A counterexample to two hypotheses on projective and flat modules
Let \(R\) be an associative ring with identity, let \(J(R)\) be the Jacobson radical of \(R\) and let \(P\) be a left \(R\)-module. Let \(\bar R=R/J(R)\) and \(\bar P=P/J(R)P\). If \(R\) is commutative then the following two assertions, denoted by A and B, are true: A. If \(P\) is a finitely generated flat \(R\)-module and if \(\bar P\) is a projective \(\bar R\)-module, then \(P\) is projective. B. If \(P\) is projective and if \(\bar P\) is finitely generated, then \(P\) is finitely generated. It is known that the assertions A and B are equivalent. The author gives an example of semi-local ring \(R\) for which the assertion B is not true.
- Projective modules over the endomorphism ring of a biuniform module.
- Complements in projective modules
- Supplement submodules and a generalization of projective modules.
- \(K_0\) of a semilocal ring
- Weakly based modules over Dedekind domains
- Reconstructing projective modules from its trace ideal.
- On semilocal modules and rings
- Generalizations of projectivity and supplements revisited for superfluous ideals
- Infinitely generated projective modules over pullbacks of rings
- On rings determined by their idempotents and units
- Projective modules are determined by their radical factors.
- Projective modules over the Gerasimov-Sakhaev counterexample.
This page was built for publication: A counterexample to two hypotheses on projective and flat modules
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q1073149)
