DOCSLIB.ORG

F-Isocrystals Ehud De Shalit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
F-Isocrystals Ehud De Shalit F-isocrystals Ehud de Shalit CHAPTER 1 F -isocrystals 1. Semilinear algebra 1.1. What is semilinear algebra? Let K be a ¯eld. Linear algebra over K is the study of linear transformations in ¯nite dimensional vector spaces over K: More generally, if ¡ is a semigroup or a group, one studies representations of ¡ in ¯nite dimensional vector spaces over K; the case of a single (invertible) linear transformation being the case of ¡ = N (¡ = Z): Equivalently, one studies K[T ]- or K[¡]-modules. Suppose that K itself is equipped with an automorphism σ (or more generally, with a group action for some group ¡). Semilinear algebra studies ¯nite dimensional vector spaces V over K with an additive transformation ' satisfying '(av) = σ(a)'(v) for all v 2 V and a 2 K: (More generally, V is equipped with a semilinear action of ¡.) Equivalently, this is the study of K hT i or K h¡i-modules, where K hT i or K h¡i is the twisted polynomial ring. Lemma 1.1. Semilinear endomorphism of an n-dimensional vector space over K are classi¯ed by twisted conjugacy classes in Mn(K): equivalence classes under ¡1 the relation A »σ B if there exists a P 2 GLn(K) such that B = P Aσ(P ): P 0 P Proof. With respect to a basis feig we have 'ej = k akjek: If ei = j pjiej P 0 0 0 ¡1 is another basis, and ek = l plkel where P = P ; then X X X 0 0 0 (1) 'ei = σ(pji)akjplkel l k j so the matrix representing ' in the new basis is P ¡1Aσ(P ). ¤ Let ¡ be a group acting on K. A 1-cocycle of ¡ in GLn(K) is a collection Aγ ; for γ 2 ¡; satisfying (2) Aσσ(A¿ ) = Aσ¿ : Another 1-cocycle B is cohomologous to A if there is an invertible P such that ¡1 (3) Bσ = P Aσσ(P ): Being cohomologous is an equivalence relation and the equivalence classes form the 1 cohomology set H (¡; GLn(K)): Precisely as in the proof of the last lemma, we have the following. Lemma 1.2. Semilinear actions of ¡ on an n-dimensional vector space over K 1 are in one-to-one correspondence with the cohomology set H (¡; GLn(K)): Variant 1. Just as it is possible to talk about ¡-representations with additional structure (symplectic, orthogonal...) it is possible to talk about semilinear ¡-actions 3 4 1. F -ISOCRYSTALS with structure group G which is not the full GLn; and they are then classi¯ed by H1(¡;G(K)): Variant 2. If ¡ is a topological group, K a topological ¯eld, and the action of ¡ on K is continuous, the semilinear continuous actions of ¡ on K-vector spaces of 1 dimension n are classi¯ed by Hcont(¡; GLn(K)): 1.2. Example: Hilbert's theorem 90. Let K=F be a ¯nite Galois extension with Galois group ¡: Hilbert's theorem 90 (see below) is the assertion that every semilinear action of ¡ over K is trivial in the sense that it comes from a trivial ¡-module over F after a semilinear extension of scalars. More generally, K=F may be in¯nite, and one is looking for continuous semilin- ear actions of ¡ = Gal(K=F ): Here continuity is with respect to the Krull topology on ¡ and the discrete topology on K: Hilbert's theorem 90 remains valid. 1.3. Example: Lang's theorem. Let K be a perfect ¯eld in characteristic p, and σ(x) = xp the Frobenius automorphism. One would like to classify all (invertible, say) semilinear endomorphisms ' of V: If K is algebraically closed Lang's theorem says that all such pairs (V; ') are trivial. They are obtained by semilinear base extension from the identity on a vector space over Fp: 1.4. Example: F -isocrystals. See below. Here one starts with F a p-adic ¯eld, K the completion of its maximal unrami¯ed extension (or any intermedi- ate unrami¯ed extension) and looks for Frobenius-semilinear bijective endomor- phisms of V: Note that this means a semilinear action of Z = W (K=F ) and not of Gal(K=F ): 1.5. Example: Tate-Sen theory. Once again K=F is a Galois