DOCSLIB.ORG

5. Divisible Groups Z-Modules Are the Same As Additive Groups (Abelian Groups with Group Operation +)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
5. Divisible Groups Z-Modules Are the Same As Additive Groups (Abelian Groups with Group Operation +) 12 MATH 131B: ALGEBRA II PART A: HOMOLOGICAL ALGEBRA 5. Divisible groups Z-modules are the same as additive groups (abelian groups with group operation +). And we will see that injective Z-modules are the same as divisible groups. Definition 5.1. An additive group D is called divisible if for any x D and any positive integer n there exists y D so that ny = x.(Wesaythatx is divisible2 by n.) 2 Equivalently, multiplication by any n>0givesasurjectivemapD ⇣ D. Example 5.2. Q is divisible. Another interesting example is: p Zp Qp Zp the product of all cyclic groups of primeL order Zp modulo their direct sum. This is divisible since, for any n, we have p Zp p>n Zp ⇠= Qp Zp Qp>n Zp and multiplication by n is an isomorphismL ZLp ⇠= Zp for all primes p>n. Proposition 5.3. Any quotient of a divisible group is divisible. Proof. Suppose D is divisible and K is a subgroup. Then any element of the quotient D/K has the form x + K where x D.Thisisdivisiblebyanypositiven since, if ny = x then 2 n(y + K)=ny + K = x + K Therefore D/K is divisible. ⇤ Example 5.4. Q/Z is divisible. Theorem 5.5. Tfae (the following are equivalent) for any additive group D: (1) D is divisible. (2) If A is a subgroup of a cyclic group B then any homomorphism A D extends to B. ! (3) D is an injective Z-module. Proof. (2) (1): Take B = Z, A = nZ.Foranyx D,letf : A D be given by ) 2 ! f(an)=ax.So,f(n)=x.Extendthistof : Z D be an extension of f to Z.Then ! ny = f(n)=f(n)=x.So,D is divisible. (1) (2): We may assume A =0.IfA is a nontrivial subgroup of a cyclic group ) 6 B then the generator a0 of A is a multiple of the generator b0 of B: a0 = nb0.For any f : A D,letx = f(a ). Since D is divisible, there is y D so that ny = x. ! 0 2 Then there is a unique homomorphism f : B D sending b to y and f A = f since ! 0 | f(a0)=f(nb0)=ny = x. (3) (2) follows from the definition of injective module. (2) ) (3). Given that D satisfies (2), we will use Zorn’s Lemma to prove that D is injective.) Suppose that X is a submodule of Y and f : X D is a homomorphism. Then we want to extend f to all of Y .TouseZorn’sLemmawetakethesetofallpairs! MATH 131B: ALGEBRA II PART A: HOMOLOGICAL ALGEBRA 13 (C, g)whereX C Y and g is an extension of f (i.e., f = g X). This set is partially ✓ ✓ | ordered in an obvious way: (C, g) < (C0,g0)ifC C0 and g = g0 C.Italsosatisfiesthe ✓ | hypothesis of Zorn’s Lemma. Namely, any totally ordered subset (C↵,g↵)hasanupper bound: ( C↵, g↵). Zorn’s Lemma tells us that this set has a maximal element, say, (M,g). We[ just[ need to show that M = Y .Weshowthisbycontradiction. If M = Y then there is at least one element y Y which is not in M.LetB be the cyclic subgroup6 of Y generated by y.LetA = B2 M.Then,by(2),therestriction \ h = g A : A D extends to a homomorphism h : B D.Then(byLemmabelow) | ! ! g h : M B D induces a homomorphism ⊕ ⊕ ! g + h : M + B D ! which is equal to g on M and h on B.Then(M + B,g + h) > (M,g)contradictingthe maximality of (M,g). Therefore, M = Y and g : Y D is an extension of f : X D. ! ! So, D is an injective Z-module. ⇤ Lemma 5.6. Suppose that A, B are submodules of an R-module C and f : A X, g : B X are homomorphisms of R-modules which agree on A B. Then we! get a well-defined! homomorphism f + g : A + B X by the formula \ ! (f + g)(a + b)=f(a)+g(b). Proof. Well-defined means that, if the input is written in two di↵erent ways, the output is still the same. So suppose that a + b = a0 + b0.Thena a0 = b0 b A B.So, − − 2 \ f(a a0)=f(a) f(a0)=g(b0 b)=g(b0) g(b) − − − − by assumption. Rearranging the terms, we get f(a)+g(b)=f(a0)+g(b0)asdesired. ⇤ This lemma also follows from left-exactness of Hom: We have a short exact sequence of R-modules: jA ( j ) p +p 0 A B − B A B A B A + B 0. ! \ −−−! ⊕ −− − ! ! Since Hom (A B,X) = Hom (A, X) Hom (B,X)thisgivesaleftexactsequence: R ⊕ ⇠ R ⊕ R 0 Hom (A + B,X) Hom (A, X) Hom (B,X) Hom (A B,X). ! R ! R ⊕ R ! R \ Exactness of this sequence is equivalent to the Lemma. 