The sum ∑λ∈PVλ(S) is direct. The sum ∑λ∈PVλ(S) is direct.
The second assertion is a consequence of the first; hence it suffices to prove that. We distinguish several cases.
a)S is empty. The assertion is trivial.
b)S is reduced to a single element s. Let λ0,λ1,...,λn be distinct elements of k. For i=0,1,...,n, let vi∈Vλi(s) and assume that v0=v1+⋯+vn. It suffices to prove that v0 = 0. For i=0,...,n, there exists an integer qi> 0 such that (r(s)−λi)qivi = 0. Consider the polynomials P(X)=∏i≥1(X−λi)qi and Q(X)=(X−λ0)q0. We have Q(r(s))v0=0, and
P(r(s))v0=∑i=1nP(r(s))vi=0. Since P and Q are relatively prime, the Bezout identity proves that v0=0.
c)S is finite and non-empty. We argue by induction on the cardinal of S. Let s∈S and S′=S-- {s}. Let (vλ)λ∈P be a finitely-supported family of elements of V such that ∑λ∈Pvλ=0 and vλ∈Vλ(S). Let λ0∈P. Let P′ be the set of λ∈P such that λ∣S′=λ0∣S′. By the induction hypothesis applied to S′, we have ∑λ∈P′vλ=0. If λ,μ are distinct elements of P′,λ(s)=μ(s).
Since the sum ∑α∈kVα(s) is direct by b), and since vλ∈Vλ(s)(s),vλ=0 for all λ∈P′, and in particular vλ0=0, which we had to prove.
d) General case. Let (vλ)λ∈P be a finitely-supported family of elements of V such that ∑λ∈Pvλ=0 and vλ∈Vλ(S). Let P′ be the finite set of λ∈P such that vλ=0, and let S′ be a finite subset of S such that the conditions λ∈P′, μ∈P′,λ∣S′=μ∣S′ imply that λ=μ. We have vλ∈Vλ∣S′(S′); applying c), we see that vλ=0 for λ∈P′, which completes the proof.
Recall that, if x∈ End(V), we denote by ad x the map y→xy−yx=[x,y] from End(V) to itself.
Bourbaki sets the proof directly after the statement, and the corpus does not separate them, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.
Nothing.