extension of a local ¯eld F; but this time it is assumed to be totally rami¯ed with ¡ = Gal(K=F ) ' Zp. One is looking for continuous semilinear actions of ¡ where K is endowed with the p-adic topology, and ¡ with the Krull topology. Since these actions do not necessarily factor through ¯nite quotients of ¡; unlike the ¯rst example, there are non-trivial actions. Tate-Sen theory completely classi¯es them in terms of Sen's operator, and proves that this is the same as classifying continuous semilinear structures over Cp: 1.6. Example: Fontaine's (©; ¡)-modules. This is, in a precise sense, the amalgamation of the previous two examples. 2. F -crystals and F -isocrystals over perfect ¯elds 2.1. De¯nitions. Let k be a perfect ¯eld of characteristic p; and σ(x) = xp its Frobenius automorphism. Let W = W (k) and K its ¯eld of fractions. Denote by σ also the Frobenius of W and K. Definition 2.1. (i) An F -crystal (M; ') de¯ned over k is a free W -module M of ¯nite rank, together with an injective σ-linear endomorphism ' : M ! M: (ii) An F -isocrystal (E; ') de¯ned over k is a ¯nite dimensional vector space E over K; together with an injective σ-linear endomorphism ' : E ! E: The rank of M (or the dimension of E) is also called its height. An F -isocrystal E is called e®ective if it comes from an F -crystal (i.e. if it contains a W -submodule of maximal rank M stable under '). Two such underlying F -crystals need not be isomorphic. 2. F -CRYSTALS AND F -ISOCRYSTALS OVER PERFECT FIELDS 5 Remark 2.1. If M is an F -crystal, '(M) is of full rank in M; and if E is an F -isocrystal, ' is bijective. Definition 2.2. A homomorphism f : M ! M 0 is a W -linear map commuting with ': The group of homomorphisms is denoted Hom(M; M 0): The same de¯nition applies to F -isocrystals. An isogeny between F -crystals is a homomorphism that induces an isomorphism on the F -isocrystals. The map ' is not an endomorphism of M; but it extends W -linearly to a homo- (p) morphism © from M = W ­σ;W M to M. Multiplication by a is an endomorphism only if a 2 Qp: Remark 2.2. For any integer m one can de¯ne a σm-crystal (or isocrystal) requiring ' to be σm-linear. If (E; ') is an F -isocrystal, then (E; 'm) is a σm- isocrystal. Let W hF i be the twisted polynomial ring over W and similarly K hF i ; where F a = σ(a)F for a 2 K: An F -crystal is the same as a left W hF i module (F acts like '), free of ¯nite rank over W; on which F is injective. The same holds for F -isocrystals. Lemma 2.1. (i) The ring K hF i is a non-commutative Euclidean domain: for f and h; h 6= 0; deg(f) ¸ deg(h); there are unique q and r; deg(r) < deg(h) such that f = qh + r (same for division on the right, but q and r may be di®erent). (ii) Every left ideal in K hF i is principal: I = K hF i h: If h is monic, it is unique. The proof of the lemma is the same as in the commutative case. Example 2.1. A cyclic F -isocrystal of rank n is of the form (4) E = K hF i =K hF i h n n¡1 where h = F + a1F + ¢ ¢ ¢ + an with ai 2 K and an 6= 0 (the last assumption is necessary and su±cient for ' to be injective). Note that h is not unique. If g 2 K hF i is such that 1 = ug + vh for some u and v; then E = K hF i g¹ and the annihilator of g¹ is (5) ff 2 K hF i ; fg 2 K hF i hg = K hF i h0 so E ' K hF i =K hF i h0. In particular if g 2 K; u = g¡1; we get 0 n n n¡1 n¡1 (6) h = hu = σ (u)F + σ (u)a1F + ¢ ¢ ¢ + uan: 2.2. The category of F -isocrystals. The category of F -isocrystals is an abelian Qp-linear category. It has a tensor product (with ' = ' ­ ') and internal Hom : Hom(E; E0) is the usual space of K-homomorphisms between E and E0 with '(u) = ' ± u ± '¡1: Do not confuse it with the categorical Hom(E; E0) which 0 '=1 is Hom(E; E ) ; a vector space over Qp (not over K) which may be 0. The F -isocrystal (K; σ) is the neutral element in the category with respect to tensor product, and E_ = Hom(E; (K; σ)) is the dual of E. The nth twist of E, denoted E(n) is the space E with ' replaced by p¡n'. For every E; E(n) is e®ective for V n << 0: The exterior power i E is also de¯ned as usual. These de¯nitions apply to F -crystals as well, although the category of F -crystals is not abelian (cokernels do not exist!). If k0 is a perfect extension of k; there is an obvious "extension of scalars" functor between crystals (isocrystals) over k to the same objects over k0: 6 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Field Theory Pete L. Clark
