Cubic Fields: A Primer
Sophie Marques and Kenneth Ward
Abstract.
We classify all cubic extensions of any field of arbitrary characteristic, up to isomorphism, via an explicit construction involving three fundamental types of cubic forms. We deduce a classification of any Galois cubic extension of a field. The splitting and ramification of places in a separable cubic extension of any global function field are completely determined, and precise Riemann-Hurwitz formulae are given. In doing so, we determine the decomposition of any cubic polynomial over a finite field.
MSC Code (primary): 11T22
MSC Codes (secondary): 11R32, 11R16, 11T55, 11R58
Keywords: Cyclotomy, cubic, function field, finite field, Galois
Contents
-
1 Classification of cubics over any field
-
1.1 Generating polynomials
-
1.2 Purely cubic extensions
-
1.3 Isomorphic cubics
-
1.3.1 p=3
-
1.3.2 p=3
-
1.4 Galois cubics
-
2 Decomposition of cubic polynomials over a finite field
-
2.1 X3−a, a∈Fs
-
2.2 X3−3X−a, a∈Fs, p=3
-
2.3 X3+aX+a2, a∈Fs, p=3
-
3 Ramification, splitting and Riemann-Hurwitz
-
3.1 Constant extensions
-
3.1.1 X3−a, a∈K, when p=3
-
3.1.2 X3−3X−a, a∈K, when p=3
-
3.1.3 X3+aX+a2, a∈K, when p=3
-
3.2 Splitting and ramification
-
3.2.1 X3−a, a∈K, when p=3
-
3.2.2 X3−3X−a, a∈K, p=3
-
3.2.3 X3+aX+a2, a∈K, p=3
-
3.3 Riemann-Hurwitz formulae
-
3.3.1 X3−a, a∈K, p=3
-
3.3.2 X3−3X−a, a∈K, p=3
-
3.3.3 X3+aX+a2, a∈K, p=3
Introduction
In this paper, we give a complete classification of cubic field extensions up to isomorphism over an arbitrary field of any characteristic, which we had begun in [4]. More precisely, in Corollary 1.3, we prove that any cubic extension of an arbitrary field admits a generator y, explicitly determined in terms of an arbitrary initial generating equation, such that
- (1)
y3=a, with a∈F, or
2. (2)
- (a)
y3−3y=a, with a∈F, when p=3, or
2. (b)
y3+ay+a2=0, with a∈F, when p=3.
In §1.3, we devise a procedure to compare, up to isomorphism, any two separable cubic extensions of a given field. When the characteristic is not equal to 3, this employs the purely cubic closure which we determine in Theorem 1.4, whereas the Galois closure is needed in characteristic 3, eliminating the need for the brute force computations given in [4]. As we demonstrate, the purely cubic closure is essential for the study of cubic extensions which are not pure in characteristic distinct from 3. Furthermore, when the characteristic is equal to 3, the form (2)(a) we obtain can be viewed as a generalised Artin-Schreier form for separable extensions, where the techniques from Artin-Schreier theory can be adapted. We emphasize that all of our classifications (in any characteristic) are valid for any separable cubic extension.
For Galois cubics extensions L/F, we prove in §1.4 that one of the following cases occurs, where each generator is again explicitly determined:
- (1)
If p=3, then L/F is an Artin-Schreier extension; that is, there is a generator y of L/F such that y3−y=a with a∈F.
2. (2)
If p=3 and F contains a primitive 3rd root of unity, then L/F is an Kummer extension; that is, there is a generator y of L/F such that y3=a with a∈F.
3. (3)
If p=3 and F does not contain a primitive 3rd root of unity, then L/F is an extension with a generator y of L/F such that y3−3y=a2+a+12a2+2a−1 with a∈F.
Cases (1) and (2) are of course well known; we are able to deduce these again in a completely explicit and elementary way. Among Galois extensions, our primary focus is the third case, where Artin-Schreier and Kummer theory do not apply. We employ a generalised form of a Shank cubic polynomial in order to describe the Galois cubic extensions of the form (3) by way of an (explicit) one-to-one correspondence (Theorem 1.16). We also describe the Galois action on generators of the form (3) (Corollary 1.9); this is a consequence of Theorem 1.8, which determines when generators of the form (3) result in isomorphic extensions.
In §3, we describe the splitting and ramification for any place in a separable cubic extension of a global function field. To accomplish this, we use Kummer’s theorem to determine splitting of cubic polynomials over a finite field, as all residue fields are finite. Thus, in §2, we characterise completely the decomposition of any cubic polynomial over a finite field, using earlier results of Dickson, Pommerening, and Williams [2, 6, 12]. This study of decomposition permits us to obtain in §3.3 a Riemann-Hurwitz formula for any separable extension of a cubic global function field (Theorems 3.22, 3.24, 3.27).
While the classification we give for ramification, splitting, and genera is presented here for global function fields, many of the methods employed remain valid over any global field. As an example, we present Proposition 1.19, which characterises certain Galois cubic extensions and is proven separately over Q and Fq(x). We intend to produce a second study which addresses number fields, as there are substantive differences between the two types of global fields.
1. Classification of cubics over any field
In this section, we wish to obtain a complete and concise description of generating equations for cubic fields. The classification we obtain yields a family of three types of generating equations, all of which require only one parameter and are depressed, i.e., possess no quadratic term (§1.1). This classification is valid over any field. We note that of the families we obtain when p=3 have generating equation X3−3X−a; in this case, when −3 is not a square in F, then the linear coefficient cannot be removed. We also provide a procedure permitting to determine whether any two cubic extensions are isomorphic (§1.3). When p=3, in order to determine when two cubics are isomorphic, we make the use of the purely cubic closure (see Definition 1.1), which we determine precisely in §1.2. The purely cubic closure is important for studying impure cubic extensions (as we will see again in later sections, for instance, when we study ramification and splitting in §3). When p=3, the Galois closure is used in the same way to find the analogous requisite criteria for isomorphism of two cubic extensions.
We then classify Galois cubics in any characteristic p=3, which gives an analogue for all Galois cubic extensions which are not addressed in Artin-Schreier and Kummer theory. We show that the form we obtain in this case can be viewed as equivalent to a weaker form of a Shanks polynomial [8]. Curiously, we note that in the form
[TABLE]
which we obtain when p=3 and the extension is impurely cubic, the denominator a2+a+1 of the constant coefficient is equal to an evaluation X2+X+1∣X=a of the cyclotomic polynomial for primitive 3rd roots of unity.
Henceforth, we let F denote a field and p=char(F) the characteristic of this field, where we admit the possibility p=0 unless stated otherwise. We let F denote the algebraic closure of F.
Definition 1.1**.**
If p=3, a generator y of a cubic extension L/F with minimal polynomial of the form X3−a (a∈F) is called a purely cubic generator, and L/F is called a purely cubic extension. If p=3, such an extension is simply called purely inseparable.
If p=3 and a cubic extension L/F does not possess a generator with minimal polynomial of this form, then L/F is called impurely cubic.
For any cubic extension L/F, we define the purely cubic closure of L/F to be the smallest extension F′ of F such that LF′/F′ is purely cubic.
