The Stacks project

Lemma 10.52.10. Let $R$ be a ring. Let $M$ be an $R$-module. The following are equivalent:

  1. $M$ is simple,

  2. $\text{length}_ R(M) = 1$, and

  3. $M \cong R/\mathfrak m$ for some maximal ideal $\mathfrak m \subset R$.

Proof. Let $\mathfrak m$ be a maximal ideal of $R$. By Lemma 10.52.6 the module $R/\mathfrak m$ has length $1$. The equivalence of the first two assertions is tautological. Suppose that $M$ is simple. Choose $x \in M$, $x \not= 0$. As $M$ is simple we have $M = R \cdot x$. Let $I \subset R$ be the annihilator of $x$, i.e., $I = \{ f \in R \mid fx = 0\} $. The map $R/I \to M$, $f \bmod I \mapsto fx$ is an isomorphism, hence $R/I$ is a simple $R$-module. Since $R/I \not= 0$ we see $I \not= R$. Let $I \subset \mathfrak m$ be a maximal ideal containing $I$. If $I \not= \mathfrak m$, then $\mathfrak m /I \subset R/I$ is a nontrivial submodule contradicting the simplicity of $R/I$. Hence we see $I = \mathfrak m$ as desired. $\square$

Comments (2)

Comment #4887 by Peng DU on

Need assume .

Comment #5164 by on

@#4887: I don't understand your comment. The statement of the lemma seems correct to me.

There are also:

  • 2 comment(s) on Section 10.52: Length

Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.

In order to prevent bots from posting comments, we would like you to prove that you are human. You can do this by filling in the name of the current tag in the following input field. As a reminder, this is tag 00J2. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.