    Field Theory Pete L. Clark Thanks to Asvin Gothandaraman and David Krumm for pointing out errors in these notes. Contents About These Notes 7 Some Conventions 9 Chapter 1. Introduction to Fields 11 Chapter 2. Some Examples of Fields 13 1. Examples From Undergraduate Mathematics 13 2. Fields of Fractions 14 3. Fields of Functions 17 4. Completion 18 Chapter 3. Field Extensions 23 1. Introduction 23 2. Some Impossible Constructions 26 3. Subfields of Algebraic Numbers 27 4. Distinguished Classes 29 Chapter 4. Normal Extensions 31 1. Algebraically closed fields 31 2. Existence of algebraic closures 32 3. The Magic Mapping Theorem 35 4. Conjugates 36 5. Splitting Fields 37 6. Normal Extensions 37 7. The Extension Theorem 40 8. Isaacs' Theorem 40 Chapter 5. Separable Algebraic Extensions 41 1. Separable Polynomials 41 2. Separable Algebraic Field Extensions 44 3. Purely Inseparable Extensions 46 4. Structural Results on Algebraic Extensions 47 Chapter 6. Norms, Traces and Discriminants 51 1. Dedekind's Lemma on Linear Independence of Characters 51 2. The Characteristic Polynomial, the Trace and the Norm 51 3. The Trace Form and the Discriminant 54 Chapter 7. The Primitive Element Theorem 57 1. The Alon-Tarsi Lemma 57 2. The Primitive Element Theorem and its Corollary 57 3 4 CONTENTS Chapter 8. Galois Extensions 61 1. Introduction 61 2. Finite Galois Extensions 63 3. An Abstract Galois Correspondence 65 4. The Finite Galois Correspondence 68 5. The Normal Basis Theorem 70 6. Hilbert's Theorem 90 72 7. Infinite Algebraic Galois Theory 74 8. A Characterization of Normal Extensions 75 Chapter 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Orbits of Automorphism Groups of Fields
    ORBITS OF AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS OF FIELDS KIRAN S. KEDLAYA AND BJORN POONEN Abstract. We address several specific aspects of the following general question: can a field K have so many automorphisms that the action of the automorphism group on the elements of K has relatively few orbits? We prove that any field which has only finitely many orbits under its automorphism group is finite. We extend the techniques of that proof to approach a broader conjecture, which asks whether the automorphism group of one field over a subfield can have only finitely many orbits on the complement of the subfield. Finally, we apply similar methods to analyze the field of Mal'cev-Neumann \generalized power series" over a base field; these form near-counterexamples to our conjecture when the base field has characteristic zero, but often fall surprisingly far short in positive characteristic. Can an infinite field K have so many automorphisms that the action of the automorphism group on the elements of K has only finitely many orbits? In Section 1, we prove that the answer is \no" (Theorem 1.1), even though the corresponding answer for division rings is \yes" (see Remark 1.2). Our proof constructs a \trace map" from the given field to a finite field, and exploits the peculiar combination of additive and multiplicative properties of this map. Section 2 attempts to prove a relative version of Theorem 1.1, by considering, for a non- trivial extension of fields k ⊂ K, the action of Aut(K=k) on K. In this situation each element of k forms an orbit, so we study only the orbits of Aut(K=k) on K − k.
