$S^{-1}Ext^n_R(A,B) cong Ext^n_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}A,S^{-1}B)$
$begingroup$
I am trying to understand a proof from the book An Introduction to Homological Algebra, Weibel.
Let $A$ be a finitely generated module over a noetherian ring $R$. Then for every multiplicative set $S$, all modules B, and all n, $S^{-1}Ext^n_R(A,B) cong Ext^n_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}A,S^{-1}B)$.
PROOF:
Choose a resolution $Flongrightarrow A$ by finitely generated free $R$-modules. Then $S^{-1}F longrightarrow S^{-1}A$ is a resolution by finitely generated free $S^{-1}R$-modules.
Because $S^{-1}$ is an exact functor from $R$-modules to $S^{-1}R$-modules, we have:
$S^{-1}Ext^n_R(A,B) = S^{-1}(H^* Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*(S^{-1}Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*Hom_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}F, S^{-1}B) = Ext^n_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}A,S^{-1}B)$
QUESTIONS:
I have seen in my lectures that $Ext_R^n(M,N)$ are the right derived functor cohomologies of some module $N$ with respect to $h^M$. And you need a complex $0 longrightarrow M longrightarrow I_0 longrightarrow I_1 longrightarrow ...$, where $I_i$ are injective objects, to compute it. But here he has a resolution $.... longrightarrow F_0longrightarrow A longrightarrow 0$ (I mean, it goes the other way). Help?
I do not understand why $S^{-1}(H^* Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*(S^{-1}Hom_R(F,B))$. Help?
In case that $A$ is not finitely generated, is this true? I guess it is not. But how could I prove it?
Why do we need to consider the resolution $S^{-1}F longrightarrow S^{-1}A$ if we only computate $Ext^n_R(A,B)$?
Thank you very much.
abstract-algebra commutative-algebra proof-explanation homological-algebra
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am trying to understand a proof from the book An Introduction to Homological Algebra, Weibel.
Let $A$ be a finitely generated module over a noetherian ring $R$. Then for every multiplicative set $S$, all modules B, and all n, $S^{-1}Ext^n_R(A,B) cong Ext^n_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}A,S^{-1}B)$.
PROOF:
Choose a resolution $Flongrightarrow A$ by finitely generated free $R$-modules. Then $S^{-1}F longrightarrow S^{-1}A$ is a resolution by finitely generated free $S^{-1}R$-modules.
Because $S^{-1}$ is an exact functor from $R$-modules to $S^{-1}R$-modules, we have:
$S^{-1}Ext^n_R(A,B) = S^{-1}(H^* Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*(S^{-1}Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*Hom_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}F, S^{-1}B) = Ext^n_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}A,S^{-1}B)$
QUESTIONS:
I have seen in my lectures that $Ext_R^n(M,N)$ are the right derived functor cohomologies of some module $N$ with respect to $h^M$. And you need a complex $0 longrightarrow M longrightarrow I_0 longrightarrow I_1 longrightarrow ...$, where $I_i$ are injective objects, to compute it. But here he has a resolution $.... longrightarrow F_0longrightarrow A longrightarrow 0$ (I mean, it goes the other way). Help?
I do not understand why $S^{-1}(H^* Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*(S^{-1}Hom_R(F,B))$. Help?
In case that $A$ is not finitely generated, is this true? I guess it is not. But how could I prove it?
Why do we need to consider the resolution $S^{-1}F longrightarrow S^{-1}A$ if we only computate $Ext^n_R(A,B)$?
Thank you very much.
abstract-algebra commutative-algebra proof-explanation homological-algebra
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am trying to understand a proof from the book An Introduction to Homological Algebra, Weibel.
Let $A$ be a finitely generated module over a noetherian ring $R$. Then for every multiplicative set $S$, all modules B, and all n, $S^{-1}Ext^n_R(A,B) cong Ext^n_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}A,S^{-1}B)$.
PROOF:
Choose a resolution $Flongrightarrow A$ by finitely generated free $R$-modules. Then $S^{-1}F longrightarrow S^{-1}A$ is a resolution by finitely generated free $S^{-1}R$-modules.
