Module 2

Topic 4
Simple Modules/ Semisimple Modules
Denition 1. An R-module M is called simple or irreducible if M = 0 and, 0 and M are the only R-submodules of M . Examples: 1. Let R be a division ring. Then R as an R module is simple. 2. Let R be a ring and I be a minimal left ideal of R. Then I is a simple left R-module. 3. Let R = Mn (F ), n > 1, F is a eld and let M = Rekk be the left R-module(or left ideal of R) generated by the matrix ekk , where ekk is the n n matrix with identity at the (k, k )th position and 0 elsewhere. Then M is a simple R-module as shown below: Let N = (0) be a submodule of M . Let 0 = A N . Then A =
i j

aij eij ekk such that

A M = Rekk .
n

A=
i j

aij eij ekk =

i=1

aik eik .

Since A = 0, there exists aik = 0. Suppose alk = 0 for some 1 l n.

1 Then (a lk ekl )A = i 1 1 a lk aik ekl eik

= akk N . M = Rakk = N . Hence proved. Thus Mn (F ) is an example of a simple ring which is not simple as a left R-module(n > 1). Theorem Let M be an R-module. Then the following are equivalent: (i) (ii) M is simple. M = (0), and M = Rx for any 0 = x M .

(iii) M = R/I , where I is a maximal left ideal of R. Proof. (i) (ii) Since M is simple, M = (0). Let 0 = x M . Then Rx is a non-zero R-submodule of M , and hence M = Rx.
c Copyright Reserved IIT Delhi

2 (ii) (i) Let N be a non-zero submodule of M and let 0 = x N . Then by (ii) M = Rx. Since M = Rx N M , we get N = M .

(i) (iii) Let 0 = x M . Then M = Rx(i ii). Dene : R Rx = M by (r) = rx. Then is a left R-module homomorphism. Clearly is onto. Let I = ker. Then R/I = M = Rx. Since M is simple. R/I is simple, and hence I is maximal left ideal of R.

(iii) (i) Let /I be a submodule of R/I . Then I J R. Since I is maximal, either I = J or J = R. 2

SCHURS LEMMA Let M be a simple R-module. Then HomR (M, M ) is a division ring.

Proof. HomR (M, M ) is a ring has been proved earlier. Let 0 = F HomR (M, M ). Then f : M M is an R-homomorphism. Now Ker(f ) and Im(f ) are submodules of M . Since f = 0, Ker(f ) = M and Im(f ) = (0). Hence Ker(f ) = (0) and Im(f ) = M follows from the fact that M is simple. Thus f is an isomorphism and hence invertible. 2

Theorem Let M be an R-module. Then the following are equivalent: (i) (ii) M is the sum of a family of simple submodules. M is the direct sum of a family of simple submodules.

(iii) If N is a submodule of M , then N is a direct summand of M .

Proof. (i) (ii) Let M =

iI

Si , where Si s are simple submodules of M . Dene S = {J J . Then we

I|
iI

Si is a direct sum }. Clearly, S = . Let {J } be a chain in S. Let L =

show L S. Let a1 + a2 + . . . + an = 0, ai Si . Suppose i Ji . Then i J i for some L. As J S, we get ai = 0 i. Hence

iL

Si is a direct sum .

By zorns lemma, S has a maximal element, say, J0 . Claim: M =

iJ0

Si Si . Choose x M such that x

iJ0 iJ0

Suppose M =

Si . Since M =
iI

Si , x Sk for some

k I . As Sk is simple, Sk Hence M =
iJ0

(
iJ0

Si ) = (0) which implies J0

{k } S a contradiction.

Si is a direct sum of simple submodules.

c Copyright Reserved IIT Delhi

(ii) (iii) Let M =

iI

3 Si , Si s are simple submodules of M . As Si s are simple N Si = (0)

or Si . If N Si = Si i I then Si N i, and hence N = M . In this case N is a direct summand (as M = N (0)). If N = M , there exists i I such that N Si = (0). Dene S = {J I |N (
iJ

Si ) = (0)}

Clearly, S is non empty. Let {J } be a chain in S. Then J = J is an upper bound. By Zorns Lemma S has a maximal element, say, L. Claim: M = N
iL

Si

Now Sj N
iL

Si

= (0) or Sj j I . If this intersection is (0), j (L) S, contracting the

maximality of L. Hence Sj Sj N
iL

N
iL

Si

= Sj j I Si .
iL

Si j I M = N

(iii) (i) First we show that every submodule of M also satises (iii). Let N be a submodule of M and K be a submodule of N . By (iii), M = K L for some submodule L of M . Now N = (K L) N = (K N ) (L N ) = K (L N ). Hence every submodule of N is a direct summand of N . Now we claim that every non-zero submodule N of M contains a simple module. Let 0 = x N . Let I = {L | L is a submodule of N such thatx L}. Now Rx is a submodule of N and hence N = Rx U for some U . Then x U . Hence I is non-empty. Applying Zorns Lemma, we obtain a maximal element, say K , of I. Then N = K S for some submodule S of N . We show S is simple. Suppose S0 is a proper submodule of S . Then S = S0 T , T = (0). Hence N = K S0 T . Now K S0 and K T both do not belong to I . Thus x (K S0 ) (K T ) x = k1 + s = k2 + t for some k1 , k2 K , s S0 , t T . k1 k2 + s t = 0 k1 = k2 , s = t = 0 x = k1 = k2 K a contradiction. Hence S is simple. Now let M0 = {S |S is a simple submodule of M }. By (iii) a submodule U of M such that

M = M0 U . If U = (0), we are done. If U = (0), then U contains a simple submodule. This implies M0 U = (0) a contradiction. Hence M = M0 is a sum of family of simple submodules. 2 Denition An R-module is called semisimple if it satises the equivalent conditions in the above theoc Copyright Reserved IIT Delhi

4 rem. Now if N is a non-zero submodule of a semisimple module M , then as shown above in the proof of (iii) (i), we obtain that N is also semisimple. Hence submodules of semisimple are semisimple. Also it is easy to see that non-zero homomorphic image of a semisimple module is semisimple.

c Copyright Reserved IIT Delhi