    [Show full text]
  • Model-Complete Theories of Pseudo-Algebraically Closed Fields
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Annals of Mathematical Logic 17 (1979) 205-226 © North-Holland Publishing Company MODEL-COMPLETE THEORIES OF PSEUDO-ALGEBRAICALLY CLOSED FIELDS William H. WHEELER* Department of Mathematics, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, U. S.A. Received 14 June 1978; revised version received 4 January 1979 The model-complete, complete theories of pseudo-algebraically closed fields are characterized in this paper. For example, the theory of algebraically closed fields of a specified characteristic is a model-complete, complete theory of pseudo-algebraically closed fields. The characterization is based upon algebraic properties of the theories' associated number fields and is the first step towards a classification of all the model-complete, complete theories of fields. A field F is pseudo-algebraically closed if whenever I is a prime ideal in a F[xt, ] F[xl F is in polynomial ring ..., x, = and algebraically closed the quotient field of F[x]/I, then there is a homorphism from F[x]/I into F which is the identity on F. The field F can be pseudo-algebraically closed but not perfect; indeed, the non-perfect case is one of the interesting aspects of this paper. Heretofore, this concept has been considered only for a perfect field F, in which case it is equivalent to each nonvoid, absolutely irreducible F-variety's having an F-rational point. The perfect, pseudo-algebraically closed fields have been promi- nent in recent metamathematical investigations of fields [1,2,3,11,12,13,14, 15,28].
    [Show full text]
  • A Note on the Non-Existence of Prime Models of Theories of Pseudo-Finite
    A note on the non-existence of prime models of theories of pseudo-finite fields Zo´eChatzidakis∗ DMA (UMR 8553), Ecole Normale Sup´erieure CNRS, PSL Research University September 23, 2020 Abstract We show that if a field A is not pseudo-finite, then there is no prime model of the theory of pseudo-finite fields over A. Assuming GCH, we generalise this result to κ-prime models, for κ a regular uncountable cardinal or . ℵε Introduction In this short note, we show that prime models of the theory of pseudo-finite fields do not exist. More precisely, we consider the following theory T (A): F is a pseudo-finite field, A a relatively algebraically closed subfield of F, and T (A) is the theory of the field F in the language of rings augmented by constant symbols for the elements of A. Our first result is: Theorem 2.5. Let T (A) be as above. If A is not pseudo-finite, then T (A) has no prime model. The proof is done by constructing 2|A|+ℵ0 non-isomorphic models of T (A), of transcendence degree 1 over A (Proposition 2.4). Next we address the question of existence of κ-prime models of T (A), where κ is a regular uncountable cardinal or ε. We assume GCH, and again show non-existence of κ-prime models arXiv:2004.05593v2 [math.LO] 22 Sep 2020 ℵ of T (A), unless A < κ or A is κ-saturated when κ 1, and when the transcendence degree of A is infinite when| | κ = (Theorem 3.4).