1.1. Generating polynomials
In the next theorem, we prove that the irreducibility of any cubic polynomial over any field F depends upon that of polynomials of the form
- (1)
X3−a, with a∈F,
2. (2)
- (a)
X3−3X−a, with a∈F, if p=3, or
2. (b)
X3+aX+a2, with a∈F, if p=3.
The criteria we give therefore depend on the field characteristic, particularly whether or not the characteristic is 3.
Theorem 1.2**.**
Let T(X)=X3+eX2+fX+g be any cubic polynomial with coefficients in F. Then one of the following is satisfied:
- (1)
g=0* or −27g2−2f3+9egf=0 and T(X) is reducible.*
2. (2)
g=0, −27g2−2f3+9egf=0, 3eg=f2 and T(X) is reducible if, and only if, R(X)=X3−a is reducible, where a=−27g2+f327g3.
3. (3)
p=3, g=0, −27g2−2f3+9egf=0, and 3eg=f2, and T(X) is reducible if, and only if, S(X)=X3−3X−a is reducible where a=−2−(3ge−f2)3(27g2−9efg+2f3)2.
4. (4)
p=3, f=0, and g=0, and T(X) is reducible if, and only if, −f2e2+ge3+f3=0 or G(X)=X3+aX+a2 is reducible, where
a=f3g2* when e=0,*
a=e6−f2e2+ge3+f3* when e=0 and −f2e2+ge3+f3=0.*
Proof.
Let x∈F.
- (1)
Suppose that g=0. Then T(X)=X3+eX2+fX=X(X2+eX+f), whence T(X) is reducible. Now, suppose that g=0 and −27g2−2f3+9egf=0, then
[TABLE]
whence T(X) is reducible with −f3g∈F as a root.
2. (2)
Suppose g=0, −27g2−2f3+9egf=0, and 3eg=f2. Then T(x)=0 if, and only if, y3=−27g2+f327g3∈F, where
[TABLE]
We note that x=3g−fy3gy. We have x=f−3g as −27g2−2f3+9egf=0. Moreover, x∈F if, and only if, y∈F. It follows that T(X) is irreducible if, and only if, −27g2+f3 is not a cube in F.
3. (3)
Suppose p=3, g=0, −27g2−2f3+9egf=0, and 3eg−f2=0, T(x)=0 if, and only if, y3−3y=a where y=(3eg−f2)(fx+3g)−(6efg−f3−27g2)x+3g(3eg−f2) and a=−2−(3ge−f2)3(27g2−9efg+2f3)2.
Note that
x=f(3eg−f2)y+6egf−f3−27g2−3g(y−1)(3eg−f2),
x=f−3g since −27g2−2f3+9egf=0 and
y=−f(3eg−f2)6egf−f3−27g2, since g=0 and −27g2−2f3+9egf=0.
Thus, T(X) is irreducible if, and only if, S(X)=X3−3X−a is irreducible where a=−2−(3ge−f2)3(27g2−9efg+2f3)2.
4. (4)
Suppose p=3, 3eg=f2, that is f=0 since p=3 and g=0.
- ⋅
If e=0, then T(x)=0 if, and only if, y3+ay+a2=0 where y=f2gx and a=f3g2. Note that x=gf2y.
2. ⋅
Suppose e=0 and T(x)=0. Note that when x=ef, then −f2e2+ge3+f3=0 and T(X) is reducible. Suppose that −f2e2+ge3+f3=0 then T(x)=0 if, and only if, y3+ay+a2=0 where y=e4(ex−f)−f2e2+ge3+f3 and a=e6−f2e2+ge3+f3. Note that x=e5yfe4y−f2e2+ge3+f3.
∎
From this, we can deduce the following corollary without difficulty, which reduces the study of any cubic extension into exactly three one-parameter forms.
Corollary 1.3**.**
Let L/F be any cubic extension with generator y with minimal polynomial X3+eX2+fX+g, where e,f,g∈F. Then there exists a generator z of L/F with minimal polynomial of the form
- (1)
X3−a* with a=−27g2+f327g3 and z=fy+3g3gy, when 3eg=f2.*
2. (2)
- (a)
X3−3X−a* with a=−2−(3ge−f2)3(27g2−9efg+2f3)2 and z=(3eg−f2)(fy+3g)−(6efg−f3−27g2)y+3g(3eg−f2), when 3eg=f2 and p=3.*
2. (b)
X3+aX+a2* with*
a=f3g2* and z=f2gy, when e=0,*
a=e6−f2e2+ge3+f3* and z=e4(ey−f)−f2e2+ge3+f3, when e=0 and −f2e2+ge3+f3=0,*
and p=3.
By the previous theorem, we know that when 3eg=f2, then L/F is purely cubic when p=3, and that L/F is purely inseparable when p=3.
1.2. Purely cubic extensions
In order to obtain a complete classification of cubic extensions (up to isomorphism), we still need a criterion deciding when two cubic extensions are isomorphic. When p=3, we have two possible types of generating equations: y3−3y−a and y3−a. So we first need to determine when the minimal equation y3−3y−a=0 represents a purely cubic extension. In this section, we obtain a criterion for the coefficients of the minimal polynomial of a cubic extension L/F which determines whether or not the extension is purely cubic.
Theorem 1.4**.**
Suppose p=3. Let L/F be a cubic extension and y a primitive element with minimal polynomial
[TABLE]
where a∈F.
Then, L/F is purely cubic if, and only if, the polynomial S(X)=X2+aX+1 has a root in F. Let c be a root of S(X) in F. In other words, F(c) is the purely cubic closure for L/F. More precisely,
[TABLE]
is a purely cubic generator for L(c)/F(c) such that u3=c if, and only if,
[TABLE]
is a generator of L/F with minimal polynomial T(X).
Proof.
Suppose that p=3. Let L/F be a cubic extension and y a primitive element such that y3−3y−a=0.
Any primitive element of L/F is of the form u=gy+hey+f for e,f,g,h∈F, since the elements of the set {y,uy,u,1} are linearly dependent over F. Moreover, e,g are not both equal to [math], since u is a primitive element. We wish to determine which extensions admit a primitive element u such that u3=c, for some c∈F. Note that c cannot be a cube, since L/F is a cubic extension. We have that u3=c and u=gy+hey+f is equivalent to
[TABLE]
Equivalently, since y3=3y+a,
[TABLE]
As {1,y,y2} forms a basis of L/F, we then have that
[TABLE]
Note that f and g are nonzero. Indeed, if f=0, then by (1) either g=0 or h=0 since c=0. When g=0, by (2), e=0, but g and e cannot be both zero, hence this case is impossible. When h=0, (2) implies that c is a cube, which is also impossible. Similarly, if g=0, since e and g are not both zero, (1) implies that f is zero, and by the previous argument this is impossible.
Since f and g are nonzero, without loss of generality, one can suppose that f=−1 and g=1, as u is a purely cubic generator, then lu is also a purely cubic generator, for any nonzero l∈F. Replacing these values in the previous system yields the new system
[TABLE]
From (1), h=−ce2 since c=0, and substitution in (2) and (3) lead to
[TABLE]
From (1) and the fact that c is a noncube, we find e=c, and substituting in (2), we obtain c2+ac+1=0. Moreover, h=−ce2=−c. Thus, in order for L/F to be purely cubic, the polynomial X2+aX+1 needs to have a root c in F, and if this is the case, then
[TABLE]
is such that
[TABLE]
Thus the theorem.
