An analogous question regarding free groups can be found here.

INTUITION: A free $R$-algebra on indeterminates $X_1,\ldots,X_n$ is the noncommutative analogue of the polynomial ring $R[X_1,\ldots,X_n]$, which is a free commutative $R$-algebra on $X_1,\ldots,X_n$.

DEFINITIONS: For a commutative ring $R$ with $1_R$ and any set $X\!=\!\{X_i;\:i\!\in\!I\}$, the free (associative) unital $R$-algebra on $X$, denoted $R\langle X\rangle\!=\!R\langle X\,|\,\emptyset\rangle$, is the free $R$-module with basis the free monoid on $X$ of all (noncommutative) words (possibly empty) over $X$. Thus every element of $R\langle X\rangle$ has the form $$\sum r_iX_{j_1}\ldots X_{j_i}$$ and is called a noncommutative polynomial, where $r_i\!\in\!R$ (only finitely many non-zero) and $X_{j_1},\ldots,X_{j_i}\!\in\!X$ and $j_i\!\in\!\mathbb{N}_0$ (when $j_i\!=\!0$, the word $X_{j_1}\ldots X_{j_i}$ is empty, denoted with $1$); furthermore, $X$ is called the alphabet, $X_i$ are called indeterminates or variables or letters or generators, $X_{j_1}\ldots X_{j_i}$ are called monomials or words, and $r_i$ are coefficients. Multiplication is defined as follows: the product of two basis elements (monomials) is their concatenation, i.e. $$(X_{i_1}\!\ldots X_{i_m}) \cdot (X_{j_1}\!\ldots X_{j_n}) := X_{i_1}\!\ldots X_{i_m}X_{j_1}\!\ldots X_{j_n};$$ the product of any two elements (polynomials) just takes into account that $\cdot$ must be $R$-bilinear. For example, for $\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta\!\in\!R$ we have $(\alpha X_1X_2^2\!+\!\beta X_2X_3)\cdot(\gamma X_3\!+\!\delta X_2^3X_3X_1)$ $=$ $\alpha\gamma X_1X_2^2X_3+\alpha\delta X_1X_2^5X_3X_1+\beta\gamma X_2X_3^2+\beta\delta X_2X_3X_2^3X_3X_1$. When $|X|\!=\!n\!<\!\infty$, this algebra is denoted $R\langle X_1,\ldots,X_n\rangle$.

In short, for any set $X$, the free unital $R$-algebra on $X$ is $$R\langle X\rangle:=\bigoplus_{w\in X^\ast}Rw$$ with the $R$-bilinear multiplication that is concatenation on monomials/words, where $X^\ast$ is the free monoid on $X$ and $Rw\!=\!\{rw;\:r\!\in\!R\}$ is the formal free module on $w$, i.e. $rw\!=\!r'w\Leftrightarrow r\!=\!r'$. The empty word/monomial of $X^\ast$ is the identity $1$ of $R\langle X\rangle$. The map $i\!:X\!\rightarrow\!R\langle X\rangle$, $X_i\!\mapsto\!X_i$ is called the canonical injection. If we replace $X^\ast$ with $X^+$ (the free semigroup on $X$, i.e. $X^\ast$ without the empty word) in the above construction, we create the free nonunital $R$-algebra on $X$: $R\langle X\rangle^+\!=\!R\langle X\,|\,\emptyset\rangle^+$.

DEFINITIONS: For $S\!\subseteq\!R\langle X\rangle$, an algebra presentation, denoted $R\langle X|S\rangle$, is the $R$-algebra $R\langle X\rangle/\langle\!\langle S\rangle\!\rangle$, where $\langle\!\langle S\rangle\!\rangle$ denotes the algebra ideal, generated by $S$. The notation $\langle X\,|\,p_i\!=\!p'_i;\, i\!\in\!I\rangle$ simply means $\langle X|p_i-p'_i; i\!\in\!I\rangle$. Any $R\langle X|S\rangle$ is finitely generated / finitely related / a finite presentation if $X$ is finite / $S$ is finite / $X$ and $S$ are finite. An arbitrary (unital) $R$-algebra $A$ is finitely generated / finitely related / finitely presented if it has a presentation $R\langle X|S\rangle\!\cong\!A$ that is finitely generated / finitely related / finite. Elements of $S$ are relations or relators. These notions are analogously defined for the free nonunital $R$-algebra on $X$; the presentation is then denoted $R\langle X|S\rangle^+$.

