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 $A$ be a commutative noetherian ring. Let $M, N$ be $A$-modules, and assume that $M$ is finite over $A$. Let $P$ be a flat $A$-module.

Is it true that there is an isomorphism $\operatorname{Hom}_A(M,N)\otimes_A P \cong \operatorname{Hom}_A(M,N\otimes_A P)$ ?

It appears that it holds at least locally (that is, when $P$ is free). Is it true in general? If so, is there a reference for this?

Thank you!

share|improve this question
    
If you assume $N$ is finite over $A$ rather than $M$, this will be ture. –  Li Zhan Nov 12 '11 at 21:38
    
@LiZhan, this sounds suprising to me. Can you please elaborate? –  the L Nov 12 '11 at 21:44

2 Answers 2

up vote 7 down vote accepted

Yes it is true for general flat modules $P$. We have a canonical map $$ \rho_M : \mathrm{Hom}_A(M, N)\otimes_A P\to \mathrm{Hom}_A(M, N\otimes_A P)$$ (it maps $\varphi \otimes p$ to the map $x\mapsto \varphi(x)\otimes p$). Write $M$ as the quotient of a free finite rank $A$-module $L$. Then we have an exact sequence \begin{equation} 0 \to \mathrm{Hom}_A(M, N)\to \mathrm{Hom}_A(L, N) \to \mathrm{Hom}_A(K, N) \end{equation} where $K$ is the kernel of $L\to M$. Tensoring by $P$, we get $$ 0 \to \mathrm{Hom}_A(M, N)\otimes_A P \to \mathrm{Hom}_A(L, N)\otimes_A P \to \mathrm{Hom}_A(K, N) \otimes_A P. $$ Similarly, replacing $N$ with $N\otimes_A P$, we have an exact sequence $$ 0 \to \mathrm{Hom}_A(M, N\otimes_A P) \to \mathrm{Hom}_A(L, N\otimes_A P) \to \mathrm{Hom}_A(K, N\otimes_A P) $$ and we have a commutative diagram with the above two lines and vertical maps $\rho_M$, $\rho_L$ and $\rho_K$. As $L\simeq A^d$, it is easy to see that $\rho_L$ is an isomorphism. Therefore $\rho_M$ is injective. As $A$ is noetherian, $K$ is finitely generated over $A$, the previous result applies to $K$ and $\rho_K$ is injective. Now coming back to our commutative diagram, it is easy to see that $\rho_M$ is then surjective.

share|improve this answer
2  
I'd like to add that you can get rid of noetherianity of A by insisting M to be of finite presentation. (which is automatic for finite modules over noetherian A) –  Jacob Bell Nov 12 '11 at 23:46
    
@QiL: cf my question here. –  Zhen Lin Nov 13 '11 at 0:49
    
@Zhen Lin: I see that in your question there you gave the right answer to the question here:). I think I can answer your question there. –  user18119 Nov 13 '11 at 14:37

Here is sufficient condition for obtaining the isomorphism you are after.
Let $A$ be an arbitrary commutative ring (not supposed noetherian) and $M, N$ arbitrary modules . We have a canonical morphism
$$ M^*\otimes_A N\to Hom (M,N):\phi \otimes n \mapsto [m\mapsto\phi(m)n] \quad (\star)$$ Proposition ($\star$) is an isomorphism as soon as $M$ is finitely generated projective.
Proof:
It is an isomorphism for $M=A$, then for finitely generated free modules $M=A^r$, and finally for summands of such i.e. finitely generated projectives.

Corollary:
Given three arbitrary modules $M,N,P$ over the commutative ring $A$ , with $M $ finitely generated projective, we have a natural isomorphism
$$Hom_A(M,N)\otimes_A P \cong Hom_A(M,N\otimes_A P)$$
Proof:
Replace all $Hom$'s by $\otimes$'s and use associativity of tensor product.

Edit:
a) The Corollary fails if $P$ is finitely generated but not projective.
Take for example $A=\mathbb Z, N=\mathbb Z, M=P=\mathbb Z/(2)$.
Then the left-hand side in the Corollary is $0$ and the right-hand side is $\mathbb Z/(2)$

b) As QiL pertinently comments, the Corollary also fails if $P$ is not assumed finitely generated.
Take for example $N=A$ and $M=P=$ an arbitrary non finitely generated module.
Then our canonical morphism $u: M^*\otimes M \to Hom(M,M)$ cannot be surjective.
Indeed any element $t\in M^*\otimes M$ gets sent to an endomorphism $u(t)=f:M\to M$ such that $u(M)$ is finitely generated, so that the identity $Id_M$ of $M$ will never be in the image of $u$.

share|improve this answer
    
Nice answer. Compared with OP's hypotheses, $A, M$ are more general, and $P$ is more restrictive. I think it can not hold with $P$ not f.g. (even with $P, M$ free and $N=A$). –  user18119 Nov 12 '11 at 22:49
1  
Your sense of fair-play is heartwarming, @QiL. And I find that infinitely more valuable than any result on projective modules ( or anything else). Also, you are absolutely right about the necessity for $P$ to be finitely generated. I have added an Edit to confirm this. –  Georges Elencwajg Nov 12 '11 at 23:46
    
@Georges: thanks for upvoting and for clearing my doubt: I was genuinely confused. –  Jacob Bell Nov 12 '11 at 23:47
    
Dear @donkey kong: you are welcome. And I forgot to mention that you deserve the upvotes independently of that problem with comments! –  Georges Elencwajg Nov 12 '11 at 23:49
    
an idle comment one could make is that this is the way to show that the identity remains true for arbitrary modules once you derive everything. (I think) –  Jacob Bell Nov 12 '11 at 23:51

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.