∎
We note that in the Galois case, this purely cubic closure is simply an extension by a primitive third root of unity.
Corollary 1.5**.**
Suppose that F does not contain a primitive 3rd root of unity. Let L/F be a Galois geometric extension and y a primitive element such that f(y)=y3−3y−a=0. Then F(ξ) is purely cubic closure for L/F.
Proof.
Suppose F does not contain a primitive 3rd root of unity. Let L/F be a Galois geometric extension and y a primitive element such that f(y)=y3−3y−a=0. Let c± denote the two roots of the quadratic polynomial S(X)=X2+aX+1. Let r be a root of the quadratic resolvent
[TABLE]
of the cubic polynomial X3−3X−a. The element r lies in F by [1, Theorem 2.3], as L/F is by supposition Galois.
We will prove that one can find a root of the polynomial S(X) which is of the form ur+v with u and v∈F(ξ). We note that
[TABLE]
We then determine whether there exists a solution to the system
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
Note that if ξ is a primitive 3rd root of unity, then v+=3a(ξ−1) and v−=3a(−ξ−2) are the two roots of the previous equation, which yields
u+=92ξ+1 and u−=9−2ξ−1. Thus, the two roots of the polynomial X2+aX+1 are given by
[TABLE]
As a consequence, F(c±)=F(ξ).
∎
1.3. Isomorphic cubics
Now, we consider two cubic extensions L1 and L2 of F, and we wish to give criteria which determine when they are isomorphic (we write L1≃L2 when this is so).
1.3.1. p=3
When p=3, if L1≃L2, then L1 is purely cubic if, and only if, L2 is purely cubic. In order to determine when L1 or L2 are purely cubic, we use Corollary 1.3 and Theorem 1.4. When both L1 and L2 are both purely cubic, we use the following result to determine if L1≃L2. Note that we do not assuming in the following lemma that any of the cubic extensions are Galois.
Theorem 1.6**.**
Suppose that L1/F and L2/F are two cubic extensions, with yi a generator of Li/F and yi3=ai with ai∈F, for each i=1,2. Then the following assertions are equivalent:
- (1)
L1≃L2,
2. (2)
y1=cy2j* where j=1,2 and c∈F,*
3. (3)
a1=c3a2j* where j=1,2 and c∈F.*
Proof.
(2) and (3) are clearly equivalent. We now prove that (1) and (2) are equivalent.
If y1=cy2j where j=1,2 and c∈F, then clearly, L1≃L2. For the converse, suppose then that L1≃L2. Thus y1∈L(y2), so that there are e,f,g∈F such that y1=ey22+fy2+g. Thus
[TABLE]
which lies in F. As {y22,y2,1} is a basis of L2/F, we therefore have the following system:
[TABLE]
If g=0, then 3fe2a2=0 in which case either e=0 or f=0. In both cases, the theorem is proven. If g=0 and f=0, then 3eg2=0 implies e=0, which is impossible, as y1 is a generator of L1/K. Thus, if g=0, then f=0. If, on the other hand, g and f are not [math], then we may compute f⋅(1)−g⋅(2), which yields
[TABLE]
As y2 defines a cubic extension, a2 is not a cube; thus e=0, and by (1), 3f2g=0, which implies that either f=0 or g=0. If e=0 and f=0, then y1 does not generate L1, a contradiction. We are thus left with the case e=0 and g=0, whence y1 satisfies the theorem once again. ∎
We easily obtain from this the following corollary, which describes the Galois action on a purely cubic generator in the Galois closure of a purely cubic extension.
Corollary 1.7**.**
Let y1 and y2 be two distinct roots of an irreducible polynomial X3−3X−a in F. Then y1=ξy2 where ξ is a primitive 3rd root of unity.
Now, we suppose that L1 is impurely cubic, and that L1≃L2, whence L2 is also impurely cubic. Moreover, since p=3, Li has a generator yi such that yi3−3yi=ai where ai∈F by Corollary 1.3, and the polynomial X2+aiX+1 is irreducible over F by Theorem 1.4. The following result describes when the two extensions L1 and L2 are isomorphic, which concludes the classification of cubics up to isomorphism when p=3.
Theorem 1.8**.**
Suppose that L1/F and L2/F are two cubic extensions, with yi a generator of Li/F and yi3−3yi=ai with ai∈F such that the polynomial X2+aiX+1 is irreducible over F, for each i=1,2. Then the following assertions are equivalent:
- (1)
L1≃L2,
2. (2)
y1=αy22+βy2−2α, where α,β∈F such that α2+a2αβ+β2=1 and
3. (3)
a1=−3a2α2β+a2β3+6α+α3a22−8α3, where α,β∈F such that α2+a2αβ+β2=1.
Proof.
Suppose that L1/F and L2/F are two cubic extensions, with yi a generator of Li/F and yi3−3yi=ai with ai∈F, for each i=1,2. We let ci be a root of the polynomial X2+aiX+1, for each i=1,2.
Suppose L1≃L2. We have that L1(c1)/F(c1) is purely cubic by Theorem 1.4 and since L1≃L2, then L1(c1)≃L2(c2); thus L2(c2)/F(c1) is purely cubic and F(c1)=F(c2) since c2∈F(c1). By Theorem 1.4, we then know that
[TABLE]
is a pure cubic generator of Li(ci)/F(ci) such that ui3=ci, i=1,2.
By Lemma 1.6, we have that u1=du2j where j=1,2 and d∈F(c1)=F(c2) and c1=d3c2j.
Note that ui can also be expressed via the basis 1, yi, yi2 as
[TABLE]
Similarly,
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
When j=1,
[TABLE]
We set α=d(c2a2+2)c2(1−d2) and β=d(c2a2+2)(1−c22d2). As L1≃L2 and {y22, y2, 1} form a basis, α and β are in F. Moreover,
[TABLE]
since c22+a2c2+1=0.
When j=2, as u23=c2, we have
[TABLE]
As before, setting α=d(c2a2+2)(c22d2−1) and β=d(c2a2+2)c2(d2−1), we have that α and β are in F and
[TABLE]
Conversely, if y1=αy22+βy2−2α, where α,β∈F are such that α2+a2αβ+β2=1, and y2 is such that y23−3y2−a2=0, then
[TABLE]
Clearly, (2) and (3) are also equivalent.
∎
The next corollary then describes the Galois action on the generator in the Galois closure.
Corollary 1.9**.**
Let y1 and y2 be two distinct roots of an irreducible polynomial X3−3X−a in F. Then
[TABLE]
where f∈F is a root of the polynomial
[TABLE]
Proof.
From Corollary 1.7 and following the proof of Theorem 1.8, as u1=ξu2, we have that (∗) is satisfied with d=ξ. Thus,
[TABLE]
In (1) we set f=ξ(ca+2)1−ξ2c2=−ξ(ca+2)ξca+1, then
[TABLE]
since c2=−ca−1. Moreover, a2f+1=ξ(ca+2)c(1−ξ2). Hence the result.