COMMENT: Rings are $\mathbb{Z}$-algebras, so the above construction gives us the free ring on $X$, namely $\mathbb{Z}\langle X\rangle^+$, and free unital ring on $X$, namely $\mathbb{Z}\langle X\rangle$.

PROPOSITION (universal property): Let $i\!:X\!\rightarrow\!R\langle X\rangle$ be the canonical injection. For any unital $R$-algebra $A$ and any map $f\!:X\!\rightarrow\!A$, there exists a unique unital algebra homomorphism $\overline{f}\!:R\langle X\rangle\!\rightarrow\!A$ such that $f\!=\!\overline{f}\!\circ\!i$, namely $\overline{f}(\sum r_iX_{j_1}\ldots X_{j_i})=\sum r_if(X_{j_1})\cdot\ldots\cdot f(X_{j_i})$.

enter image description here

Proof: $\overline{f}$ must be a homomorphism and $f\!=\!\overline{f}\!\circ\!i$, so $\overline{f}(\sum r_iX_{j_1}\!\ldots\!X_{j_i}\!)\!=\!\sum r_if(X_{j_1}\!)\!\cdot\ldots\!\cdot\!f(X_{j_i}\!)$ must be satisfied, hence uniqueness of $\overline{f}$. It is also evident that such $\overline{f}$ is a unital algebra homomorphism. To prove it is well defined, assume $\sum r_iX_{j_1}\ldots X_{j_i}\!=\!0$. By definition, $R\langle X\rangle$ is a free module on $X^\ast$, thus $r_i\!=\!0$. Therefore $\overline{f}(0)\!=\!0$, and $\overline{f}$ is well defined. $\blacksquare$

COMMENT: by the universal property, $R\langle X\rangle$ is the free object on $X$ in the category of unital $R$-algebras.

PROPOSITION: Every unital $R$-algebra $A$ has a presentation, i.e. $\forall A\:\exists X,S\!:\: A\!\cong\!R\langle X|S\rangle$.

Proof: Let $A$ be generated by $X\!\subseteq\!A$ ($X:=A$ suffices) and let $f\!:X\!\hookrightarrow\!A$ be the inclusion. By the universal property, $\exists!$ algebra homomorphism $\overline{f}\!:R\langle X\rangle\!\rightarrow\!A$ that extends $f$. We have $X\!\subseteq\!\mathrm{Im}\,\overline{f}$, so $\overline{f}$ is surjective. Therefore $A\!\cong\!R\langle X\rangle/\mathrm{Ker}\,\overline{f}\!=\!R\langle X| \mathrm{Ker}\,\overline{f}\rangle$. $\blacksquare$

QUESTION: how can I prove the statement $R\langle X\rangle\!\cong\!R\langle Y\rangle\:\Rightarrow\:|X|\!=\!|Y|$ ?

I've thought of using the following theorem from Grillet's Abstract algebra (page 333): enter image description here However, this just gives us $|X^\ast|\!=\!|Y^\ast|$. I've also thought of abelianising both algebras, so we get $R[X]\!\cong\!R[Y]$. But I'm not sure how to continue from here.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ If $R$ has finite Krull dimension, then abelianization works: $\operatorname{Ab}(R\langle X \rangle)\cong R[X]$ and $\dim R[X]=\dim R + |X|$. However, if $R$ is a polynomial ring in countably many variables, $R[X]\cong R$ whenever $|X|<\infty$, and so this argument cannot work in general. Similarly, it is important that $R$ is commutative, as the proposition is false when $R$ is a free associative algebra in countably many variables. $\endgroup$
    – Aaron
    Sep 7 '11 at 15:10
  • $\begingroup$ Also I don't know if you want to consider this a counterexample or not, but if $R$ is a polynomial ring in countably many variables, then $R\langle\emptyset\rangle=R\cong R[x]\cong R\langle\{x\}\rangle$ and $|\emptyset|\neq |\{x\}|$. Thus, you need to add the condition that $X\neq \emptyset$. Where is the problem coming from? Do you know it to be true without any conditions on $R$? $\endgroup$
    – Aaron
    Sep 7 '11 at 16:34
  • $\begingroup$ @Aaron: No, I don't know it to be true. I'm trying to establish some basic properties of free algebras myself, inspired by the properties of free groups. I thought this would be true, but guess I was wrong; however, I'm still looking for sufficient conditions. Is $R$ being a field one of them? (I'm not very familiar with Commutative Algebra) $\endgroup$
    – Leo
    Sep 7 '11 at 16:44
  • $\begingroup$ As I said in my comment, it is enough to assume that $R$ has finite Krull dimension. Thus, if $R$ is finitely generated (over $\mathbb Z$ or a field), this will work. However, I suspect that things work in much greater generality. For example, if we add that the isomorphism is of $R$-algebras (and not just rings), that gets rid of the counterexample I mentioned. It also allows you to talk about "minimum number of generators", which I think is likely to be $|X|$. However, I don't have a good proof at the moment. $\endgroup$
    – Aaron
    Sep 7 '11 at 17:13
  • $\begingroup$ @Aaron: "...if we add that the isomorphism is of R-algebras (and not just rings), that gets rid of the counterexample I mentioned...". Umm, $R$ is from the start a commutative unital ring, $R\langle X\rangle$ is an $R$-algebra, and $R\langle X\rangle\cong R\langle Y\rangle$ is an $R$-algebra isomorphism. $\endgroup$
    – Leo
    Sep 7 '11 at 17:43

