty since 0M ∈ IM , i.e. 0M = 0R m ∈ IM for any m ∈ M . Then for all m, n ∈ IM m = ai1 mi1 + · · · + aik mik and n = aj1 mj1 + · · · + ajl mjl . and for all r ∈ I m + rn = (ai1 mi1 + · · · + aik mik ) + r(aj1 mj1 + · · · + ajl mjl ) = ai1 mi1 + · · · + aik mik + (raj1 )mj1 + · · · + (rajl )mjl . Therefore m + rn can be expressed as the ﬁnite sum of elements of the form am, where m ∈ M and a ∈ I since I is a left ideal. Hence m + rn ∈ IM and thus IM is a submodule of M as desired. 6. Show that the intersection of any nonempty collection of submodules of an R-module is a submodule.

Abstract Algebra by Dummit and Foote 2

Section 10.1.

Homework #1

Masaya Sato

Proof. For an arbitrary index set Λ, let {Nλ |∅ Nλ ≤ M ∀λ ∈ Λ} be the collection of nonempty submodules of an R-module M . Then we claim that λ∈Λ Nλ is a submodule of M . Observe ﬁrst that λ∈Λ Nλ is not empty since each Nλ has the additive identity 0M . Then for all m, n ∈ λ∈Λ Nλ m and n are in Nλ for every λ ∈ Λ. This implies that rm + n ∈ Nλ for all r ∈ R since each Nλ is a submodule. Therefore rm + n is an element of Nλ for all λ ∈ Λ and included in λ∈Λ Nλ . Hence λ∈Λ Nλ is a submodule as desired. 8. An element m of the R-module M is called a torsion element if rm = 0 for some nonzero element r ∈ R. The set of torsion elements is denoted T or(M ) = {m ∈ M |rm = 0 for some nonzero r ∈ R}. (a) Prove that if R is an integral domain then T or(M ) is a submodule. (c) If R has zero divisors show that every nonzero R-module has nonzero torsion elements. Proof. (a) Recall that an integral domain R is a commutative ring with the unity 1 = 0 without any zero divisors. Since 0 = r0 for every r ∈ R, T or(M ) is not empty. Then for all m, n ∈ T or(M ) there are nonzero s, t ∈ R so that sm = 0, tn = 0, and st = 0 since R is an integral domain. Moreover for all r ∈ R (st)(m + rn) = (st)m + (st)rn = (ts)m + r(st)n = t(sm) + (rs)(tn) = 0 + 0 = 0. Therefore m + rn ∈ T or(M ) and thus T or(M ) is a submodule of M . (c) Suppose that R has zero divisors. So there exist some r = 0 and s = 0 in R such that rs = 0. Then for an arbitrary nonzero R-module M , choose a nonzero m ∈ M and consider sm ∈ M . If sm = 0, then m is an torsion elements. Otherwise if sm = 0, then r(sm) = (rs)m = 0R m = 0M and therefore m is a torsion element. Hence M has nonzero torsion elements. 9. If N is a submodule of M , the annihilator of N in R is deﬁned to be {r ∈ R|rn = 0 for all n ∈ N }. Prove that the annihilator of N in R is a 2-sided ideal of R. Proof. Let A = {r ∈ R|rn = 0 for all n ∈ N }. Then for all r, s ∈ A r − s ∈ R and (r − s)n = rn + (−s)n = rn − sn = 0 − 0 = 0. So A is a subgroup of R under addition. Then, for all r ∈ A and s ∈ R, sr ∈ R and (sr)n = s(rn) = s0 = 0 and thus A is a left ideal of R. Moreover sn ∈ N because N is a submodule and (rs)n = r(sn) = 0. This implies that A is a right ideal and therefore A is a 2-sided ideal of R. Abstract Algebra by Dummit and Foote 3

Section 10.1.

