This paper proves that for a smooth projective variety over a finitely generated field, the associated family of $ ext{ell}$-adic Galois representations become group theoretically independent after restricting to certain finite Galois extensions, ensuring no common finite simple quotients.
Contribution
It establishes the existence of finite Galois extensions making the family of Galois representations group theoretically independent, a novel structural result.
Findings
01
Existence of finite Galois extensions with independence property.
02
Family of Galois representations has no common finite simple quotients after restriction.
03
Provides a new structural understanding of $ ext{ell}$-adic Galois representations.
Abstract
Let K/Q be a finitely generated field of characteristic zero and X/K a smooth projective variety. Fix q∈N. For every prime number ℓ let ρℓ be the representation of Gal(K) on the \'etale cohomology group Hq(XK,Qℓ). For a field k we denote by kab its maximal abelian Galois extension. We prove that there exist finite Galois extensions k/Q and F/K such that the restricted family of representations (ρℓ∣Gal(kabF))ℓ is group theoretically independent in the sense that ρℓ1(Gal(kabF)) and ρℓ2(Gal(kabF)) do not have a common finite simple quotient group for all prime numbers ℓ1=ℓ2.
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Full text
Group theoretical independence of ℓ-adic Galois representations
Sebastian Petersen
Abstract
Let K/Q be a finitely generated field of characteristic zero and
X/K a smooth projective variety. Fix q∈N. For every prime number ℓ
let ρℓ be the representation of Gal(K) on the étale cohomology group
Hq(XK,Qℓ). For a field k we denote by kab its maximal abelian Galois
extension. We prove that
there exist finite Galois extensions k/Q and F/K such that
the restricted family of representations (ρℓ∣Gal(kabF))ℓ is group theoretically
independent in the sense that ρℓ1(Gal(kabF)) and ρℓ2(Gal(kabF))
do not have a common finite simple quotient group for all prime numbers ℓ1=ℓ2.
††2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary 11G10; Secondary 14F20.††Key words and phrases: Galois representation, étale cohomology,
finitely generated field.
Introduction
Following Serre (cf. [20]), let us call an arbitrary family (ρℓ:G→Gℓ)ℓ∈L of continuous homomorphisms of
profinite groups
independent, if the induced homomorphism
ρ:G→∏ℓ∈Lρℓ(G) is surjective. The family (ρℓ:G→Gℓ)ℓ∈L
is said to be group theoretically independent if for all prime numbers ℓ1=ℓ2 the
groups ρℓ1(Gal(K)) and ρℓ2(Gal(K)) do not have a common finite simple group as a quotient.
It is known that group theoretical independence implies independence (cf. [20, Lemme 2]). The following
results have been established in the line of papers [20], [9], [4], [5].
Let K be a field of characteristic p≥0
and X/K a separated algebraic scheme. Let L′=L∖{p}.
Let q∈N and let ρℓ be the
representation of Gal(K) on Hq(XK,Qℓ).
(I1)
If K is a finitely generated field of characteristic zero, then there exists a finite extension
E/K such that the restricted family (ρℓ∣Gal(E))ℓ∈L is independent.
(I2)
If K is a function field over an algebraically closed field, then there exists a finite separable extension
E/K such that (ρℓ∣Gal(E))ℓ∈L′ is group theoretically independent.
(I1) in the important special case where K is a number field was proved by Serre in [20].
(I1) in the special case trdeg(K/Q)>0 was proved by Gajda and the author
in [9], answering a question of Serre
(cf. [20, Section 3.2], [21, 10.1?])
and Illusie (cf. [12, 5.5]). (I2) was proved by Böckle, Gajda and the author
in [4] and independently by Cadoret and Tamagawa in [5].
One can not replace the word “independent” by “group
theoretically independent” in (I1):
If K is a finitely generated field of characteristic zero, then dimQℓ(H2(PK1,Qℓ))=1 and the
action of Gal(K) on H2(PK1,Qℓ) is given by the inverse of the cyclotomic
character εK,ℓ:Gal(K)→Zℓ× over K, and it can easily be seen from the prime number theorem
in arithmetic progressions that
the family of cyclotomic
characters (εK,ℓ)ℓ∈L is not group theoretically
independent. Assume for the moment that K is a finitely generated field without any restriction on its characteristic p≥0.
In the light of these facts the following question comes up naturally.
*Are the cyclotomic
characters the only obstruction to group theoretical independence, i.e. is there
a finite separable
extension E/K such that (ρℓ∣Gal(E(μ∞)))ℓ∈L′ is group theoretically
independent? *
If p>0, then the answer to this question is “yes”, because then the prime field
F of K is finite and hence F agrees with the field F(μ∞) obtained from F by
adjoining all roots of unity; one can thus apply (I2)
to XFK/FK to conclude that there is a finite separable extension E/K such
that (ρℓ∣Gal(FE)ℓ∈L) is
group theoretically independent.
Somewhat surprisingly the answer to the above question is “no” in the case
p=0 (cf. Corollary A.2, Remark A.3), as we shall see in Appendix A.
One can construct counterexamples from
certain CM abelian varieties. We do have the
following affirmative result, however.
