Galois Groups in Ramification Theory
$begingroup$
I had a slight confusion about Galois groups over a base field which is complete with respect to a discrete valuation.
We know that there are irreducible polynomials such as $X^3+X^2+2X-8$ where the roots have different valuation in the splitting field. In this example, take $K=mathbb{Q}_2$ to be the base field and consider its splitting field. By Newton's Polygon, the three roots have valuations $0$, $1$ and $2$. (See the algebraic number theory notes at www.jmilne.org/math/)
However, it is also noted that Galois groups preserve the valuation regardless of what kind of extension it is (unramified, totally ramified, etc). This is by the uniqueness of extension of an absolute value in a complete field. (Analogous to the result, all norms of a finite real dimensional vector space are Lipschitz equivalent.)
To be more specific, if $v$ is a valuation then $v':xmapsto v(sigma(x))$ for $sigmain Gal(L/K)$ is another valuation and $Im(v)=Im(v')$, they must be the same valuation. (i.e. no nonsense about scale factors)
My question is that these two results seem to be contradicting each other. If we take $K=mathbb{Q}_2$ and $L$ to be the splitting field of $X^3+X^2+2X-8$, then a field automorphism in the Galois group needs to be able to send an element $alpha_1$, a root of $X^3+X^2+2X-8$ to another root $alpha_2$ of a different valuation.
So where did I reason wrongly?
galois-theory algebraic-number-theory valuation-theory ramification
asked Dec 25 '18 at 3:41
darumadaruma
982612
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I had a slight confusion about Galois groups over a base field which is complete with respect to a discrete valuation.
We know that there are irreducible polynomials such as $X^3+X^2+2X-8$ where the roots have different valuation in the splitting field. In this example, take $K=mathbb{Q}_2$ to be the base field and consider its splitting field. By Newton's Polygon, the three roots have valuations $0$, $1$ and $2$. (See the algebraic number theory notes at www.jmilne.org/math/)
However, it is also noted that Galois groups preserve the valuation regardless of what kind of extension it is (unramified, totally ramified, etc). This is by the uniqueness of extension of an absolute value in a complete field. (Analogous to the result, all norms of a finite real dimensional vector space are Lipschitz equivalent.)
To be more specific, if $v$ is a valuation then $v':xmapsto v(sigma(x))$ for $sigmain Gal(L/K)$ is another valuation and $Im(v)=Im(v')$, they must be the same valuation. (i.e. no nonsense about scale factors)
My question is that these two results seem to be contradicting each other. If we take $K=mathbb{Q}_2$ and $L$ to be the splitting field of $X^3+X^2+2X-8$, then a field automorphism in the Galois group needs to be able to send an element $alpha_1$, a root of $X^3+X^2+2X-8$ to another root $alpha_2$ of a different valuation.
So where did I reason wrongly?
galois-theory algebraic-number-theory valuation-theory ramification
asked Dec 25 '18 at 3:41
darumadaruma
982612
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I had a slight confusion about Galois groups over a base field which is complete with respect to a discrete valuation.
We know that there are irreducible polynomials such as $X^3+X^2+2X-8$ where the roots have different valuation in the splitting field. In this example, take $K=mathbb{Q}_2$ to be the base field and consider its splitting field. By Newton's Polygon, the three roots have valuations $0$, $1$ and $2$. (See the algebraic number theory notes at www.jmilne.org/math/)
However, it is also noted that Galois groups preserve the valuation regardless of what kind of extension it is (unramified, totally ramified, etc). This is by the uniqueness of extension of an absolute value in a complete field. (Analogous to the result, all norms of a finite real dimensional vector space are Lipschitz equivalent.)
To be more specific, if $v$ is a valuation then $v':xmapsto v(sigma(x))$ for $sigmain Gal(L/K)$ is another valuation and $Im(v)=Im(v')$, they must be the same valuation. (i.e. no nonsense about scale factors)
My question is that these two results seem to be contradicting each other. If we take $K=mathbb{Q}_2$ and $L$ to be the splitting field of $X^3+X^2+2X-8$, then a field automorphism in the Galois group needs to be able to send an element $alpha_1$, a root of $X^3+X^2+2X-8$ to another root $alpha_2$ of a different valuation.
So where did I reason wrongly?
galois-theory algebraic-number-theory valuation-theory ramification
asked Dec 25 '18 at 3:41
darumadaruma
982612
$endgroup$
I had a slight confusion about Galois groups over a base field which is complete with respect to a discrete valuation.
