Unnecessary finite dimensionality requirement in Theorem 5.1.8 of Sweedler’s “Hopf Algebras” The Next CEO of Stack OverflowAnnihilator of maximal ideals in a finite dimensional algebraIf a Hopf Algebra has a nontrivial, finite-dimensional right ideal, then it is finite dimensionalPrimitive elements of finite dimensional Hopf algebrasFinite-dimensional algebras which do not satisfy Wedderburn's principal theoremClassification of special Hopf algebrasUsing nilpotent rings for constructing triangular Hopf Algebras using Etingof, Gelaki methodProof of Weyl's theorem on semisimple lie algebras in Milne's notesSearching for Proofs of Wedderburn Theorem for finite dimensional simple AlgebrasExistence of integrals in f.d Hopf algebrasExercise on block theory of finite dimensional algebras
Is it possible to create a QR code using text?
Is there a rule of thumb for determining the amount one should accept for a settlement offer?
Is it correct to say moon starry nights?
Calculate the Mean mean of two numbers
Prodigo = pro + ago?
Is the offspring between a demon and a celestial possible? If so what is it called and is it in a book somewhere?
Is it OK to decorate a log book cover?
"Eavesdropping" vs "Listen in on"
Compensation for working overtime on Saturdays
Man transported from Alternate World into ours by a Neutrino Detector
How to pronounce fünf in 45
Do I need to write [sic] when including a quotation with a number less than 10 that isn't written out?
That's an odd coin - I wonder why
Does Germany produce more waste than the US?
Upgrading From a 9 Speed Sora Derailleur?
Would a grinding machine be a simple and workable propulsion system for an interplanetary spacecraft?
Creating a script with console commands
Strange use of "whether ... than ..." in official text
Raspberry pi 3 B with Ubuntu 18.04 server arm64: what pi version
The sum of any ten consecutive numbers from a fibonacci sequence is divisible by 11
Is a linearly independent set whose span is dense a Schauder basis?
How should I connect my cat5 cable to connectors having an orange-green line?
Free fall ellipse or parabola?
Avoiding the "not like other girls" trope?
Unnecessary finite dimensionality requirement in Theorem 5.1.8 of Sweedler’s “Hopf Algebras”
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowAnnihilator of maximal ideals in a finite dimensional algebraIf a Hopf Algebra has a nontrivial, finite-dimensional right ideal, then it is finite dimensionalPrimitive elements of finite dimensional Hopf algebrasFinite-dimensional algebras which do not satisfy Wedderburn's principal theoremClassification of special Hopf algebrasUsing nilpotent rings for constructing triangular Hopf Algebras using Etingof, Gelaki methodProof of Weyl's theorem on semisimple lie algebras in Milne's notesSearching for Proofs of Wedderburn Theorem for finite dimensional simple AlgebrasExistence of integrals in f.d Hopf algebrasExercise on block theory of finite dimensional algebras
$begingroup$
I’m currently reading Sweedler’s Hopf Algebras, but am confused by the finite dimensionality in the following theorem:
Theorem 5.1.8 A finite dimensional Hopf algebra $H$ is semi-simple as an algebra if and only if$epsilon(int) neq 0$.
Sweedler seems to use the finite dimensionality of $H$ only for the implication
$$
text$H$ semisimple
implies
epsilon( textstyleint ) neq 0
$$
by using that $dim int = 1$, which seems unnecessary to me.
Question: Why does Sweedler requires $H$ to be finite dimensional?
Sweedler’s argumentation is as follows:
If $H$ is semi-simple, then there is a left ideal $I$ such that
$$
H = operatornameKer epsilon oplus I.
$$
For $x in operatornameKer epsilon$ and $y in I$ we have $xy in operatornameKer epsilon cap I$.
Hence $xy = 0$.
Then for any $h in H$,
$$
h = (h - epsilon(h)1) + epsilon(h)1,
$$
so $hy = epsilon(h)y$, since $(h - epsilon(h) 1) in operatornameKer epsilon$.
Thus $I subseteq int$, a $1$-dimensional space, hence $I = int$.