Main Theorem**.**
(cf. Corollary 3.2) Let K be a finitely generated
field of characteristic [math]
and X/K a smooth projective variety. Let q∈N and let ρℓ be the
representation of Gal(K) on Hq(XK,Qℓ). Then
there is a finite Galois extension k/Q and a finite Galois extension F/K such that
the family (ρℓ∣Gal(kabF))ℓ∈L is group theoretically independent, if kab stands for the maximal abelian Galois
extension of k. Furthermore
(ρℓ∣Gal(kab†F))ℓ∈L is group theoretically independent, if kab† is the compositum
kab†=∏ℓ∈Lkab(ℓ) where kab(ℓ)/k is the maximal abelian extension of k which is
unramified outside ℓ and of order prime to ℓ.
In certain special cases it can be shown that group theoretical independence is achieved already over the smaller extension Fcyc†=∏ℓ∈LF(μℓ) where F(μℓ) is the field obtained from F in adjoining an ℓ-th root of unity.
For example, if in the situation of the main theorem q=1 and X is an abelian variety with EndK(X)=Z and of dimension 2, 6 or odd, then, based on Serre’s open image theorem [18, 2.2.8], one can see easily that in this case one can choose the finite Galois extension
F/K in such a way that
(ρℓ∣Gal(Fcyc†))ℓ∈L is group theoretically independent. On the other hand, if q=1, K is a number field and
X/K is an absolutely simple abelian variety with complex multiplication over K, then (ρℓ∣Gal(Fcyc†))ℓ∈L is not group theoretically independent
for every finite Galois extension F/K (cf. Corollary A.2, Remark A.3).
There are three main ingredients to the proof: (1) We make strong use of certain concepts from group theory (profinite and algebraic). In particular we crucially use
information about the structure of subgroups of GLn(Fℓ) (cf. [15] and [4, Section 3]) and about point groups of reductive algebraic groups defined over finite fields (cf.
Proposition 1.1). (2) We certainly use information about the ramification of the representations under consideration provided by constructability and semistability theorems in étale cohomology (cf. [12]). Furthermore we make use of Caruso’s solution of Serre’s tame inertia conjecture (cf. [6])
in order to control the ramification of ρℓ “at primes above ℓ”. (3) Finally we invoke finiteness results for étale fundamental groups from geometric class field theory
(cf. [13] and [9, Section 2]).
Notation
Throughout this manuscript L denotes the set of all prime numbers.
If K is a field, then we denote by K an algebraic closure of K and by Gal(K) its absolute Galois group.
We denote by Kab the maximal abelian extension of K and by Ksolv the
maximal prosolvable extension of K. Furthermore we denote by Kcyc=K(μ∞) the extension obtained from
K by adjoining all roots of unity and put Kcyc†=∏ℓ∈LK(μℓ). If K is a number field,
then for ℓ∈L we denote by Kab(ℓ) the maximal abelian extension of K
which is unramified outside ℓ and of degree prime to ℓ. Furthermore we define
Kab†:=∏ℓ∈LKab(ℓ).
A K-variety is a separated algebraic
K-scheme which is reduced and irreducible.
For a profinite group G we shall denote by Sℓ(G) the
normal subgroup of G generated by its ℓ-Sylow subgroups. If ℓ is clear from the context, then we
write G+ instead of Sℓ(G).
1 Preliminaries on group theory
This section is devoted to the concepts from group theory used in this paper.
The following proposition about point groups of connected algebraic groups over finite fields is
probably well-known to the expert. It will be applied later in the situation of the Main Theorem
to suitable reductive envelopes of the images of the semisimplified mod-ℓ representations under
consideration.
Proposition 1.1**.**
Let F be a finite field of characteristic ℓ and G a connected
algebraic group over F.
Then the group G(F)/G(F)+ is an abelian group of order prime to ℓ.
Proof. Let U be the unipotent radical of G and
H=G/U. Let S=[H,H] be the derived group of H.
The group U(F) is a normal subgroup of G(F) of ℓ-power order. Hence
U(F)⊂G(F)+⊂G(F). Furthermore H(F)=G(F)/U(F) because
U is connected. It follows that H(F)+=G(F)+/U(F) and G(F)/G(F)+≅H(F)/H(F)+. Thus we can assume that G is reductive (i.e. that U is trivial
and G=H). Then
T:=G/S is a torus and G(F)/S(F) embeds into T(F). Hence
G(F)/S(F) is abelian of order prime to ℓ. This implies that G(F)+=S(F)+.
Let Z be the center of G. Let S→S be the simply connected
covering of the semisimple group S and let I be the image of S(F)→S(F). Then
S(F)+=I by a theorem of Steinberg (cf. [23, 12.4, 12.6]).
It thus suffices to show that [G(F),G(F)]⊂I. To prove this, let a1,a2∈G(F) and s=[a1,a2]. Then s∈S(F)
and we denote by ai the image of ai in G/Z(F). We have central isogenies
[TABLE]
Choose for i∈{1,2} an element ai~∈S(F) such that g∘f(ai~)=ai and
define s~=[a~1,a~2].
There exist elements zi∈Z(F) such that f(a~i)=ziai. Thus
[TABLE]
For every σ∈Gal(F) and every i∈{1,2} there exists an element ki∈ker(g∘f)(F) such that
ai~σ=kiai~. Hence
s~σ=[k1a~1,k2a~2]=s~,
because the ki lie in the center of S(F). It follows that
s~∈S(F) is
F-rational. Thus s∈I as desired. □
Definition 1.2**.**
For d∈N we shall denote by B(d) the class of all finite groups of order ≤d, and by
Jor(d) the class of all finite groups G which admit an abelian normal subgroup N
such that G/N∈B(d). For ℓ∈L denote by Lieℓ the class of all finite simple groups of Lie type in characteristic
ℓ.
