4
$\begingroup$

Consider the following problem.

Problem: Suppose $M$ is a module over $\mathbb{Q}[x]$ such that $M$ is finitely generated over $\mathbb{Q}$. Prove that there is a non-zero polynomial $p(x) \in \mathbb{Q}[x]$ and a non-zero $m \in M$ such that $p(x)*m = 0$.

My attempt: Since $M$ is finitely generated over a field, $M \simeq \mathbb{Q}^n$ as a $\mathbb{Q}$-module. If $M$ is torsion-free over $\mathbb{Q}[x]$ too, then $M \simeq \mathbb{Q}[x]^m$ as $\mathbb{Q}[x]$-modules. Now restricting the action to $\mathbb{Q}$ again, we get $\mathbb{Q}^n \simeq \mathbb{Q}[x]^m$ as $\mathbb{Q}$-modules. At this point, I feel this is absurd, but can't quite explain why.

My questions: Is the above reasoning correct? How do I finish the argument? If not, what would be the right way to prove this?

Thanks.

  • 0
    @Student: it turns out there is a unique $\mathbb{Q}$-vector space structure on $\mathbb{Q}[x]$ that respects the addition of polynomials (this is a special feature of $\mathbb{Q}$ though; normally it also has to respect scalar multiplication). There are however different notions of dimension, and under several of those notions of dimension $\mathbb{Q}[x]$ has dimension 1. However, by dimension I mean $\mathbb{Q}$-vector space dimension. Since $\mathbb{Q}[x]$ has basis $\{1,x,x^2,\ldots\}$, the dimension is $\infty$.2012-07-31

3 Answers 3

6

$m, xm, x^2m,...$ cannot all be linearly independent over $\mathbb{Q}$. hence for every $m\in M$ there is a $p_m(x)\in\mathbb{Q}[x]$ with $p_m(x)m=0$

4

A variation on your attempt and other comments: the map $\mathbb Q[x]$ to $\mathbb Q$-linear endomorphisms of $M$ must have a non-trivial kernel, since $M$ is finite-dimensional as $\mathbb Q$-module and $\mathbb Q[x]$ is not. The kernel is thus a non-zero ideal in the PID $\mathbb Q[x]$, generated by the minimal polynomial of $x$ acting on $M$.

(Although it is interesting to understand Cayley-Hamilton and the characteristic polynomial, I think it is also useful to understand the minimal poly.)

Edit: In response to the comment, the map I'm thinking of just sends $x$ to the map $m\to x\cdot m$ for $m\in M$.

  • 0
    Dear Paul, could you explain a little bit what is the map you're talking about? I can't see any natural map from $\mathbb{Q}[x]$ to $\mathbb{Q}$-linear endomorphisms of $M$, unless I'm given some fixed $T : M \rightarrow M$, and then interpret each $p(x) \in \mathbb{Q}[x]$ as $p(T)$ formally.2012-07-31
1

You can build upon what you already wrote to finish:

Although it's not stated explicitly, you must be requiring that $M \neq 0,$ otherwise it contains no non-zero elements $m$ at all.

But if $M \neq 0$ and $M = \mathbb Q[x]^m$, then $m \geq 1$, and so $M$ contains a coyp of $\mathbb Q[x]$. Now thinking, as you suggest, over $\mathbb Q$, you have an inclusion of $\mathbb Q$-vector spaces $\mathbb Q[x] \subset \mathbb Q^n$. Is this possible?

[This is a minor variation of the reasoning suggested by Jack Schmidt in his comments.]


Incidentally, it's not only true that $M$ is not torsion-free; in fact if $M$ is finite-dimensional over $\mathbb Q$ it will be torsion over $\mathbb Q[x]$. The same argument as above proves this (if $M$ is not torsion, it contains a copy of $\mathbb Q[x]$), as do the arguments in the other answers.

  • 0
    @student: Dear student, The embeding $\mathbb Q[x] \subset M$ is an inclusion of $\mathbb Q[x]$-modules, so you are giving your self that $\mathbb Q[x]$ acts on itself in the natural way (by multiplication of polynomials). In particular the $\mathbb Q$-action is given as the natural one. Regards,2012-07-31