Text-Ex. 2.2. Let be a ring, an ideal, an -module. Show that is isomorphic to . (Tensor the exact sequence with .)
\begin{proof}
Note that is exact, then is exact. Define , then is defined by , and . It suffices to show . Recall that is an isomorphism.
If with , then , which deduces that for some and so . Conversely, each element has a preimage with , and . Therefore, and so . Since is surjective, we have .
\end{proof}
Text-Ex. 2.3. Let be a local ring, and finitely generated -modules. Prove that if , then or . (Let m be the maximal ideal, the residue field. Let by Exercise 2. By Nakayama’s lemma, . But or , since are vector spaces over a field.)
\begin{proof}
Let be the unique maximal ideal of , and let . Then is a field. By Exercise 2, and . Since , by Exercise 2.15 one have
Furthermore, as are -modules.
Assume that and . Since , is a vector space over , where is a set of basis. Similarly, is also a -vector space, where is a set of basis. Then is a -vector space, whose basis is and .
However, yields that and one of is . That is, one of is trivial. WLOG we assume that . By Nakayama’s lemma, as , that is , we have .
\end{proof}
4. Let be any family of -modules, and let be their direct sum. Prove that is flat each is flat. Here we assume .
\begin{proof}
For any exact sequence , it suffices to show that the sequence
is exact iff is exact for all .
Note that there is an isomorphism such that , and we can define similarly. Since is injective iff
is injective iff is injective for all iff is injective for all , we know is exact iff is exact for all . Similarly we can prove is exact iff is exact for all .
\end{proof}
Text-Ex 2.7. Let be a prime ideal in . Show that is a prime ideal in . If is a maximal ideal in , is a maximal ideal in ?
\begin{proof}
To show is a prime ideal in , it suffices to show is an integral domain. Note that . Assume that and are elements of with , then and so with , which is impossible as is a prime ideal of .
If is a maximal ideal in , is not necessarily a maximal ideal in . For example, is a maximal ideal, but is not a field, as is not a unit.
\end{proof}
Text-Ex. 2.8.
- i) If and are flat -modules, then so is .
- ii) If is a flat -algebra and is a flat -module, then is flat as an -module.
\begin{proof}
i) It suffices to show for any injective map , is flat. Since is flat, the map is injective. Since is flat, is injective. Recall that there exists unique isomorphism , then injective yields that injective. Therefore, is flat.
ii) For any injective map with -modules , we aim to show is injective. Since is a flat -algebra, is injective. Since is a flat -module and are -modules, is injective. By Exercise 15, . Therefore, is injective and so is flat as an -module.
\end{proof}