1
$\begingroup$

Let $A_0,\dots,A_n$ be algebras over some fixed commutative ring $k$ (you may assume $k=\mathbb{Z}$ for simplicity). Let $M_i$ be an $(A_{i-1},A_i)$-bimodule for $i=1,\dots,n$. A multilinear map from $M_0\times\dots\times M_n$ (identifying a bimodule with its underlying set) to an $(A_0,A_n)$-bimodule $T$ is a map which is $k$-linear in every argument and such that $\alpha f(m_0,\dots,m_n)=f(\alpha m_0,m_1,\dots,m_n)$, $f(m_0,\dots,m_{i-1}\alpha,m_i,\dots,m_n)=f(m_0,\dots,m_i,\alpha m_{i+1},\dots,m_n)$ and $f(m_0,\dots,m_n\alpha)=f(m_0,\dots,m_n)\alpha$ whenever it makes sense (with a slight variation in the $n=0$ case).

Define the tensor product $M_1\otimes\dots\otimes M_n$ as an $(A_0,A_n)$-bimodule with a multilinear map into it, such that every other multilinear map into a bimodule $T$ factors uniquely $A_0-A_n$-linear over it.

One sees that for $n=0$ the tensor product is $A_0$ equipped with the obvious bimodule structure and for $n=1$ the tensor product ist $M_1$.

Is there an obvious way to see that $(M_1\otimes M_2)\otimes M_3\cong M_1\otimes M_2\otimes M_3$?

Of course, one needs an isomorphism of functors $\operatorname{Mult}(M_1\otimes M_2,M_3;-)\cong\operatorname{Mult}(M_1,M_2,M_3;-)$. The morphism $\to$ is easy, but starting from a multilinear map $M_1\times M_2\times M_3\longrightarrow T$, how do i get a multilinear map $M_1\otimes M_2\times M_3\longrightarrow T$?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Associativity for three factors is standard and essentially obvious; the general case follows by induction. $\endgroup$ – egreg Apr 25 '16 at 15:58
0
$\begingroup$

Given a trilinear map $\mu:M_1\times M_2\times M_3\to T$, for each $m_3\in M_3$ the map $(m_1,m_2)\mapsto \mu(m_1,m_2,m_3)$ is an $(A_0,A_1,k)$-bilinear map $M_1\times M_2\to T$. There is thus a unique map $\nu:(M_1\otimes_{A_1} M_2)\times M_3\to T$ such that $\nu(m_1\otimes m_2,m_3)=\mu(m_1,m_2,m_3)$ and $\nu$ is $A_0$-linear in the first variable. It is straightforward to check that $\nu$ is also $A_2$-balanced and $A_3$-linear in the second variable (since $\mu$ is $A_2$-balanced and $A_3$-linear), and so $\nu$ is $(A_0,A_2,A_3)$-bilinear. It is now straightforward to see that this construction is inverse to the obvious construction taking a bilinear map $(M_1\otimes_{A_1} M_2)\times M_3\to T$ to a trilinear map $M_1\times M_2\times M_3\to T$ (namely, sending $\nu$ to the map $\mu(m_1,m_2,m_3)=\nu(m_1\otimes m_2,m_3)$).

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you! But how can there be a bilinear map $M_1\times M_2\to T$, if $T$ is a $(A_0,A_3)$-module and $M_2$ is a $(A_1,A_2)$-bimodule? $\endgroup$ – user114885 Apr 25 '16 at 18:07
  • $\begingroup$ I have edited to clarify exactly what sort of linearity I am talking about at each step. $\endgroup$ – Eric Wofsey Apr 25 '16 at 18:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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