Since $H = operatornameKer epsilon oplus I$ we conclude $epsilon(int) neq 0$.
It seems to me that the inclusion $I subseteq int$ sufficies because then $epsilon(textstyle int) supseteq epsilon(I) neq 0$.
Remark: If I’m not mistaken then it should also follow from a later exercise (any Hopf algebra that contains a nonzero finite dimensional one-sided ideal is already finite dimensional itself) that the above theorem also holds for any infinite dimensional Hopf algebra $H$: By considering the above one-dimensional ideal $I$ we see that $H$ cannot be semisimple. On the other hand $int = 0$ (and hence $epsilon(int) = 0$) because for every nonzero $x in int$ the one-dimensional span $kx$ would be a left ideal.
But this doesn’t explain why Sweedler restricts the above theorem to finite dimensional Hopf algebras in the first place.
abstract-algebra proof-explanation hopf-algebras
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I’m currently reading Sweedler’s Hopf Algebras, but am confused by the finite dimensionality in the following theorem:
Theorem 5.1.8 A finite dimensional Hopf algebra $H$ is semi-simple as an algebra if and only if$epsilon(int) neq 0$.
Sweedler seems to use the finite dimensionality of $H$ only for the implication
$$
text$H$ semisimple
implies
epsilon( textstyleint ) neq 0
$$
by using that $dim int = 1$, which seems unnecessary to me.
Question: Why does Sweedler requires $H$ to be finite dimensional?
Sweedler’s argumentation is as follows:
If $H$ is semi-simple, then there is a left ideal $I$ such that
$$
H = operatornameKer epsilon oplus I.
$$
For $x in operatornameKer epsilon$ and $y in I$ we have $xy in operatornameKer epsilon cap I$.
Hence $xy = 0$.
Then for any $h in H$,
$$
h = (h - epsilon(h)1) + epsilon(h)1,
$$
so $hy = epsilon(h)y$, since $(h - epsilon(h) 1) in operatornameKer epsilon$.
Thus $I subseteq int$, a $1$-dimensional space, hence $I = int$.
Since $H = operatornameKer epsilon oplus I$ we conclude $epsilon(int) neq 0$.
It seems to me that the inclusion $I subseteq int$ sufficies because then $epsilon(textstyle int) supseteq epsilon(I) neq 0$.
Remark: If I’m not mistaken then it should also follow from a later exercise (any Hopf algebra that contains a nonzero finite dimensional one-sided ideal is already finite dimensional itself) that the above theorem also holds for any infinite dimensional Hopf algebra $H$: By considering the above one-dimensional ideal $I$ we see that $H$ cannot be semisimple. On the other hand $int = 0$ (and hence $epsilon(int) = 0$) because for every nonzero $x in int$ the one-dimensional span $kx$ would be a left ideal.
But this doesn’t explain why Sweedler restricts the above theorem to finite dimensional Hopf algebras in the first place.
abstract-algebra proof-explanation hopf-algebras
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I’m currently reading Sweedler’s Hopf Algebras, but am confused by the finite dimensionality in the following theorem:
Theorem 5.1.8 A finite dimensional Hopf algebra $H$ is semi-simple as an algebra if and only if$epsilon(int) neq 0$.
Sweedler seems to use the finite dimensionality of $H$ only for the implication
$$
text$H$ semisimple
implies
epsilon( textstyleint ) neq 0
$$
by using that $dim int = 1$, which seems unnecessary to me.
Question: Why does Sweedler requires $H$ to be finite dimensional?
Sweedler’s argumentation is as follows:
If $H$ is semi-simple, then there is a left ideal $I$ such that
$$
H = operatornameKer epsilon oplus I.
$$
For $x in operatornameKer epsilon$ and $y in I$ we have $xy in operatornameKer epsilon cap I$.
Hence $xy = 0$.
Then for any $h in H$,
$$
h = (h - epsilon(h)1) + epsilon(h)1,
$$
so $hy = epsilon(h)y$, since $(h - epsilon(h) 1) in operatornameKer epsilon$.