Because $S^{-1}$ is an exact functor from $R$-modules to $S^{-1}R$-modules, we have:
$S^{-1}Ext^n_R(A,B) = S^{-1}(H^* Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*(S^{-1}Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*Hom_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}F, S^{-1}B) = Ext^n_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}A,S^{-1}B)$
QUESTIONS:
I have seen in my lectures that $Ext_R^n(M,N)$ are the right derived functor cohomologies of some module $N$ with respect to $h^M$. And you need a complex $0 longrightarrow M longrightarrow I_0 longrightarrow I_1 longrightarrow ...$, where $I_i$ are injective objects, to compute it. But here he has a resolution $.... longrightarrow F_0longrightarrow A longrightarrow 0$ (I mean, it goes the other way). Help?
I do not understand why $S^{-1}(H^* Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*(S^{-1}Hom_R(F,B))$. Help?
In case that $A$ is not finitely generated, is this true? I guess it is not. But how could I prove it?
Why do we need to consider the resolution $S^{-1}F longrightarrow S^{-1}A$ if we only computate $Ext^n_R(A,B)$?
Thank you very much.
abstract-algebra commutative-algebra proof-explanation homological-algebra
$endgroup$
I am trying to understand a proof from the book An Introduction to Homological Algebra, Weibel.
Let $A$ be a finitely generated module over a noetherian ring $R$. Then for every multiplicative set $S$, all modules B, and all n, $S^{-1}Ext^n_R(A,B) cong Ext^n_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}A,S^{-1}B)$.
PROOF:
Choose a resolution $Flongrightarrow A$ by finitely generated free $R$-modules. Then $S^{-1}F longrightarrow S^{-1}A$ is a resolution by finitely generated free $S^{-1}R$-modules.
Because $S^{-1}$ is an exact functor from $R$-modules to $S^{-1}R$-modules, we have:
$S^{-1}Ext^n_R(A,B) = S^{-1}(H^* Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*(S^{-1}Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*Hom_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}F, S^{-1}B) = Ext^n_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}A,S^{-1}B)$
QUESTIONS:
I have seen in my lectures that $Ext_R^n(M,N)$ are the right derived functor cohomologies of some module $N$ with respect to $h^M$. And you need a complex $0 longrightarrow M longrightarrow I_0 longrightarrow I_1 longrightarrow ...$, where $I_i$ are injective objects, to compute it. But here he has a resolution $.... longrightarrow F_0longrightarrow A longrightarrow 0$ (I mean, it goes the other way). Help?
I do not understand why $S^{-1}(H^* Hom_R(F,B)) cong H^*(S^{-1}Hom_R(F,B))$. Help?
In case that $A$ is not finitely generated, is this true? I guess it is not. But how could I prove it?
Why do we need to consider the resolution $S^{-1}F longrightarrow S^{-1}A$ if we only computate $Ext^n_R(A,B)$?
Thank you very much.
abstract-algebra commutative-algebra proof-explanation homological-algebra
abstract-algebra commutative-algebra proof-explanation homological-algebra
edited Dec 29 '18 at 16:03
idriskameni
asked Dec 29 '18 at 15:56
idriskameniidriskameni
14415
14415
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
One of the things one learns about the $mathrm{Ext}$ functor is that it is 'balanced', in the sense that to compute $mathrm{Ext}^*(M,N)$ for two left $R$-modules $M$ and $N$, one can either resolve $M$ by projectives $P_*to M$ or $N$ by injectives $Nto I^*$. What one then shows is that the two morphisms of chain complexes $hom(P_*,N)longleftarrow hom(P_*,I^*) longrightarrow hom(M,I^*)$ obtained by pre- or post-composition with the augmentation maps for $M$ and $N$ are quasi-isomorphisms, so this shows the definitions agree.
Since localization is exact, it commutes with homology. A general fact of life is exact functors commute with homology. In this case, if $C$ is a complex of $R$-modules, then we have a map of chain complexes $S^{-1}H(C) to H(S^{-1}C)$ that sends $s^{-1}[z]$ to $[s^{-1}z]$, and this is an isomorphism. This follos from the fact that if $F$ is flat then $F otimes H(C) to H(Fotimes C)$ is an isomorphism, for example by the Kunneth formula.
