On proposition I.1.2 of “Quantum Groups” by Christian Kassel
$begingroup$
I am working through Christian Kassel's textbook on Quantum Groups. The Proposition states that 5 statemens are equivalent. The two I am having trouble with are as follows.
1.For any pair $V'subset V$ of finite-dimensional $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ such that $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
3.For any pair $V'subset V$ of finite-dimensional $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-linear map $p:Vrightarrow V'$ with $p^2=p$.
In the proof it has the following for 3 implies 1: Let $V''=operatorname{Ker}(p)$; it is a submodule of $V$. The relations $v=p(v)+big(v-p(v)big)$ and $p^2=p$ prove that $V$ is the direct sum $V''$ and $V'$.
I am completely lost as to how those relations prove the direct sum. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
modules representation-theory direct-sum projection algebras
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am working through Christian Kassel's textbook on Quantum Groups. The Proposition states that 5 statemens are equivalent. The two I am having trouble with are as follows.
1.For any pair $V'subset V$ of finite-dimensional $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ such that $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
3.For any pair $V'subset V$ of finite-dimensional $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-linear map $p:Vrightarrow V'$ with $p^2=p$.
In the proof it has the following for 3 implies 1: Let $V''=operatorname{Ker}(p)$; it is a submodule of $V$. The relations $v=p(v)+big(v-p(v)big)$ and $p^2=p$ prove that $V$ is the direct sum $V''$ and $V'$.
I am completely lost as to how those relations prove the direct sum. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
modules representation-theory direct-sum projection algebras
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I assume that $p$ must be surjective. Otherwise this is clearly false by taking $p$ to be the zero map.
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 18 '18 at 19:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am working through Christian Kassel's textbook on Quantum Groups. The Proposition states that 5 statemens are equivalent. The two I am having trouble with are as follows.
1.For any pair $V'subset V$ of finite-dimensional $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ such that $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
3.For any pair $V'subset V$ of finite-dimensional $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-linear map $p:Vrightarrow V'$ with $p^2=p$.
In the proof it has the following for 3 implies 1: Let $V''=operatorname{Ker}(p)$; it is a submodule of $V$. The relations $v=p(v)+big(v-p(v)big)$ and $p^2=p$ prove that $V$ is the direct sum $V''$ and $V'$.
I am completely lost as to how those relations prove the direct sum. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
modules representation-theory direct-sum projection algebras
$endgroup$
I am working through Christian Kassel's textbook on Quantum Groups. The Proposition states that 5 statemens are equivalent. The two I am having trouble with are as follows.
1.For any pair $V'subset V$ of finite-dimensional $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ such that $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
3.For any pair $V'subset V$ of finite-dimensional $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-linear map $p:Vrightarrow V'$ with $p^2=p$.
In the proof it has the following for 3 implies 1: Let $V''=operatorname{Ker}(p)$; it is a submodule of $V$. The relations $v=p(v)+big(v-p(v)big)$ and $p^2=p$ prove that $V$ is the direct sum $V''$ and $V'$.
I am completely lost as to how those relations prove the direct sum. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
modules representation-theory direct-sum projection algebras
modules representation-theory direct-sum projection algebras
edited Jan 2 at 14:31
user593746
asked Dec 18 '18 at 14:30
WaltWalt
387114
387114
1
$begingroup$
I assume that $p$ must be surjective. Otherwise this is clearly false by taking $p$ to be the zero map.
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 18 '18 at 19:11
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
I assume that $p$ must be surjective. Otherwise this is clearly false by taking $p$ to be the zero map.
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 18 '18 at 19:11
1
1
$begingroup$
I assume that $p$ must be surjective. Otherwise this is clearly false by taking $p$ to be the zero map.
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 18 '18 at 19:11
$begingroup$
I assume that $p$ must be surjective. Otherwise this is clearly false by taking $p$ to be the zero map.
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 18 '18 at 19:11
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In this answer, $V'$ and $V$ are not necessarily finite dim. In fact $A$ can be any ring (i.e., not necessarily an algebra over any field, and not necessarily unital). That is the equivalence of the two statements is as follow.
