1
$\begingroup$

Let $A$ be a local selfinjective algebra with indecomposable module $M$. Let $N=A \oplus M$.

When there is an indecomposable module $U$ not in $add(N)$, having finite $add(N)$-resolution for some choice of $A$ and $M$?

This is not possible in general due to the following examples:

  • $A=K[x]/(x^n)$ for arbitary $M$

  • $A$ arbitrary and $M$ simple.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

I think that this is possible if and only if $\operatorname{Ext}^1_A(M,M)=0$, and so the question reduces to another question Ext^1 for a local finite dimensional selfinjective algebra that you have asked (and which I don't know the answer to).

If $\operatorname{Ext}^1(M,M)=0$ then take $U=\Omega^{-1}M$.

Conversely, if there is such a $U$, then by truncating the $\text{add}(N)$-resolution (and changing $U$) we can assume the resolution $0\to N_1\to N_0\to U\to 0$ has length $2$ and is minimal.

By minimality, $N_1$ is a direct sum of copies of $M$. By the long exact sequence of $\text{Hom}(M,-)$, the map $\text{Ext}^1(M,N_1)\to\text{Ext}^1(M,N_0)$ is injective.

So, removing the free summands from $N_0$, we have a map $\alpha:N_1\to N'_0$ between direct sums of copies of $M$, not a split injection on any summand of $N_1$, that becomes injective upon applying $\text{Ext}^1(M,-)$. But since all components of $\alpha$ are in the radical of $\text{End}(M)$, this is not possible unless $\text{Ext}^1(M,N_1)=0$.

More generally, if $\alpha: M^m\to M^n$ ($m>0$) is a map between direct sums of copies of $M$ all of whose components are in the radical of $\text{End}(M)$, and $F$ is an additive functor such that $F(\alpha)$ is injective, then $F(M)=0$.

To see this, let $E=\text{End}(M)$, and suppose $\beta: M\to M$ is in the radical of $E$. If $F(M)\neq0$ then choose $x\neq0$ in $\text{rad}^s(E)F(M)$ where $s$ is maximal subject to $\text{rad}^s(E)F(M)\neq0$. Then $F(\beta)(x)=\beta x\in\text{rad}^{s+1}(E)F(M)=0$. Therefore the element of $F(M^n)=F(M)^n$ with all components equal to $x$ is a nonzero element of $\ker(\alpha)$.

[This is the sillier proof of the last claim that I originally posted:

Without loss of generality, $n$ is a multiple of $m$, as otherwise we could add extra summands to $M^n$ until it is. Say $n=dm$. Splitting $M^{dm}$ into $d$ summands, and mapping each to $M^{dm}$ by $\alpha$, we get a map $M^{dm}\to M^{d^2m}$. Continuing in this way, we get a sequence of maps $$M^m\to M^{dm}\to M^{d^2m}\to\dots\to M^{d^km},$$ all of which become injective upon applying $F$. But for $k$ greater than the Loewy length of $\text{End}(M)$ the composition of this sequence of maps is zero, so $F(M^m)=0$.]

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ thanks, can you explain the last step a little more? What is the conenction between Ext^1 and the radical there? $\endgroup$
    – Mare
    Dec 22 '16 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ @Mare That part is nothing specific to $\text{Ext}^1$. I'll add more explanation. $\endgroup$ Dec 23 '16 at 10:16
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, thats some weird looking argument. That generalises a result I have found. Ill write you an email about that. $\endgroup$
    – Mare
    Dec 23 '16 at 10:38
  • $\begingroup$ @Mare Probably the proof I gave makes it look weirder than it really is: I was replying to your comment in a hurry, so was content with any proof that worked. The picture in my head, though, is that $F(M)$ is a module for $E=\text{End}(M)$ and that $F(\alpha)$ maps into the radical (as an $E$-module) of $F(M^n)$. If you fill in the gaps in that argument, I think you'll get something less weird. $\endgroup$ Dec 23 '16 at 16:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Mare I've included a more sensible proof in my answer. $\endgroup$ Dec 24 '16 at 9:04

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.