Assuming that $R$ is commutative, then we can make the following statements.

  1. If $R\langle X\rangle\cong R\langle Y\rangle$ as $R$-algebras, then $\vert X\vert = \vert Y\vert$.
  2. If $R\langle X\rangle\cong R\langle Y\rangle$ as rings then either $\vert X\vert = \vert Y\vert$ or $\{\vert X\vert,\vert Y\vert\}=\{0,1\}$.

So, if we only assume that they are isomorphic as rings then we still get the desired conclusion with the exception of the counterexample mentioned by Aaron.

Let's start by proving 1. Let $f\colon R\langle X\rangle\to R$ be any $R$-algebra homomorphism and $K={\rm ker}(f)=f^{-1}(0)$. This is a two sided ideal. Also, define $R^{(X)}$ to be the free $R$-module on $X$. Note that the quotient $K/K^2$ is an $R$-algebra. In fact, I'll show that $R^{(X)}\cong K/K^2$. So, if we have an $R$-algebra isomorphism $\theta\colon R\langle Y\rangle\to R\langle X\rangle$ then $$ R^{(X)}\cong K/K^2\cong\theta^{-1}(K)\big/\theta^{-1}(K)^2={\rm ker}(f\circ\theta)\big/{\rm ker}(f\circ\theta)^2\cong R^{(Y)}. $$ As noted in the question, free $R$-modules have bases of the same cardinality, so $\vert X\vert=\vert Y\vert$.

To construct an isomorphism from $R^{(X)}$ to $K/K^2$, first note that $f$ takes $X_i\in X$ to some element $x_i\in R$. Then (by universality), there is an isomorphism $u\colon R\langle X\rangle\to R\langle X\rangle$ taking $X_i$ to $X_i-x_i$. By composing with $u$, we can suppose that $f(X_i)=0$. Then, $K$ is the linear combinations of monomials without constant term, and $K^2$ is the linear span of monomials of degree at least 2. So, as an $R$-module, $K=K_1\oplus K^2$ where $K_1$ is the span of the degree 1 monomials, which is isomorphic to $R^{(X)}$. Then, $K/K^2\cong K_1\cong R^{(X)}$.

Comparing with Aaron's answer, this proof is very similar to his except that he works in the dual space. The $R$-derivations on $R\langle X\rangle$ is naturally isomorphic to the space of $R$-module homomorphisms from $K/K^2$ to $R$. So, by what I have just said above, $$ {\rm Der}_R(R\langle X\rangle,R)\cong {\rm Hom}_R(K/K^2,R)\cong{\rm Hom}_R(R^{(X)},R)\cong R^{\vert X\vert}. $$By passing to the dual space we pass from the direct sum $R^{(X)}$ to the direct product $R^{\vert X\vert}$ which, in the infinite case loses a bit of information about the cardinality of $X$ (without making set-theoretic assumptions beyond ZFC).

Finally, we can deal with case 2 above where it is only assumed that they are isomorphic as rings. Note that if $\vert X\vert > 1$ then $X_1X_2\not=X_2X_1$, so $R\langle X\rangle$ is not commutative, and it is commutative if $\vert X\vert\le1$.

