Take the 2-minute tour ×
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.

I think I'm missing something important about tensor products as I look over this question from an old qualifying exam:

Let $R$ be a principal ideal domain and let $A$ and $B$ be finitely generated $R$-modules. Show that if $a\in A$ and $b\in B$ are not torsion elements, then $a\otimes b \neq 0$ in $A\otimes_R B$.

I tried using the definition of tensor products, but did not have any luck. Any suggestions to solve this problem would be appreciated!

share|improve this question
    
Quite untrue, if you take $A=B=R=\mathbb{Z}$.This is because $A \otimes B$ is trivial, right? Or am I missing something? –  Galois Group Dec 30 '12 at 20:09
1  
@FortuonPaendrag in your case $A \otimes_R B = \mathbb Z \otimes_\mathbb{Z} \mathbb Z = \mathbb Z$ but this doesn't seem trivial to me and more important for each pair of elements $a,b \in \mathbb Z$ you get that $a \otimes b = ab$ which is not $0$. –  Giorgio Mossa Dec 30 '12 at 20:11
    
of course we suppose that $a,b$ as above must be not torsion element, i.e. both non null. :) –  Giorgio Mossa Dec 30 '12 at 20:22

1 Answer 1

up vote 0 down vote accepted

Note. I've changed $A$ by $M$ and $B$ by $N$.

If $M$ and $N$ are free, we are done.

Now we reduce the general case to the free case. We have the following isomorphism: $$M/t(M)\otimes_R N/t(N)\simeq M\otimes_RN/S,$$ where $S$ is the submodule of $M\otimes_R N$ generated by the tensor monomials $x\otimes y$ with $x\in t(M)$ and $y\in t(N)$. (This isomorphism is canonical and sends $\bar x\otimes \bar y\in M/t(M)\otimes_R N/t(N)$ to $\widehat{x\otimes y}\in M\otimes_RN/S$.) If $a\otimes b=0$, then its residue class in $M\otimes_RN/S$ is also $0$. This shows that $\bar a\otimes\bar b=0$ in $M/t(M)\otimes_R N/t(N)$. But $\bar a\neq 0$ and $\bar b\neq 0$ and $M/t(M)$ and $N/t(N)$ are free, so...

share|improve this answer
    
Your answer makes sense. I didn't occur to me to look at the isomorphism you described. Thanks! –  phenomenalwoman4 Dec 31 '12 at 15:35

Your Answer

 
discard

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.