Let Lieℓ(d) be the class of all finite groups
G which admit an abelian normal subgroup N such that ∣N∣ is coprime to ℓ, ∣N∣≤d and G/N is isomorphic
to a finite product of groups in Lieℓ.
Note that the product is allowed to be empty and
thus the trivial group lies in Lieℓ(d) (but not in Lieℓ).
The following theorem about finite subgroups of GLn(Fℓ) is a corollary to a result of Larsen and Pink (cf. [15]) which was established in
[4, Section 3]. It slightly generalizes [20, Thm. 3’] and [20, Thm. 4]. We shall apply it in order to understand the group theoretical properties
of the images of certain mod-ℓ representations later.
Theorem 1.3**.**
(cf. [4, Section 3]) For every n∈N there exists a constant J′(n)≥5 with the
following property: For every ℓ∈L and every finite
subgroup G of GLn(Fℓ) the group G/G+ lies in Jor(J′(n)).
Moreover, if ℓ>J′(n) and P denotes the maximal normal ℓ-subgroup of G+, then
G+/P lies in Lieℓ(2n−1).
Let G be a profinite group and H a finite simple (not necessarily non-abelian) group. We call H a
Jordan-Hölder factor of G if there exists a closed normal subgroup G1 of G and an open
normal subgroup G2 of G1
and a continuous
isomorphism G1/G2≅H. We denote by JH(G) the class of all Jordan-Hölder factors of G. Let FSQ(G) be the class of all finite simple (not necessarily non-abelian) quotients of G. Then
FSQ(G)⊂JH(G). The proof of the following elementary Lemma is left to the reader.
Lemma 1.4**.**
(a)
If ⟶G′′→11→G′→G\buildrelπ is an exact sequence of profinite groups, then
JH(G)=JH(G′)∪JH(G′′) and FSQ(G)⊂FSQ(G′)∪FSQ(G′′).
2. (b)
Let G be a profinite group. Let (Ni)i∈I be a family of closed normal subgroups of G
and N=⋂i∈INi.
Then JH(G/N)⊂⋃i∈IJH(G/Ni).
Theorem 1.3 will frequently enter our considerations through the following remark.
Remark 1.5**.**
Let G be a finite subgroup of GLn(Fℓ) where ℓ≥J′(n). Let P be the maximal normal ℓ-subgroup of G+.
a)
The group G/G+ lies in Jor(J′(n)) (cf. Theorem 1.3) and thus
The group G+/P lies in Lieℓ(2n−1) (cf. Theorem 1.3) and thus
[TABLE]
by Lemma 1.4.
Furthermore FSQ(G+) cannot contain groups of order prime to ℓ as G+ is generated by its ℓ-Sylow subgroups,
and consequently FSQ(G+)⊂Lieℓ∪{Z/ℓ}.
For technical reasons the following Lemma will be useful.
Lemma 1.6**.**
Let G be a finite subgroup of GLn(Fℓ). Assume that ℓ>J′(n). Let N be a normal subgroup of G+.
If JH(G/N)∩Lieℓ=∅, then N=N+.
Proof. Let P be the maximal normal ℓ-subgroup of G and consider the exact sequence of groups
[TABLE]
The group G+/NP is a quotient of a G+/N which is in turn isomorphic to a normal subgroup of G/N.
Hence, by Lemma 1.4, JH(G+/NP)∩Lieℓ=∅. On the other hand
G+/NP is a quotient of G+/P. As ℓ>J′(n) we have
[TABLE]
(cf. Remark 1.5).
It follows that FSQ(G+/NP)=∅, hence G+/NP is the trivial group. By the exact sequence above
N/P∩N≅G+/P is a group which is generated by its ℓ-Sylow subgroups. As P∩N is an ℓ-group, it follows
that N is generated by its ℓ-Sylow subgroups as well, i.e. N=N+. □
2 The monodromy groups of the mod-ℓ representations
Let K be a field of characteristic zero and X/K a smooth projective variety. Fix q∈N.
Let ρℓ (resp.
ρℓ) be the representation of Gal(K) on Hq(XK,Qℓ) (resp. on
Hq(XK,Fℓ)). The following Lemma explains the relation between the ℓ-adic monodromy groups
ρℓ(Gal(K)) and the mod-ℓ monodromy groups ρℓ(Gal(K)). The rest of this section is then
devoted to the images of the mod-ℓ representations.
Lemma 2.1**.**
*There is a constant D such that for every prime number ℓ≥D there
is an epimorphism πℓ:ρℓ(Gal(K))→ρℓ(Gal(K)) such that πℓ∘ρℓ=ρℓ and
such that Pℓ:=ker(πℓ) is a pro-ℓ group.
*
Proof. By a theorem of Gabber (cf. [8]) there exists
a constant D such that Hq(XK,Zℓ) and Hq+1(XK,Zℓ) torsion
free Zℓ-modules for all prime numbers ℓ≥D.
For every ℓ∈L there is an exact sequence of Gal(K)-modules
[TABLE]
We put Vℓ:=Hq(XK,Qℓ), Tℓ:=Hq(XK,Zℓ) and Wℓ:=Hq(XK,Fℓ).