Thus $I subseteq int$, a $1$-dimensional space, hence $I = int$.
Since $H = operatornameKer epsilon oplus I$ we conclude $epsilon(int) neq 0$.
It seems to me that the inclusion $I subseteq int$ sufficies because then $epsilon(textstyle int) supseteq epsilon(I) neq 0$.
Remark: If I’m not mistaken then it should also follow from a later exercise (any Hopf algebra that contains a nonzero finite dimensional one-sided ideal is already finite dimensional itself) that the above theorem also holds for any infinite dimensional Hopf algebra $H$: By considering the above one-dimensional ideal $I$ we see that $H$ cannot be semisimple. On the other hand $int = 0$ (and hence $epsilon(int) = 0$) because for every nonzero $x in int$ the one-dimensional span $kx$ would be a left ideal.
But this doesn’t explain why Sweedler restricts the above theorem to finite dimensional Hopf algebras in the first place.
abstract-algebra proof-explanation hopf-algebras
$endgroup$
I’m currently reading Sweedler’s Hopf Algebras, but am confused by the finite dimensionality in the following theorem:
Theorem 5.1.8 A finite dimensional Hopf algebra $H$ is semi-simple as an algebra if and only if$epsilon(int) neq 0$.
Sweedler seems to use the finite dimensionality of $H$ only for the implication
$$
text$H$ semisimple
implies
epsilon( textstyleint ) neq 0
$$
by using that $dim int = 1$, which seems unnecessary to me.
Question: Why does Sweedler requires $H$ to be finite dimensional?
Sweedler’s argumentation is as follows:
If $H$ is semi-simple, then there is a left ideal $I$ such that
$$
H = operatornameKer epsilon oplus I.
$$
For $x in operatornameKer epsilon$ and $y in I$ we have $xy in operatornameKer epsilon cap I$.
Hence $xy = 0$.
Then for any $h in H$,
$$
h = (h - epsilon(h)1) + epsilon(h)1,
$$
so $hy = epsilon(h)y$, since $(h - epsilon(h) 1) in operatornameKer epsilon$.
Thus $I subseteq int$, a $1$-dimensional space, hence $I = int$.
Since $H = operatornameKer epsilon oplus I$ we conclude $epsilon(int) neq 0$.
It seems to me that the inclusion $I subseteq int$ sufficies because then $epsilon(textstyle int) supseteq epsilon(I) neq 0$.
Remark: If I’m not mistaken then it should also follow from a later exercise (any Hopf algebra that contains a nonzero finite dimensional one-sided ideal is already finite dimensional itself) that the above theorem also holds for any infinite dimensional Hopf algebra $H$: By considering the above one-dimensional ideal $I$ we see that $H$ cannot be semisimple. On the other hand $int = 0$ (and hence $epsilon(int) = 0$) because for every nonzero $x in int$ the one-dimensional span $kx$ would be a left ideal.
But this doesn’t explain why Sweedler restricts the above theorem to finite dimensional Hopf algebras in the first place.
abstract-algebra proof-explanation hopf-algebras
abstract-algebra proof-explanation hopf-algebras
edited Mar 4 at 23:07
Bernard
124k741118
124k741118
asked Mar 4 at 22:33
Jendrik StelznerJendrik Stelzner
7,92121440
7,92121440
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
You don't need that hypothesis in the proof but you don't earn nothing by removing it, as a Hopf algebra satisfying the above conditions is automatically finite-dimensional. You may in fact prove the following result.
Theorem (Maschke Theorem for Hopf algebras) For a Hopf
algebra over a field $Bbbk $ the following assertions are equivalent.
$H$ is semisimple as a ring.- There exists $tin int_H^l$ such that $%
varepsilon left( tright) =1$.
$H$ is separable as an algebra.
