Sign up ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Suppose that $k$ is an algebraically closed field. Let $F/k$ be a (possibly non-finitely generated) field extension. Is

$$ k[[x]] \otimes_{k} F $$


If not, is the natural map $k[[x]] \otimes_{k} F \to F[[x]]$ injective?

share|cite|improve this question
The natural map is injective, by a simple argument: Let $T$ be a tensor in $k\left[\left[x\right]\right]\otimes_k F$ which gets mapped to $0$ by this map. Then, we can write $T$ as $\sum\limits_{i\in I} s_i \otimes f_i$ for some finite set $I$, some $s_i\in k\left[\left[x\right]\right]$ and some linearly independent $f_i\in F$. Now, the condition that $T$ gets mapped to $0$ by the natural map rewrites as $\sum\limits_{i\in I} f_is_i=0$. Hence, every $j\in\mathbb N$ satisfies $\sum\limits_{i\in I} f_i\left(s_i\right)_j=0$, where we treat power series in $k\left[\left[x\right]\right]$ ... –  darij grinberg Mar 31 '12 at 3:17
... as sequences of elements of $k$. But due to the linear independence of the $f_i$, this yields that $\left(s_i\right)_j = 0$ for all $i$ and $j$, and thus $T=0$. –  darij grinberg Mar 31 '12 at 3:18
I gave a wrong answer sometime ago, using injectivity. As it seems ok, let me try again:starting with infinitely many power series $\sum_ia_n^{i}x^i$ with $a_n\in\mathbb{C}$ all algebraically independent, the ideal generated by all of these is not generated by finitely many of them, I guess, for an argument of transcendence degree. But I still lack a neat proof, so I do not post it as an answer. –  Filippo Alberto Edoardo Mar 31 '12 at 6:12
Darij's argument show in fact that for any field $k$ and any $k$-vector space $V$, the natural map $k^{\mathbf{N}} \otimes V \to V^{\mathbf{N}}$ is injective (it is bijective if and only if $V$ is finite dimensional). –  François Brunault Mar 31 '12 at 11:33

2 Answers 2

up vote 15 down vote accepted

The answer is no: for example, $k[[x]]\otimes_k k((x))$ is not noetherian.
Indeed, if it were, so would be $ k((x))\otimes_k k((x))$.
But this would contradict the following interesting general theorem of Vámos:

Given an extension of fields $K/F$ the tensor product $K\otimes_F K$ is noetherian if and only if $K$ is finitely generated as a field over $F$.

Full confession
I have only read an abstract of Vámos's article because I have no access to it. Anyway, here is the reference:
P. Vámos, On the minimal prime ideal of a tensor product of two fields, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 84 (1978), no. 1, p.25-35.

share|cite|improve this answer
Every proper inclusion of subfields $F\subset L_1\subset L_2\subset K$ gives rise to a non-injective surjective ring homomorphism $K\otimes_{F_1} K\to K\otimes_{F_2} K$. So, in Vamos' theorem, the "only if" directly follows, and the "if" condition is equivalent to the fact that every sub-extension of a finitely generated extension of $F$ is itself finitely generated. The latter fact is stated with no reference in Wiki's page on the 14th Hilbert problem's_fourteenth_problem –  YCor Mar 31 '12 at 13:16
[of course I means $L_i=F_i$]. Note that the immediate implication in my comment is that if $K$ is infinitely generated then $K\otimes_F K$ is not noetherian (this is enough for Georges's example). For the converse, let $L\subset K$ be the field generated by a transcendence basis $x_1,\dots,x_d$, so $B=L\otimes_F L$ is a localization of $F[x_1,\dots,x_d,y_1,\dots,y_d]$ so is noetherian, and $K\otimes_F K$ is a finitely generated $B$-algebra so is noetherian as well. (By my previous remark, as a corollary every subfield of a f.g. field is f.g.) –  YCor Apr 1 '12 at 15:53
Dear @Yves, your comments are quite interesting. Why not upgrade them to a leisurely answer, which will be easier to read than necessarily terse comments? –  Georges Elencwajg Apr 1 '12 at 19:30

I was emailed the following argument:

We prove that $k[[x]]\otimes_{k} k((x))$ is not noetherian by showing directly that $k((x)) \otimes k((x))$ is not noetherian (as suggested by Georges Elencwajg). I will just handle the case $k=\bar{\mathbb{Q}}$ and then make a remark about the general case at the end.

The field $k((x))$ has only countably many finite separable extensions because every such extension is obtained by adjoining a root of $x$. On the other hand, the transcendence degree of $k((x))$ over $k$ must be uncountable because $k((x))$ is uncountable and $k$ is countable. Fix a transcendence basis $( t_i )_{i \in I}$ for $k((x))$ over $k$.

The algebraic extension $k((x))$ of $K := k((t_i))$ is algebraic with infinite separable degree. Indeed, if the separable degree was finite, then $K$ would admit at most countably many finite separable extensions as this is true for $k((x))$. This is absurd because $( t_i )$ is uncountable.

Because the separable degree of $k((x))$ over $k((t_i))$ is infinite, $(k((x)) \otimes_{K} k((x)))_{\text{red}}$ has infinitely many idempotents and so

$$k((x)) \otimes_{K} k((x))$$ and hence $$k((x)) \otimes_{k} k((x))$$

are non-noetherian. This completes the proof.

With work, this proof can be modified to hold when $k$ is a finite field $\mathbb{F}$. In this case, one must argue more carefully to show that $k((x))$ has only countably many finite separable extensions. (The email indicated that one should use local compactness together with Krasner's Lemma.) Finally, one can deduce the case of a more general field $k$ from the case $k=\bar{\mathbb{Q}}$ or $\mathbb{F}$ by using a faithfully flat descent argument.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.