26
$\begingroup$

If $R$ is a local ring and $M$ and $N$ are finitely generated $R$-modules such that $M\otimes N=0$ then how does it follow from Nakayama's lemma that either $M=0$ or $N=0$?

This is an exercise in Atiyah and Macdonald. The part I could not show in the hints is $({M{\otimes}_R N)}_{k}=0$ implies $M_{k}{\otimes }_{k} N_{k}=0$, where $k=R/\mathfrak m$ and $\mathfrak m$ is the maximal ideal of $R$.

$\endgroup$
0

1 Answer 1

29
$\begingroup$

From $M\otimes_RN=0$ we get $R/\mathfrak m\otimes_R (M\otimes_R N)=0$. Then it follows that $(R/\mathfrak m\otimes_R M)\otimes_{R/\mathfrak m}(R/\mathfrak m\otimes_R N)=0$. But $R/\mathfrak m\otimes_R M\simeq M/\mathfrak mM$ and similarly $R/\mathfrak m\otimes_R N\simeq N/\mathfrak mN$. Since $M/\mathfrak mM$ and $N/\mathfrak mN$ are $R/\mathfrak m$-vector spaces, it follows that $M/\mathfrak mM=0$ or $N/\mathfrak mN=0$, that is, $M=\mathfrak mM$ or $N=\mathfrak mN$, so by Nakayama we have $M=0$ or $N=0$.

Edit. For proving $$R/\mathfrak m\otimes_R (M\otimes_R N)\simeq(R/\mathfrak m\otimes_R M)\otimes_{R/\mathfrak m}(R/\mathfrak m\otimes_R N)$$ use the associativity and the following property of tensor product: $L\otimes_SS\simeq L$, where in this case $S=R/\mathfrak m$ and $L=R/\mathfrak m\otimes_RM$.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm looking for a counterexample (with $M$ or $N$ not finitely generated) where the implication $M = 0$ or $N = 0$ does not hold. Do you have any ideas? $\endgroup$
    – mathcourse
    Jul 2, 2018 at 21:26

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.