    [Show full text]
  • F-Isocrystals on the Line
    F -isocrystals on the line Richard Crew The University of Florida December 16, 2012 I V is a complete discrete valuation with perfect residue field k of characteristic p and fraction field K. Let π be a uniformizer of V and e the absolute ramification index, so that (πe ) = (p). I A is a smooth V-algebra of finite type, and X = Spec(A). n+1 I A1 is the p-adic completion of A, and An = A/π , so that A = lim A . 1 −n n I We then set Xn = Spec(An) and X1 = Spf(A1). th I φ : A1 ! A1 is a ring homomorphism lifting the q -power Frobenius of A0. We denote by the restriction of φ to V, and by σ : K ! K its extension to K. I If X has relative dimension d over V, t1;:::; td will usually denote local parameters at an (unspecified) point of X , so 1 that ΩX =V has dt1;:::; dtd at that point. Same for local parameters on the completion X1. The Setup We fix the following notation: f I p > 0 is a prime, and q = p . I A is a smooth V-algebra of finite type, and X = Spec(A). n+1 I A1 is the p-adic completion of A, and An = A/π , so that A = lim A . 1 −n n I We then set Xn = Spec(An) and X1 = Spf(A1). th I φ : A1 ! A1 is a ring homomorphism lifting the q -power Frobenius of A0. We denote by the restriction of φ to V, and by σ : K ! K its extension to K.
    [Show full text]
  • An Extension K ⊃ F Is a Splitting Field for F(X)
    What happened in 13.4. Let F be a field and f(x) 2 F [x]. An extension K ⊃ F is a splitting field for f(x) if it is the minimal extension of F over which f(x) splits into linear factors. More precisely, K is a splitting field for f(x) if it splits over K but does not split over any subfield of K. Theorem 1. For any field F and any f(x) 2 F [x], there exists a splitting field K for f(x). Idea of proof. We shall show that there exists a field over which f(x) splits, then take the intersection of all such fields, and call it K. Now, we decompose f(x) into irreducible factors 0 0 p1(x) : : : pk(x), and if deg(pj) > 1 consider extension F = f[x]=(pj(x)). Since F contains a 0 root of pj(x), we can decompose pj(x) over F . Then we continue by induction. Proposition 2. If f(x) 2 F [x], deg(f) = n, and an extension K ⊃ F is the splitting field for f(x), then [K : F ] 6 n! Proof. It is a nice and rather easy exercise. Theorem 3. Any two splitting fields for f(x) 2 F [x] are isomorphic. Idea of proof. This result can be proven by induction, using the fact that if α, β are roots of an irreducible polynomial p(x) 2 F [x] then F (α) ' F (β). A good example of splitting fields are the cyclotomic fields | they are splitting fields for polynomials xn − 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Math 370 Fields and Galois Theory Spring 2019 HW 6
    Yale University Department of Mathematics Math 370 Fields and Galois Theory Spring 2019 Problem Set # 6 (due in class on Thursday March 7) Notation: The Galois group of a polynomial f(x) over a field F is defined to be the F - automorphism group of its splitting field E. Let F be a field of characteristic p > 0. Define the Frobenius map φ : F ! F by φ(x) = xp. By the “first-year's dream" the Frobenius map is a ring homomorphism. We call F perfect if the Frobenius map is surjective (equivalently, is a field automorphism), i.e., if every element of F has a pth root. By definition, we say that any field of characteristic 0 is perfect. Problems: p p p 1. Let K = Q( 2; 3; 5). Determine the Q-automorphism group of K=Q by writing down all the elements as automorphisms and also by describing the isomorphism class of the group. 3 2. Compute the Galois group of the polynomial f(x) = x − 4x + 2 2 Q[x]. 3. Let F be a field of characteristic 6= 2. Let f(x) = x4 + bx2 + c 2 F [x]. Assume that f(x) is separable. Prove that the Galois group of f(x) is isomorphic to a subgroup of the dihedral group D8 of order 8. 4. Prove that if F is a perfect field, then any irreducible polynomial f(x) 2 F [x] is separable. (In class, this was stated in the case when F has characteristic 0; this is now one of the cases you'll need to prove, the other case being perfect fields of characteristic p > 0.) 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Algebraically Closed Fields