We know that there are irreducible polynomials such as $X^3+X^2+2X-8$ where the roots have different valuation in the splitting field. In this example, take $K=mathbb{Q}_2$ to be the base field and consider its splitting field. By Newton's Polygon, the three roots have valuations $0$, $1$ and $2$. (See the algebraic number theory notes at www.jmilne.org/math/)
However, it is also noted that Galois groups preserve the valuation regardless of what kind of extension it is (unramified, totally ramified, etc). This is by the uniqueness of extension of an absolute value in a complete field. (Analogous to the result, all norms of a finite real dimensional vector space are Lipschitz equivalent.)
To be more specific, if $v$ is a valuation then $v':xmapsto v(sigma(x))$ for $sigmain Gal(L/K)$ is another valuation and $Im(v)=Im(v')$, they must be the same valuation. (i.e. no nonsense about scale factors)
My question is that these two results seem to be contradicting each other. If we take $K=mathbb{Q}_2$ and $L$ to be the splitting field of $X^3+X^2+2X-8$, then a field automorphism in the Galois group needs to be able to send an element $alpha_1$, a root of $X^3+X^2+2X-8$ to another root $alpha_2$ of a different valuation.
So where did I reason wrongly?
galois-theory algebraic-number-theory valuation-theory ramification
galois-theory algebraic-number-theory valuation-theory ramification
asked Dec 25 '18 at 3:41
darumadaruma
982612
asked Dec 25 '18 at 3:41
darumadaruma
982612
asked Dec 25 '18 at 3:41
darumadaruma
982612
asked Dec 25 '18 at 3:41
darumadaruma
982612
asked Dec 25 '18 at 3:41
darumadaruma
982612
982612
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Your problem is that you didn’t use the fact that Newton Polygon tells you that your cubic is by no means irreducible: in fact, it splits over $Bbb Q_2$ into three linear factors. In other words, as a $Bbb Q_2$ polynomial, its splitting field is $Bbb Q_2$.
answered Dec 25 '18 at 5:07
LubinLubin
45.7k44688
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank you, that makes sense.
$endgroup$
– daruma
Dec 25 '18 at 5:29
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3051825%2fgalois-groups-in-ramification-theory%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Your problem is that you didn’t use the fact that Newton Polygon tells you that your cubic is by no means irreducible: in fact, it splits over $Bbb Q_2$ into three linear factors. In other words, as a $Bbb Q_2$ polynomial, its splitting field is $Bbb Q_2$.
answered Dec 25 '18 at 5:07
LubinLubin
45.7k44688
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank you, that makes sense.
$endgroup$
– daruma
Dec 25 '18 at 5:29
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your problem is that you didn’t use the fact that Newton Polygon tells you that your cubic is by no means irreducible: in fact, it splits over $Bbb Q_2$ into three linear factors. In other words, as a $Bbb Q_2$ polynomial, its splitting field is $Bbb Q_2$.
answered Dec 25 '18 at 5:07
LubinLubin
45.7k44688
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank you, that makes sense.
$endgroup$
– daruma
Dec 25 '18 at 5:29
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your problem is that you didn’t use the fact that Newton Polygon tells you that your cubic is by no means irreducible: in fact, it splits over $Bbb Q_2$ into three linear factors. In other words, as a $Bbb Q_2$ polynomial, its splitting field is $Bbb Q_2$.
answered Dec 25 '18 at 5:07
LubinLubin
45.7k44688
$endgroup$
Your problem is that you didn’t use the fact that Newton Polygon tells you that your cubic is by no means irreducible: in fact, it splits over $Bbb Q_2$ into three linear factors. In other words, as a $Bbb Q_2$ polynomial, its splitting field is $Bbb Q_2$.
answered Dec 25 '18 at 5:07
LubinLubin
45.7k44688
answered Dec 25 '18 at 5:07
LubinLubin
45.7k44688
answered Dec 25 '18 at 5:07
LubinLubin
45.7k44688
answered Dec 25 '18 at 5:07
LubinLubin
45.7k44688
45.7k44688
$begingroup$
Thank you, that makes sense.
$endgroup$
– daruma
Dec 25 '18 at 5:29
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thank you, that makes sense.
$endgroup$
– daruma
Dec 25 '18 at 5:29
$begingroup$
Thank you, that makes sense.
$endgroup$
– daruma
Dec 25 '18 at 5:29
$begingroup$
Thank you, that makes sense.
$endgroup$
– daruma
Dec 25 '18 at 5:29
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3051825%2fgalois-groups-in-ramification-theory%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