Then, for all ℓ∈L with ℓ>D the natural map
Tℓ⊗Fℓ→Wℓ
is an isomorphism, because Hq+1(XK,Zℓ)[ℓ]=0. Furthermore
Vℓ=Tℓ⊗Qℓ (by definition), and the natural map Tℓ→Vℓ must be injective because Tℓ is
torsion free.
We denote by ρℓ′ the representation
of Gal(K) on the finitely generated free Zℓ-module Tℓ. The canonical maps
[TABLE]
induce by restriction epimorphisms
[TABLE]
such that fℓ∘ρℓ′=ρℓ and gℓ∘ρℓ′=ρℓ. Furthermore
ker(fℓ) is pro-ℓ because ker(Fℓ) is pro-ℓ, and gℓ is injective because Gℓ is injective.
It follows that πℓ:=fℓ∘(gℓ)−1 is an epimorphism ρℓ(Gal(K))→ρℓ(Gal(K))
such that ρℓ∘πℓ=ρℓ, and
Pℓ:=ker(πℓ) is pro-ℓ.
□
For a non-archimedian place v of a number field K we shall denote by char(v) its residue characteristic.
Recall the definition of Kab† from the notation section.
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let K be a number field, X/K a smooth projective geometrically irreducible variety and q∈N. Let
ρℓ be the representation of Gal(K) on Hq(XK,Fℓ).
Then there exists a finite Galois extension E/K such that ρℓ(Gal(Eab†))⊂ρℓ(Gal(K))+
for every ℓ∈L.
Proof. We denote by ρℓ the representation of Gal(K) on Hq(XK,Qℓ).
By [12, Cor. 2.3] there exists
a finite set S of places of K such that for every non-archimedian place v
of K outside S and every prime number ℓ=char(v) the representation ρℓ is unramified at v.
Furthermore there exists a finite Galois extension of K′/K, such that for every non-archimedian place v′ of K′ above
S and every prime number ℓ=char(v′) the group ρℓ(Iv′) is a pro-ℓ group (cf. [7],
[3, 6.3.2]). After replacing K′ by a larger finite Galois extension of K we can assume in addition that
ρℓ(Gal(K′))={e} for all ℓ≤D where D is the constant from Lemma 2.1. It follows (via Lemma 2.1)
that for every place v′ of K′ and every ℓ=char(v′)
the group ρℓ(Iv′) is an ℓ-group, which is trivial if v′ does not lie over S.
Let Wℓss be the semisimplification of the Gal(K)-module Hq(XK,Fℓ) and ρℓss be the representation of Gal(K) on Wℓss. By the above we see that for
every place v′ of K′ and every prime number ℓ=char(v′) the group
ρℓss(Iv′) is an ℓ-group, which is trivial if v′ does not lie over S. Let ℓ0=max(char(w):w∈S). Let ℓ∈L with ℓ>ℓ0. If
w′ is a place of K′ with char(w′)=ℓ, then by Caruso [6, Thm. 1.2] the
weight of the tame inertia group It(w′) acting via the
contragredient of the semisimplification of the restricted representation ρℓss∣I(w′) are comprised in
the inval [0,eq] where e is the ramification index of Kw′′/Qℓ. Furthermore dim(Wℓss) does not depend on ℓ.
Altogether we see that ρℓss∣Gal(K′) satisfies the conditions (a)-(d) of [24, Section 3.3].
By [24, Thm. 4] (or by [11, Thm. 2.3.5])
there exists, after replacing ℓ0 by a larger constant, a finite Galois
extension L/K′ and for every prime number ℓ≥ℓ0
a reductive algebraic subgroup Gℓ/Fℓ of
GLWℓss with the following properties:
(1)
ρℓss(Gal(L))⊂Gℓ(Fℓ) for every prime number ℓ≥ℓ0.
2. (2)
ρℓss(Gal(L))+=Gℓ(Fℓ)+ for every prime number ℓ≥ℓ0.
We can replace L by its Galois closure and enlarge ℓ0 accordingly in order to assume L/K is Galois.
It follows from (1), (2) and Proposition 1.1 that ρℓss(Gal(L))/ρℓss(Gal(L))+ is abelian for every prime number
ℓ≥ℓ0. The kernel Pℓ of the natural epimorphism g:ρℓ(Gal(L))→ρℓss(Gal(L)) is an ℓ-group; hence it lies in ρℓ(Gal(L))+. Thus
g induces an isomorphism
[TABLE]
It follows that ρℓ(Gal(L))/ρℓ(Gal(L))+ is abelian for every ℓ≥ℓ0.
In particular
[TABLE]
for every finite extension E/L and every ℓ≥ℓ0.
We now choose E to be a finite Galois extension of K containing L⋅∏ℓ≤ℓ0K(ρℓ).
Then ρℓ(Gal(Eab))⊂ρℓ(Gal(K))+ for every ℓ∈L. Moreover, for every ℓ∈L, the
group
ρℓ(Iv) is an ℓ-group and hence contained in ρℓ(Gal(K))+ for every place v of E with char(v)=ℓ.
Thus ρ(Gal(Eab(ℓ)))⊂ρℓ(Gal(K))+ for all ℓ∈L.
