Modules
Having dipped our toes into algebraic geometry, we are back in commutative algebra.
Next we would like to introduce “linear algebra” over a ring A. Most of the proofs should pose no difficulty to the reader so we will skip them. We recommend that the reader prove these properties at least once.
Definition.
An A-module is an abelian group
together with a map
, written as
, such that the following hold for all
and
.
.
.
.
.
Alternative Look
If we fix , we obtain a “multiplication-by-a” map defined by
. The last property says
is an (additive) homomorphism so we get a map
, where
is the set of all group homomorphisms
. Now
is not just any old set – it has a natural structure of a (non-commutative) ring if we introduce the following definitions:
In words, we say “addition is defined on the image and product is given by composition”.
Now that has a ring structure, the first three axioms of the definition says
is a ring homomorphism.
Easy Properties
Immediately, we can show the following:
E.g. a(-m) = -(am) because is an additive homomorphism.
Examples
1. Since the homomorphism is unique, every abelian group is automatically a
-module.
2. A module over a field k is the same as a vector space over k.
3. Any ring A is a module over itself. More generally if is a subring, then B is an A-module.
4. If M and M’ are A-modules, then becomes an A-module via
.
5. From examples 3 and 4, we get with
.
6. Let be a product of two rings. Then any B-module M gives an A-module
; similarly, any B’-module M’ gives an A-module
.
7. More generally for , any B-module N and B’-module N’ gives an A-module
.
Basic Constructions
Just as we have subspaces of vector spaces, we have:
Definition.
If M is an A-module, a A-submodule is a subgroup N of
such that for all
we have
.
And this gives:
Proposition 1.
Let N be an A-submodule of M. The quotient of
by the subgroup N has a natural structure of an A-module, given by:
.
Thus we obtain the quotient module
.
Proof. Easy exercise. ♦
Next, we have the linear maps.
Definition.
Let M, N be A-modules. A module homomorphism is a function
such that
We will also say f is an A-linear map (or just linear map if the base ring is implicit).
A monomorphism (resp. epimorphism, isomorphism) of modules is an injective (resp. surjective, bijective) homorphism of modules.
Immediately we have the following.
First Isomorphism Theorem.
Let
be a linear map of A-modules.
- The kernel of f,
, is a submodule of M.
- The image of f,
, is a submodule of N.
- The map f induces an isomorphism of modules
Proof. Easy exercise. ♦
Exercise A
Let be a product of two rings. For a B-module N and B’-module N’, take the A-module
. Must every submodule of M be of the form
for B-submodule
and B’-submodule
?
Ideals as Modules
Recall that every non-trivial ring A comes with two modules.
- The zero module is the trivial group (0, +), and
for all
.
- The ring A is a module over itself, where
is given by ring product
.
Lemma 1.
For any ring A, a subset of A is a submodule if and only if it is an ideal of A.
Proof. Easy exercise. ♦
Some Notes
Although the lemma is a trivial observation, it highlights an important philosophy: modules can be considered as a generalization of ideals. For an ideal , it is geometrically more natural to associate it with
as a module, although the reasons are not clear for now.
Note that an ambiguity may arise if we were sloppy with words: for , as a module, could mean the ring
as a module over itself, or the quotient A-module of
by the submodule
. We will try to be extra careful in stating the base ring. Often, the base ring is used as a subscript in notation, e.g.
means a certain construction from M by regarding it as an A-module.
For readers with some experience with differentiable manifolds, another geometrical application of modules is as follows. Recall that closed sets V correspond with their coordinate ring k[V]. Modules over k[V] then correspond to “vector bundles” over the set V. Of special interest are those bundles which are “locally free”, i.e. close to each point the vector bundle restricts to a trivial one.
Operations on Submodules
Finally, the operations on ideals can be generalized.
Proposition 2.
Let
be a collection of submodules of M, over a ring A.
is a submodule of M.
- Let
be the set of all finite sums
, where
. This is a submodule of M.
- If
is an ideal of A, let
be the set of all finite sums
for
and
. This is a submodule of M.
Proof. Easy exercise. ♦
Exercise B
An A-module is said to be simple if it is non-zero and its only submodules are 0 and itself. Prove that a simple A-module must be isomorphic to for some maximal ideal
.
Note
When M = A and each is an ideal of A, these definitions are consistent with the earlier ones for ideals. Thus we can think of them as generalizations of the corresponding operations on ideals.
Note that product of submodules is not defined since we cannot multiply elements in a module. But as we shall see later, one can forcibly define a “product space” P for modules M and N so that and
multiply to give an element in P. That leads us to tensor products.
The next result is important, so we will state it separately.
Proposition 3.
If M is an A-module and
is an ideal of A, then
has a canonical structure of an
-module, via
.
Proof. Easy exercise. ♦
Proposition 3 shows a “canonical” way of constructing a module over given a module over A. We will state more precisely what canonicity means in later articles, by universal properties.