Lemma 10.62.1. Let R be a Noetherian ring, and let M be a finite R-module. There exists a filtration by R-submodules
such that each quotient M_ i/M_{i-1} is isomorphic to R/\mathfrak p_ i for some prime ideal \mathfrak p_ i of R.
Lemma 10.62.1. Let R be a Noetherian ring, and let M be a finite R-module. There exists a filtration by R-submodules
such that each quotient M_ i/M_{i-1} is isomorphic to R/\mathfrak p_ i for some prime ideal \mathfrak p_ i of R.
First proof. By Lemma 10.5.4 it suffices to do the case M = R/I for some ideal I. Consider the set S of ideals J such that the lemma does not hold for the module R/J, and order it by inclusion. To arrive at a contradiction, assume that S is not empty. Because R is Noetherian, S has a maximal element J. By definition of S, the ideal J cannot be prime. Pick a, b\in R such that ab \in J, but neither a \in J nor b\in J. Consider the filtration 0 \subset aR/(J \cap aR) \subset R/J. Note that both the submodule aR/(J \cap aR) and the quotient module (R/J)/(aR/(J \cap aR)) are cyclic modules; write them as R/J' and R/J'' so we have a short exact sequence 0 \to R/J' \to R/J \to R/J'' \to 0. The inclusion J \subset J' is strict as b \in J' and the inclusion J \subset J'' is strict as a \in J''. Hence by maximality of J, both R/J' and R/J'' have a filtration as above and hence so does R/J. Contradiction. \square
Second proof. For an R-module M we say P(M) holds if there exists a filtration as in the statement of the lemma. Observe that P is stable under extensions and holds for 0. By Lemma 10.5.4 it suffices to prove P(R/I) holds for every ideal I. If not then because R is Noetherian, there is a maximal counter example J. By Example 10.28.7 and Proposition 10.28.8 the ideal J is prime which is a contradiction. \square
Comments (2)
Comment #6765 by Thomas on
Comment #6930 by Johan on
There are also: