We need only a special case of the tensor product construction.
Let
and
be commutative rings containing a field
and suppose that
is of finite dimension
over
, say, with basis
Then
is determined up to isomorphism as a ring over
by the multiplication table
defined by
We define a new ring
containing
whose elements are
the set of all expressions
where the
have the same multiplication rule
as the
.
There are injective ring homomorphisms

(note that $
w_1=1$)
and
Moreover
is defined, up to isomorphism, by
and
and is
independent of the particular choice of basis
of
(i.e., a
change of basis of
induces a canonical isomorphism of the
defined by the first basis to the
defined by the second basis).
We write
since
is, in fact, a special case of the ring tensor product.
Let us now suppose, further, that
is a topological ring, i.e., has
a topology with respect to which addition and multiplication are
continuous. Then the map
defines a bijection between
and the product of
copies of
(considered as sets). We give
the product topology. It is readily
verified that this topology is independent of the choice of basis
and that multiplication and addition on
are
continuous, so
is a topological ring. We call this topology
on
the .
Now drop our assumption that
and
have a topology, but suppose
that
and
are not merely rings but fields. Recall that a
finite extension
of fields is if the number of
embeddings
that fix
equals the degree of
over
, where
is an algebraic closure of
. The primitive
element theorem from Galois theory asserts that any such extension is
generated by a single element, i.e.,
for some
.
Lemma 18.2.1
Let
and
be fields containing the field
and suppose
that
is a separable extension of finite degree
. Then
is the direct sum of a finite number of fields
, each containing an isomorphic image of
and an isomorphic
image of
.
Proof.
By the primitive element theorem, we have

, where

is a
root of some separable irreducible polynomial
![$ f(x)\in K[x]$](img2125.png)
of
degree

. Then

is a basis
for

over

, so
where

are
linearly independent over

and

satisfies

.
Although the polynomial
is irreducible as an element
of
, it need not be irreducible in
. Since
is a field, we have a factorization
where
![$ g_j(x)\in A[x]$](img2133.png)
is irreducible. The

are
distinct because

is separable (i.e., has distinct
roots in any algebraic closure).
For each
, let
be a root of
, where
is a fixed
algebraic closure of the field
. Let
.
Then the map
 |
(18.1) |
given by sending any polynomial

in

(where
![$ h\in A[x]$](img2140.png)
)
to

is a ring homomorphism, because the image
of

satisfies the polynomial

, and
![$ A\otimes _K B\cong A[x]/(f(x))$](img2142.png)
.
By the Chinese Remainder Theorem, the maps from (18.2.1)
combine to define a ring isomorphism
Each
is of the form
, so contains an isomorphic
image of
. It thus remains to show that the ring
homomorphisms
are injections. Since

and

are both fields,

is either the
0 map or injective. However,

is
not the
0 map since

.
Example 18.2.2
If

and

are finite extensions of

, then

is an algebra of degree
![$ [A:\mathbf{Q}]\cdot [B:\mathbf{Q}]$](img2149.png)
. For example, suppose

is generated by a root of

and

is generated by a root
of

. We can view

as either
![$ A[x]/(x^3-2)$](img2151.png)
or
![$ B[x]/(x^2+1)$](img2152.png)
. The polynomial

is irreducible over

,
and if it factored over the cubic field

, then there would be a
root of

in

, i.e., the quadratic field

would be
a subfield of the cubic field
![$ B=\mathbf{Q}(\sqrt[3]{2})$](img2154.png)
, which is
impossible. Thus

is irreducible over

, so
![$ A\otimes _\mathbf{Q}B
= A.B = \mathbf{Q}(i,\sqrt[3]{2})$](img2155.png)
is a degree

extension of

.
Notice that

contains a copy

and a copy of

. By the
primitive element theorem the composite field

can be generated
by the root of a single polynomial. For example, the minimal
polynomial of
![$ i+\sqrt[3]{2}$](img2157.png)
is

, hence
![$ \mathbf{Q}(i+\sqrt[3]{2})=A.B$](img2159.png)
.
Example 18.2.3
The case

is even more exciting. For example, suppose

. Using the Chinese Remainder Theorem we have that
since

and

are coprime. The last isomorphism
sends

, with

, to

.
Since

has zero divisors, the tensor
product

must also have zero divisors.
For example,

and

is a zero divisor pair
on the right hand side, and we can trace back to the elements
of the tensor product that they define. First, by solving
the system

and
we see that

corresponds to

and

, i.e., to the element
This element in turn
corresponds to
Similarly the other element

corresponds to
As a double check, observe that
Clearing the denominator of

and writing

, we have

, so

is a root of the
polynomimal

, and

is not

, so

has
more than

roots.
In general, to understand
explicitly
is the same as factoring either the defining polynomial of
over the field
, or factoring the defining polynomial of
over
.
Proof.
We show that both sides of (
18.2.2) are the characteristic
polynomial

of the image of

in

over

.
That

follows at once by computing the characteristic
polynomial in terms of a basis

of

, where

is a basis for

over

(this is
because the matrix of left multiplication by

on

is exactly the same as the matrix of left multiplication on

, so
the characteristic polynomial doesn't change). To see that

, compute the action of the image of

in

with respect to a basis of
 |
(18.3) |
composed of basis of the individual extensions

of

. The
resulting matrix will be a block direct sum of submatrices, each of
whose characteristic polynomials is one of the

. Taking
the product gives the claimed identity (
18.2.2).
Corollary 18.2.5
For
we have
and
Proof.
This follows from Corollary
18.2.4. First, the norm is

the constant term of the characteristic polynomial, and the constant
term of the product of polynomials is the product of the constant
terms (and one sees that the sign matches up correctly). Second,
the trace is minus the second coefficient of the characteristic
polynomial, and second coefficients add when one multiplies
polynomials:
One could also see both the statements by considering a matrix of
left multiplication by

first with respect to the basis of

and second with respect to the basis coming from the left
side of (
18.2.3).
William Stein
2004-05-06