The finite generation is required to commute localization and homs, that is, there is in general a map $S^{-1}hom_R(M,N) to hom_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N)$ but this fails to be an isomorphism for $M$ and $N$ arbitrary. If $M$ is finitely presented, it is an isomorphism. In case $R$ is noetherian, this is the same as $M$ being finitely generated. Since Ext is Hom at 0, the general claim is false.
Finally, you want that resolution because it computes the right hand side of your formula, i.e. the Ext over the localized ring with arguments the localized modules.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Ext defined using injectives is equivalent to the one defined using projectives, it is called balanced Ext.
There is a natural map $S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)to operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N)$ by $frac{f}{s}mapsto left[frac{x}{t}mapsto frac{f(x)}{st}right]$.
Note that when $M$ is free of finite rank, the map is isomorphism (see 3.).
When $M$ is finitely presented (if $R$ is noetherian, then any finitely generated modules are finitely presented), Let
$$R^{m}to R^nto Mto 0$$
Be right short exact sequence. Consider the following diagram
$$begin{array}{ccccccc}
0 & to &S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)& to & S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^n,N)&to& S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^m,N)\
&&downarrow && downarrow&& downarrow\
0& to &operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N) & to & operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^n,S^{-1}N)& to & operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^{m},S^{-1}N)
end{array}$$
The right two columns of maps are isomorphic, thus so is the first one.The problem occurs when it involves infinite products. For example,
$$operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^{oplus Lambda},S^{-1}N)=(S^{-1}N)^{Lambda}qquad S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^{oplus Lambda},N)=S^{-1}big(N^{ Lambda}big)$$
They are quite different for infinite $Lambda$. For example, $R=mathbb{Z}=N$, and $S={1,2,4,8ldots }$ and $Lambda= mathbb{Z}_{geq 0}$, then there is no element of $S^{-1}(N^{Lambda})$ corresponding to
$$left(1,frac{1}{2},frac{1}{4},frac{1}{8},ldots right)in (S^{-1}N)^{Lambda}$$We didn't, you need to check the proof again.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Note that your answer to 4. is not quite right.
$endgroup$
– Pedro Tamaroff♦
Dec 29 '18 at 16:55
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
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%2f3055973%2fs-1extn-ra-b-cong-extn-s-1rs-1a-s-1b%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
One of the things one learns about the $mathrm{Ext}$ functor is that it is 'balanced', in the sense that to compute $mathrm{Ext}^*(M,N)$ for two left $R$-modules $M$ and $N$, one can either resolve $M$ by projectives $P_*to M$ or $N$ by injectives $Nto I^*$. What one then shows is that the two morphisms of chain complexes $hom(P_*,N)longleftarrow hom(P_*,I^*) longrightarrow hom(M,I^*)$ obtained by pre- or post-composition with the augmentation maps for $M$ and $N$ are quasi-isomorphisms, so this shows the definitions agree.
Since localization is exact, it commutes with homology. A general fact of life is exact functors commute with homology. In this case, if $C$ is a complex of $R$-modules, then we have a map of chain complexes $S^{-1}H(C) to H(S^{-1}C)$ that sends $s^{-1}[z]$ to $[s^{-1}z]$, and this is an isomorphism. This follos from the fact that if $F$ is flat then $F otimes H(C) to H(Fotimes C)$ is an isomorphism, for example by the Kunneth formula.
The finite generation is required to commute localization and homs, that is, there is in general a map $S^{-1}hom_R(M,N) to hom_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N)$ but this fails to be an isomorphism for $M$ and $N$ arbitrary. If $M$ is finitely presented, it is an isomorphism. In case $R$ is noetherian, this is the same as $M$ being finitely generated. Since Ext is Hom at 0, the general claim is false.
