Proof
In the Jacobson density theorem, the right R-module U is simultaneously viewed as a left D-module where D=End(UR) module in the natural way: the action g·u is defined to be g(u). It can be verified that this is indeed a left module structure on U. As noted before, Schur's lemma proves D is a division ring if U is simple, and so U is a vector space over D.
The proof also relies on the following theorem proven in (Isaacs 1993) p. 185:
Theorem
- Let U be a simple right R-module and let D = End(UR) - the set of all R module endomorphisms of U. Let X be a finite subset of U and write I = annR(X) - the annihilator of X in R. Let u be in U with u·I = 0. Then u is in XD; the D-span of X.
Proof (of the Jacobson density theorem)
- We proceed by mathematical induction on the number n of elements in X. If n=0 so that X is empty, then the theorem is vacuously true and the base case for induction is verified. Now we assume that X is non-empty with cardinality n. Let x be an element of X and write Y = X \ {x}. If A is any D-linear transformation on U, the induction hypothesis guarantees that there exists an s in R such that A(y) = y·s for all y in Y.
- Write I = annR(Y). It is easily seen that x·I is a submodule of U. If it were the case that x·I = 0, then the previous theorem would indicate that x would be in the D-span of Y. This would contradict the linear independence of X, so it must be that x·I ≠ 0. So, by simplicity of U, the submodule x·I = U. Since A(x) - x·s is in U=x·I, there exists i in I such that x·i = A(x) - x·s.
- After defining r = s + i, we compute that y·r = y·(s + i) = y·s + y·i = y·s = A(y) for all y in Y. Also, x·r = x·(s + i) = x·s + A(x) - x·s = A(x). Therefore, A(z) = z·r for all z in X, as desired. This completes the inductive step of the proof. It follows now from mathematical induction that the theorem is true for finite sets X of any size.
Read more about this topic: Jacobson Density Theorem
Famous quotes containing the word proof:
“If we view our children as stupid, naughty, disturbed, or guilty of their misdeeds, they will learn to behold themselves as foolish, faulty, or shameful specimens of humanity. They will regard us as judges from whom they wish to hide, and they will interpret everything we say as further proof of their unworthiness. If we view them as innocent, or at least merely ignorant, they will gain understanding from their experiences, and they will continue to regard us as wise partners.”
—Polly Berrien Berends (20th century)
“Sculpture and painting are very justly called liberal arts; a lively and strong imagination, together with a just observation, being absolutely necessary to excel in either; which, in my opinion, is by no means the case of music, though called a liberal art, and now in Italy placed even above the other twoa proof of the decline of that country.”
—Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl Chesterfield (16941773)
“If some books are deemed most baneful and their sale forbid, how, then, with deadlier facts, not dreams of doting men? Those whom books will hurt will not be proof against events. Events, not books, should be forbid.”
—Herman Melville (18191891)