Lemma 10.107.11. Let $\varphi : R \to S$ be a ring map. Let $g \in S$. The following are equivalent:
$g \otimes 1 = 1 \otimes g$ in $S \otimes _ R S$, and
there exist $n \geq 0$ and elements $y_ i, z_ j \in S$ and $x_{i, j} \in R$ for $1 \leq i, j \leq n$ such that
$g = \sum _{i, j \leq n} x_{i, j} y_ i z_ j$,
for each $j$ we have $\sum x_{i, j}y_ i \in \varphi (R)$, and
for each $i$ we have $\sum x_{i, j}z_ j \in \varphi (R)$.
Proof. It is clear that (2) implies (1). Conversely, suppose that $g \otimes 1 = 1 \otimes g$. Choose generators $\{ s_ i\} _{i \in I}$ of $S$ as an $R$-module with $0, 1 \in I$ and $s_0 = 1$ and $s_1 = g$. Apply Lemma 10.107.10 to the relation $g \otimes s_0 + (-1) \otimes s_1 = 0$. We see that there exist $a_{i, j} \in R$ such that $g = \sum _ i a_{i, 0} s_ i$, $-1 = \sum _ i a_{i, 1} s_ i$, and for $j \not= 0, 1$ we have $0 = \sum _ i a_{i, j} s_ i$, and moreover for all $i$ we have $\sum _ j a_{i, j}s_ j = 0$. Then we have
and for each $j \not= 0$ we have $\sum _{i \not= 0} a_{i, j}s_ i \in R$. This proves that $-g + a_{0, 0}$ can be written as in (2). It follows that $g$ can be written as in (2). Details omitted. Hint: Show that the set of elements of $S$ which have an expression as in (2) form an $R$-subalgebra of $S$. $\square$
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.
In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).
All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
Comments (0)