Finally, you want that resolution because it computes the right hand side of your formula, i.e. the Ext over the localized ring with arguments the localized modules.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
One of the things one learns about the $mathrm{Ext}$ functor is that it is 'balanced', in the sense that to compute $mathrm{Ext}^*(M,N)$ for two left $R$-modules $M$ and $N$, one can either resolve $M$ by projectives $P_*to M$ or $N$ by injectives $Nto I^*$. What one then shows is that the two morphisms of chain complexes $hom(P_*,N)longleftarrow hom(P_*,I^*) longrightarrow hom(M,I^*)$ obtained by pre- or post-composition with the augmentation maps for $M$ and $N$ are quasi-isomorphisms, so this shows the definitions agree.
Since localization is exact, it commutes with homology. A general fact of life is exact functors commute with homology. In this case, if $C$ is a complex of $R$-modules, then we have a map of chain complexes $S^{-1}H(C) to H(S^{-1}C)$ that sends $s^{-1}[z]$ to $[s^{-1}z]$, and this is an isomorphism. This follos from the fact that if $F$ is flat then $F otimes H(C) to H(Fotimes C)$ is an isomorphism, for example by the Kunneth formula.
The finite generation is required to commute localization and homs, that is, there is in general a map $S^{-1}hom_R(M,N) to hom_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N)$ but this fails to be an isomorphism for $M$ and $N$ arbitrary. If $M$ is finitely presented, it is an isomorphism. In case $R$ is noetherian, this is the same as $M$ being finitely generated. Since Ext is Hom at 0, the general claim is false.
Finally, you want that resolution because it computes the right hand side of your formula, i.e. the Ext over the localized ring with arguments the localized modules.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
One of the things one learns about the $mathrm{Ext}$ functor is that it is 'balanced', in the sense that to compute $mathrm{Ext}^*(M,N)$ for two left $R$-modules $M$ and $N$, one can either resolve $M$ by projectives $P_*to M$ or $N$ by injectives $Nto I^*$. What one then shows is that the two morphisms of chain complexes $hom(P_*,N)longleftarrow hom(P_*,I^*) longrightarrow hom(M,I^*)$ obtained by pre- or post-composition with the augmentation maps for $M$ and $N$ are quasi-isomorphisms, so this shows the definitions agree.
Since localization is exact, it commutes with homology. A general fact of life is exact functors commute with homology. In this case, if $C$ is a complex of $R$-modules, then we have a map of chain complexes $S^{-1}H(C) to H(S^{-1}C)$ that sends $s^{-1}[z]$ to $[s^{-1}z]$, and this is an isomorphism. This follos from the fact that if $F$ is flat then $F otimes H(C) to H(Fotimes C)$ is an isomorphism, for example by the Kunneth formula.
The finite generation is required to commute localization and homs, that is, there is in general a map $S^{-1}hom_R(M,N) to hom_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N)$ but this fails to be an isomorphism for $M$ and $N$ arbitrary. If $M$ is finitely presented, it is an isomorphism. In case $R$ is noetherian, this is the same as $M$ being finitely generated. Since Ext is Hom at 0, the general claim is false.
Finally, you want that resolution because it computes the right hand side of your formula, i.e. the Ext over the localized ring with arguments the localized modules.
$endgroup$
One of the things one learns about the $mathrm{Ext}$ functor is that it is 'balanced', in the sense that to compute $mathrm{Ext}^*(M,N)$ for two left $R$-modules $M$ and $N$, one can either resolve $M$ by projectives $P_*to M$ or $N$ by injectives $Nto I^*$. What one then shows is that the two morphisms of chain complexes $hom(P_*,N)longleftarrow hom(P_*,I^*) longrightarrow hom(M,I^*)$ obtained by pre- or post-composition with the augmentation maps for $M$ and $N$ are quasi-isomorphisms, so this shows the definitions agree.
Since localization is exact, it commutes with homology. A general fact of life is exact functors commute with homology. In this case, if $C$ is a complex of $R$-modules, then we have a map of chain complexes $S^{-1}H(C) to H(S^{-1}C)$ that sends $s^{-1}[z]$ to $[s^{-1}z]$, and this is an isomorphism. This follos from the fact that if $F$ is flat then $F otimes H(C) to H(Fotimes C)$ is an isomorphism, for example by the Kunneth formula.