14 MATH 131B: ALGEBRA II PART A: HOMOLOGICAL ALGEBRA 6. Injective envelope There is one very important fact about injective modules which is not covered in Lang’s book. This is the fact that every R-module M embeds in a minimal injective module which is called the injective envelope of M. This is from Jacobson’s Basic Algebra II. Definition 6.1. An embedding A, B is called essential if every nonzero submodule of B meets A.I.e.,C B,C =0 !A C =0. ✓ 6 ) \ 6 For example, Z , Q is essential because, if a subgroup of Q contains a/b,thenit ! contains a Z. Also, every isomorphism is essential. 2 Exercise 6.2. Show that the composition of essential maps is essential. Lemma 6.3. Suppose A B. Then ✓ (1) X B s.t. A X =0and A, B/X is essential. (2) 9C ✓ B maximal\ so that A C!is essential. 9 ✓ ✓ Proof. For (1) the set of all X B s.t. A X =0hasamaximalelementbyZorn’s Lemma. Then A, B/X must✓ be essential,\ otherwise there would be a disjoint sub- module of the form!Y/X and X Y,A Y =0contradictingthemaximalityofY .For ⇢ \ (2), C exists by Zorn’s Lemma. ⇤ Lemma 6.4. Q is injective i↵every short exact sequence 0 Q M N 0 ! ! ! ! splits. Proof. If Q is injective then the identity map Q Q extends to a retraction r : M Q giving a splitting of the sequence. Conversely,! suppose that every sequence as above! splits. Then for any monomorphism i : A, B and any morphism f : A Q we can form the pushout M in the following diagram! ! i A / B f f 0 ✏ j ✏ Q / M These morphisms form an exact sequence: f ( i ) (j, f ) A Q B − 0 M 0 −−! ⊕ −− − ! ! This implies that j is a monomorphism. [If j(x)=0then(j, f 0)(x, 0) = 0. So, there is an a A so that (x, 0) = (f(a),i(a)). But i(a)=0impliesa−=0.So,x = f(a)=0.] Since2j is a monomorphism there is a short exact sequence j 0 Q M coker j 0 ! ! ! ! We are assuming that all such sequences split. So, there is a retraction r : M Q ! (r j = id ). It follows that r f 0 : B Q is the desired extension of f : A Q: ◦ Q ◦ ! ! r f 0 i = r j f = id f = f ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ Q ◦ MATH 131B: ALGEBRA II PART A: HOMOLOGICAL ALGEBRA 15 So, Q is injective. ⇤ Lemma 6.5. Q is injective if and only if every essential embedding Q, C is an isomorphism. ! Proof. ( )SupposeQ is injective and Q, C is essential. Then the identity map Q Q )extends to a retraction r : C Q whose! kernel is disjoint from Q and therefore ! ! must be zero making C ⇠= Q. ( ) Now suppose that every essential embedding of Q is an isomorphism. We want to show( that Q is injective. By the previous lemma it suffices to show that every short exact sequence j 0 Q M N 0 ! ! ! ! splits. By Lemma 6.3 there is a submodule X M so that jQ X =0andQ, M/X is essential. Then, by assumption, this map must✓ be an isomorphism.\ So, M =!Q X ⇠ ⊕ and the sequence splits proving that Q is injective. ⇤ Theorem 6.6. For any R-module M there exists an essential embedding M, Q with Q injective. Furthermore, Q is unique up to isomorphism under M. ! Proof. We know that there is an embedding M, Q where Q is injective. By Lemma ! 0 0 6.3 we can find Q maximal with M, Q, Q0 so that M, Q is essential. Claim: Q is injective. ! ! ! If not, there exists an essential Q, N.SinceQ0 is injective, there exists f : N Q0 extending the embedding Q, Q .! Since f is an embedding on Q,kerf Q =0.This! ! 0 \ forces ker f =0sinceQ, N is essential. So, f : N Q0 is a monomorphism. This contradicts the maximality! of Q since the image of N !is an essential extension of M in Q0 which is larger than Q. It remains to show that Q is unique up to isomorphism. So, suppose M, Q0 is ! another essential embedding of M into an injective Q0.ThentheinclusionM, Q0 ! extends to a map g : Q Q0 which must be a monomorphism since its kernel is disjoint ! from M. Also, g must be onto since g(Q)isinjectivemakingtheinclusiong(Q) , Q0 ! split which contradicting the assumption that M, Q0 is essential unless g(Q)=Q0. ! ⇤.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 18 Divisible Groups
    18 Divisible groups Every group splits as a direct sum G = D © R where D is divisible and R is reduced. However, the divisible subgroup is natural whereas the reduced subgroup is not. [Recall that all groups are abelian in this chapter.] Definition 18.1. A group G is called divisible if for every x 2 G and every positive integer n there is a y 2 G so that ny = x, i.e., every element of G is divisible by every positive integer. For example the additive group of rational numbers Q and real numbers R and any vector space over Q or R are divisible but Z is not divisible. [In fact there are no nontrivial finitely generated divisible groups.] Another example of a divisible group is Z=p1. This is usually defined as a direct limit: Z=p1 = lim Z=pk ! where Z=pk maps to Z=pk+1 by multiplication by p. This is the quotient of the direct sum ©Z=pk by the relation that n 2 Z=pk is identified with pjn 2 Z=pj+k. Another way to say this is that Z=p1 is generated by elements x0; x1; x2; x3; ¢ ¢ ¢ which are related by xk = pxk+1 and x0 = 0. Since xk has order pk it is divisible by any number relatively prime to p and is divisible j by any power of p since xk = p xj+k. Yet another description of Z=p1 is the multiplicative group of all p-power roots of unity. These are complex numbers of the form e2¼in=pk where n is an integer.
    [Show full text]
  • Injective Modules and Divisible Groups
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 5-2015 Injective Modules And Divisible Groups Ryan Neil Campbell University of Tennessee - Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Algebra Commons Recommended Citation Campbell, Ryan Neil, "Injective Modules And Divisible Groups. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2015. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/3350 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Ryan Neil Campbell entitled "Injective Modules And Divisible Groups." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Mathematics. David Anderson, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Shashikant Mulay, Luis Finotti Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) Injective Modules And Divisible Groups AThesisPresentedforthe Master of Science Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Ryan Neil Campbell May 2015 c by Ryan Neil Campbell, 2015 All Rights Reserved. ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • HKR CHARACTERS, P-DIVISIBLE GROUPS and the GENERALIZED CHERN CHARACTER
    TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 362, Number 11, November 2010, Pages 6159–6181 S 0002-9947(2010)05194-3 Article electronically published on June 11, 2010 HKR CHARACTERS, p-DIVISIBLE GROUPS AND THE GENERALIZED CHERN CHARACTER TAKESHI TORII Abstract. In this paper we describe the generalized Chern character of clas- sifying spaces of finite groups in terms of Hopkins-Kuhn-Ravenel generalized group characters. For this purpose we study the p-divisible group and its level structures associated with the K(n)-localization of the (n +1)stMorava E-theory. 1. Introduction For a finite group G,weletBG be its classifying space. A generalized cohomol- ogy theory h∗(−) defines a contravariant functor from the category of finite groups to the category of graded modules by assigning to a finite group G a graded module h∗(BG). When h∗(−) has a graded commutative multiplicative structure, this func- tor takes its values in the category of graded commutative h∗-algebras. If we have a description of this functor in terms of finite groups G, then it is considered that we have some intrinsic information for the cohomology theory h∗(−). For example, when h∗(−) is the complex K-theory K∗(−), there is a natural ring homomorphism from the complex representation ring R(G)toK∗(BG), and Atiyah [4] has shown that this induces a natural isomorphism after completion at the augmentation ideal I of R(G), ∗ ∼ ∧ K (BG) = R(G)I , where we regard K∗(−)asaZ/2Z-graded cohomology theory. This isomorphism is considered to be intimately related to the definition of K-theory by vector bundles.