∎
Remark 1.10**.**
Note that f in Corollary 1.9 is such that f=3(a2−4)−6+ar, where r is a root of the quadratic resolvent
[TABLE]
of the polynomial f(X).
1.3.2. p=3
When p=3, if L1≃L2, then L1 is separable if, and only if, L2 is separable. Note that if L1 and L2 is inseparable, then L1≃L2, by the proof of Lemma 1.6, since (1) and (2) in the proof are always satisfied. If L1 and L2 are separable, then the following Theorem accomplishes what we need, in accordance with Corollary 1.3.
Theorem 1.11**.**
Suppose that p=3, and let Li=F(yi)/F (i=1,2) be two separable extensions of degree 3 of the form yi3+aiyi+ai2=0, ai∈F, i=1,2. Then the following statements are equivalent:
- (1)
L1≃L2.
2. (2)
y2=−β(a1jy1+a11w)*
where w∈F, j=1,2 and β=−ja1−(a1w3+w)∈F;*
3. (3)
[TABLE]
where j=1,2 and w∈F.
Proof.
Via evaluation of the discriminant of the polynomial X3+aiX+ai2, the Galois closure of Li is seen to be Li(bi) where bi2=−ai. Moreover, Li(bi)/Fi(bi) is an Artin-Schreier extension with Artin-Schreier generator biyi possessing minimal polynomial X3−X+bi. Suppose that L1≃L2. Then L1(b1)=L2(b2) is the common Galois closure of L1/F and L2/F, and b1y1 and b2y2 are two Artin-Schreier generators of the same Artin-Schreier extension. Thus, by [10, Proposition 5.8.6], we know that b2y2=jb1y1+c with 1≤j≤2 and c∈F, and that
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
As y2∈F(y1), we have that b2c∈F, b1b2∈F, whence w:=b1c∈F. Multiplication of (∗) by b1 yields
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Conversely, suppose that (1) holds, where w∈F and β=−ja1−(a1w3+w). Then, since y13=−a1y1−a12, we have
[TABLE]
where a2=a1β2.
Finally, one may easily compute that conditions (2) and (3) are equivalent.
∎
In this case, we also deduce from Lemma 1.11 the Galois action on the generator in the Galois closure via the following corollary.
Corollary 1.12**.**
Let p=3, and let y1 and y2 be two distinct roots in F of an irreducible polynomial X3+aX+a2. Then y1=y2+lb, where b2=−a and l=1,2.
Proof.
Following the notation in the proof of Theorem 1.11, we have that by1=by2+l where l=1,2 and b2=−a since byi, i=1,2 are roots of an Artin-Schreier polynomial. Thus y1=y2+lb.
∎
1.4. Galois cubics
We conclude this section with the classification of Galois cubics. In this section, we will prove that if L/F is a Galois cubic extension, then
- (1)
If p=3, then L/F is an Artin-Schreier extension; that is, there is a generator y of L/F such that y3−y−a with a∈F.
2. (2)
If p=3 and F contains a primitive 3rd root of unity, then L/F is an Kummer extension; that is, there is a generator y of L/F such that y3−a with a∈F.
3. (3)
If p=3 and F does not contain a primitive 3rd root of unity, then L/F is an extension with a generator y of L/F such that y3−3y−a2+a+12a2+2a−1 with a∈F.
Parts (1) and (2) are well known; we include a proof to illustrate how these forms can be deduced directly from Corollary 1.3 to give a explicit Artin-Schreier (resp., Kummer) generator.
Theorem 1.13**.**
Let p=3, let L/F be a Galois extension of degree 3. Then there is a primitive element z such that its minimal polynomial is of the form R(z)=z3−z−a. Furthermore, this primitive element is explicitly determined.
Proof.
By Corollary 1.3, we know that there is a primitive element y′ such that its minimal polynomial is of the form
[TABLE]
The discriminant of such a polynomial is equal to −4b3. As L/F is Galois, the discriminant is a square, thus −b is a square, say −b=a2. With y=y′/a, it follows that y3−y=a.
∎
In the case that p=3, a cubic extension L/K being Galois, F containing a primitive 3rd root of unity and L/K being purely cubic are closely related as explained in the following theorem.
Theorem 1.14**.**
Let p=3. Let L/F be a cubic extension.
- (1)
If F contains a primitive 3rd root of unity, then L/F is Galois if, and only if, it is purely cubic.
2. (2)
If L/F is purely cubic, then L/F is Galois if, and only if, F contains a primitive 3rd root of unity.
Proof.
Let p=3. Let L/F be a cubic extension.
- (1)
Suppose that F contains a primitive 3rd root of unity ξ.
Suppose that L/F is purely cubic. Then we may find a primitive element y such that its minimal polynomial is y3=a, for some a∈F. In the usual way, the three elements y, ξy, and ξ2y are the roots of the minimal polynomial of y, and they are all contained in L. Thus, L/F is Galois, and Gal(L/F)=Z/3Z.
Suppose now that L/F is Galois, and let y be a primitive element of L/F with minimal equation y3+ey2+fy+g=0. By Corollary 1.3, if 3eg=f2, then L/F is purely cubic. Suppose then that 3eg=f2. By Corollary 1.3, there exists a primitive element z (which is explicitly determined) with minimal polynomial T(X)=X3−3X−a.
By Corollary 1.5, we have that L/K is purely cubic, and Theorem 1.5 gives an explicit purely cubic genererator.
2. (2)
Suppose L/F be a purely cubic extension, so that y3=a for some a∈F. As in [1, Theorem 2.3], L/K is Galois if, and only if,
- ∙
p=2 and the discriminant Δ=−27a2 is a square in F, which in turn is equivalent to F containing a primitive 3rd root of unity, or
2. ∙
p=2 and the resolvent polynomial R(X)=X2+aX+a2 is reducible, which is true if, and only if, X2+X+1 is reducible, i.e., F contains a primitive 3rd root of unity.
∎
Theorem 1.14 proves that when F contains a primitive 3rd root of unity, a cubic extension L/F is Galois if, and only if, the extension L/F is purely cubic. Particularly, when F does not contain a primitive 3rd root of unity and L/F is Galois, then by Corollary 1.3, L/F admits a primitive element with minimal polynomial of the form X3−3X−a, where a∈F. It follows that when p=3, it remains to identify the Galois extensions with a generator with minimal polynomial of the form X3−3X−a, where a∈F.
Shanks studied Galois cubic extensions of Q with generation
[TABLE]
where a∈Z [8]. This led also to the definition of a Shanks cubic function field [7] as a Galois cubic extension L/Fq(x) with generating equation y3+ay2−(a+3)y+1, where a∈Fq[x]. We note that over Q or Fq(x), the Shanks cubics so defined do not include all Galois cubic extensions. One may, however, show that any Galois cubic extension L/F such that F does not contain a primitive 3rd root of unity admits a generator y with minimal equation X3+aX2−(a+3)X+1, where a∈F. We give the proof of this, which A. Brumer shared with us in a helpful discussion; we will use this form to identify the missing Galois extensions.