Proof:
To prove that $left( 1right) $ implies $left( 2right) $ consider the left $H$-linear morphism $varepsilon :Hrightarrow Bbbk $. Since $H$ is semisimple and $varepsilon $ is surjective, it admits a left $H$-linear section $sigma :Bbbk rightarrow H$. Set $t:=sigma left( 1_Bbbkright) $ and observe that for every $hin H$ we have $ht=hsigma left(1_Bbbk right) =sigma left( hcdot 1_Bbbk right) =sigma left(varepsilon left( hright) 1_Bbbk right) =varepsilon left( hright) t$
and that $varepsilon left( tright) =varepsilon left( sigma left(1_Bbbk right) right) =1_Bbbk $.
To prove that $left( 2right) $ implies $left( 3right) $ consider the Casimir element $e=sum t_left( 1right) otimes Sleft( t_left( 2right) right) $. Of course, $sum t_left( 1right) Sleft( t_left( 2right) right) =varepsilon left( tright) 1_B=1_B $, whence $e$ is a separability idempotent.
Finally, to prove that $left( 3right) $ implies $left( 1right) $ pick any surjective morphism of left $H$-modules $pi:Mrightarrow N$. Since it is in particular of $Bbbk $-vector spaces it admits a $Bbbk $-linear section $sigma :Nrightarrow M$. Of course, $sigma $ is not $H$-linear in general, but we may consider $tau:Nrightarrow M:nlongmapsto sum e^prime sigma left( e^prime prime
nright) $ where $e=sum e'otimes e''$ is the separability idempotent. This is $H$-linear because $sum e^prime sigma left(e^prime prime hnright) =sum he^prime sigma left( e^prime primenright) $ for every $hin H$ and it is still a section since $pi left(tau left( nright) right) =sum pi left( e^prime sigma left(e^prime prime nright) right) =sum e^prime pi left( sigma left(e^prime prime nright) right) =sum e^prime e^prime prime n=n$
for every $nin N$. $square$
Now the point is that a separable $Bbbk$-algebra is always finite-dimensional.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
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%2f3135471%2funnecessary-finite-dimensionality-requirement-in-theorem-5-1-8-of-sweedler-s-ho%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
$begingroup$
You don't need that hypothesis in the proof but you don't earn nothing by removing it, as a Hopf algebra satisfying the above conditions is automatically finite-dimensional. You may in fact prove the following result.
Theorem (Maschke Theorem for Hopf algebras) For a Hopf
algebra over a field $Bbbk $ the following assertions are equivalent.
$H$ is semisimple as a ring.- There exists $tin int_H^l$ such that $%
varepsilon left( tright) =1$.
$H$ is separable as an algebra.
Proof:
To prove that $left( 1right) $ implies $left( 2right) $ consider the left $H$-linear morphism $varepsilon :Hrightarrow Bbbk $. Since $H$ is semisimple and $varepsilon $ is surjective, it admits a left $H$-linear section $sigma :Bbbk rightarrow H$. Set $t:=sigma left( 1_Bbbkright) $ and observe that for every $hin H$ we have $ht=hsigma left(1_Bbbk right) =sigma left( hcdot 1_Bbbk right) =sigma left(varepsilon left( hright) 1_Bbbk right) =varepsilon left( hright) t$
and that $varepsilon left( tright) =varepsilon left( sigma left(1_Bbbk right) right) =1_Bbbk $.
To prove that $left( 2right) $ implies $left( 3right) $ consider the Casimir element $e=sum t_left( 1right) otimes Sleft( t_left( 2right) right) $. Of course, $sum t_left( 1right) Sleft( t_left( 2right) right) =varepsilon left( tright) 1_B=1_B $, whence $e$ is a separability idempotent.
Finally, to prove that $left( 3right) $ implies $left( 1right) $ pick any surjective morphism of left $H$-modules $pi:Mrightarrow N$. Since it is in particular of $Bbbk $-vector spaces it admits a $Bbbk $-linear section $sigma :Nrightarrow M$. Of course, $sigma $ is not $H$-linear in general, but we may consider $tau:Nrightarrow M:nlongmapsto sum e^prime sigma left( e^prime prime
nright) $ where $e=sum e'otimes e''$ is the separability idempotent. This is $H$-linear because $sum e^prime sigma left(e^prime prime hnright) =sum he^prime sigma left( e^prime primenright) $ for every $hin H$ and it is still a section since $pi left(tau left( nright) right) =sum pi left( e^prime sigma left(e^prime prime nright) right) =sum e^prime pi left( sigma left(e^prime prime nright) right) =sum e^prime e^prime prime n=n$
for every $nin N$. $square$
Now the point is that a separable $Bbbk$-algebra is always finite-dimensional.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You don't need that hypothesis in the proof but you don't earn nothing by removing it, as a Hopf algebra satisfying the above conditions is automatically finite-dimensional. You may in fact prove the following result.