    [Show full text]
  • Moduli of P-Divisible Groups
    Cambridge Journal of Mathematics Volume 1, Number 2, 145–237, 2013 Moduli of p-divisible groups Peter Scholze and Jared Weinstein We prove several results about moduli spaces of p-divisible groups such as Rapoport–Zink spaces. Our main goal is to prove that Rapoport–Zink spaces at infinite level carry a natural structure as a perfectoid space, and to give a description purely in terms of p- adic Hodge theory of these spaces. This allows us to formulate and prove duality isomorphisms between basic Rapoport–Zink spaces at infinite level in general. Moreover, we identify the image of the period morphism, reproving results of Faltings, [Fal10]. For this, we give a general classification of p-divisible groups over OC ,whereC is an algebraically closed complete extension of Qp, in the spirit of Riemann’s classification of complex abelian varieties. Another key ingredient is a full faithfulness result for the Dieudonn´e module functor for p-divisible groups over semiperfect rings (i.e. rings on which the Frobenius is surjective). 1 Introduction 146 2 Adic spaces 157 2.1 Adic spaces 157 2.2 Formal schemes and their generic fibres 161 2.3 Perfectoid spaces 164 2.4 Inverse limits in the category of adic spaces 167 3 Preparations on p-divisible groups 170 3.1 The universal cover of a p-divisible group 170 3.2 The universal vector extension, and the universal cover 173 3.3 The Tate module of a p-divisible group 175 3.4 The logarithm 177 145 146 Peter Scholze and Jared Weinstein 3.5 Explicit Dieudonn´e theory 179 4 Dieudonn´e theory over semiperfect rings
    [Show full text]
  • October 17, 2014 P-DIVISIBLE GROUPS Let's Set Some Conventions. Let S = Spec R Where R Is a Complete Local Noetherian Ring. Le
    October 17, 2014 p-DIVISIBLE GROUPS SPEAKER: JOSEPH STAHL Let's set some conventions. Let S = Spec R where R is a complete local noetherian ring. Let K = Frac R and k be the residue field of R. Recall that S is connected. 1. Reminder on finite flat group schemes Last time, we defined a group scheme over S to be a group object in S − Sch. If G is a finite flat group scheme then we have a connected-´etaleexact sequence j 0 ! G0 −!i G −! G´et ! 0: If we write G = Spec A then G0 = Spec A0 where A0 is the local quotient through which the co-unit of the Hopf algebra structure " : A ! R factors. And G´et = Spec(A´et) where A´et ⊂ A is the maximal ´etale subalgebra of A. Proposition 1. The two functors G 7! G0 and G 7! G´et are exact. Before we do this, let's recall something about ´etaleschemes. Let α : Spec k ! S be a geometric point. If X is an S-scheme then let X(α) = HomSch =S(Spec k; X) sep so if X = Spec A then X(α) = HomR(A; k). Let π1(S; α) = Gal(k =k). Then π1(S; α) acts on X(α) and X 7! X(α) defines an equivalence of categories between finite ´etale S-schemes and finite continuous π1(S; α)-sets. Proof. Let 0 ! G0 ! G ! G00 ! 0 be a short exact sequence in the category of group schemes over S. The easy directions are showing \connected parts" is left exact and \´etaleparts" is right exact.
    [Show full text]
  • Monomorphism - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    Monomorphism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomorphism Monomorphism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In the context of abstract algebra or universal algebra, a monomorphism is an injective homomorphism. A monomorphism from X to Y is often denoted with the notation . In the more general setting of category theory, a monomorphism (also called a monic morphism or a mono) is a left-cancellative morphism, that is, an arrow f : X → Y such that, for all morphisms g1, g2 : Z → X, Monomorphisms are a categorical generalization of injective functions (also called "one-to-one functions"); in some categories the notions coincide, but monomorphisms are more general, as in the examples below. The categorical dual of a monomorphism is an epimorphism, i.e. a monomorphism in a category C is an epimorphism in the dual category Cop. Every section is a monomorphism, and every retraction is an epimorphism. Contents 1 Relation to invertibility 2 Examples 3 Properties 4 Related concepts 5 Terminology 6 See also 7 References Relation to invertibility Left invertible morphisms are necessarily monic: if l is a left inverse for f (meaning l is a morphism and ), then f is monic, as A left invertible morphism is called a split mono. However, a monomorphism need not be left-invertible. For example, in the category Group of all groups and group morphisms among them, if H is a subgroup of G then the inclusion f : H → G is always a monomorphism; but f has a left inverse in the category if and only if H has a normal complement in G.