Lemma 1.15**.**
Let p=3. Suppose that F does not contain a primitive 3rd root of unity. A Galois cubic extension L/F has a primitive element y with minimal polynomial X3+aX2−(a+3)X+1, where a∈F. Moreover, σ(y)=−1/(y−1), where σ is a generator of Gal(L/F).
Proof.
Let L=F(z), and let Σ be a generator of the Galois group Gal(F(z)/F). Then σ(z)=Σ(z), where
[TABLE]
where we denote Σ(z)=(az+b)/(cz+d). As σ is of order 3, we have Σ3−I=0, where I denotes the 2×2 identity matrix, and the minimal polynomial of Σ is a polynomial of degree 1 or 2 dividing X3−1=(X−1)(X2+X+1). The polyomial X2+X+1 is irreducible, as F does not contain a primitive 3rd root of unity by assumption. Thus, the minimal polynomial is either X−1 or X2+X+1. If the minimal polynomial is X−1, then 1 is the only eigenvalue for Σ, and thus Σ is either similar to I or
[TABLE]
but neither of these has order 3, as p=3. It follows that the minimal polynomial of Σ is equal to X2+X+1 and therefore similar to the matrix
[TABLE]
Thus, there is a matrix S∈GL2(F) such that
[TABLE]
We let y=S−1(z). We obtain
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
Moreover, y is a root of the polynomial
[TABLE]
We note that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Defining
[TABLE]
we then have
[TABLE]
and the minimal polynomial of y is X3+aX2−(a+3)X+1, with a∈F.
∎
In next result, we prove that when F does not contain a primitive 3rd root of unity, any Galois cubic extension has a generator y with minimal polynomial
[TABLE]
announced at the beginning of §1. In doing so, we give an explicit one-to-one correspondence between y and the generator z with minimal polynomial of the form X3+aX2−(a+3)X+1.
Theorem 1.16**.**
Let p=3. Suppose that F does not contain a primitive 3rd root of unity. Let L/F be a Galois cubic extension.
Then there is a generator w of L/F whose minimal polynomial equal to
[TABLE]
where b∈F. More precisely, y is a generator with minimal polynomial X3+aX2−(a+3)X+1, where a∈F if, and only if, w=3−(a+3)y3+ay is a generator with minimal polynomial equal to X3−3X−a2+3a+92a2+6a−9, where a=3b∈F. Furthermore, σ(y)=−1/(y−1) and σ(w)=−(b2−1)w+(b2+b+1)(b2+b+1)w+b(b−2), where σ is a fixed choice of generator of Gal(L/F).
Proof.
By Lemma 1.15, we have that there is a generator y with minimal polynomial X3+aX2−(a+3)X+1, where a∈F. Via the change of basis
[TABLE]
(see Theorem 1.3), where M is the matrix defined as
[TABLE]
we find via Corollary 1.3 that w satisfies the cubic equation
[TABLE]
Letting b=3a, we then obtain
[TABLE]
Moreover,
[TABLE]
Finally, the reverse transformation
[TABLE]
converts this generator w into a Shank generator.
∎
Remark 1.17**.**
We note that the quantity a2+a+1=(a+ξ)(a+ξ2) in Theorem 1.16 is a norm of F(ξ) over F.
Suppose that F=K is a global field, i.e., a function field over a finite field, or a number field. If the base field F=K is a function field with field of constants Fq, let OK,x denote the ring of integers of K over Fq[x], where x∈K\Fq. Then one can write the element b in the Theorem 1.16 as b=BA with A,B∈OK,x. If the base field K is a number field, then the same can be done in OK, the ring of integers over Z in K. We obtain the following corollary in terms of this decomposition.
Corollary 1.18**.**
Let K be a global field which does not contain a primitive 3rd root of unity, and let L/K be a Galois cubic extension.
Then there is a generator w of L/K with minimal polynomial equal to
[TABLE]
where A,B lie in OK,x if K/Fq is a function field and OK if K is a number field.
When K=Q, or K=Fq(x) with q≡−1mod3, this yields an additional corollary on the irreducible factors appearing in the denominator of the parameter b in the form X3−3X−b.
Proposition 1.19**.**
Let K=Q, or K=Fq(x) with q≡−1mod3, and let L/K a Galois cubic extension. By Theorem 1.16, L/K has a primitive element with minimal polynomial of the form
[TABLE]
with b=QP, where P,Q∈Z or Fq[x] such that (P,Q)=1. Then we have
[TABLE]
- (1)
if K=Q, then each Qi is a prime number such that Qi≡1mod3 and w=±1; and
2. (2)
if K=Fq(x) with q≡−1mod3, then each Qi∈Fq[x] is unitary and irreducible of even degree and w∈Fq∗.
Proof.
Let ξ be a primitive 3rd root of unity.
- (1)
By [5, Corollary 10.4], a prime number p splits in Q(ξ) if, and only if, p≡1mod3. Moreover, by [5, Proposition 10.2] , the ring of integers of Q(ξ) is equal to Z[ξ], and by [11, Theorem 11.1], the ring Z[ξ] is a unique factorisation domain. Thus, Qi is a prime number with Qi≡1mod3, if and only if
[TABLE]
where Ai,Bi∈Z are coprime.
2. (2)
By [3, Theorem 3.46], an irreducible polynomial over Fq of degree n factors over Fqk[x] into gcd(k,n) irreducible polynomials of degree n/gcd(k,n). It follows that an irreducible polynomial over Fq factors in Fq2 into polynomials of smaller degree if, and only if, gcd(2,n)>1, i.e., 2∣n. As a consequence, the irreducible polynomials in Fq2[x] are those irreducible polynomials of odd degree in Fq[x] or those occurring as factors of irreducible polynomials of even degree in Fq[x]. Thus, only even degree irreducible polynomials Qi∈Fq[x] can be written as a norm
[TABLE]
with Ai,Bi∈Fq[x] coprime.
Since in both cases, the norm map sending α+ξβ to α2+αβ+β2 is multiplicative and K(ξ) is a unique factorisation domain, we obtain the result.
∎
Remark 1.20**.**
Conversely, when Q=w∏iQi is of the form specified in Proposition 1.19, then one may find a Galois extension with primitive element possessing minimal polynomial of the form
[TABLE]
with b=QP, where P∈Z or Fq[x]. As K(ξ) is a unique factorisation domain, it follows that any Qi can be uniquely written as a product Qi=(Ai+ξBi)(Ai+ξ2Bi). Therefore, writing each irreducible factor Qi∣Q in this way, and using the norm map, we may then write Q=A2+AB+B2 for some A,B∈Z or Fq[x]. These coprime A and B are precisely all of the possible such elements of Z or Fq[x] which result in a Galois cubic extension with generation y3−3y−QP, and for such a Galois extension, P=2A2+2AB−B2. This remark together with Proposition 1.19 thus describes how to obtain all Galois cubic extensions of Q, and of Fq(x) when q≡−1mod 3.
2. Decomposition of cubic polynomials over a finite field
Let Fs denote a finite field with s=pm elements, where p is a prime integer. In this section, we use the forms of Corollary 1.3 to obtain a simple characterisation of the irreducibility and splitting of cubic polynomials over any finite field. This will be needed for our detailed study of ramification and splitting for cubic function fields.