Let's deal with the $\vert X\vert > 1$ case first. Then $R\langle X\rangle$ is noncommutative with $R$ being its center. $R\langle Y\rangle$ is also noncommutative with center $R$. So, a ring isomorphism $f\colon R\langle X\rangle\to R\langle Y\rangle$ restricts to an isomorphism of the centers of the rings and, hence, restricts to an isomorphism of $R$. By composing with an isomorphism $R\langle Y\rangle\to R\langle Y\rangle$ of $R$ (fixing the $Y_i$), we can reduce to the case that $f$ fixes $R$. So, $f$ is an $R$-algebra homomorphism, and we have reduced to case 1.

Finally, suppose that $\vert X\vert\le1$. Then $R\langle X\rangle$ is commutative, so $R\langle Y\rangle$ is commutative and $\vert Y\vert\le 1$. The only situation where $\vert X\vert\not=\vert Y\vert$ is when $\{\vert X\vert,\vert Y\vert\}$ equals $\{0,1\}$. This situation can occur, as mentioned by Aaron in the comment, so is the only possible exception.

Here's another quite neat way of looking at the proof of 1. If $A$ is an $R$-algebra and $M$ is an $A$-bimodule then a derivation is a homomorphism (as $R$-modules) $D\colon A\to M$ satisfying $D(ab)=(Da)b+a(Db)$. The space of Kähler differentials $\Omega_{A/R}$ is an $A$-bimodule with derivation $d\colon A\to \Omega_{A/R}$ satisfying the following universal property: if $D\colon A\to M$ is any other derivation then there is a unique $A$-bimodule homomorphism $\theta\colon\Omega_{A/R}\to M$ satisfying $D=f\circ d$. The universal property ensures that $d\colon A\to \Omega_{A/R}$ is uniquely defined up to isomorphism. It can be seen that the Kähler differentials $\Omega_{R\langle X\rangle/R}$ is just the free $R\langle X\rangle$ bimodule generated by terms $dX_i$ for $X_i\in X$. Then any $R$-algebra homomorphism $f\colon R\langle X\rangle\to R$ allows $R$ to be viewed as an $R\langle X\rangle$-bimodule, and we can form the (bimodule) tensor product $R\otimes_{R\langle X\rangle}\Omega_{R\langle X\rangle/R}$. By the universal property of $R\langle X\rangle$, all homomorphisms to $R$ are equivalent up to an isomorphism of $R\langle X\rangle$ so, up to isomorphism the tensor product is independent of the choice of $f$. In fact, the homomorphism $R\langle X\rangle\to R\otimes\Omega_{R\langle X\rangle/R}$ takes $X_i$ to $f(X_i)\in R$ so, considered as an $R$-module, the tensor product is just the free module over $R$ generated by terms $dX_i$. So, $$ R\otimes_{R\langle X\rangle}\Omega_{R\langle X\rangle/R}\cong R^{(X)} $$ regardless of the choice of $f$. This determines $\vert X\vert$ in terms of the $R$-algebra structure of $R\langle X\rangle$. We can regard the homomorphism $f$ as a generalized point ${\rm Spec}(R)\to{\rm Spec}(R\langle X\rangle)$ (although these definitions only really hold in the commutative case). The tensor product is then restricting the space of Kähler differentials to the point, which gives a free module generated by terms $dX_i$, just like in the commutative case. This is related to $K/K^2$ above because the homomorphism taking $a\in R\langle X\rangle$ to $(a-f(a)1)+K^2\in K/K^2$ is a derivation, giving a natural homomorphism $\Omega_{R\langle X\rangle/R}\to K/K^2$, and tensoring with $R$ turns it into an isomorphism. Using the universal property of Kähler differentials we also relate to Aaron's method, $$ \begin{align} {\rm Der}_R(R\langle X\rangle,R)&\cong{\rm Hom}_{R\langle X\rangle}(\Omega_{R\langle X\rangle/R},R)\cong{\rm Hom}_R(R\otimes\Omega_{R\langle X\rangle/R},R)\\&\cong{\rm Hom}_R(R^{(X)},R)\cong R^{\vert X\vert}. \end{align} $$

