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.

Let $k$ be a commutative ring, let $R$ be a $k$-algebra, a $R$-Bimodule $M$ over $R$ is a $k$-module with two actions of $R$ on $M$, on the left and on the right, the classical example of this being $R$ itself with left and right multiplications as the actions. A $R$-Bimodule $M$ can also be considered a left $R^e = R \otimes R^{op}$-module.

Now consider the $R$-Bimodule $R$, according to this text I'm reading on Hochschild (co)homology the $k$-module $R \otimes R$ is an $R$-Bimodule by multiplication on the left and the right, there's a surjective map $R \otimes R \rightarrow R$ of bimodules and a resolution of $R$ as an $R$-Bimodule:

$\cdots \rightarrow R \otimes R \otimes R \otimes R \rightarrow R \otimes R \otimes R \rightarrow R \otimes R \rightarrow R$.

Just two things the author mentioned and I was curious about:

1 - The bimodule $R \otimes R$ converted to a left $R^e = R \otimes R^{op}$-module is $R \otimes R^{op}$ itself and it is free.

2 - If $R$ is free (or projective) as a $k$-module then $R \otimes R^{\otimes n} \otimes R$ is free (or projective).

I wanted to know:

Why is $R \otimes R$ (and the subsequent modules $R \otimes R^{\otimes n} \otimes R$) free (or projective)? Is that the case too even if $R$ is not free (or projective)?

share|improve this question
    
You mention an author but do not tell us his/her name nor what he has authored! –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Mar 23 '13 at 18:53
    
It's "Hochschild homology" by Clas Lofwall. –  Richard Jennings Mar 24 '13 at 2:26

1 Answer 1

up vote 5 down vote accepted

Suppose $R$ is a $k$-algebra, with $k$ a commutative ring.

  • If $M$ is a $k$-module, we can construct the $k$-module $R\otimes_kM\otimes_kR$, which is automatically an $R$-bimodule or, equivalently, an $R^e$-module.

    If $N$ is an $R$-bimodule, there is a canonical isomorphism $$\hom_{R^e}(R\otimes_kM\otimes_kR, N)\cong\hom_k(M,\bar N)$$ with $\bar N$ the underlying $k$-module of $N$. Since going from $N$ to $\bar N$ is an exact functor, we thus see that the functor $\hom_{R^e}(R\otimes_kM\otimes_kR,\mathord-)$ is exact if $\hom_k(M,\mathord-)$ is exact, that is, $R\otimes_kM\otimes_kR$ is a projective $R$-bimodule if $M$ is a projective $k$-module.

  • If $M$ and $N$ are projective $k$-modules, then $M\otimes_kN$ is projective. Indeed, there exist $k$-modules $M'$ and $N'$ such that $M\oplus M'$ and $N\oplus N'$ are free. One easily checks that the tensor product of free modules is free, so that $(M\oplus M')\otimes_k(N\oplus N')$ is projective, and $M\otimes_kN$ is a direct summand of this (because $\otimes$ is an additive functor).

  • Using this last fact, we see that if $R$ is $k$-projective, then $R^{\otimes n}$ is $k$-projective for all $n\geq1$, and then the first bullet point above implies that $R\otimes R^{\otimes n}\otimes R$ is a projective $R$-module.


Suppose now $R$ is a $k$-algebra, with $k$-commutative, that we have a morphism $\epsilon:R\to k$ of $k$-algebras, and let us suppose that $R$ is not $k$-projective. There exists then a short exact sequence $$0\to M'\to M\to M''\to0\tag{$\star$}$$ of $r$-modules such that the associated sequence $$0\to\hom_k(R,M')\to\hom_k(R,M)\to\hom_k(R,M'')\to0\tag{$\clubsuit$}$$ is not exact.

Now every $k$-module $N$ can be viewed as a $R$-bimodule, defining the left and right actions of $R$ on $N$ by $$r\cdot n\cdot s=\epsilon(rs)n, \qquad\forall r,s\in R,\quad\forall n\in N.$$ This operation of turning $k$-modules into $R$-bimodules is a functor which is obviously exact (because it does not change the underlying abelian groups, say) It allows us to view the short exact seequence $(\star)$ as a sequence of $R$-bimodules.

Now consider the $R$-bimodule $R\otimes R\otimes R$. For every $R$-bimodule $Q$ we have $\hom_{R^e}(R\otimes R\otimes R,Q)\cong\hom_k(R,Q)$, as we observed before. It follows that if we apply the functor $\hom_{R^e}(R\otimes R\otimes R,\mathord-)$ to the short exact sequence $(\star)$ we get exactly the same exact sequence $(\clubsuit)$, which is not exact. It follows that $R\otimes R\otimes R$ is not a projective bimodule

For a concrete example, take $k=\mathbb Z$, $R=\mathbb Z\oplus \mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z$ with multiplication given by $(a,b)(c,d)=(ac,ad+bc)$ and $\epsilon:(a,n)\in R\mapsto a\in k$.

share|improve this answer
    
To construct the example in the 2nd part, I used an augmented algebra (this means, a $k$-algebra $R$ with a morphism $R\to k$ of $k$-algebras) but there exist examples which are not augmented. The augmentation makes it very easy to prove what we want, though. –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Mar 23 '13 at 18:48
    
My argument for the 1st part is in Cartan-Eilenberg, for example (and I guess it was they who realized that projectivity plays a role); as for examples for the 2nd part, I don't recall seeing them anywhere (although everyone doing Hochschild theory knows that $R$ better be projective! :D ) –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Mar 23 '13 at 18:51
    
Thank you, thank you so much! I'm really going to go for broke here and ask: 1 - Where did the isomorhpism $\hom_{R^e}(R \otimes_{k} M \otimes_{k} R, N) ≅ \hom_{k}(M,\bar{N})$ come from? –  Richard Jennings Mar 24 '13 at 2:22
    
2 - Just to be clear you're considering $R \otimes_{k} M \otimes_{k} R$ as a left $R^e$-module in $\hom_{R^e}(R \otimes_{k} M \otimes_{k} R)$? I'm interested in $R \otimes R^{\otimes n} \otimes R$ as a left $R^e$-module, I basically want to know if $R$ projective as a $k$-module implies $R \otimes R^{\otimes n} \otimes R$ as a left $R^e$-module. I ask because I asked on MO if $R$ projective as a $k$-module implied $R$ projective as a $R^e$-module and that's not the case. –  Richard Jennings Mar 24 '13 at 2:23
    
For (1): there is exactly one map that makes sense from $\hom_{R^e}(R\otimes M\otimes R,N)$ to $\hom_k(M,N)$. Show it is an iso. –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Mar 24 '13 at 2:25

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.