Consider an integral domain $R$, its field of fractions $K$ and an $R-$module $M$ that has at least one linearly independent element, i.e.:

$$ D:=\{ m \in M \mid \forall \ r \in R \backslash\{0\}, \ rm \neq 0\} \neq \emptyset.$$

Then it should be true that $M \otimes_R K \neq 0$, but I don't know how to show it. It seems logical that $d \otimes 1 \neq 0$ for all $d \in D$, but how to prove it? We could find an $R-$bilinear map $ \alpha\colon M \times K \to N$ for some $R-$module $N$ so that $\alpha(d,1) \neq 0$, but I cannot find such an $\alpha$.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The obvious sequence $0\to M_{tor}\to M\to K\otimes_RM$ is exact. $\endgroup$ – Pierre-Yves Gaillard Apr 11 '18 at 16:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Isn't this just a reformulation of what I want to prove? My question could be rephrased as asking why $\ker(f) \subseteq M_{tor}$, where $f \colon M \to K \otimes_R M$ $\endgroup$ – 57Jimmy Apr 12 '18 at 9:28
  • $\begingroup$ I wasn't sure I understood your question. There is a generalization: $m/1=0$ in $S^{-1}M$ iff $sm=0$ for some $s$ in $S$. ($S$ is a multiplicative system. (And $R$ is not necessarily a domain.)) This is in Bourbaki's Commutative Algebra. If you want I can try to understand the proof and describe it in an answer. $\endgroup$ – Pierre-Yves Gaillard Apr 12 '18 at 11:20
  • $\begingroup$ @Pierre-YvesGaillard Thanks, now I've got it. The key fact I was missing is that we can work directly with the localization. Or we can work with the tensor product and use the bilinear map to the localization. Thanks anyway :) $\endgroup$ – 57Jimmy Apr 12 '18 at 13:09
  • $\begingroup$ The fact that $R$ is a domain makes sure that $S=R \backslash \{0\}$ is multiplicatively closed. $\endgroup$ – 57Jimmy Apr 12 '18 at 13:21

Here is a general outline:

The first thing to note is that $$K \otimes_R M \cong K \otimes M/M_{tor},$$

where $M_{tor}$ is the torsion submodule of $M$ (this is not hard to show). In your case we have that $M_{tor} \neq M$, so we can reduce to the case where $M$ is torsion-free.

Then the idea is, as you have said yourself, to construct a bilinear map from $K \times M$ to a nonzero $R$-module. To do this, we want to take a look at formal products of the type $x \cdot m$ with $x \in K$ and $m \in M$. Formally, define on $K \times M$ an equivalence relation by

$$(\frac{a}{b}, m) \sim (\frac{c}{d},n) \iff adm = bcn \in M.$$

To show that this is indeed well-defined and an equivalence relation, you need that $M$ is torsion-free. Once you have this, consider $S := K \times M / \sim$ and we have a scalar multiplication $x \cdot m := (x, m)$ as above. Define addition on it in the canonical way and we obtain that $S$ is a $K$-vector space, in particular $R$-module. Check easily that the canonical map $M \to S$ is injective, hence $S \neq 0$ as $M \neq 0$. Then get a bilinear map $K \times M \to S, (x, m) \mapsto x \cdot m$, which can easily be shown to be surjective, and you are done.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks a lot! Is there a general name for the construction of $S$ or is it just an ad hoc construction? $\endgroup$ – 57Jimmy Apr 12 '18 at 9:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Wait a second: isn't $S$ just the localization of $M$ at $R \backslash \{0\}$? $\endgroup$ – 57Jimmy Apr 12 '18 at 10:39
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, and if you are aware of the relation $S^{-1}M \cong M \otimes_R S^{-1}R$ for localizations, then a one-line argument would be: $K \otimes_R M \cong M_{(0)}$, which is not zero as you have elements that aren't torsion. $\endgroup$ – johnnycrab Apr 12 '18 at 14:04
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, got that. Thanks! $\endgroup$ – 57Jimmy Apr 12 '18 at 14:37

Let $m$ denote your non-torsion element. Because $K$ is a flat $R$-module (as it is a localization) the following sequence is exact: $$0\rightarrow \overbrace{mR\otimes_RK}^{K} \rightarrow M\otimes_R K$$


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.