Annihilator

Definition

Let be a ring, and let be a left -module. For any , define

as the *annihilator *of in . Notice that is a left ideal of .

For a set , define . If is a -submodule of , then is a -sided ideal of .

Lemma

Let be a ring with identity . Let be a left simple -module. Then is a quotient of the left regular module .

\begin{proof} Let be an nonzero element of . Consider cyclic module , then . Define

and note that is an epimorphism. Hence is a quotient of the left regular module . \end{proof}

Jacobson Radical

Definition

Let be a ring. The Jacobson radical of is the intersection of all left maximal ideals of . As a left -module, .

Intersection of Annihilators of Simples

Theorem

The following holds for the Jacobson radical of a ring .

  • is the intersection of all the annihilator ideals of simple (left) -modules. Consequently, is a -sided ideal of .
  • iff has a left inverse for all , i.e., there exists such that .
  • is the largest one among the ideals of satisfying the following condition: if , then is a unit of .
  • coincides with the intersection of all maximal right ideals of .

\begin{proof} i) Let be a simple -module. As for any by ^09efb3, is a maximal left ideal of . It deduces that and so .

Conversely, we aim to show that, for any , if for each simple -module , then is contained in all maximal left ideals. For a maximal left ideal , is a simple -module. Since , we know and so . Now we finish the proof.

ii) "" If and has no left inverse for some , then . Hence there is a maximal left-ideal of with . Then yields , which is a contradiction.

"" If , then for some maximal left ideal of . Then and for some and . So and has no left inverse.

iii) Let . Then there exists such that and then has a left inverse, i.e. there exists such that . It deduces that and so is a unit.

Let be a -sided ideal with the property ” then is a unit of “. If , then there exists a maximal ideal such that and . So for some and . As , is not a unit, which is a contradiction.

iv) Suppose is the intersection of all maximal right ideals of , then by the argument of iii), we can prove that is the largest one among the ideals of satisfying the following condition: if , then is a unit of . Then by iii) and so we finish the proof. \end{proof}

Nilpotency of in Artinian Rings

Definition

  • An element is called nilpotent if for some . If so, and is a unit.
  • An left ideal of is called a nil left ideal if every element of is nilpotent.
  • is called nilpotent if for some . Clearly, nilpotent ideals are nil.

Theorem

If is a nil left ideal, then .

\begin{proof} Let . For any , . Since is nil, is a unit and so by ^p95eh4. \end{proof}

Theorem

If is Artinian, then is nilpotent.

\begin{proof} Consider . Since is Artinian, there exists such that . Assume that .

Consider the set of left ideals . It is a nonempty set since . Let be the minimal member of this set. There exists such that . Since and , by the minimality of , we know . In particular, there exists such that , i.e. . Recall that , then is a unit, leading to a contradiction. \end{proof}

Corollary

Let be an Artinian ring, then is the maximal nilpotent left ideal of .

\begin{proof} By ^112eab and ^a43f1d. \end{proof}

Corollary

Let be an Artinian ring. Then is the unique left ideal of with the property that is nilpotnent and is semisimple.

\begin{proof} By ^r8oe32 and ^8uxtcw. \end{proof}

Theorem

Let be a -sided ideal of with . Then .

\begin{proof} By ^9eaa9e. \end{proof}

Theorem

Let be an Artinian. Then is semisimple iff .

\begin{proof} "" Assume that are all maximal left ideals of . We consider the set of left ideals that are expressed a finite intersection of some . By Artinian, this set has minimal element, say . If , then there exists such that , which contradicts to the minimality of . So

Define a map , which is a monomorphism and so is semisimple. (This part can also be proved by ^r8oe32.)

"" Assume is semisimple, then with simple. Since , . It deduces that . \end{proof}