    Algebraically Closed Fields Thierry Coquand May 2018 Algebraically Closed Fields Constructive Algebra Constructive algebra is algebra done in the context of intuitionistic logic 1 Algebraically Closed Fields Algebraic closure In the previous lecture, we have seen how to \force" the existence of prime ideals, even in a weak framework where we don't have choice axiom A prime filter always exists in the Zariski topos Instead of \forcing" the existence of a point of a space (a mathematical object), we are going to \force" the existence of a model (a mathematical structure) 2 Algebraically Closed Fields Forcing/Beth models/Kripke models 1956 Beth models 1958 Kripke models 1962 Cohen forcing 1964 sheaf models, site models, topos 1966 Boolean valued models 3 Algebraically Closed Fields Algebraic closure The first step to build a closure of a field k is to show that we can build a splitting field of any polynomial P in k[X]. We have to build an extension of k where P decomposes in linear factor. However in the theory of discrete fields we cannot prove 9x (x2 + 1 = 0) _ 8x (x2 + 1 6= 0) 4 Algebraically Closed Fields Irreducibe polynomial Indeed, this is not valid in the following Kripke model over 0 6 1 At level 0 we take k = Q At level 1 we take k = Q[i] Essentially the same argument can be found in van der Waerden (1930) Eine Bemerkung ¨uber die Unzerlegbarkeit von Polynomen (before recursive functions theory was developped!) 5 Algebraically Closed Fields Algebraically closed fields Language of ring. Theory of ring, equational Field axioms 1 6= 0 and
    [Show full text]
  • Some Structure Theorems for Algebraic Groups
    Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics Some structure theorems for algebraic groups Michel Brion Abstract. These are extended notes of a course given at Tulane University for the 2015 Clifford Lectures. Their aim is to present structure results for group schemes of finite type over a field, with applications to Picard varieties and automorphism groups. Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Basic notions and results 4 2.1. Group schemes 4 2.2. Actions of group schemes 7 2.3. Linear representations 10 2.4. The neutral component 13 2.5. Reduced subschemes 15 2.6. Torsors 16 2.7. Homogeneous spaces and quotients 19 2.8. Exact sequences, isomorphism theorems 21 2.9. The relative Frobenius morphism 24 3. Proof of Theorem 1 27 3.1. Affine algebraic groups 27 3.2. The affinization theorem 29 3.3. Anti-affine algebraic groups 31 4. Proof of Theorem 2 33 4.1. The Albanese morphism 33 4.2. Abelian torsors 36 4.3. Completion of the proof of Theorem 2 38 5. Some further developments 41 5.1. The Rosenlicht decomposition 41 5.2. Equivariant compactification of homogeneous spaces 43 5.3. Commutative algebraic groups 45 5.4. Semi-abelian varieties 48 5.5. Structure of anti-affine groups 52 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 14L15, 14L30, 14M17; Secondary 14K05, 14K30, 14M27, 20G15. c 0000 (copyright holder) 1 2 MICHEL BRION 5.6. Commutative algebraic groups (continued) 54 6. The Picard scheme 58 6.1. Definitions and basic properties 58 6.2. Structure of Picard varieties 59 7. The automorphism group scheme 62 7.1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Structure of Perfect Fields
    THE STRUCTURE OF PERFECT FIELDS Duong Quoc Viet and Truong Thi Hong Thanh ABSTRACT: This paper builds fundamental perfect fields of positive characteristic and shows the structure of perfect fields that a field of positive characteristic is a perfect field if and only if it is an algebraic extension of a fundamental perfect field. 1 Introduction It has long been known that perfect fields are significant because Galois theory over these fields becomes simpler, since the separable condition (the most important condi- tion of Galois extensions) of algebraic extensions over perfect fields are automatically satisfied. Recall that a field k is said to be a perfect field if any one of the following equivalent conditions holds: (a) Every irreducible polynomial over k is separable. (b) Every finite-degree extension of k is separable. (c) Every algebraic extension of k is separable. One showed that any field of characteristic 0 is a perfect field. And any field k of characteristic p> 0 is a perfect field if and only if the Frobenius endomorphism x xp is an automorphism of k; i.e., every element of k is a p-th power (see e.g. [1, 2, 3,7→ 4]). arXiv:1408.2410v1 [math.AC] 8 Aug 2014 In this paper, we show the structure of perfect fields of positive characteristic. Let p be a positive prime and X = xi i I a set of independent variables. Denote { } ∈ by Zp the field of congruence classes modulo p and Zp(X) the field of all rational pn functions in X. For any u Zp(X) and any n 0, we define √u to be the unique root n n p ∈ ≥ p pn of y u Zp(X)[y] in an algebraic closure Zp(X) of Zp(X).
