Talk:Krull–Schmidt theorem

Untitled

Shouldn't the chain under the following sentence: "Likewise, one can define the descending chain condition ..." begin with G and not with 1?

I don't think it has to. If you look at the article ascending chain condition, which also defines the descending chain condition, it shows both the ascending and descending chains beginning with an element (as the condition apparently applies to chains other than groups and their subgroups) with subscript 1 and going up by 1 with each succeeding element. Kevin Lamoreau 16:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Move or merge

I moved Krull-Schmidt theorem to this page in accordance with hyphenation policies. Masnevets (talk) 00:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, you didn't do it right, but it's fixed now. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 01:58, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Artinian

I would change the last line of the short section "Krull-Schmidt theorem for modules" to: "In general, the theorem fails if one only assumes that the module is Noetherian or Artinian.^{[2]}"

As a consequence, in the "Notes", it is necessary to write as a second line: "2. ^ Facchini et al. (1995)."

Moreover, it is necessary to move the article "A. Facchini, D. Herbera, L.S.Levy, P. ..., (1995), no. 12, 3587--3592" from the section "Further reading" to the section "References".

Thank you. Serialsam (talk) 08:53, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Remak decomposition into Krull–Schmidt theorem

Stub on a topic closely related to the theorem, which has a significantly more detailed article. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:37, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 11:14, 12 November 2022 (UTC)