Theorem. Let $V$ be a module over a ring $A$ with a submodule $V'$. Then, $V'$ is a direct summand of $V$ (that is, $V=V'oplus V''$ for some submodule $V''$ of $V$) if and only if there exists a projection $p:Vto V$ such that $operatorname{im}p=V'$. (A projection on $V$ is an $A$-module endomorphism $p:Vto V$ such that $p^2=p$.)
Remark. The OP's version of this theorem is false. If $p$ is not required to be surjective, we have a counterexample, e.g., when $V'$ is a non-zero submodule of $V$ with $p=0$.)
Proof. Suppose that $V'$ and $V$ are $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$ and there exists a projection $p:Vto V$ with $V'=operatorname{im}p$. We will show that $V=V'oplus V''$ where $V''=ker p$.
First, $V=V'+V''$. To see this, we note that $v=p(v)+big(v-p(v)big)$. Clearly, $p(v)in V'$. We must prove that $v-p(v)in V''$, which is equivalent to $pbig(v-p(v)big)=0$. But $$pbig(v-p(v)big)=p(v)-p^2(v)=p(v)-p(v)=0$$ by the hypothesis that $p^2=p$. So $v-p(v)in ker p = V''$.
To finish the prove we must show that the sum $V=V'+V''$ is direct. That is $V'cap V''={0}$. Suppose that $win V'cap V''$. Since $win V'=operatorname{im}p$, we must have $w=p(v)$ for some $vin V$. Since $win V''=ker p$, $p(w)=0$. Therefore,
$$0=p(w)=pbig(p(v)big)=p^2(v)=p(v)=w,$$
where we use again the hypothesis that $p^2=p$. This proves that $V'cap V''={0}$. Therefore, $V$ is the internal direct sum $Voplus V''$. $square$
Corollary. For a ring $A$, the following statements are equivalent.
(a) For any pair $(V,V')$ of $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$, there exists an $A$-submodule $V''$ of $V$ s.t. $V$ is the internal direct sum $V'oplus V''$.
(b) For any pair $(V,V')$ of $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V$ with $operatorname{im} p =V'$ and $p^2=p$.
If $A$ is unital, then we have another equivalent statement.
(c) Any $A$-module is semisimple.
If you are curious about the whole statement in Kassel's book, I put it below. However, I would like to note that the proposition is not true. My correction will be in bold italic font. In this setting, $A$ is an algebra over a field $k$, and an $A$-module means a left $A$ module.
Proposition I.1.2. The following statements are equivalent.
(i) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ s.t. $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
(ii) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules where $V'$ is simple, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ such that $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
(iii) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V'$ with $p^2=p$.
(iv) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules where $V'$ is simple, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V'$ with $p^2=p$.
(v) Any finite dim $A$-module is semisimple.
Note that (i) and (iii) are equivalent in the general setting as well. See the corollary after the proof of the theorem above.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3045229%2fon-proposition-i-1-2-of-quantum-groups-by-christian-kassel%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In this answer, $V'$ and $V$ are not necessarily finite dim. In fact $A$ can be any ring (i.e., not necessarily an algebra over any field, and not necessarily unital). That is the equivalence of the two statements is as follow.
Theorem. Let $V$ be a module over a ring $A$ with a submodule $V'$. Then, $V'$ is a direct summand of $V$ (that is, $V=V'oplus V''$ for some submodule $V''$ of $V$) if and only if there exists a projection $p:Vto V$ such that $operatorname{im}p=V'$. (A projection on $V$ is an $A$-module endomorphism $p:Vto V$ such that $p^2=p$.)
Remark. The OP's version of this theorem is false. If $p$ is not required to be surjective, we have a counterexample, e.g., when $V'$ is a non-zero submodule of $V$ with $p=0$.)
Proof. Suppose that $V'$ and $V$ are $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$ and there exists a projection $p:Vto V$ with $V'=operatorname{im}p$. We will show that $V=V'oplus V''$ where $V''=ker p$.