    [Show full text]
  • SUSTAINED P-DIVISIBLE GROUPS in This Chapter We Develop And
    SUSTAINED p-DIVISIBLE GROUPS CHING-LI CHAI & FRANS OORT preliminary draft, version 9/10/2017 for a chapter in a monograph Hecke Orbits In this chapter we develop and explain the notion of sustained p-divisible groups, which provides a scheme-theoretic definition of the notion of central leaves intro- duced in [21]. 1. Introduction: what is a sustained p-divisible group 1.1. In a nutshell, a p-divisible group X ! S over a base scheme S in equi- characteristic p is said to be sustained if its pn-torsion subgroup X[pn] ! S is constant locally in the flat topology of S, for every natural number n; see 1.3 for the precise definition. In music a sustained (sostenuto in Italian) tone is constant, but as the underlying harmony may change it does not feel constant at all. Hence we use the adjective \sustained" to describe a familiy of \the same objects" whereas the whole family need not be constant. This concept enriches the notion of geometrically fiberwise constant family of p-divisible groups. Proofs of statements in this introduction are given in later sections. Careful readers are likely to have zeroed in on an important point which was glossed over in the previous paragraph: being \constant" over a base scheme is fundatmentally a relative concept. There is no satisfactory definition of a \constant family Y ! S of algebraic varieties" over a general base scheme S, while for a scheme S over a field κ, a κ-constant family over S is a morphism Y ! S which is S-isomorphic to Y0 ×Spec(κ) S for some κ-scheme Y0.
    [Show full text]
  • THE MODULE of PSEUDO-RATIONAL RELATIONS of a QUOTIENT DIVISIBLE GROUP Introduction in the Most General Case, an Abelian Group G
    Algebra i analiz St. Petersburg Math. J. Tom 22 (2010), 1 Vol. 22 (2011), No. 1, Pages 163–174 S 1061-0022(2010)01136-1 Article electronically published on November 17, 2010 THE MODULE OF PSEUDO-RATIONAL RELATIONS OF A QUOTIENT DIVISIBLE GROUP A. V. TSAREV Abstract. It is proved that the module of pseudo-rational relations determines a quotient divisible group up to quasi-isomorphism. Introduction In the most general case, an Abelian group G may be called quotient divisible if it contains a free subgroup F such that G/F is a divisible periodic group. In the present paper, we consider only quotient divisible torsion-free groups of finite rank that do not contain divisible periodic subgroups. Fomin and Wickless introduced such groups in [1]; moreover, they constructed the category of quotient divisible groups with quasihomomor- phisms as morphisms and showed that this category is dual to the well-known category of torsion-free groups of finite rank with quasihomomorphisms as morphisms. Even earlier, in [2], Beaumont and Pierce considered quotient divisible torsion-free groups of finite rank (the term itself “quotient divisible group” first appeared in that paper), for which they constructed a system of invariants that determine such a group up to quasi-isomorphism. It was an initial example of a description of Abelian groups up to quasi-isomorphism rather than up to isomorphism, which was quite timely in view of the papers [3] by J´onsson and [4] by Yakovlev. In the present paper, we develop an idea of Fomin from [5] about the invocation of modules over the ring R of pseudo-rational numbers for the study of quotient divisible groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on P-Divisible Groups
    Notes on p-Divisible Groups March 24, 2006 This is a note for the talk in STAGE in MIT. The content is basically following the paper [T]. 1 Preliminaries and Notations Notation 1.1. Let R be a complete noetherian local ring, m its maximal ideal. We keep the assumption that the residue ¯eld k = R=m is of characteristic p > 0. (Indeed, most of the de¯nitions and propositions are true for arbitrary noetherian schemes; however, we will work mostly with the described case later on.) By a ¯nite group scheme G over R, we mean an a±ne commutative group scheme G = Spec A, where A is a ¯nite R-algebra and it is free of rank m as an R-module. m is called the order of the group. It can be shown that if G has order m, then G ¡!£m G is the trivial map. In other words, 8x 2 G(S), mx = e for any R-scheme S. (This is only known as Deligne theorem when G is commutative. It is still a conjecture for noncommutative case.) The augmentation ideal I is the kernel of the unity map ² : A ! R. The di®erential 2 » of G is given by ­G=R = I=I ­R A. (Using the map à : G £ G ! G £ G, given by Ã(x; y) = (xy; y)). For (commutative) ¯nite group scheme G = Spec A, one can de¯ne its Cartier Dual _ _ _ G = Spec A , where A = HomR¡mod(A; R) and its multiplication is given by the dual of the comultiplication m¤ : A ! A ­ A.
