Bourbaki

Proposition 11

Tag 05KP, permanent. Cite it as [Bourbaki, Tag 05KP].

Algebra, chapter II, § 1. Modules

Let (Mι)ι∈I(M_\iota)_{\iota \in I} be a family of submodules of an A-module EE. The following properties are equivalent:

(a) The submodule ∑ι∈IMι\sum_{\iota \in I} M_\iota is the direct sum of the family (Mι)ι∈I(M_\iota)_{\iota \in I}.

(b) The relation ∑i∈Ixi=0\sum_{i \in I} x_i = 0, where xi∈Mix_i \in M_i for all i∈Ii \in I, implies xi=0x_i = 0 for all i∈Ii \in I.

(c) For all κ∈I\kappa \in I, the intersection of MκM_\kappa and ∑i≠κMi\sum_{i \neq \kappa} M_i reduces to 0.

It is immediate that (a) and (b) are equivalent, since the relation ∑ixi=∑iyi\sum_i x_i = \sum_i y_i is equivalent to ∑i(xi−yi)=0\sum_i (x_i - y_i) = 0. On the other hand, by virtue of Definition 6, (a) implies (c) by the uniqueness of the expression of an element of ⨁i∈IMi\bigoplus_{i \in I} M_i as a direct sum of elements xi∈Mix_i \in M_i. Finally, the relation ∑ixi=0\sum_i x_i = 0, where xi∈Mix_i \in M_i for all ii, can be written, for all κ∈I\kappa \in I, xκ=∑i≠κ(−xi)x_\kappa = \sum_{i \neq \kappa} (-x_i); condition (c) then implies xκ=0x_\kappa = 0 for all κ∈I\kappa \in I, hence (c) implies (b).

Bourbaki puts the proof directly after the statement, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.

Cited by

Cites

Transcribed from the printed edition, 1998, Springer. Not translated.