Theorem (Maschke Theorem for Hopf algebras) For a Hopf
algebra over a field $Bbbk $ the following assertions are equivalent.
$H$ is semisimple as a ring.- There exists $tin int_H^l$ such that $%
varepsilon left( tright) =1$.
$H$ is separable as an algebra.
Proof:
To prove that $left( 1right) $ implies $left( 2right) $ consider the left $H$-linear morphism $varepsilon :Hrightarrow Bbbk $. Since $H$ is semisimple and $varepsilon $ is surjective, it admits a left $H$-linear section $sigma :Bbbk rightarrow H$. Set $t:=sigma left( 1_Bbbkright) $ and observe that for every $hin H$ we have $ht=hsigma left(1_Bbbk right) =sigma left( hcdot 1_Bbbk right) =sigma left(varepsilon left( hright) 1_Bbbk right) =varepsilon left( hright) t$
and that $varepsilon left( tright) =varepsilon left( sigma left(1_Bbbk right) right) =1_Bbbk $.
To prove that $left( 2right) $ implies $left( 3right) $ consider the Casimir element $e=sum t_left( 1right) otimes Sleft( t_left( 2right) right) $. Of course, $sum t_left( 1right) Sleft( t_left( 2right) right) =varepsilon left( tright) 1_B=1_B $, whence $e$ is a separability idempotent.
Finally, to prove that $left( 3right) $ implies $left( 1right) $ pick any surjective morphism of left $H$-modules $pi:Mrightarrow N$. Since it is in particular of $Bbbk $-vector spaces it admits a $Bbbk $-linear section $sigma :Nrightarrow M$. Of course, $sigma $ is not $H$-linear in general, but we may consider $tau:Nrightarrow M:nlongmapsto sum e^prime sigma left( e^prime prime
nright) $ where $e=sum e'otimes e''$ is the separability idempotent. This is $H$-linear because $sum e^prime sigma left(e^prime prime hnright) =sum he^prime sigma left( e^prime primenright) $ for every $hin H$ and it is still a section since $pi left(tau left( nright) right) =sum pi left( e^prime sigma left(e^prime prime nright) right) =sum e^prime pi left( sigma left(e^prime prime nright) right) =sum e^prime e^prime prime n=n$
for every $nin N$. $square$
Now the point is that a separable $Bbbk$-algebra is always finite-dimensional.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You don't need that hypothesis in the proof but you don't earn nothing by removing it, as a Hopf algebra satisfying the above conditions is automatically finite-dimensional. You may in fact prove the following result.
Theorem (Maschke Theorem for Hopf algebras) For a Hopf
algebra over a field $Bbbk $ the following assertions are equivalent.
$H$ is semisimple as a ring.- There exists $tin int_H^l$ such that $%
varepsilon left( tright) =1$.
$H$ is separable as an algebra.
Proof:
To prove that $left( 1right) $ implies $left( 2right) $ consider the left $H$-linear morphism $varepsilon :Hrightarrow Bbbk $. Since $H$ is semisimple and $varepsilon $ is surjective, it admits a left $H$-linear section $sigma :Bbbk rightarrow H$. Set $t:=sigma left( 1_Bbbkright) $ and observe that for every $hin H$ we have $ht=hsigma left(1_Bbbk right) =sigma left( hcdot 1_Bbbk right) =sigma left(varepsilon left( hright) 1_Bbbk right) =varepsilon left( hright) t$
and that $varepsilon left( tright) =varepsilon left( sigma left(1_Bbbk right) right) =1_Bbbk $.