Thus the assertion follows with the above choice of E. □
We shall now generalize Lemma 2.2 to the situation where the ground field K is
an arbitrary finitely generated extension of Q, possibly of transcendence degree ≥1. For this we use
a specialization argument along with a finiteness theorem for unramified Jordan extensions from [9]; this theorem from [9] in turn
relies on a finiteness theorem in geometric class field theory of Katz and Lang (cf. [13]) and on some finiteness results for
geometric fundamental groups from SGA.
Proposition 2.3**.**
Let K/Q be a finitely generated extension of fields. Let X/K be a smooth projective variety. For
every prime number ℓ let ρℓ
be the representation of Gal(K) on Hq(XK,Fℓ).
There exists a finite Galois extension E/K and a finite Galois extension k/Q such that
ρℓ(Gal(kab†E))⊂ρℓ(Gal(K))+ for every ℓ∈L.
Proof. There exists a finite Galois extension K′/K such that XK′ splits up into a disjoint
sum of geometrically connected (smooth projective) K′-varieties. Once the proposition is true for every connected component of
XK′/K′ it will follow for X/K. We may thus assume right from the outset that X/K is geometrically connected.
There exists a Q-variety S with function field K. Moreover, by the usual spreading-out principles, there
exists after replacing S by one of its dense open subschemes a smooth projective morphism
f:X→S with generic fibre X.
The stalk of f∗OX at the generic point of S is zero because X/K is
geometrically connected. Now, after replacing S by one of its non-empty open subschemes and
shrinking X accordingly, we may assume that f∗OX=0, where OX stands for
the structure sheaf of X. Then f has geometrically connected fibres (c.f. [10, 4.3.4]).
Shrinking S and X once more one can assume that the étale sheaves Rqf∗Fℓ
are lisse and compatible with any base change [12, Cor. 2.2]. In particular the representation ρℓ factors
through111We take the étale fundamental group with resprect to the geometric generic base point of S afforded by the choice of K. the
étale fundamental group π1(S). Let Gℓ=ρℓ(π1(S)) and let n be an upper bound for the dimensions of the Fℓ-vector spaces Hq(XK,Fℓ)
(ℓ∈L). The existence of such an upper bound is guaranteed by [12, Thm. 1.1]. Now ρℓ(Gal(K)) is isomorphic to a subgroup of GLn(Fℓ) for
all ℓ∈L. Thus there exists a
constant J′(n) such that Gℓ/Gℓ+∈Jor(J′(n)) for all ℓ∈L (cf. Theorem 1.3). Hence, by [9, Prop. 2.2], there exists an open
normal subgroup U of π1(S) such that ρℓ(U∩π1(SQ))⊂Gℓ+ for all ℓ∈L. Let s∈S be a closed point.
Let S′ be the finite étale Galois cover of S corresponding to U and pick a closed point s′∈S′ over s. Let E be the function field of S′.
Let us consider the following commutative diagram of profinite groups:
[TABLE]
(The map s∗ is well-defined only up to conjugation.) If Xs=X×SSpec(k(s)) is the special fibre of X over S, then, by the base change compatibility alluded to above, the representation
ρℓ∘s∗ of Gal(k(s)) on Hq(XK,Fℓ) is isomorphic to the representation of Gal(k(s)) on
Hq(Xs,k(s),Fℓ). Furthermore Xs is a smooth projective geometrically connected variety over the number field k(s). By Lemma
2.2 there is a finite Galois extension k/Q containing k(s) such that
[TABLE]
After replacing k by a finite extension we can also assume that k⊃k(s′).
Now there is a commutative diagram with exact rows
[TABLE]
We already know that ρℓ(π1(SQ′)) and ρℓ(s∗(Gal(kab†))) are contained in Gℓ+. As π1(Skab†′) is generated
by π1(SQ′) and s∗(Gal(kab†)) we conclude that ρℓ(Gal(kab†E))=ρℓ(π1(Skab†′))⊂Gℓ+
as desired. □
Remark 2.4**.**
In the situation of Proposition 2.3 it is easy to see (with the help of Remark 1.5 and Lemma 1.4) that
[TABLE]
for all but finitely many primes ℓ∈L.
Note, however, that this does not rule out the possibility that for some small prime number p there exist infinitely many
ℓ∈L such that
Z/p is a finite simple quotient of ρℓ(Gal(kab†E)). Hence Proposition 2.3 alone does not imply group theoretical independence for the family
(ρℓ∣Gal(kab†E))ℓ∈L; we need additional arguments to establish the Main Theorem.
3 Independence results
In the following theorem we shall prove among other things that in the situation of Proposition 2.3 one can, after replacing
E by a finite extension F which is Galois over K, achieve a very good control over the possible finite simple quotients of
ρℓ(Gal(kab†F)) and of ρℓ(Gal(kab†F)). In particular we shall see that for a suitable choice of F
the groups ρℓ(Gal(kab†F)) cannot have a finite simple quotient of order prime to ℓ any more.
The argument is of a group
theoretical nature. The Main Theorem about group theoretical independence along with
some variants will then follow quite easily.
Theorem 3.1**.**
Let K/Q be a finitely generated field extension.
Let X/K be a smooth projective
variety. Fix q∈N. Let ρℓ (resp.
ρℓ) be the representation of Gal(K) on Hq(XK,Qℓ) (resp. on
Hq(XK,Fℓ)). Let ℓ0∈N.
Then there is a finite Galois extension F/K and
a finite Galois extension k/Q with the following properties.
(a)
For every algebraic extension Ω/F and every ℓ≤ℓ0 in L the group ρℓ(Gal(Ω)) is trivial and the group
ρℓ(Gal(Ω)) is a pro-ℓ* group.*
2. (b)
For every solvable Galois extension Ω/kab†F and every ℓ∈L we have
ρℓ(Gal(Ω))=ρℓ(Gal(Ω))+, and there exists a closed normal pro-ℓ* subgroup Qℓ of ρℓ(Gal(Ω)) such that
ρℓ(Gal(Ω))/Qℓ≅ρℓ(Gal(Ω)).*
3. (c)
For every solvable Galois extension Ω/kab†F and every ℓ∈L we have
[TABLE]
Proof. There exists n∈N such that
[TABLE]
for all ℓ∈L (cf. [12, Thm. 1.1]).
We can assume right from the outset that ℓ0≥max(J′(n),D) where J′(n) is the constant from Theorem 1.3 and D is the constant from
Lemma 2.1. We put Gℓ:=ρℓ(Gal(K)) and Gℓ=ρℓ(Gal(K)).
For every ℓ∈L the maximal normal pro-ℓ subgroup Pℓ of Gℓ is open.
By Proposition 2.3 there exists a finite Galois extension E/K such that ρℓ(Gal(kab†E))⊂Gℓ+ for every ℓ∈L.
Let E′:=E⋅∏ℓ≤ℓ0Kρℓ−1(Pℓ)⋅Kker(ρℓ), pick a prime number ℓ1>max(ℓ0,[E′:K]) and let
F:=E′⋅∏ℓ0<ℓ≤ℓ1Kker(ρℓ). The extensions E′/K and F/K are
finite Galois extension because Pℓ is open and normal in Gℓ and Gℓ is finite.
Note that for every algebraic extension Ω/F the group ρℓ(Gal(Ω)) is pro-ℓ for every ℓ≤ℓ0 in L and
ρℓ(Gal(Ω)) is trivial for every ℓ≤ℓ1 in L. In particular a) holds true.
To prove b) let Ω be a solvable Galois extension of
kab†F. We already know that b) holds true for all ℓ≤ℓ0. For ℓ>ℓ0, by Lemma 2.1, the group ρℓ(Gal(Ω)) is an extension
of ρℓ(Gal(Ω)) by a pro-ℓ group. As we know that ρℓ(Gal(Ω)) is trivial for all ℓ≤ℓ1 it follows that ρℓ(Gal(Ω)) is pro-ℓ for
all ℓ≤ℓ1. Thus b) holds true for every ℓ≤ℓ1, and to establish b) completely it suffices to prove the following
Claim:ρℓ(Gal(Ω))=ρℓ(Gal(Ω))+* for all ℓ>ℓ1. *
Let C be the class of all prime cyclic groups.
We shall now compute JH(Gal(kab†F/K)) and then establish the claim with the help of Lemma 1.6.
By Lemma 1.4
[TABLE]
and JH(Gal(E′/K))⊂B([E′/K])⊂B(ℓ1). Moreover JH(Gal(kab†K/K))⊂C. If ℓ0<ℓ≤ℓ1,
then J′(n)<ℓ, and hence
For ℓ>ℓ1 the groups in Lieℓ are non-commutative and generated by their ℓ-Sylow subgroups, and hence they are neither contained in
C nor in B(ℓ1). Together with a theorem of E. Artin about the orders of the finite simple groups of Lie type (cf. [20, Thm. 5], see also
[2], [14]) we see that
[TABLE]
We now prove the claim. Let ℓ>ℓ1. Let Nℓ=ρℓ(Gal(kab†F)) and Mℓ=ρℓ(Gal(Ω)). As F⊃E by construction, we see that
Nℓ⊂Gℓ+. Moreover Gℓ/Nℓ is a quotient of Gal(kab†F/K). Hence JH(Gℓ/Nℓ)∩Lieℓ=∅ for
all ℓ>ℓ1. Lemma 1.6 implies Nℓ=Nℓ+. But then Mℓ⊂Nℓ=Nℓ+, and moreover Nℓ/Mℓ is a quotient
of Gal(Ω/kab†F). As Ω/kab†F is solvable we see that JH(Nℓ/Mℓ)∩Lieℓ=∅ for all ℓ>ℓ1.
Applying Lemma 1.6 once more, we see that Mℓ=Mℓ+ for all ℓ>ℓ1. This finishes up the proof of the claim and of Part (b).
We now prove Part (c). If ℓ>ℓ1, then (recall that ℓ1≥ℓ0≥J′(n)) FSQ(Mℓ)⊂Lieℓ∪{Z/ℓ} by Remark 1.5.
If ℓ≤ℓ1, then we even have FSQ(Mℓ)=∅ by part (a). Thus FSQ(Mℓ)⊂Lieℓ∪{Z/ℓ} for all ℓ∈L. As ρℓ(Gal(Ω))
is an extension of Mℓ by a pro-ℓ group, the statement about ρℓ in part (c) is also true. □
Corollary 3.2**.**
Let K/Q be a finitely generated field extension.
Let X/K be a smooth projective
variety. Fix q∈N. Let ρℓ (resp.
ρℓ) be the representation of Gal(K) on Hq(XK,Qℓ) (resp. on
Hq(XK,Fℓ)).