As it will be useful in a few results which follow, particularly in characteristics 2 and 3, we state the usual definition of the trace map from the finite field Fs=Fpm to the prime field Fp:
[TABLE]
If f(X)=X3+eX2+fX+g is any cubic polynomial where e,f,g∈Fs, then by Theorem 1.2, f(X) is reducible in the following cases:
g=0
−27g2−2f3+9egf=0 (∗)
p=3, −f2e2+ge3+f3=0
Furthermore, in the proof of Theorem 1.2, we give an explicit root of f(X) in each of these cases. It follows that when any of these occur, we may write f(X)=(X−r)Q(X), where r∈Fs is this explicit root and Q(X)∈Fs[X] is quadratic, so that it remains only to study the splitting of a quadratic polynomial over Fs. We have:
If p=2, then as is true for a quadratic polynomial over a field of characteristic zero, Q(X) is reducible over Fs if, and only if, its discriminant is a square in Fs, and Q(X) has distinct roots when this discriminant is nonzero.
If p=2, the discriminant is not the requisite tool; instead, the trace map Tr(⋅) defined above may be used [6, Proposition 1].
On the other hand, when the cases listed in (∗) above do not occur, then also as in Theorem 1.2, there is an explicit change of variable which reduces the study of the decomposition of f(X) over Fs to one of the following three forms of polynomial:
- (1)
X3−a, a∈Fs;
2. (2)
X3−3X−a, a∈Fs, when p=3;
3. (3)
X3+aX+a2, a∈Fs, when p=3.
In this section, we thus proceed to study the decomposition of these forms over Fs.
2.1. X3−a, a∈Fs
In characteristic 3, the study is immediate, as X3−a is irreducible if, and only if, a is not a cube, and as soon as a is a cube, say a=b3, b∈Fs, then X3−a=(X−b)3. Thus, we are left to study the case p=3. We let ξ denote a primitive 3rd root of unity.
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let p=3 and f(X)=X3−a, where a∈Fs. Then all possible decompositions of f(X) over Fs are as follows:
- (1)
f(X)* is irreducible if, and only if, s≡1mod3 and a(s−1)/3=ξi, for some i=1,2.*
2. (2)
f(X)=(X−α)Q(X)* where α∈Fs and Q(X) is an irreducible quadratic polynomial if, and only if, s≡−1mod3.*
3. (3)
The case f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)2 with α,β∈Fs and α=β cannot occur.
4. (4)
f(X)* has a unique root with multiplicity 3 if, and only if, a=0.*
5. (5)
f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)(X−γ)* with α,β,γ∈Fs distinct if, and only if, s≡1mod3 and a(s−1)/3=1.*
Proof.
- (1)
A cubic polynomial over any field is irreducible if, and only if, it has no root in that field. Thus, f(X) is irreducible if, and only if, a is not a cube in Fs. If s≡−1mod3, then a is always a cube. Indeed, any element b∈Fs is a cube: Fs∗ is a group under multiplication of order s−1, and by Lagrange’s theorem, bs−1=1 in Fs. Thus, b2s−1=b. If s≡−1mod3, then there is l∈Z such that s=3l−1 and b2s−1=b6l−3=(b2l−1)3=b, whence b is a cube.
As a consequence, if a is not a cube, then s≡1mod3. Furthermore, if s≡1mod3, so that
3∣s−1, we let y in Fs be a root of X3−a. We may write
[TABLE]
in Fs. Also, Gal(Fs3/Fs)=⟨ϕ⟩, where ϕ is the Frobenius automorphism of Fs3 over Fs sending α→αs. The polynomial f(X) is irreducible over Fs if, and only if, Fs(y)=Fs3. This is equivalent to ys−1=ξi, with i=1,2. Indeed, when ys=y, then Gal(Fs(y)/Fs)={Id}, whence Fs(y)=Fs, so that X3−a would not be irreducible and when ys=y, then as ξy and ξ2y are the other two roots of X3−a and ϕ∈Gal(Fs(y)/Fs), then ϕ sends a root of X3−a to another such root, so that ys=ξiy for some i=1,2. In this case, ∣Gal(Fs(y)/Fs)∣=3 and X3−a is irreducible.
2. (2)
f(X)=(X−α)Q(X) where α∈Fs and Q(X) is an irreducible quadratic polynomial, if and only if f(X) has a root α in Fs and the two other roots ξα and ξ2α are not in Fs. Equivalently, a is a cube and ξ∈/Fs .Thus, using what we proved in (1), we obtain the result.
3. (3)
If f(X) has a root α, then since the two other roots are ξα and ξ2α, it follows immediately that these three roots are all distinct unless α=0, in which case they are all equal. Thus, the case f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)2 with α,β∈Fs and α=β cannot occur.
4. (4)
If f(X)=(X−α)3, then the equality X3−a=(X−α)3=X3−3αX2+3α2X−α3 implies that −α3=0. It again follows that α=0, and hence that X3−a=X3, which holds if, and only if, a=0.
5. (5)
This is the complement of all other cases.
∎
2.2. X3−3X−a, a∈Fs, p=3
This is the only case remaining for the study of the splitting of a polynomial over a finite field when p=3.
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let p=3 and f(X)=X3−3X−a, where a∈Fs. We denote by Δ:=−27(a2−4) the discriminant of f(X) and δ∈Fs such that δ2=a2−4. Then all possible decompositions of f(X) over Fs are as follows:
- (1)
f(X)* is irreducible if, and only if,*
- (a)
p=2,
- (i)
s≡1mod3, Δ is a non-zero square and 21(a+δ) is not a cube in Fs, or
2. (ii)
s=5* and a=±1; or*
2. (b)
p=2* (s=2m), a=0, Tr(1/a2)=Tr(1), and the roots of T2+aT+1 are non-cubes in Fs, when m is even (resp. in Fs2, when m is odd).*
2. (2)
f(X)=(X−α)Q(X)* where α∈Fs and Q(X) is an irreducible quadratic polynomial if, and only if,*
- (a)
p=2* and Δ is a non-square in Fs; or*
2. (b)
p=2, a=0, and Tr(1/a2)=Tr(1).
3. (3)
f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)2* with α,β∈Fs and α=β if, and only if, a=±2.*
4. (4)
f(X)* may never have a unique root with multiplicity 3.*
5. (5)
f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)(X−γ)* with α,β,γ∈Fs distinct if, and only if, a=±2 and*
- (a)
p=2, Δ is a square, and either
- ∙
s≡1mod3, and 21(a+δ) is a cube in Fs, or
2. ∙
s=5, or
3. ∙
s=5* and a=±1;*
or
2. (b)
p=2* (s=2m), Tr(1/a2)=Tr(1) and the roots of T2+aT+1 are cubes in Fs, when m is even (resp. in Fs2, when m is odd).*
Proof.
-
(1)
-
(a)
Suppose p=2. We denote by t a root of the polynomial X2+3 in Fs.
