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










1












$begingroup$


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.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$
















    1












    $begingroup$


    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.










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      1












      1








      1


      1



      $begingroup$


      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.










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      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






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Mar 4 at 23:07









      Bernard

      124k741118




      124k741118










      asked Mar 4 at 22:33









      Jendrik StelznerJendrik Stelzner

      7,92121440




      7,92121440




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0












          $begingroup$

          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.




          1. $H$ is semisimple as a ring.

          2. There exists $tin int_H^l$ such that $%
            varepsilon left( tright) =1$
            .


          3. $H$ 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.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













            Your Answer





            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
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            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









            0












            $begingroup$

            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.




            1. $H$ is semisimple as a ring.

            2. There exists $tin int_H^l$ such that $%
              varepsilon left( tright) =1$
              .


            3. $H$ 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.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$

















              0












              $begingroup$

              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.




              1. $H$ is semisimple as a ring.

              2. There exists $tin int_H^l$ such that $%
                varepsilon left( tright) =1$
                .


              3. $H$ 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.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$















                0












                0








                0





                $begingroup$

                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.




                1. $H$ is semisimple as a ring.

                2. There exists $tin int_H^l$ such that $%
                  varepsilon left( tright) =1$
                  .


                3. $H$ 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.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                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.




                1. $H$ is semisimple as a ring.

                2. There exists $tin int_H^l$ such that $%
                  varepsilon left( tright) =1$
                  .


                3. $H$ 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.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Mar 28 at 10:24









                Ender WigginsEnder Wiggins

                865421




                865421



























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    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.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    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





















































                    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







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Triangular numbers and gcdProving sum of a set is $0 pmod n$ if $n$ is odd, or $fracn2 pmod n$ if $n$ is even?Is greatest common divisor of two numbers really their smallest linear combination?GCD, LCM RelationshipProve a set of nonnegative integers with greatest common divisor 1 and closed under addition has all but finite many nonnegative integers.all pairs of a and b in an equation containing gcdTriangular Numbers Modulo $k$ - Hit All Values?Understanding the Existence and Uniqueness of the GCDGCD and LCM with logical symbolsThe greatest common divisor of two positive integers less than 100 is equal to 3. Their least common multiple is twelve times one of the integers.Suppose that for all integers $x$, $x|a$ and $x|b$ if and only if $x|c$. Then $c = gcd(a,b)$Which is the gcd of 2 numbers which are multiplied and the result is 600000?

                    Ingelân Ynhâld Etymology | Geografy | Skiednis | Polityk en bestjoer | Ekonomy | Demografy | Kultuer | Klimaat | Sjoch ek | Keppelings om utens | Boarnen, noaten en referinsjes Navigaasjemenuwww.gov.ukOffisjele webside fan it regear fan it Feriene KeninkrykOffisjele webside fan it Britske FerkearsburoNederlânsktalige ynformaasje fan it Britske FerkearsburoOffisjele webside fan English Heritage, de organisaasje dy't him ynset foar it behâld fan it Ingelske kultuergoedYnwennertallen fan alle Britske stêden út 'e folkstelling fan 2011Notes en References, op dizze sideEngland

                    Հադիս Բովանդակություն Անվանում և նշանակություն | Դասակարգում | Աղբյուրներ | Նավարկման ցանկ