4
$\begingroup$

Let $R$ be a (not necessarily commutative) ring, $M$ a left $R$-module, and $N$ a right $R$-module. We say that a pairing $$ \langle -,-\rangle:M \otimes_R N \to R $$ is non-degenerate if, for all $n \in N$ there exists an $m \in M$ such that $\langle m,n\rangle \neq 0$, \textbf{and} for all $m \in M$, there exists an $n \in N$ such that $\langle m,n\rangle \neq 0$.

Such a pairing will give embeddings $$ M \hookrightarrow N^*, ~~~~~ N \hookrightarrow M^*, $$ where $M^*$ and $N^*$ denote the dual modules of $M$ and $N$ respectively. In general (even for infinite-dimensional vector spaces) this will not give isomorphisms $$ N \simeq M^*, ~~~~ M \simeq N^*. $$ However, if we assume that $M$ and $N$ are finitely-generalted projective, then does non-degeneracy imply that we get isomorphisms?

If it fails in the general noncommutative setting, I would still be interested in a positive answer in the commutative setting.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ In general $M, N$ need not even be abstractly isomorphic. For example, any two rank one projective modules over a ring admit a non-degenerate pairing, as such a pairing is the same as a nonzero element of $(M\otimes N)^\vee$. $\endgroup$ Mar 8, 2022 at 14:06
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Just take $R = M = N = \mathbb{Z}$ and $\langle m, n \rangle = 2mn$. $\endgroup$ Mar 8, 2022 at 14:48
  • $\begingroup$ @Najib: Excellent example! This illustrates exactly what goes wrong. $\endgroup$ Mar 9, 2022 at 11:57

1 Answer 1

5
$\begingroup$

No: for $R=\mathbb{Z}$ and even for $M,N$ both free (i.e. free Abelian groups), non-degenerate doesn't imply perfect. (You get finite index sublattices, so torsion quotients, unlike the case of vector spaces.)

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ By an odd coincidence, I've spent the last few weeks in exactly this situation, and mildly grumpy that this isn't true as it would save a pile of work... $\endgroup$ Mar 8, 2022 at 14:03
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Even for $R = \mathbb{Z}$ . . . I didn't know life was so cruel. $\endgroup$ Mar 8, 2022 at 14:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Could you please provide a reference for this? $\endgroup$ Mar 8, 2022 at 14:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ No I can't sorry. I struggled to find this set out anywhere - it took a bit of digging even to turn up that non-degenerate and perfect were the right terminology. $\endgroup$ Mar 8, 2022 at 14:17

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.