  • $\begingroup$ Apologies for the late reply. In 1., $f$ must be a specific homomorphisms in order for $R^{(X)}\!\cong\!K/K^2$ to hold, namely $f(X_i)\!=\!0,f(1)\!=\!1$, yes? Why then does the last $\cong$ in $R^{(X)}$ $\cong$ $K/K^2$ $\cong$ $\theta^{−1}(K)/\theta^{−1}(K)^2$ $=$ $\mathrm{ker}(f\!\circ\!\theta)/\mathrm{ker}(f\!\circ\!θ)^2$ $\cong$ $R^{(Y)}$ hold? When you composed $f$ with $u$, you have changed $K$ to $\tilde{K}\!=\!\mathrm{ker}(f\!\circ\!u)$, so only $\tilde{K}/\tilde{K}^2\!\cong\!R^{(X)}$ holds. $\endgroup$
    – Leo
    Sep 16 '11 at 0:59
  • $\begingroup$ The problem is that the isomorphism $R\langle Y\rangle\!\rightarrow\!R\langle X\rangle$ doesn't necessarily map a monomial to a monomial, but to a sum of monomials. $\endgroup$
    – Leo
    Sep 16 '11 at 1:15
  • $\begingroup$ @Leon: in answer to your first comment, no, $f$ need not be a specific homomorphism. You do need $f(1)=1$, but that's implicit in the definition of a homomorphism of (unitial) algebras. You do not need $f(X_i)=0$. The point is that, up to isomorphism, the quotient described does not depend on the $f$ chosen. So it is enough to consider that specific case. Then, in answer to your second comment, no it is not a problem, it is not assumed that the isomorphism takes monomials to monomials. $\endgroup$ Sep 16 '11 at 14:27
  • $\begingroup$ @Lowther: thank you very much for a nice solution and clarification. Is my reformulation of it below actually what you had in mind? $\endgroup$
    – Leo
    Sep 16 '11 at 16:07
  • $\begingroup$ @Leon: yes it is. $\endgroup$ Sep 16 '11 at 17:57

We always have that $R\langle X \rangle \cong R \langle Y \rangle$ implies $|X|=|Y|$, assuming that the map $R\langle X \rangle \cong R \langle Y \rangle$ is a map of $R$-algebras.

Given an $R$-algebra $S$ and an $S$-bimodule $M$, a map $\delta:S\to M$ is an $R$-derivation if it is $R$-linear and $\delta(st)=\delta(s)t+s\delta(t)$. For example, if $S=R[x]$, then $f\mapsto \frac{df}{dx}$ is an $R$ derivation from $S$ to itself. We let $\operatorname{Der}_R(S,M)$ denote the collection of all $R$ derivations. This will be an $R$-module. Note that we need $R$ to be commutative and to lie in the center of $S$, or we run into some minor technical difficulties.

Let us view $R\langle X \rangle$ as an augmented $R$-algebra, that is, we fix a map of $R$ algebras $\epsilon:R\langle X \rangle\to R$. In general, such a map is given by selecting $n$ elements $r_1, \ldots r_n\in R$ and taking the algebra map satisfying $x_i\mapsto r_i$. This allows us to view $R$ as an $R\langle X \rangle$-bimodule. We wish to consider $N=\operatorname{Der}_R(R\langle X \rangle,R)$. We assert the following proposition.

Proposition: There is an isomorphism of $R$-modules $\operatorname{Der}_R(R\langle X \rangle,R)\cong R^{|X|}$.

sketch of proof: If $S$ is generated as an $R$-algebra by a collection of generators $\{x_i\}$, then $\delta\in \operatorname{Der}_R(S,M)$ is determined completely by $\delta(x_i)$. Thus an $R$ derivation $\delta$ of $R\langle X \rangle$ is determined by $\delta(x_i)$ and we have a map $\operatorname{Der}_R(R\langle X \rangle,M)\to M^{|X|}$. This map is an isomorphism (exercise!). Now take $M=R$.

With the proposition in hand, using your result that the rank of a free module is well defined, we easily have that $$R\langle X \rangle \cong R\langle Y \rangle \Leftrightarrow R^{|X|}\cong R^{|Y|} \Leftrightarrow |X|=|Y|.$$