- (i)
Suppose also that s≡1mod3. Thus, −3 is a square in Fs and Fs(t)=Fs. As −3 is a square in Fs, it follows that a2−4 is a square in Fs if, and only if, Δ is. When Δ is a square in Fs, there is δ∈Fs such that a2−4=δ2. By [2, Theorem 3], the polynomial f(X) is irreducible over Fs if, and only if, its discriminant Δ is a nonzero square and the element 21(a+δ) is a non-cube in Fs.
2. (ii)
If s≡−1mod3, then again by [2, Theorem 3], the irreducible cubic polynomials in Fs[X] are given by
[TABLE]
where ν∈Fs(t) is a non-cube in Fs(t). Note that Fs(t)=Fs2 since s≡−1mod3. Thus, if X3−3X−a is an irreducible polynomial in Fs[X], then
[TABLE]
for a non-cube ν∈Fs(t). We also have
[TABLE]
As ν∈Fs(t), it must also be true that ν is a (s2−1)st root of unity. Thus
[TABLE]
so that 31(s−2) divides (s−1), i.e.,
[TABLE]
As (s−2,s−1)=1, we obtain (s−2)∣3. As s≥p>3, it follows that s=p=5. Hence
[TABLE]
so that by (∗), a=ν5+ν for the non-cube 6th root of unity ν. Let ζ∈F25 be a primitive 6th root of unity. As ν is a non-cube in F25, it follows that ν=ζi for some i=1,2,4,5, and thus that ν is either a primitive 3rd or 6th root of unity.
In the case that ν is a primitive 3rd root of unity, we have
[TABLE]
whereas when ν is a primitive 6th root of unity, as ν2=ν−1, we have
[TABLE]
It follows that in this case, X3−3X−a is irreducible over Fs if, and only if, s=5 and a=±1.
2. (b)
When p=2, then by [12, Theorem 1], the polynomial
[TABLE]
is irreducible over Fs if, and only if, Tr(1/a2)=Tr(1) and the roots of
[TABLE]
are non-cubes in Fs, when m is even (resp. in Fs2, when m is odd).
2. (2)
f(X)=(X−α)Q(X), where α∈Fs and Q(X) is an irreducible quadratic polynomial if and only if f(X) has a root α in Fs and the two other roots α1 and α2 are not in Fs.
As noted in Corollary 1.9 and Remark 1.10, the other two roots of f(X) in Fs are given by
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and r is a root of the quadratic resolvent
[TABLE]
of f(X). As a consequence, f(X)=(X−α)Q(X) where α∈Fs and Q(X) is irreducible quadratic if, and only if, f(X) is not irreducible and R(X) is irreducible in Fs. The discriminant of R(X) is equal to Δ=−27(a2−4), whence irreducibility of R(X) over Fs is equivalent to Δ a non-square in Fs when p=2. When p=2, we can rewrite R(X) as R(X)=X2+aX+(1+a2). Taking Y=X/a, we obtain
[TABLE]
This polynomial is irreducible if, and only if, Tr(1+a21)=0, that is, Tr(a21)=Tr(1) (see, [6, Proposition 1]). Hence the result.
3. (3)
The equality f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)2 gives us
[TABLE]
Thus α=−2β.
We therefore have −3=β2−4β2=−3β2 and a=−2β3. The first of these implies that
[TABLE]
Thus β=±1 and a=∓2. Conversely, when a=∓2, then
[TABLE]
Hence the result.
4. (4)
If f(X)=(X−α)3, then the equality X3−3X−a=(X−α)3=X3−3αX2+3α2X−α3 implies that −3α=0 and 3α2=−3. As p=3, this is impossible.
5. (5)
This is the complement of all other cases.
∎
2.3. X3+aX+a2, a∈Fs, p=3
This is the final case we must consider.
Lemma 2.3**.**
Let p=3 and f(X)=X3+aX+a2, where a∈Fs. Then all possible decompositions of f(X) over Fs are as follows:
- (1)
f(X)* is irreducible if, and only if, −a is a non-zero square in Fs, say −a=b2, and Tr(b)=0.*
2. (2)
f(X)=(X−α)Q(X)* where α∈Fs and Q(X) is an irreducible quadratic polynomial if, and only if, a a non-square in ∈Fs.*
3. (3)
The case f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)2 with α,β∈Fs and α=β may never occur.
4. (4)
f(X)* has a unique root with multiplicity 3 if, and only if, a=0.*
5. (5)
f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)(X−γ)* with α,β,γ∈Fs distinct if, and only if, −a is a non-zero square in Fs say −a=b2, and Tr(b)=0.*
Proof.
This is a direct consequence of [12, Theorem 2], that the case
[TABLE]
with α,β∈Fs and α=β never occurs, and that f(X) has a unique root with multiplicity 3 if, and only if, a=0.
To see this, suppose that f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)2 where α=β. Then
[TABLE]
It follows that α=−2β, β2+2αβ=a, and αβ2=−a2. Thus, in this case, a=−3β2=0, from which it follows that f(X) has a root of multiplicity 3. Finally, suppose that
[TABLE]
In particular, it follows that a=0, which in turn implies that a2=0, so that f(X)=X3, whence α=0.
∎
In §3, we will use these criteria to specialise to the case where F=K is a function field over Fq. In this context, we will be able to determine ramification and splitting data of our cubic forms by reducing to residue fields, which are finite, so that all of the results of §2 will apply.
Remark 2.4**.**
If F is an arbitrary field of characteristic different from 2 or 3, then the decomposition of a cubic polynomial over F depends upon the irreducibility of one of the cubic forms
- (1)
X3−a, a∈F
2. (2)
X3−3X−a, a∈F
In case (1), the decomposition of X3−a depends upon where a is a cube in F. In case (2), by Theorem 1.4, given a root c∈F of X2+aX+1, the variable Y=X−ccX−1 satisfies Y3=c. Then, by Theorem 1.4, given a cube root γ∈F of c, we have for each i=0,1,2 that
[TABLE]
are the roots in F of the cubic form X3−3X−a. The decomposition of X3−3X−a is equivalent to determining which αi lie in F and are distinct.
3. Ramification, splitting and Riemann-Hurwitz
In this section, we let F=K denote a function field with field of constants Fq, where q=pn and p>0 is a prime integer. We denote by p a place of K. The degree dK(p) of p is defined as the degree of its residue field, which we denote by k(p), over the constant field Fq. The cardinality of the residue field k(p) may be written as ∣k(p)∣=qdK(p). In an extension L/K and a place P of L over p, we let f(P∣p)=[k(P):k(p)] denote the inertia degree of P∣p. We let e(P∣p) be the ramification index of P∣p, i.e., the unique positive integer such that vP(z)=e(P∣p)vp(z), for all z∈K. If vp(a)≥0, then we let
[TABLE]
denote the image of a in k(p).
Here, we study the ramification and splitting of places in cubic function fields over K, and we give an explicit Riemann-Hurwitz formula for separable cubic function fields over K. We obtain these results for any prime characteristic p, using the classification given in Corollary 1.3, which establishes that any separable cubic extensions L/K has a generator with minimal polynomial equal to one of the following:
- (1)
X3−a, a∈K, when p=3
2. (2)
X3−3X−a, a∈K, when p=3
3. (3)
X3+aX+a2, a∈K, when p=3.