    [Show full text]
  • Projective and Injective Modules Master of Science
    PROJECTIVE AND INJECTIVE MODULES A Project Report Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Mathematics and Computing by BIKASH DEBNATH (Roll No. 132123008) to the DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY GUWAHATI GUWAHATI - 781039, INDIA April 2015 CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the work contained in this report entitled \Projec- tive and Injective Modules" submitted by Bikash Debnath (Roll No: 132123008) to the Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Tech- nology Guwahati towards the requirement of the course MA699 Project has been carried out by him under my supervision. Guwahati - 781 039 (Dr. Shyamashree Upadhyay) April 2015 Project Supervisor ii ABSTRACT Projective and Injective modules arise quite abundantly in nature. For example, all free modules that we know of, are projective modules. Similarly, the group of all rational numbers and any vector space over any field are ex- amples of injective modules. In this thesis, we study the theory of projective and injective modules. iv Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Some Basic Definitions . 1 1.1.1 R- Module Homomorphism . 2 1.1.2 Exact Sequences . 3 1.1.3 Isomorphic Short Exact sequences . 5 1.1.4 Free Module . 8 2 Projective Modules 9 2.1 Projective modules : Definition . 9 3 Injective Modules 13 3.1 Injective modules : Definition . 13 3.1.1 Divisible Group . 16 Bibliography 20 vi Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Some Basic Definitions Modules over a ring are a generalization of abelian groups (which are mod- ules over Z). Definition 1. Let R be a ring.
    [Show full text]
  • Workshop on Group Schemes and P-Divisible Groups: Homework 4. 1
    Workshop on group schemes and p-divisible groups: Homework 4. 1. Let A be an abelian variety over a field k with characteristic p > 0 and dimension g > 0. Use the fact that A and A_ are isogenous to prove that the ´etalepart of A[p1] has height at most dim A, and 0 g that equality holds if and only if A has no αp subgroups. In this case, prove that A[p1] µ . k k ' p1 Such abelian varieties are called ordinary. (It is a hard theorem of Norman and Oort that in moduli schemes of polarized abelian varieties (with ´etalelevel structure) in characteristic p, the locus of ordinary abelian varieties is a Zariski-dense open set.) 2. Let k be an algebraically closed field of characteristic p > 0. Using Dieudonn´etheory, construct a local-local height-2g p-divisible group over k with dimension g such that it is not isogenous to its dual, and so cannot arise as the p-divisible group of an abelian variety over k. (One cannot do this unless g 4.) ≥ 3. Prove that over a local noetherian ring R with residue characteristic p > 0, there are no nonzero maps from an ´etale p-divisible to a connected one. (Hint: Pass to an algebraically closed residue field and use the Serre{Tate equivalence.) Give a counterexample if the noetherian condition is dropped or if we work with finite flat commutative group schemes. 4. We work with abelian varieties over a field k. (i) Prove that a complex of abelian varieties 0 A0 A A00 0 ! ! ! ! is a short exact sequence of k-groups if and only if the induced complex of `-divisible groups 0 A0[`1] A[`1] A00[`1] 0 ! ! ! ! is short exact for all primes `.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 the Hom Functors — Projectivity and Injectivity
    3 The Hom Functors — Projectivity and Injectivity. Our immediate goal is to study the phenomenon of category equivalence, and that we shall do in the next Section. First, however, we have to be in control of the so-called Hom functors and projective modules. Later in the term, the duals of projective modules, the injective modules, will play a crucial role. So in this Section we will treat the basics of these two types of modules. We begin with a pair of rings R and S aand an (R, S)-bimodule RUS. This bimodule determines two Hom functors HomR(RUS, ):RMod → SMod and HomR( ,R US):RMod → ModS dened by HomR(RUS, ):R M 7→ HomR(RUS,R M) and HomR( ,R US):R M 7→ HomR(RM,R US) for each RM in RMod, and HomR(RUS,f):ϕ 7→ f ϕ and HomR(f,R US): 7→ f for all f : M → N in RMod and all ϕ ∈ HomR(U, M) and all ∈ HomR(N,U). One readily checks that both of these are additive, that HomR(RUS, ) is covariant and HomR( ,R US) is contravariant. In general, these functors are not exact, but each is left exact. That is, for each short exact sequence f g 0 → K → M → N → 0 in RMod the sequence Hom(U,f) Hom(U,g) 0 → Hom(U, K) → Hom(U, M) → Hom(U, N) is exact in SMod, and Hom(g,U) Hom(f,U) 0 → Hom(N,U) → Hom(M,U) → Hom(K, U) is exact in ModS. We do not want to take the time to prove these facts here.
    [Show full text]