    [Show full text]
  • On the Galois Cohomology of Unipotent Algebraic Groups Over Local Fields
    ON THE GALOIS COHOMOLOGY OF UNIPOTENT ALGEBRAIC GROUPS OVER LOCAL FIELDS NGUYE^N~ DUY TAN^ Abstract. In this paper, we give a necessary and sufficient condition for the finiteness of the Galois cohomology of unipotent groups over local fields of positive characteristic. AMS Mathematics Subject Classification (2000): 11E72. Introduction Let k be a field, G a linear k-algebraic group. We denote by ks the separable closure of k in ¯ 1 1 an algebraic closure k, by H (k; G) := H (Gal(ks=k);G(ks)) the usual first Galois cohomology set. It is important to know the finiteness of the Galois cohomology set of algebraic groups over certain arithmetic fields such as local or global fields. A well-known result of Borel-Serre states that over local fields of zero characteristic the Galois cohomology set of algebraic groups are always finite. A similar result also holds for local fields of positive characteristic with restriction to connected reductive groups, see [Se, Chapter III, Section 4]. Joseph Oesterl´ealso gives examples of unipotent groups with infinite Galois cohomology over local fields of positive characteristic (see [Oe, page 45]). And it is needed to give sufficient and necessary conditions for the finiteness of the Galois cohomology of unipotent groups over local function fields. In Section 1, we first present several technical lemmas concerning images of additive polynomials in local fields which are needed in the sequel, and we then give the definition of unipontent groups of Rosenlicht type. Then, in Section 2, we apply results in Section 1 to give a necessary and sufficient condition for the finiteness of the Galois cohomology of an arbitrary unipotent group over local function fields, see Theorem 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Constructing Algebraic Closures, I
    CONSTRUCTING ALGEBRAIC CLOSURES KEITH CONRAD Let K be a field. We want to construct an algebraic closure of K, i.e., an algebraic extension of K which is algebraically closed. It will be built out of the quotient of a polynomial ring in a very large number of variables. Let P be the set of all nonconstant monic polynomials in K[X] and let A = K[tf ]f2P be the polynomial ring over K generated by a set of indeterminates indexed by P . This is a huge ring. For each f 2 K[X] and a 2 A, f(a) is an element of A. Let I be the ideal in A generated by the elements f(tf ) as f runs over P . Lemma 1. The ideal I is proper: 1 62 I. Pn Proof. Every element of I has the form i=1 aifi(tfi ) for a finite set of f1; : : : ; fn in P and a1; : : : ; an in A. We want to show 1 can't be expressed as such a sum. Construct a finite extension L=K in which f1; : : : ; fn all have roots. There is a substitution homomorphism A = K[tf ]f2P ! L sending each polynomial in A to its value when tfi is replaced by a root of fi in L for i = 1; : : : ; n and tf is replaced by 0 for those f 2 P not equal to an fi. Under Pn this substitution homomorphism, the sum i=1 aifi(tfi ) goes to 0 in L so this sum could not have been 1. Since I is a proper ideal, Zorn's lemma guarantees that I is contained in some maximal ideal m in A.
    [Show full text]