Statement
Let R be a commutative ring with identity 1. The following is Nakayama's lemma, as stated in Matsumura (1989):
Statement 1: Let I be an ideal in R, and M a finitely-generated module over R. If IM = M, then there exists an r ∈ R with r ≡ 1 (mod I), such that rM = 0.
This is proven below.
The following corollary is also known as Nakayama's lemma, and it is in this form that it most often appears.
Statement 2: With conditions as above, if I is contained in the Jacobson radical of R, then necessarily M = 0.
- Proof: r−1 (with r as above) is in the Jacobson radical so r is invertible.
More generally, one has
Statement 3: If M = N + IM for some ideal I in the Jacobson radical of R and M is finitely-generated, then M = N.
- Proof: Apply Statement 2 to M/N.
The following result manifests Nakayama's lemma in terms of generators
Statement 4: Let I be an ideal in the Jacobson radical of R, and suppose that M is finitely-generated. If m1,...,mn have images in M/IM that generate it as an R-module, then m1,...,mn also generate M as an R-module.
- Proof: Apply Statement 2 to N = M/ΣiRmi.
This conclusion of the last corollary holds without assuming in advance that M is finitely generated, provided that M is assumed to be a complete and separated module with respect to the I-adic topology. Here separatedness means that the I-adic topology satisfies the T1 separation axiom, and is equivalent to
Read more about this topic: Nakayama Lemma
Famous quotes containing the word statement:
“The honor my country shall never be stained by an apology from me for the statement of truth and the performance of duty; nor can I give any explanation of my official acts except such as is due to integrity and justice and consistent with the principles on which our institutions have been framed.”
—Andrew Jackson (17671845)
“Eroticism has its own moral justification because it says that pleasure is enough for me; it is a statement of the individuals sovereignty.”
—Mario Vargas Llosa (b. 1936)
“Most personal correspondence of today consists of letters the first half of which are given over to an indexed statement of why the writer hasnt written before, followed by one paragraph of small talk, with the remainder devoted to reasons why it is imperative that the letter be brought to a close.”
—Robert Benchley (18891945)