The finite generation is required to commute localization and homs, that is, there is in general a map $S^{-1}hom_R(M,N) to hom_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N)$ but this fails to be an isomorphism for $M$ and $N$ arbitrary. If $M$ is finitely presented, it is an isomorphism. In case $R$ is noetherian, this is the same as $M$ being finitely generated. Since Ext is Hom at 0, the general claim is false.
Finally, you want that resolution because it computes the right hand side of your formula, i.e. the Ext over the localized ring with arguments the localized modules.
edited Dec 29 '18 at 16:44
answered Dec 29 '18 at 16:23
Pedro Tamaroff♦Pedro Tamaroff
96.4k10151296
96.4k10151296
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Ext defined using injectives is equivalent to the one defined using projectives, it is called balanced Ext.
There is a natural map $S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)to operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N)$ by $frac{f}{s}mapsto left[frac{x}{t}mapsto frac{f(x)}{st}right]$.
Note that when $M$ is free of finite rank, the map is isomorphism (see 3.).
When $M$ is finitely presented (if $R$ is noetherian, then any finitely generated modules are finitely presented), Let
$$R^{m}to R^nto Mto 0$$
Be right short exact sequence. Consider the following diagram
$$begin{array}{ccccccc}
0 & to &S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)& to & S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^n,N)&to& S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^m,N)\
&&downarrow && downarrow&& downarrow\
0& to &operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N) & to & operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^n,S^{-1}N)& to & operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^{m},S^{-1}N)
end{array}$$
The right two columns of maps are isomorphic, thus so is the first one.The problem occurs when it involves infinite products. For example,
$$operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^{oplus Lambda},S^{-1}N)=(S^{-1}N)^{Lambda}qquad S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^{oplus Lambda},N)=S^{-1}big(N^{ Lambda}big)$$
They are quite different for infinite $Lambda$. For example, $R=mathbb{Z}=N$, and $S={1,2,4,8ldots }$ and $Lambda= mathbb{Z}_{geq 0}$, then there is no element of $S^{-1}(N^{Lambda})$ corresponding to
$$left(1,frac{1}{2},frac{1}{4},frac{1}{8},ldots right)in (S^{-1}N)^{Lambda}$$We didn't, you need to check the proof again.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Note that your answer to 4. is not quite right.
$endgroup$
– Pedro Tamaroff♦
Dec 29 '18 at 16:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Ext defined using injectives is equivalent to the one defined using projectives, it is called balanced Ext.
There is a natural map $S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)to operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N)$ by $frac{f}{s}mapsto left[frac{x}{t}mapsto frac{f(x)}{st}right]$.
Note that when $M$ is free of finite rank, the map is isomorphism (see 3.).
When $M$ is finitely presented (if $R$ is noetherian, then any finitely generated modules are finitely presented), Let
$$R^{m}to R^nto Mto 0$$
Be right short exact sequence. Consider the following diagram
$$begin{array}{ccccccc}
0 & to &S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)& to & S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^n,N)&to& S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^m,N)\
&&downarrow && downarrow&& downarrow\
0& to &operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N) & to & operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^n,S^{-1}N)& to & operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^{m},S^{-1}N)
end{array}$$
The right two columns of maps are isomorphic, thus so is the first one.The problem occurs when it involves infinite products. For example,
$$operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^{oplus Lambda},S^{-1}N)=(S^{-1}N)^{Lambda}qquad S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^{oplus Lambda},N)=S^{-1}big(N^{ Lambda}big)$$
They are quite different for infinite $Lambda$. For example, $R=mathbb{Z}=N$, and $S={1,2,4,8ldots }$ and $Lambda= mathbb{Z}_{geq 0}$, then there is no element of $S^{-1}(N^{Lambda})$ corresponding to
$$left(1,frac{1}{2},frac{1}{4},frac{1}{8},ldots right)in (S^{-1}N)^{Lambda}$$We didn't, you need to check the proof again.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Note that your answer to 4. is not quite right.