To prove that $left( 2right) $ implies $left( 3right) $ consider the Casimir element $e=sum t_left( 1right) otimes Sleft( t_left( 2right) right) $. Of course, $sum t_left( 1right) Sleft( t_left( 2right) right) =varepsilon left( tright) 1_B=1_B $, whence $e$ is a separability idempotent.
Finally, to prove that $left( 3right) $ implies $left( 1right) $ pick any surjective morphism of left $H$-modules $pi:Mrightarrow N$. Since it is in particular of $Bbbk $-vector spaces it admits a $Bbbk $-linear section $sigma :Nrightarrow M$. Of course, $sigma $ is not $H$-linear in general, but we may consider $tau:Nrightarrow M:nlongmapsto sum e^prime sigma left( e^prime prime
nright) $ where $e=sum e'otimes e''$ is the separability idempotent. This is $H$-linear because $sum e^prime sigma left(e^prime prime hnright) =sum he^prime sigma left( e^prime primenright) $ for every $hin H$ and it is still a section since $pi left(tau left( nright) right) =sum pi left( e^prime sigma left(e^prime prime nright) right) =sum e^prime pi left( sigma left(e^prime prime nright) right) =sum e^prime e^prime prime n=n$
for every $nin N$. $square$
Now the point is that a separable $Bbbk$-algebra is always finite-dimensional.
$endgroup$
You don't need that hypothesis in the proof but you don't earn nothing by removing it, as a Hopf algebra satisfying the above conditions is automatically finite-dimensional. You may in fact prove the following result.
Theorem (Maschke Theorem for Hopf algebras) For a Hopf
algebra over a field $Bbbk $ the following assertions are equivalent.
$H$ is semisimple as a ring.- There exists $tin int_H^l$ such that $%
varepsilon left( tright) =1$.
$H$ is separable as an algebra.
Proof:
To prove that $left( 1right) $ implies $left( 2right) $ consider the left $H$-linear morphism $varepsilon :Hrightarrow Bbbk $. Since $H$ is semisimple and $varepsilon $ is surjective, it admits a left $H$-linear section $sigma :Bbbk rightarrow H$. Set $t:=sigma left( 1_Bbbkright) $ and observe that for every $hin H$ we have $ht=hsigma left(1_Bbbk right) =sigma left( hcdot 1_Bbbk right) =sigma left(varepsilon left( hright) 1_Bbbk right) =varepsilon left( hright) t$
and that $varepsilon left( tright) =varepsilon left( sigma left(1_Bbbk right) right) =1_Bbbk $.
To prove that $left( 2right) $ implies $left( 3right) $ consider the Casimir element $e=sum t_left( 1right) otimes Sleft( t_left( 2right) right) $. Of course, $sum t_left( 1right) Sleft( t_left( 2right) right) =varepsilon left( tright) 1_B=1_B $, whence $e$ is a separability idempotent.
Finally, to prove that $left( 3right) $ implies $left( 1right) $ pick any surjective morphism of left $H$-modules $pi:Mrightarrow N$. Since it is in particular of $Bbbk $-vector spaces it admits a $Bbbk $-linear section $sigma :Nrightarrow M$. Of course, $sigma $ is not $H$-linear in general, but we may consider $tau:Nrightarrow M:nlongmapsto sum e^prime sigma left( e^prime prime
nright) $ where $e=sum e'otimes e''$ is the separability idempotent. This is $H$-linear because $sum e^prime sigma left(e^prime prime hnright) =sum he^prime sigma left( e^prime primenright) $ for every $hin H$ and it is still a section since $pi left(tau left( nright) right) =sum pi left( e^prime sigma left(e^prime prime nright) right) =sum e^prime pi left( sigma left(e^prime prime nright) right) =sum e^prime e^prime prime n=n$
for every $nin N$. $square$
Now the point is that a separable $Bbbk$-algebra is always finite-dimensional.
answered Mar 28 at 10:24
Ender WigginsEnder Wiggins
865421
865421
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%2f3135471%2funnecessary-finite-dimensionality-requirement-in-theorem-5-1-8-of-sweedler-s-ho%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