Abstract

In two recent papers (9, 10) we answered a question raised in the book by Eklof and Mekler (7, p. 455, Problem 12) under the set theoretical hypothesis of }@1 which holds in many models of set theory, respectively of the special continuum hypothesis (CH). The objects are re∞exive modules over countable principal ideal domains R, which are not flelds. Following H. Bass (1) an R-module G is re∞exive if the evaluation map ae : G i! G ⁄⁄ is an iso- morphism. Here G ⁄ = Hom(G;R) denotes the dual module of G. We proved the existence of re∞exive R-modules G of inflnite rank with G6 G'R, which provide (even essentially indecomposable) counter examples to the question (7, p. 455). Is CH a necessary condition to flnd 'nasty' re∞exive modules? In the last part of this paper we will show (assuming the existence of super- compact cardinals) that large re∞exive modules always have large summands. So at least being essentially indecomposable needs an additional set theoretic assumption. However the assumption need not be CH as shown in the flrst part of this paper. We will use Martin's axiom to flnd re∞exive modules with the above decomposition which are submodules of the Baer-Specker module R ! .

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.