[Merged by Bors] - feat: variations of Submodule.disjoint_map with weaker hypotheses#41511
[Merged by Bors] - feat: variations of Submodule.disjoint_map with weaker hypotheses#41511ADedecker wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
ADedecker
commented
Jul 8, 2026
| /-- Let `f : M →ₗ N`. Assume that `p` and `q` are disjoint submodules of `M`, | ||
| and that the kernel of `f` "decomposes well" wrt. `p` and `q`, in the sense that | ||
| `f.ker = (f.ker ⊓ p) ⊔ (f.ker ⊓ q)`. Then `map f p` and `map f q` are disjoint. -/ | ||
| lemma disjoint_map_of_ker_le_inf_sup {f : M →ₛₗ[τ₁₂] M₂} {p q : Submodule R M} | ||
| (hpq : Disjoint p q) (hker : f.ker ≤ (f.ker ⊓ p) ⊔ (f.ker ⊓ q)) : | ||
| Disjoint (p.map f) (q.map f) := by |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This one is maybe overkill (and I don't need it), but I had fun figuring out the proof without picking elements.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Doesn't hker simplify with inf_sup_left to something like f.ker ≤ p ⊓ q or something?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
p ⊓ q is trivial thanks to hpq, so I assume you mean f.ker ≤ p ⊔ q ? In any case, the point is that the lattice of submodules is not distributive, so inf_sup_left does not apply (for a counterexample you can take three different lines in the plane), and what I'm asking is precisely that the kernel "distributes well" on p ⊔ q. In fact I should probably be able to weaken it a bit more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This sent me into a rabbit hole about lattice theory, which you can follow at https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/116395-maths/topic/A.20conjecture.20about.20modular.20lattices/near/609407757. I'll just remove this statement for now, I'll add it together with the required abstract nonsense.
PR summary b90eaaf837Import changes for modified filesNo significant changes to the import graph Import changes for all files
|
|
bors r+ |
|
Pull request successfully merged into master. Build succeeded: |