Then there is a finite Galois extension F/K and a finite Galois extension k/Q such that
for every solvable Galois extension Ω/kab†F
the families (ρℓ∣Gal(Ω))ℓ∈L and (ρℓ∣Gal(Ω))ℓ∈L are
group theoretically independent.
Proof. Let ℓ0=5. Let F/K and k/Q be finite
Galois extensions such that the assertions (a) - (c) from Theorem 3.1 hold true. From part (c) we have
[TABLE]
for all ℓ∈L. If ℓ∈{2,3}, then even
[TABLE]
by part (a). The class Lieℓ consists of non-commutative groups, and Lieℓ1∩Lieℓ2=∅ for all
prime numbers 5≤ℓ1<ℓ2 by E. Artin’s theorem (cf. [20, Thm. 5], see also
[2], [14]). Hence FSQ(ρℓ1(Gal(Ω)))∩FSQ(ρℓ2(Gal(Ω)))=∅ for
all prime numbers ℓ1=ℓ2, and thus (ρℓ)ℓ∈L is group theoretically independent. Similarly the assertion about
(ρℓ)ℓ∈L is true. □
The aim of this appendix is to prove that one cannot replace kab†F by kcyc†F (or by
kcycF) in
Corollary 3.2. In fact certain abelian varieties with complex multiplication over a number field
K provide a counterexample. Throughout this section let K be a number field and A/K an absolutely simple
abelian variety with complex multiplication over K. We denote for every m∈N by A[m]={x∈A(K):mx=0} the group of
m-torsion points of A and for ℓ∈L by Tℓ(A)=jlimA[ℓj] the ℓ-adic Tate module of A.
Let ηℓ (resp. ηℓ) be the representation
of Gal(K) on Tℓ(A) (resp. on A[ℓ]). It is known that ηℓ(Gal(K)) is abelian for all ℓ∈L.
Theorem A.1**.**
For every prime number q there exists a set S⊂L of positive Dirichlet density such that
Z/q∈FSQ(ηℓ(Gal(K(μ∞))) for every ℓ∈S.
Proof. There exists a finite extension K′/K such that AK′ has good reduction everywhere
(cf. [22, Thm. 7]).
For every number field F we let OF be its ring of integers and Spl(F) the set of
prime numbers ℓ which split completely in F. We always denote
by TF=ResF/QGm the torus
over Q obtained as the Weil restriction of the multiplicative group over F. Furthermore we denote for every prime
p of F by Fp the corresponding local field and by Up(F) the group of units in the
integer ring of Fp. For any torus T/Q, ℓ∈L and n≥0 we define following
Ribet [17, p. 77]
[TABLE]
where vℓ denotes the unique extension to Qℓ of the canonical discrete valuation
of the complete field Qℓ. We put
[TABLE]
and T(Fℓ)=T(Zℓ)/T(1+ℓZℓ).
Note that TF(Qℓ)=∏p∣ℓFp× and TF(Zℓ)=∏p∣ℓUp(F) (cf. [17, Example 2.1]).
We denote by IF the idele group of F, define
[TABLE]
and view TF(Zℓ) as a subgroup of IF1.
Let I⊂L be a finite set of prime numbers that contains the primes dividing
[OE:E∩EndK′(A)] and
the primes that are ramified in K′E. Let ℓ∈L∖I. Then
the OE⊗Zℓ-module
Tℓ(A) is free of rank 1 (cf. [22, Thm. 5]) and hence
[TABLE]
Thus ηℓ factors to a map Gal(Kab′/K′)→TE(Zℓ) which is again denoted ηℓ. We compose ηℓ with the Artin symbol (−,Kab′/K′)
in order to obtain a map
[TABLE]
The image U of IK′1 under the norm residue symbol is open in Gal(Kab′/K′) and the fixed field of U is the
Hilbert class field H of K′. If p is a prime of K′ and p∤ℓ, then ηℓ
is unramified at p by [22, Thm 1] because A has good reduction everywhere. Hence η^ℓ(Up)={e}. Thus η^ℓ induces a map η^ℓ′:TK′(Zℓ)=∏p∣ℓUp(K′)→TE(Zℓ)
and im(η^ℓ′)=ηℓ(Gal(H)). By a reformulation due to Serre and Tate (cf. [22, Thm. 11, Cor. 2]) of a theorem of Shimura and Taniyama there is a homomorphism ψ:TK′→TE of tori over Q such that
η^′(x)=ψℓ(x−1) for all x∈TK′(Zℓ), where ψℓ:TK′(Zℓ)→TE(Zℓ) is the homomorphism induced by ψ. Thus ηℓ(Gal(H))=im(ψℓ). Let
T/Q be the image of ψℓ. Ribet proved that dim(T)≥2 (cf. [17, p. 87]).
(It is known that T agrees with the Mumford-Tate group of A, but
we will not need this fact.) Furthermore
ηℓ(Gal(H))=im(ψℓ)⊂T(Fℓ) if ψℓ:TK′(Fℓ)→TE(Fℓ) is the homomorphism induced by ψ.
By a theorem of Ribet (cf. [17, Thm. 2.4]) there is a constant C such that cℓ:=[T(Fℓ):ηℓ(Gal(H))]≤C for all ℓ∈L∖I. Furthermore, by [20],
there exists a finite extension H′/H such that (H′(μℓ∞,A[ℓ]))ℓ∈L is a linearly disjoint sequence of
extensions of H′.
