Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $k$ be a commutative ring, a $R$-Bimodule $M$ over a $k$-algebra $R$ is a $k$-module with two actions of $R$ on $M$, on the left and on the right, the classical example of this being $R$ itself with left and right multiplications as the actions. A $R$-Bimodule $M$ can also be considered a left $R \otimes R^{op}$-module.

Now what I want to know:

1 - Let this $R$-Bimodule $M = R$, let $R$ (considered as a left $k$-module) be projective (actually, let $k$ be a field, so $R$ is a vector space), is the corresponding $R \otimes R^{op}$-module a projective module too?

2 - 1 - Let this $R$-Bimodule $M = R$, let $R$ (considered as a left $k$-module) be free (actually, let $k$ be a field, so $R$ is a vector space), is the corresponding $R \otimes R^{op}$-module a free module too?

share|improve this question
2  
I don't understand the hypothesis. Is $M$ to be assumed free as a left (or right) $R$-module? Or is it assumed free both as a left $R$-module and as a right $R$-module? –  Steven Landsburg Mar 12 '13 at 5:26
    
$M$ is a $R$-$R$-Bimodule, that is, a left and right $R$ module. I'm interested in $M$ as a left $R$-module. I want to know if $M$, seen as a left $R$-module, is projective, I want to know if $M$, seen as the corresponding left $R \otimes R^{op}$-module, is also projective. –  Richard Jennings Mar 12 '13 at 6:17
1  
R will be projective if and ony if the Hochschild cohomology vanished above dimension 0 which almost never happens. –  Benjamin Steinberg Mar 12 '13 at 13:55
    
I don't understand the question, really: in your last sentence do you mean «if $R$ is a (free) projective bi module...»? –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Mar 12 '13 at 15:19
    
There's been some confusion (I was tired), I actually rewrote the question. I mean if $M = R$ happens to be projective (as a left $k$-module), is the corresponding $R \otimes R^{op}$-module a projective module too? –  Richard Jennings Mar 13 '13 at 11:44
add comment

2 Answers 2

up vote 0 down vote accepted

No. A ring $R$ for which $R$ is projective as a left $R\otimes_{\mathbb Z}R^{op}$-module is sometimes called separable over ${\mathbb Z}$.

This is equivalent to the splitting, as a surjection of $R\otimes_{\mathbb Z}R^{op}$-modules, of the multiplication map $R\otimes_{\mathbb Z}R\to R$. So applying $-\otimes_R M$, the $R$-action map $R\otimes_{\mathbb Z}M\to M$ has to split as a surjection of $R$-modules for every left $R$-module $M$. In particular, if $M$ is ${\mathbb Z}$-free, so that $R\otimes_{\mathbb Z}M$ is free as an $R$-module, $M$ must be projective as an $R$-module.

But it's not true that every ${\mathbb Z}$-free $R$-module is projective if (as in Steven's answer) $R=\mathbb{Z}[X]$ or $R=\mathbb{Z}G$ for a non-trivial group $G$, or a host of other examples.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you, thank you, thank you so much. There's been some confusion (I was tired), I actually rewrote the question. I mean if a bimodule $M = R$ happens to be projective as a left $k$-module (actually it is a vector space), is the corresponding $R \otimes R^{op}$-module a projective module too? –  Richard Jennings Mar 13 '13 at 11:53
    
You can just replace ${\mathbb Z}$ by $k$ in what I wrote (apart, sometimes, for the bit about ${\mathbb Z}G$). If $R$ is free as an $R\otimes_k R^{op}$-module, then in particular every ($k$-free, which is automatic if $k$ is a field) $R$-module is projective, which restricts $R$ severely. –  Jeremy Rickard Mar 13 '13 at 15:42
    
Thanks, the wording in this paper on Hochschild (co)homology that I was reading confused me and led me to believe that. But I'm curious, you say that if $R$ is free as a left $R \otimes R^{op}$-module then every $k$-free $R$-module is projective, you have a reference for that? or where I can find more info on enveloping algebras and modules over them? I'd like to know what kind of $R$-Bimodules make the corresponding $R \otimes R^{op}$-module projective, or just know more about this topic. thank you. –  Richard Jennings Mar 15 '13 at 2:25
    
You could look up "separable algebra" in Cohn's Algebra 3 (or many other algebra or ring theory books: that's just the first I tried). –  Jeremy Rickard Mar 15 '13 at 11:25
    
I've already done, thank you. –  Richard Jennings Mar 22 '13 at 3:15
add comment

I'm not sure what hypothesis you intend, but I don't think there's any reasonable interpretation under which it implies your conclusion.

Let $R=M={\mathbb Z}[X]$, acting on itself by multiplication from both the left and the right. Then $R\otimes R^{op}\approx {\mathbb Z}[X,Y]$ is a domain, and $(X-Y)$ annihilates $M$, whence $M$ cannot be free.

share|improve this answer
    
First of all: thank you so much. There's been some confusion (I was tired), I actually rewrote the question. I mean if a bimodule $M = R$ happens to be projective as a left $k$-module (actually it is a vector space), is the corresponding $R \otimes R^{op}$-module a projective module too? –  Richard Jennings Mar 13 '13 at 11:53
    
The same counterexample still applies; if you want $k$ to be a field, use $k[x]$ instead of ${\mathbb Z}[x]$. –  Steven Landsburg Mar 13 '13 at 12:16
    
Thank you again. I just was reading this paper on Hochschild (co)homology and the author wrote: "The $R$-bimodule $R$ mentioned above is not free, not even projective in general, in the sense that the corresponding $R \otimes R^{op}$ is not free (or projective)" whick kind of led me to believe that $R$ projective $\Rightarrow$ $R$ (as a left $R \otimes R^{op}$-module) projective. Thank you. –  Richard Jennings Mar 15 '13 at 2:07
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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