First, $V=V'+V''$. To see this, we note that $v=p(v)+big(v-p(v)big)$. Clearly, $p(v)in V'$. We must prove that $v-p(v)in V''$, which is equivalent to $pbig(v-p(v)big)=0$. But $$pbig(v-p(v)big)=p(v)-p^2(v)=p(v)-p(v)=0$$ by the hypothesis that $p^2=p$. So $v-p(v)in ker p = V''$.
To finish the prove we must show that the sum $V=V'+V''$ is direct. That is $V'cap V''={0}$. Suppose that $win V'cap V''$. Since $win V'=operatorname{im}p$, we must have $w=p(v)$ for some $vin V$. Since $win V''=ker p$, $p(w)=0$. Therefore,
$$0=p(w)=pbig(p(v)big)=p^2(v)=p(v)=w,$$
where we use again the hypothesis that $p^2=p$. This proves that $V'cap V''={0}$. Therefore, $V$ is the internal direct sum $Voplus V''$. $square$
Corollary. For a ring $A$, the following statements are equivalent.
(a) For any pair $(V,V')$ of $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$, there exists an $A$-submodule $V''$ of $V$ s.t. $V$ is the internal direct sum $V'oplus V''$.
(b) For any pair $(V,V')$ of $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V$ with $operatorname{im} p =V'$ and $p^2=p$.
If $A$ is unital, then we have another equivalent statement.
(c) Any $A$-module is semisimple.
If you are curious about the whole statement in Kassel's book, I put it below. However, I would like to note that the proposition is not true. My correction will be in bold italic font. In this setting, $A$ is an algebra over a field $k$, and an $A$-module means a left $A$ module.
Proposition I.1.2. The following statements are equivalent.
(i) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ s.t. $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
(ii) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules where $V'$ is simple, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ such that $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
(iii) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V'$ with $p^2=p$.
(iv) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules where $V'$ is simple, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V'$ with $p^2=p$.
(v) Any finite dim $A$-module is semisimple.
Note that (i) and (iii) are equivalent in the general setting as well. See the corollary after the proof of the theorem above.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In this answer, $V'$ and $V$ are not necessarily finite dim. In fact $A$ can be any ring (i.e., not necessarily an algebra over any field, and not necessarily unital). That is the equivalence of the two statements is as follow.
Theorem. Let $V$ be a module over a ring $A$ with a submodule $V'$. Then, $V'$ is a direct summand of $V$ (that is, $V=V'oplus V''$ for some submodule $V''$ of $V$) if and only if there exists a projection $p:Vto V$ such that $operatorname{im}p=V'$. (A projection on $V$ is an $A$-module endomorphism $p:Vto V$ such that $p^2=p$.)
Remark. The OP's version of this theorem is false. If $p$ is not required to be surjective, we have a counterexample, e.g., when $V'$ is a non-zero submodule of $V$ with $p=0$.)
Proof. Suppose that $V'$ and $V$ are $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$ and there exists a projection $p:Vto V$ with $V'=operatorname{im}p$. We will show that $V=V'oplus V''$ where $V''=ker p$.
First, $V=V'+V''$. To see this, we note that $v=p(v)+big(v-p(v)big)$. Clearly, $p(v)in V'$. We must prove that $v-p(v)in V''$, which is equivalent to $pbig(v-p(v)big)=0$. But $$pbig(v-p(v)big)=p(v)-p^2(v)=p(v)-p(v)=0$$ by the hypothesis that $p^2=p$. So $v-p(v)in ker p = V''$.
To finish the prove we must show that the sum $V=V'+V''$ is direct. That is $V'cap V''={0}$. Suppose that $win V'cap V''$. Since $win V'=operatorname{im}p$, we must have $w=p(v)$ for some $vin V$. Since $win V''=ker p$, $p(w)=0$. Therefore,
$$0=p(w)=pbig(p(v)big)=p^2(v)=p(v)=w,$$
where we use again the hypothesis that $p^2=p$. This proves that $V'cap V''={0}$. Therefore, $V$ is the internal direct sum $Voplus V''$. $square$
Corollary. For a ring $A$, the following statements are equivalent.