Now let a∈N be an exponent such that
qa>C[H′:H]. Let L/Q be a Galois extension such that T×Spec(L) is a split torus and such that
K′E(μqa)⊂L. Then Spl(L)∩I=∅. Let ℓ∈Spl(L). Then T×Qℓ is a split torus over Qℓ
because L can be embedded into Qℓ.
Hence, if we put d=dim(T), then T(Fℓ)=(Fℓ×)d. If ℓ∈Spl(L) does not
divide the polarization degree π of A, then H′(μℓ)⊂H′(A[ℓ]) and
[TABLE]
[H′(μℓ):H′] divides ℓ−1, cℓ≤C[H′:H], qa>C[H′:H], d≥2 and
ℓ=1modqa because ℓ splits completely in Q(μpa). This forces
[H′(A[ℓ]):H′(μℓ)] to be divisible by q. Furthermore Gal(H′(μℓ∞)/H′(μℓ))≅Zℓ. It follows that [H′(A[ℓ],μℓ∞):H′(μℓ∞)] is still divisible by q. Finally, by the linear disjointness of the sequence
(H′(μℓ∞,A[ℓ]))ℓ∈L, one sees that ∏ℓ′=ℓH′(μℓ′∞)
is linearly disjoint from H′(μℓ∞,A[ℓ]) over H′ for every ℓ∈L. If follows that
∣ηℓ(Gal(H′(μ∞))∣=[H′(μ∞,A[ℓ]):H′(μ∞)] is divisible by q for all but finitely
many ℓ∈Spl(L). Furthermore ηℓ(Gal(K(μ∞)) is a subgroup of ηℓ(Gal(H′(μ∞)), and
hence ∣ηℓ(Gal(K(μ∞))∣ is divisible by q for all ℓ∈Spl(L). As ηℓ(Gal(K(μ∞))
is a finite abelian group, it follows that Z/q∈FSQ(ηℓ(Gal(K(μ∞))) for all ℓ∈Spl(L).
Finally, by Chebotarev, the set S:=Spl(L) of prime numbers has a positive Dirichlet density. □
Corollary A.2**.**
For every finite extension E/K neither the restricted family (ηℓ∣Gal(Ecyc))ℓ∈L
nor the restricted family (ηℓ∣Gal(Ecyc†))ℓ∈L
is group theoretically independent.
Proof. Let E/K be a finite extension. We apply Theorem A.1 to AE/E in order to conclude
that Z/2∈FSQ(ηℓ(Gal(Ecyc)) for infinitely many ℓ∈L. As ηℓ(Gal(Ecyc)) is a subgroup
of the finite abelian group ηℓ(Gal(Ecyc†)), we conclude that also
Z/2∈FSQ(ηℓ(Gal(Ecyc†)) for infinitely many ℓ∈L. □
Remark A.3**.**
Corollary A.2 holds accordingly with ηℓ replaced by ηℓ. In fact, for every algebraic
extension K′/K we have
FSQ(ηℓ(Gal(K′)))⊂FSQ(ηℓ(Gal(K′))) for all ℓ∈L, because A[ℓ]=Tℓ(A)⊗Fℓ for
all ℓ∈L and thus ηℓ(Gal(K′)) is a quotient of ηℓ(Gal(K′)) for all ℓ∈L.
Acknowledgements
The Main Theorem of this paper agrees with a result from the author’s habilitation theses [16]. It continues the line of
investigations [20], [9], [4], [5] and is inspired largely by seminal work of
Serre (cf. [18], [19], [20]). We acknowledge this with pleasure.
I want to thank Lior Bary-Soroker, Gebhard Böckle, Wojciech Gajda and
Cornelius Greither for interesting discussions. I acknowledge
enlightning answers of Jim Humphreys and of an anonymous user to a question of mine
posed on the internet platform
www.mathoverflow.net. From this I learned the proof of Proposition 1.1. I want to thank the
anonymous referee for a careful reading of the manuscript and for many helpful comments and suggestions.
Part of this work
was done during visits in Poznań at Adam
Mickiewicz University financed by NCN grant nr. UMO-2014/15/B/ST1/00128.
Bibliography24
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1]
2[2] Emil Artin. The orders of the classical simple groups. Comm. Pure and Applied Math. , 8:455–472, 1955.
3[3] Pierre Berthelot. Altérations de variétés algébriques. Séminaire N. Bourbaki , 815:273–311, 1996/96.
4[4] Gebhard Böckle, Wojciech Gajda and Sebastian Petersen. Independence of ℓ ℓ \ell -adic representations of geometric Galois groups. To appear in Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 27 pages, 2015.
5[5] Anna Cadoret and Akio Tamagawa. A refined Jordan-Nori theorem and applications to representations of étale fundamental groups. Preprint, 14 pages.
6[6] Xavier Caruso. Conjecture de l’inertie modérée de Serre. Invent. Math. 171 (2008): 629–699.
7[7] Aise de Jong. Smoothness, semi-stability and alterations. Publ. Math. I.H.É.S , 83: 51–93, 1996.
8[8] Ofer Gabber. Sur la torsion dans la cohomologie ℓ ℓ \ell -adique d’ une variété. Note C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris , Série I, t. 297: 179–182, 1983.