$endgroup$
– Pedro Tamaroff♦
Dec 29 '18 at 16:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Ext defined using injectives is equivalent to the one defined using projectives, it is called balanced Ext.
There is a natural map $S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)to operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N)$ by $frac{f}{s}mapsto left[frac{x}{t}mapsto frac{f(x)}{st}right]$.
Note that when $M$ is free of finite rank, the map is isomorphism (see 3.).
When $M$ is finitely presented (if $R$ is noetherian, then any finitely generated modules are finitely presented), Let
$$R^{m}to R^nto Mto 0$$
Be right short exact sequence. Consider the following diagram
$$begin{array}{ccccccc}
0 & to &S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)& to & S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^n,N)&to& S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^m,N)\
&&downarrow && downarrow&& downarrow\
0& to &operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N) & to & operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^n,S^{-1}N)& to & operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^{m},S^{-1}N)
end{array}$$
The right two columns of maps are isomorphic, thus so is the first one.The problem occurs when it involves infinite products. For example,
$$operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^{oplus Lambda},S^{-1}N)=(S^{-1}N)^{Lambda}qquad S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^{oplus Lambda},N)=S^{-1}big(N^{ Lambda}big)$$
They are quite different for infinite $Lambda$. For example, $R=mathbb{Z}=N$, and $S={1,2,4,8ldots }$ and $Lambda= mathbb{Z}_{geq 0}$, then there is no element of $S^{-1}(N^{Lambda})$ corresponding to
$$left(1,frac{1}{2},frac{1}{4},frac{1}{8},ldots right)in (S^{-1}N)^{Lambda}$$We didn't, you need to check the proof again.
$endgroup$
The Ext defined using injectives is equivalent to the one defined using projectives, it is called balanced Ext.
There is a natural map $S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)to operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N)$ by $frac{f}{s}mapsto left[frac{x}{t}mapsto frac{f(x)}{st}right]$.
Note that when $M$ is free of finite rank, the map is isomorphism (see 3.).
When $M$ is finitely presented (if $R$ is noetherian, then any finitely generated modules are finitely presented), Let
$$R^{m}to R^nto Mto 0$$
Be right short exact sequence. Consider the following diagram
$$begin{array}{ccccccc}
0 & to &S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(M,N)& to & S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^n,N)&to& S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^m,N)\
&&downarrow && downarrow&& downarrow\
0& to &operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}M,S^{-1}N) & to & operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^n,S^{-1}N)& to & operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^{m},S^{-1}N)
end{array}$$
The right two columns of maps are isomorphic, thus so is the first one.The problem occurs when it involves infinite products. For example,
$$operatorname{Hom}_{S^{-1}R}(S^{-1}R^{oplus Lambda},S^{-1}N)=(S^{-1}N)^{Lambda}qquad S^{-1}operatorname{Hom}_R(R^{oplus Lambda},N)=S^{-1}big(N^{ Lambda}big)$$
They are quite different for infinite $Lambda$. For example, $R=mathbb{Z}=N$, and $S={1,2,4,8ldots }$ and $Lambda= mathbb{Z}_{geq 0}$, then there is no element of $S^{-1}(N^{Lambda})$ corresponding to
$$left(1,frac{1}{2},frac{1}{4},frac{1}{8},ldots right)in (S^{-1}N)^{Lambda}$$We didn't, you need to check the proof again.
answered Dec 29 '18 at 16:51
Cube BearCube Bear
542211
542211
1
$begingroup$
Note that your answer to 4. is not quite right.
$endgroup$
– Pedro Tamaroff♦
Dec 29 '18 at 16:55
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Note that your answer to 4. is not quite right.
$endgroup$
– Pedro Tamaroff♦
Dec 29 '18 at 16:55
1
1
$begingroup$
Note that your answer to 4. is not quite right.
$endgroup$
– Pedro Tamaroff♦
Dec 29 '18 at 16:55
$begingroup$
Note that your answer to 4. is not quite right.
$endgroup$
– Pedro Tamaroff♦
Dec 29 '18 at 16:55
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%2f3055973%2fs-1extn-ra-b-cong-extn-s-1rs-1a-s-1b%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