0
$\begingroup$

$A\rightarrow B$ a ring homomorphism of Noetherian rings, where $A$ is local. $M$, $N$ finitely generated and nonzero $A$- and $B$- modules, respectively. Then I seem to get $\mbox{dim}_ {B}(M\otimes_{A} N) = \mbox{dim}_ {B}N$. Could that be true? It seems a little strange that the dimension of $(M\otimes_{A} N)$ (as a $B$-module) is independent of $M$.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ But isn't the (Krull) dimension of any vector space 0? $\endgroup$
    – ashpool
    Jun 25, 2010 at 23:18
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Let $k$ be the residue field of $A$ such that dim A>0. Take N=B=A, M=k. Then LSH=0, RHS = dim A. $\endgroup$ Jun 25, 2010 at 23:59
  • $\begingroup$ I think my mistake stems from not recognizing the fact that if (A,m) is a local ring and p is a non-maximal prime, A localized at p is not finitely generated as an A-module. $\endgroup$
    – ashpool
    Jun 26, 2010 at 14:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The Krull dimension of a vector space is definitely not zero. The Krull dimension of $k[X]$ is $1$ ($k$ a field) for instance. You must be thinking finite-dimensional vector spaces. A module finite $k$-algebra is artinian, hence zero-dimensional. This is because it is a finitely-generated module over an artin ring, so it satisfies DCC on $k$-subspaces, and any ideal is clearly a $k$-subspace. $\endgroup$ Jun 26, 2010 at 18:30
  • $\begingroup$ The Krull dimension of k[x] as a module over itself(i.e. as a ring) is 1. But as a vector space(i.e. as a k-module) it is zero, since the dimension of a field (as a ring) is zero. $\endgroup$
    – ashpool
    Jun 29, 2010 at 0:34

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

See Bruns and Herzog A.5(b) and A.11(b).

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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