(a) For any pair $(V,V')$ of $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$, there exists an $A$-submodule $V''$ of $V$ s.t. $V$ is the internal direct sum $V'oplus V''$.
(b) For any pair $(V,V')$ of $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V$ with $operatorname{im} p =V'$ and $p^2=p$.
If $A$ is unital, then we have another equivalent statement.
(c) Any $A$-module is semisimple.
If you are curious about the whole statement in Kassel's book, I put it below. However, I would like to note that the proposition is not true. My correction will be in bold italic font. In this setting, $A$ is an algebra over a field $k$, and an $A$-module means a left $A$ module.
Proposition I.1.2. The following statements are equivalent.
(i) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ s.t. $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
(ii) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules where $V'$ is simple, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ such that $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
(iii) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V'$ with $p^2=p$.
(iv) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules where $V'$ is simple, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V'$ with $p^2=p$.
(v) Any finite dim $A$-module is semisimple.
Note that (i) and (iii) are equivalent in the general setting as well. See the corollary after the proof of the theorem above.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In this answer, $V'$ and $V$ are not necessarily finite dim. In fact $A$ can be any ring (i.e., not necessarily an algebra over any field, and not necessarily unital). That is the equivalence of the two statements is as follow.
Theorem. Let $V$ be a module over a ring $A$ with a submodule $V'$. Then, $V'$ is a direct summand of $V$ (that is, $V=V'oplus V''$ for some submodule $V''$ of $V$) if and only if there exists a projection $p:Vto V$ such that $operatorname{im}p=V'$. (A projection on $V$ is an $A$-module endomorphism $p:Vto V$ such that $p^2=p$.)
Remark. The OP's version of this theorem is false. If $p$ is not required to be surjective, we have a counterexample, e.g., when $V'$ is a non-zero submodule of $V$ with $p=0$.)
Proof. Suppose that $V'$ and $V$ are $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$ and there exists a projection $p:Vto V$ with $V'=operatorname{im}p$. We will show that $V=V'oplus V''$ where $V''=ker p$.
First, $V=V'+V''$. To see this, we note that $v=p(v)+big(v-p(v)big)$. Clearly, $p(v)in V'$. We must prove that $v-p(v)in V''$, which is equivalent to $pbig(v-p(v)big)=0$. But $$pbig(v-p(v)big)=p(v)-p^2(v)=p(v)-p(v)=0$$ by the hypothesis that $p^2=p$. So $v-p(v)in ker p = V''$.
To finish the prove we must show that the sum $V=V'+V''$ is direct. That is $V'cap V''={0}$. Suppose that $win V'cap V''$. Since $win V'=operatorname{im}p$, we must have $w=p(v)$ for some $vin V$. Since $win V''=ker p$, $p(w)=0$. Therefore,
$$0=p(w)=pbig(p(v)big)=p^2(v)=p(v)=w,$$
where we use again the hypothesis that $p^2=p$. This proves that $V'cap V''={0}$. Therefore, $V$ is the internal direct sum $Voplus V''$. $square$
Corollary. For a ring $A$, the following statements are equivalent.
(a) For any pair $(V,V')$ of $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$, there exists an $A$-submodule $V''$ of $V$ s.t. $V$ is the internal direct sum $V'oplus V''$.
(b) For any pair $(V,V')$ of $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V$ with $operatorname{im} p =V'$ and $p^2=p$.
If $A$ is unital, then we have another equivalent statement.
(c) Any $A$-module is semisimple.
If you are curious about the whole statement in Kassel's book, I put it below. However, I would like to note that the proposition is not true. My correction will be in bold italic font. In this setting, $A$ is an algebra over a field $k$, and an $A$-module means a left $A$ module.
Proposition I.1.2. The following statements are equivalent.
