Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The problem:

Let $K$ and $L$ be subfields of a field $\Omega$, and let $k\subset K\cap L$ be a common subfield.

(a) Show that there exists a unique ring homomorphism $f_{K,L}:K\otimes_k L\to \Omega$ such that $f(x\otimes y) = xy$ for all $x\in K, y\in L$.

(b) Prove that $f_{L,K}$ is injective if and only if $K$ and $L$ are linearly disjoint over $k$.

My problem: I've never really seen tensor products before. It's just being assumed known for this course and it's 3 weeks until our algebra course gets there, so I'm a little hazy, and was hoping I could pass my work over some delectable scrutiny :).

(a) We first prove the map $f_{K,L}$ is a homomorphism of rings. Let $k_1,k_2\in K$ and $\ell_1,\ell_2\in L$. Then we have \begin{align*} f_{K,L}(k_1\otimes \ell_1) + f_{K,L}(k_2\otimes \ell_2) &= k_1\ell_1 + k_2\ell_2\newline &= (k_1\ell_1\ell_2^{-1} + k_2)\ell_2\newline &= (k_1\ell + k_2)\ell_2 \end{align*} where $\ell = \ell_1\ell_2^{-1} \in L$. If $\ell\in K$ (moreover, $\ell \in k$), then we know it has inverse \begin{align*} k_1\ell + k_2 \otimes \ell_2 &= k_1\ell \otimes \ell_2 + k_2\otimes \ell_2\newline &= k_1 \otimes \ell\ell_2 + k_2\otimes \ell_2\newline &= k_1 \otimes \ell_1 + k_2\otimes \ell_2. \end{align*} Hence, $f_{L,K}(k_1\otimes \ell_1 + k_2\otimes\ell_2) = f_{L,K}(k_1\otimes\ell_1) + f_{L,K}(k_2\otimes\ell_2)$.

Now this relies on $\ell$ being in $K$, which I don't see why this should always be true, given the $\ell_i$'s are arbitrary. Another approach, we could look at $$f_{K,L}(k_1\otimes \ell_1 + k_2\otimes \ell_2)$$ instead, but there's no need for $k_1\otimes \ell_1 + k_2\otimes \ell_2$ to be expressible as a simple tensor, so this expression doesn't really make sense given the definition of the map..?

We also have $$ f_{L,K}(k_1\otimes \ell_1)f_{L,K}(k_2\otimes\ell_2) = k_1k_2\ell_1\ell_2 = f_{L,K}(k_1k_2\otimes\ell_1\ell_2)$$ and $$ f_{L,K}(1\otimes 1) = 1.$$ Thus $f_{L,K}$ is a ring homomorphism. Now as $K\otimes_k L$ is completely determined by the simple tensors on bases for $K$ and $L$ (which always exist, if necessary, using the axiom of choice), we have that this homomorphism must be unique by construction.

(b) We know that $K$ and $L$ are not linearly disjoint over $k$ if and only if there exists a finite set of elements of $K$, say $\{a_1,\ldots,a_n\}$ that are linearly independent over $k$, but not over $L$. In other words, there would be elmenets $\{b_1,\ldots,b_n\}$ of $L$ such that $$ a_1b_1 + \ldots + a_nb_n = 0.$$ But this is equivalent to having $$ f_{L,K}(a_1\otimes b_1) + \ldots + f_{L,K}(a_n\otimes b_n) = f_{L,K}(a_1\otimes b_1 + \ldots + a_n\otimes b_n) = 0.$$ So $f_{L,K}$ is injective when $K$ and $L$ are not linearly disjoint if and only if $$ a_1\otimes b_1 = -a_2\otimes b_2 - \ldots - a_n\otimes b_n.$$ By construction, the $a_i$ are linearly independent over $k$, so this dependence must comes from the $b_i$. But, since the left hand side is a simple tensor, and the $a_i$ are linearly independent over $k$, all the $b_i$ must be multiples of some element $b\in L$, and reducing the right hand side via bilinear relations shows $a_1$ is a $k$-linear combination of $a_2,\ldots,a_n$, which is not possible.

Thus $f_{L,K}$ is injective if and only if $L$ and $K$ are linearly disjoint over $k$.

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 0 down vote accepted

Alright, well I spoke to my Algebra prof about it, and it seems quite trivial with the right point of view! (I.e., universal property.)

Namely, consider the map $f:K\times L \to \Omega$ given by $f((k_0,\ell)) = k_0\ell$. Firstly, we show this map is bilinear. Notice $$f((k_1 + k_2,\ell)) = (k_1+k_2)\ell = k_1\ell + k_2\ell = f((k_1,\ell)) + f((k_2,\ell)).$$ Similarly, $$ f((k_0,\ell_1+\ell_2)) = k_0(\ell_1+\ell_2) = k_0\ell_1 + k_0\ell_2 = f((k_0,\ell_1)) + f((k_0,\ell_2)),$$ and lastly, for any $r\in k$, we have $$ f((rk_0,\ell)) = k_0r\ell = f((k_0,r\ell)) = r(k_0\ell) = rf((k_0,\ell)).$$

Now that $f$ is bilinear, we know there must be a unique linear map, $g:K\otimes_k L\to \Omega$ such that $$g(k_0\otimes \ell) = f((k_0,\ell)) = k_0\ell,$$ by the universal property of tensor products. But then we are almost done. By construction, we see $g = f_{L,K}$, and all that's left is to show that $f_{L,K}$ satisfies $$ f_{L,K}(k_1,\ell_1)f_{L,K}(k_2,\ell_2) = f_{L,K}(k_1k_2,\ell_1\ell_2)$$ and $$ f_{L,K}(1_K\otimes 1_L) = 1_\Omega.$$ But these are clear. We have $$ f_{L,K}(k_1\otimes \ell_1)f_{L,K}(k_2\otimes\ell_2) = k_1k_2\ell_1\ell_2 = f_{L,K}(k_1k_2\otimes\ell_1\ell_2)$$ and the latter follows by the definition of $f_{L,K}$, since $1_K = 1_L = 1_\Omega$.

Hence, there is a unique ring homomorphism $f_{L,K}:K\otimes_k L\to \Omega$ such that $f_{L,K}(x\otimes y) = xy$ for all $x\in K$ and $y\in L$. Definitely interesting to see that the hands on approach is so far from the nicest way, given it seemed so easy at first...

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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