J. P. Jans is kind enough to inform me a gap of Necessity proof in my paper appearing in these Proceedings, 13 (1962), 701-703. In this note I shall report Theorem 2 in the paper is however valid by a slight alteration of the proof. In p. 702, the argument between line 9 and line 18 should be replaced by the following: Let ex be a primitive idempotent of A such that 1(N)exXO. Then there exists an element xEL such that 1(N)exx#O for L is faithful. Denote x by axe. + axex, a., ax E A. Since ex( ,,,x age.) C N, I(N)exx = I(N)exaxex and we have 1(N)e,xLex#0. Here, suppose Lex #Aex. Then LexCNex for Nex is the unique maximal left ideal of Aex and it follows 1(N)exLexC1(N)N = 0. But this is a contradiction. Thus we obtain Lex=Aex. Now, let 0 be the epimorphism: L-*Lex(=Aex), defined by 0(x) =xex for all xEL. Since Lex is projective, we have a direct sum decomposition of L:L>DLx', where LxAex. Then as Hom(L, K) is monomorphic to P and Hom(Aex, K) is injective, Hom(Aex, K) is isomorphic to a direct summand of P. Thus if we denote by A the set of all indices X such that 1(N)ex X 0, Hom(:XeA Aex, K) is projective.
Read full abstract