(i) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ s.t. $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
(ii) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules where $V'$ is simple, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ such that $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
(iii) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V'$ with $p^2=p$.
(iv) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules where $V'$ is simple, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V'$ with $p^2=p$.
(v) Any finite dim $A$-module is semisimple.
Note that (i) and (iii) are equivalent in the general setting as well. See the corollary after the proof of the theorem above.
$endgroup$
In this answer, $V'$ and $V$ are not necessarily finite dim. In fact $A$ can be any ring (i.e., not necessarily an algebra over any field, and not necessarily unital). That is the equivalence of the two statements is as follow.
Theorem. Let $V$ be a module over a ring $A$ with a submodule $V'$. Then, $V'$ is a direct summand of $V$ (that is, $V=V'oplus V''$ for some submodule $V''$ of $V$) if and only if there exists a projection $p:Vto V$ such that $operatorname{im}p=V'$. (A projection on $V$ is an $A$-module endomorphism $p:Vto V$ such that $p^2=p$.)
Remark. The OP's version of this theorem is false. If $p$ is not required to be surjective, we have a counterexample, e.g., when $V'$ is a non-zero submodule of $V$ with $p=0$.)
Proof. Suppose that $V'$ and $V$ are $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$ and there exists a projection $p:Vto V$ with $V'=operatorname{im}p$. We will show that $V=V'oplus V''$ where $V''=ker p$.
First, $V=V'+V''$. To see this, we note that $v=p(v)+big(v-p(v)big)$. Clearly, $p(v)in V'$. We must prove that $v-p(v)in V''$, which is equivalent to $pbig(v-p(v)big)=0$. But $$pbig(v-p(v)big)=p(v)-p^2(v)=p(v)-p(v)=0$$ by the hypothesis that $p^2=p$. So $v-p(v)in ker p = V''$.
To finish the prove we must show that the sum $V=V'+V''$ is direct. That is $V'cap V''={0}$. Suppose that $win V'cap V''$. Since $win V'=operatorname{im}p$, we must have $w=p(v)$ for some $vin V$. Since $win V''=ker p$, $p(w)=0$. Therefore,
$$0=p(w)=pbig(p(v)big)=p^2(v)=p(v)=w,$$
where we use again the hypothesis that $p^2=p$. This proves that $V'cap V''={0}$. Therefore, $V$ is the internal direct sum $Voplus V''$. $square$
Corollary. For a ring $A$, the following statements are equivalent.
(a) For any pair $(V,V')$ of $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$, there exists an $A$-submodule $V''$ of $V$ s.t. $V$ is the internal direct sum $V'oplus V''$.
(b) For any pair $(V,V')$ of $A$-modules such that $V'subseteq V$, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V$ with $operatorname{im} p =V'$ and $p^2=p$.
If $A$ is unital, then we have another equivalent statement.
(c) Any $A$-module is semisimple.
If you are curious about the whole statement in Kassel's book, I put it below. However, I would like to note that the proposition is not true. My correction will be in bold italic font. In this setting, $A$ is an algebra over a field $k$, and an $A$-module means a left $A$ module.
Proposition I.1.2. The following statements are equivalent.
(i) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ s.t. $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
(ii) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules where $V'$ is simple, there exists an $A$-module $V''$ such that $Vcong V'oplus V''$.
(iii) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V'$ with $p^2=p$.
(iv) For any pair $V'subseteq V$ of finite dim $A$-modules where $V'$ is simple, there exists a surjective $A$-linear map $p:Vto V'$ with $p^2=p$.
(v) Any finite dim $A$-module is semisimple.
Note that (i) and (iii) are equivalent in the general setting as well. See the corollary after the proof of the theorem above.
edited Dec 18 '18 at 21:59
answered Dec 18 '18 at 19:14
user593746
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3045229%2fon-proposition-i-1-2-of-quantum-groups-by-christian-kassel%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
I assume that $p$ must be surjective. Otherwise this is clearly false by taking $p$ to be the zero map.
$endgroup$
– user593746
Dec 18 '18 at 19:11