Homework #1

Masaya Sato

15. If M is a ﬁnite abelian group then M is naturally a Z-module. Can this action be extended to make M into a Q-module? Solution: No. Suppse M = Z2 . Then M is a ﬁnite abelian group under ordinary addition + and moreover Z-module by the action ×, ordinary multiplication. However, the action of Z cannot be extended to Q since for 1/2 ∈ Q 1/2 × 1 = 1/2 ∈ M = {0, 1}. /

18. Let F = R, let V = R2 and let T be the linear transformation from V to V which is rotation clockwise about the origin by π/2 radians. Show that V and 0 are the only F [x]-submodules for this T . Proof. Note that the linear transformation T is expressed as the 2 × 2 matrix, i.e. T = 0 −1 . 1 0

We ﬁrst claim that both V and {0} are f [x]-submodules. Then both V and {0} are subspaces of V and T -invariant or T -stable since T (V ) ⊆ V and T ({0}) = {0}.

Then we show that no other subspace W can be a submodule. So for every proper subspace W = {(x, y) ∈ R2 |ax + by = 0 for some a and b ∈ R} of V , ax + by represents a straight line on the xy-plane that passes through the origin (0, 0)T . However T (W ) represents the line that is perpendicular to W and thus W is not T -invariant. 19. Let F = R, let V = R2 and let T be the linear transformation from V to V which is projection onto the y-axis. Show that V , 0, the x-axis and the y-axis are the only F [x]submodules for this T . Proof. Observe that T = 0 0 . Then we ﬁrst claim that V , 0, the x-axis and the y-axis are 0 1 F [x]-submodules for T . It is immediate to show that V and 0 are submodules as discussed in problem #18. So let us consider the x- and y-axes. Then observe that both the x-axis and y-axis are expressed as Vx = {(x, 0)T ∈ R2 } and Vy = {(0, y)T ∈ R2 },

respectively, and both Vx and Vy are subspaces of V . Moreover they are T -invariant since T (Vx ) = {0} ⊆ Vx and T (Vy ) = Vy .

Thus Vx and Vy are F [x]-submodules. Now let us consider a proper subspace. W = {(x, y) ∈ R2 |ax + by = 0 for some a and b ∈ R× } distinct from both the x- and y-axes. Then T (W ) = {(0, y)T ∈ R2 } Abstract Algebra by Dummit and Foote 4

Section 10.1.

Homework #1

Masaya Sato

and thus T (W ) represents the y-axis or each line ax + by = 0 is projected onto the y-axis. Therefore W is not T -invariant and hence W is not a submodule. 20. Let F = R, let V = R2 and let T be the linear transformation from V to V which is rotation clockwise about the origin by π radians. Show that every subspace of V is an F [x]-submodule for this T . Proof. Again, it is obvious to show that both V and {0} are submodules. So let us think of a proper subspace W = {(x, y) ∈ R2 |ax + by = 0 for some a and b ∈ R}. Then T (W ) = W since rotation of each line ax + by = 0 about the origin by π is invariant. Therefore W is T -invariant and hence every subspace of V is a F [x]-submodule of V . 21. Let n ∈ Z+ , n > 1 and let R be the ring of n × n matrices with entries from a ﬁeld F . Let M be the set of n × n matrices with arbitrary elements of F in the ﬁrst column and zeros elsewhere. Show that M is a submodule of R when R is considered as a left module over itself, but M is not a submodule of R when R is considered as a right R-module. Proof. Note that R = Mn (F ) and a11 0 · · · 0 . . . M = . . ... . ’ . . . an1 0 · · · 0 (0.1)

where ai1 ∈ F for i = 1, . . . , n. We ﬁrst claim that M is a submodule of the left module R over itself. Since F is not empty, M is not empty. Then for all m, n ∈ M and for all r ∈ R rm + n = r[ai , 0, . . . , 0] + [ai , 0, . . . , 0] = [rai + ai , 0, . . . , 0], where ai , ai , and 0 are column vectors in F n . Therefore M is a submodule of R if R is considered as the left module over itself. However if R is the right module over itself, then M is not a submodule. The following is a counterexample. Let m ∈ M be 1 0 ··· 0 . . . m = . . ... . , . . . 1 0 ··· 0 where 1 ∈ F is the multiplicative identity, and 1 1 . . r = . . . . 0 0 Then 1 . mr = . . 1 and thus mr ∈ M . / Abstract Algebra by Dummit and Foote 5 let r ∈ R be ··· 1 .. . . . . . ··· 0

1 ··· 1 . .. . . . . . . 1 ··· 1