BRIEF ANSWERS FOR TEST 1

  1. To prove that the category has finite products, it is enough to show it has products for any pair of objects. It can be shown that if X and Y are metric spaces, then the function d defined by:

    d((a,b),(c,d)) = max{ d_X(a,c), d_Y(b,d) }

    makes X x Y into a metric space which satisfies the universal property for products in this category.

    To show that the category does not have infinite products, consider the spaces X_n = ({0,1}; d_n) where d_n(0,1) = n. If P were a product of these spaces, then applying the universal property of products to morphisms from the 1-point space m: {*} --> X_n : * |--> 1 leads to a morphism from {*} to P that "selects" a point of P whose projection to each X_n is the element 1. This means that P has an element whose "coordinates" are all 1. Similarly, P has an element whose coordinates are all 0. But the distance between these two elements must be at least n for the n-th projection to be a morphism. This is impossible, because it means P has a pair of elements whose distance apart is greater than n for all n.

  2. The category of compact spaces does have objects that satisfy the universal property for "freeness" over any finite set: just give the finite set the discrete topology.

    Here is Allen Mann's argument that there do not exist free compact spaces over any infinite set. Suppose that X is an infinite set and that F(X) is a compact space that is free over X. Let Y be the 2-element space with the indiscrete topology, and let f:X-->Y be an arbitrary function. The universal property of F(X) implies that there is a unique continuous extension of f to F(X). But every function from F(X) to Y is continuous. Since f has a unique extension to F(X) it must be that F(X) = X. Now let Z be the 2-element space with the discrete topology. The universal property of F(X) says that any function f:X-->Z has a continuous extension to F(X) = X. Hence any function from X to Z is continuous. This forces each singleton in X to be open, so we have that F(X) = X with the discrete topology. This is a contradiction, since F(X) is assumed to be compact.

  3. By definition, the abelian group presented in this way is the quotient of the free abelian group F_Ab(x,y) = Zx + Zy by the subgroup N generated by {3x+5y, 7x+10y}. The subgroup N contains x = (7x+10y) - 2(3x+5x), and 5y = (3x+5y) - 3x. Therefore (Zx+Zy)/N is a homomorphic image of (Zx + Zy)/(Zx + 5Zy) = {0} + Z/5Z = Z_5. This means that the group is either Z_5 or {0}. To see that the answer is Z_5, it is enough to note that Z_5 is generated by elements x = 0, y = 1 which satisfy the relations in the presentation. This is enough to show that (Zx+Zy)/N has a homomorphism onto Z_5, so it must equal Z_5. (Here + means direct sum.)

  4. Using the definition of presentations, the ring presented is just Z[x]/(3, x^2+1), which (by the 3rd Isomorphism Theorem) is just Z_3[x]/(x^2+1). Since Z_3[x] = (a field)[x] is a PID, and x^2+1 is irreducible modulo 3, it follows that Z_3[x]/(x^2+1) IS a field. Its elements are represented by the cosets of I = (x^2+1), and the elements have the form (ax+b) + I where a, b are from Z_3, so the ring has size 9. (3 choices for each of a and b.)

  5. Lower bound: the cardinality of the direct sum of the M_i is greater than |M_i| for any i, since the direct sum contains a submodule isomorphic to M_i (the image of the i-th coprojection). Hence the cardinality of the direct sum is at least as large as sup{|M_i|}. To see that it is also as large as |I|, choose a nonzero m_i in M_i for all i. Now consider the function from I to the direct sum that maps i to the tuple that is equal to zero everywhere except the i-th coordinate, and equal to m_i there. This function is 1-1, so |I| is not larger than the cardinality of the direct sum. Since product of two infinite cardinals equals the maximum, we get that |I| * sup{|M_i|} is a lower bound for the cardinality of the direct sum.

    Upper bound: Suppose that S is a set of size sup{|M_i|} that has an element 0. The size of the direct sum cannot exceed the size of the subset of S^I consisting of all tuples with finite support (i.e., that are 0 almost everywhere), since there is an obvious 1-1 function from the direct sum of the M_i's to the subset of S^I of tuples of finite support. But a typical element of S^I of finite support may be specified by choosing a number n, then choosing an n-element subset of indices from I, then finally choosing a tuple from S^n to assign to those n coordinates. The number of ways that these choices can be made is |N| * |I| * |S| = |I| * |S| (since there are |N| choices for n, |I| choices of a finite subset of I, and |S| = |S^n| choices for the n-tuple).

    Since the upper and lower bounds are equal, we are done.

  6. If rm = 0 for all m, and sm = 0 for all m, then (r+s)m = rm+sm=0+0=0 for all m. Thus I is closed under +. Similar arguments show that I is closed under multiplication from the right or left.

    M may be considered an R/I module by defining (r+I)m = rm. One must prove that this scalar multiplication is well defined and makes M into an R/I-module, but the verifications are straightforward consequences of the definition of I.

    In fact, there is a simpler way to view this. Saying that M is an R module is equivalent to saying that there is a ring homomorphism h: R --> End_Z(M). That is, h ``explains'' how to view each ring element as an additive endomorphism of M. The set I is simply the kernel of h. (That's the easy proof that I is an ideal.) The first isomorphism theorem says that if h: R --> End_Z(M) is a ring homomorphism, and I = ker(h), then there is an induced ring homomorphism h': R/I --> End_Z(M). But now h' ``explains'' how to view elements of R/I as additive endomorphisms of M, hence h' makes M into an R/I-module.

  7. Since Hom_R(A,B) is an abelian group under the pointwise group operations for any A and B, End_R(S) = Hom_R(S,S) has an abelian group structure. It has associative composition and 1 since it is the collection of endomorphisms of an algebra. The left distributive law holds because End_R(S) consists of additive endomorphisms, and the right distributive law holds because addition is defined pointwise. This makes End_R(S) a ring.

    To see that it is a division ring we have to show that a nonzero element of End_R(S) is invertible (i.e., an isomorphism). If f is in End_R(S), and f:S -->S is not the zero function, then ker(f) is not all of S and im(f) contains more than just {0}. Since ker(f) and im(f) are submodules of S, and S is simple, it follows that ker(f) = {0} and im(f) = S. This shows that f is 1-1 and onto, hence is invertible.

  8. We have seen that the module F^n of all column vectors of length n is a simple R-module when R = M_n(F). The submodule C_i of R = M_n(F) consisting of all nxn matrices that are zero everywhere except the i-th column is isomorphic to F^n, hence C_i is a simple submodule of R for any i. One can show that R is the direct sum of all C_i by using the characterization of products for modules and the fact that finite products coincide with finite direct sums for modules.


Last modified on February 11, 2002.