N.B. While we needed to choose an augmentation, and our isomorphism $\operatorname{Der}_R(R\langle X \rangle,R)\cong R^{|X|}$ depended on the augementation, we see that this choice was inconsequential to the final result.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This works for the finite case, but for the infinite case I don't think you have $R^{\vert X\vert}\cong R^{\vert Y\vert}$ implies $\vert X\vert = \vert Y\vert$ without assuming something like GCH. $\endgroup$ Sep 7 '11 at 22:40
  • $\begingroup$ @George Lowther: I agree that this proof likely only holds when things are finite (and in the infinite case, $R^{|X|}$ is meant to be a direct product and not a direct sum, so even if Leon's cited proposition holds in an infinite case, the cardinality of a basis would NOT be sufficient to prove the result). I see how we might need something like GCH if we don't make use of the $R$-module structure. However, might there be a way to make use of the structure without getting into set theoretic issues? Or a more direct proof not making use of $R^{|X|}$? $\endgroup$
    – Aaron
    Sep 7 '11 at 23:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Aaron: I added my own answer which uses the direct sum, so guarantees that $\vert X\vert=\vert Y\vert$. Your method is essentially dual to mine (the space of derivations is dual to the space of `differential forms'). $\endgroup$ Sep 8 '11 at 0:24
  • $\begingroup$ @Aaron: thank you for your good idea :) $\endgroup$
    – Leo
    Sep 16 '11 at 16:09

This is just a clarification (at least for me) of Lowther's answer (from what I understand), in case someone beside me needs an additional/easier/pedestrian explanation.

Proposition: $R\langle X\rangle\!\cong\!R\langle Y\rangle\:\Leftrightarrow\:|X|\!=\!|Y|$

Proof: $(\Leftarrow)$: If $f\!:X\rightarrow Y$ is the bijection, then $\overline{f}(\sum r_iX_{j_1}\ldots X_{j_i}):=\sum r_if(X_{j_1})\ldots f(X_{j_i})$ is the isomorphism.

$(\Rightarrow)\!:$ Let $\varphi\!:\!R\langle Y\rangle\!\rightarrow\!R\langle X\rangle$ be the unital algebra isomorphism and via universal property define $f\!:\!R\langle X\rangle\!\rightarrow\!R$ by $X_i\!\mapsto\!0,1\!\mapsto\!1$. Then $K\!:=\!\mathrm{ker}f\!=\!f^{-1}(0)$ consists of linear combinations of monomials without constant term, and $K^2\!=\!\{k_1k_1'\!+\!\ldots\!+\!k_nk_n'; n\!\in\!\mathbb{N}_0,k_i,k_i'\!\in\!K\}$ consists of linear combinations of monomials of degree at least $2$. So, as an $R$-module, $K\!=\!K_1\!\oplus\!K^2$ where $K_1$ is the span of the degree $1$ monomials, which is isomorphic to $R^{(X)}$, the free $R$-module on $X$. Thus $K/K^2\!\cong\! K_1\!\cong\!R^{(X)}$. We wish to change $\varphi$ to an isomorphism $\widetilde{\varphi}\!:\!R\langle Y\rangle\!\rightarrow\!R\langle X\rangle$, such that $f\!\circ\!\widetilde{\varphi}\!:\!R\langle Y\rangle\!\rightarrow\!R$ maps $Y_i\!\mapsto\!0$, $1\!\mapsto\!1$. To achieve this, denote $y_i\!:=\!f\!\circ\!\varphi(Y_i)\!\in\!R$ and via universal property define $\alpha\!:\!R\langle Y\rangle\!\rightarrow\!R\langle Y\rangle$ by $Y_i\!\mapsto\!Y_i\!-\!y_i$. This is an isomorphism with inverse $\alpha^{-1}\!:Y_i\!\mapsto\!Y_i\!+\!y_i$, hence we put $\widetilde{\varphi}\!:=\!\varphi\!\circ\!\alpha$, and indeed $f\!\circ\!\widetilde{\varphi}\!:Y_i\!\mapsto\!Y_i\!-\!y_i\!\mapsto\!y_i\!-\!y_i\!=\!0$. Therefore we can deduce $$R^{(X)} \cong K/K^2 \cong \widetilde{\varphi}^{-1}(K)\big/\widetilde{\varphi}^{-1}(K)^2 = {\rm ker}(f\!\circ\!\widetilde{\varphi})\big/{\rm ker}(f\!\circ\!\widetilde{\varphi})^2 \cong R^{(Y)},$$ which by the property of free modules (proposition 4.12 in the opening question) implies $|X|\!=\!|Y|$.$\blacksquare$

  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I agree that's a fairly accurate clarification of my answer. $\endgroup$ Sep 16 '11 at 17:56

Finite Krull dimension of $R$ does not imply that $\dim R[x]=\dim R+1$. We have instead $\dim R+1\le\dim R[x]\le 2\dim R+1$. However, if $R$ is noetherian, then the equality $\dim R[x]=\dim R+1$ holds.


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.