2
$\begingroup$

If I have tensor product of two fields $V_1\otimes V_2$, what is the general approach to decompose this product into a direct sum of fields? In particular, I have

$\bullet\;\Bbb Q(\sqrt 2) \otimes_\Bbb Q \Bbb Q(\sqrt 3)$ and

$\bullet\;\Bbb{F_{q^2}} \otimes_{\Bbb {F_q}} \Bbb F_{q^3}$

How do I proceed with these tensor products? And is there a general algorithm?

Edit: Can I simply take basis of $V_1$ and $V_2$ separetely (let it be $\{e_i\}$ and $\{f_j\}$) and write something like $V_1\otimes V_2 \cong \bigoplus_{i,j} F(e_i\otimes f_j)\cong \bigoplus_{i,j}F $?
Then $\Bbb Q(\sqrt 2) \otimes_\Bbb Q \Bbb Q(\sqrt 3)\cong \Bbb Q \oplus \Bbb Q \oplus \Bbb Q \oplus \Bbb Q$ since $dim V_1=2$ and $dim V_2=2$ and
$\Bbb{F_{q^2}} \otimes_{\Bbb {F_q}} \Bbb F_{q^3}\cong \Bbb F_q^5$ since $dim V_1=2$ and $dim V_2=3$?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The tensor product of fields is not, in general, a direct product of fields! $\endgroup$ – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Jun 16 '14 at 2:16
  • $\begingroup$ @Mariano Suárez-Alvarez: Maybe S/he is thinking of some sort of coalgebra structure? $\endgroup$ – user99680 Jun 16 '14 at 3:44
  • $\begingroup$ @Mariano Suárez-Alvarez: BTW: would you help me merge two accounts if I sent you the two e-mail addresses by stack exchange moderator mail? I followed some protocol I was advised to follow to this effect, but no merging happened. $\endgroup$ – user99680 Jun 16 '14 at 3:45
  • $\begingroup$ @user99680, sure. But we mods cannot merge accounts anymore but we can point you in the right direction :-) $\endgroup$ – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Jun 16 '14 at 4:09
  • $\begingroup$ In the listed cases the fields are linearly disjoint over the common subfield they are being tensored over. Isn't it the case that when $L_1$ and $L_2$ are linearly disjoint fields over $K$ (inside some common extension field), the bilinear mapping $$f:L_1\otimes_KL_2\to L_1L_2,\ell\otimes\ell'\mapsto \ell\ell'$$ to the compositum is an isomorphism of fields? $\endgroup$ – Jyrki Lahtonen Jun 17 '14 at 19:48
1
$\begingroup$

If $A$ and $B$ are algebras over a feld $K$ then $A\otimes_KB$ is also a $K$-algebra. If we have bases $\cal A$ and $\cal B$ of the spaces $A,B$ over $K$ respectively then $(\bigoplus aK)\otimes(\bigoplus bK)\cong \bigoplus abK$ is a valid direct sum decomposition of vector spaces, but generally not of algebras. Why should $abK$ be closed under $\times$?

If $A$ is a finite separable field extension of $K$, then $A=K(a)\cong K[x]/(f(x))$ by the primitive element theorem, and subsequently $A\otimes_K B\cong B[x]/(f(x))$, which can be resolved into a direct product of fields by resolving $f(x)$ into irreducible factors over $B$ and then invoking the chinese remainder thm.

$\endgroup$

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.