We would like to point out that by Corollary 1.3, if p=3, then every impure cubic extension L/K has a primitive element y with minimal polynomial of the form
[TABLE]
We mention this here, as we will use it whenever this case occurs in §3. When this is used, the element y will denote any such choice of primitive element.
3.1. Constant extensions
In this subsection, we wish to determine when a cubic function field over K is a constant extension of K. We do this before a study of ramification and splitting, as constant extensions are unramified and their splitting behaviour is well understood [10, Chapter 6]. In the subsequent subsections, we will thus assume that our cubic extension L/K is not constant, which, as 3 is prime, is equivalent to assuming that the extension is geometric.
3.1.1. X3−a, a∈K, when p=3
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let p=3, and let L/K be purely cubic, i.e. there exists a primitive element y∈L such that y3=a, a∈K. Then L/K is constant if, and only if, a=ub3, where b∈K and u∈Fq∗ is a non-cube. In other words, there is a purely cubic generator z of L/K such that z3=u, where u∈Fq∗.
Proof.
Suppose that a=ub3, where b∈K and u is a non-cube in Fq∗. Then z=by∈L is a generator of L/K such that z3=u. The polynomial X3−u has coefficients in Fq, and as a consequence, L/K is constant.
Suppose then that L/K is constant. We denote by l the algebraic closure of Fq in L, so that L=Kl. Let l=Fq(λ), where λ satisfies a cubic polynomial X3+eX2+fX+g with e,f,g∈Fq. Hence, L=K(λ). We denote
[TABLE]
As L/F is purely cubic, it then follows by Theorem 1.4 that either 3eg=f2 or the quadratic polynomial X2+αX+1 has a root in K. In both cases, there is a generator λ′∈L such that
[TABLE]
Hence λ′∈l. The elements λ′ and y are two purely cubic generators of L/K, whence by Lemma 1.6, it follows that y=cλ′j where j=1, or 2 and c∈K. Thus, a=c3βj, where β∈Fq. The result follows.
∎
3.1.2. X3−3X−a, a∈K, when p=3
Via Corollary 1.3 and Lemma 1.8 , a proof similar to that of Lemma 3.1 yields the following result.
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let p=3 and L/K be an impurely cubic extension, so that there is a primitive element y∈L such that y3−3y=a (see Corollary 1.3). Then L/K is constant if, and only if,
[TABLE]
for some α,β∈K such that α2+a2αβ+β2=1. In other words, there is a generator z of L/K such that z3−3z=u, where u∈Fq∗.
3.1.3. X3+aX+a2, a∈K, when p=3
In this case, one may prove the following result, similarly to the proof of Lemma 3.1, via Corollary 1.3 and Lemma 1.11.
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let p=3 and L/K be a separable cubic extension, so that there is a primitive element y∈L such that y3+ay+a2=0 (see Corollary 1.3). Then L/K is constant if, and only if,
[TABLE]
for some w∈K and j=1,2. In other words, there is a generator z of L/K such that z3+uz+u2=0, where u∈Fq∗.
3.2. Splitting and ramification
In this section, we describe the splitting and ramifcation of any place of K in a cubic extension L/K. As usual, we divide the analysis into the three fundamental cubic forms derived in Corollary 1.3.
Remark 3.4**.**
Given any place p of K, one may always choose (via weak approximation) an element x∈K\Fq such that p is not above the pole divisor p∞ of x in Fq(x). As [L:Fq(x)]<∞, the integral closure OL,x of the ring Fq[x] in L is a Dedekind domain [10, Theorem 5.7.7] and a holomorphy ring [9, Corollary 3.2.8]: A holomorphy ring is defined in any global field L as the intersection
[TABLE]
for a nonempty, proper subset S of the collection of all places of L. By [9, Theorem 3.2.6], we have OL,x=OS, where S is the collection of places of L which lie above the places of Fq(x) associated to irreducible polynomials in Fq[x]. By construction, the place p of K also lies above a place of Fq(x) associated to an irreducible polynomial in Fq[x], so that all places of L which lie above p belong to S.
As OL,x is Dedekind, it follows that p factors in OL,x as
[TABLE]
where for each i=1,…,r, the quantity e(Pi∣p) is equal to the ramification index of Pi∣p. By [9, Proposition 3.2.9], the collection S is in one-to-one correspondence with the maximal ideals of OS=OL,x, so that the places P1,…,Pr are independent of the choice of such an x.
Also by [9, Proposition 3.2.9], we have for each place P∈S an isomorphism
[TABLE]
where mP is the maximal ideal of OL,x associated to P, OP is the valuation ring at P, and
OP/P is the residue field at the place P. It follows that for each i=1,…,r, the inertia degree f(Pi∣p), too, is independent of such a choice of x. Finally, the ramification indices e(Pi∣p) are also independent of this choice of x: The localisation (OL,x)Pi has maximal ideal mPi, and by the factorisation (2), we have
[TABLE]
One may easily show that (OL,x)Pi=OPi, so that by [5, Corollary 11.2],
[TABLE]
where OPi/p(OPi)Pi, and hence e(Pi∣p), is independent of x. The 2r-tuple
[TABLE]
is called the signature of p in L.
3.2.1. X3−a, a∈K, when p=3
If the extension L/K is purely cubic, one may find a purely cubic generator of a form which is well-suited to a determination of splitting and ramification, as in the following lemma.
Lemma 3.5**.**
Let L/K be a purely cubic extension. Given a place p of K, one may select a primitive element y with minimal polynomial of the form X3−a such that either
- (1)
vp(a)=1,2, or
2. (2)
vp(a)=0.
Such a generator y is said to be in local standard form at p.
Proof.
Let y be a generator of L such that y3=a∈K. Given a place p of K, we write vp(a)=3j+r with r=0,1,2. Via weak approximation, one may find an element c∈K such that vp(c)=j. Then cy is a generator of L such that
[TABLE]
and vp(c3a)=r. Hence the result.
∎
When a purely cubic extension L/K is separable, one may also easily determine the fully ramified places in L/K.
Theorem 3.6**.**
Let p=3, and let L/K be a purely cubic extension. Given a purely cubic generator y with minimal polynomial X3−a, a place p of K is fully ramified if, and only if, (vp(a),3)=1.
Proof.
Let p be a place of K and P be a place of L above p. Suppose that (vp(a),3)=1. Then
[TABLE]
Since (vp(a),3)=1, we obtain 3∣e(P∣p), and as e(P∣p)≤3, it follows that e(P∣p)=3, so that p is fully ramified in L.
Conversely, suppose that (vp(a),3)=1. By Lemma 3.5, we know that there exists a generator z of L such that z3−c=0 and vp(c)=0. By Lemma 2.1, we know that the polynomial X3−a is either
- (1)
irreducible modulo p,
2. (2)
X3−a=(X−α)Q(X)modp, where α∈k(p) and Q(X) is an irreducible quadratic polynomial over modulo p, or
3. (3)
f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)(X−γ) modulo p with α,β,γ∈k(p) all distinct.
In any of these cases, by Kummer’s theorem [9, Theorem 3.3.7], p is either inert or there exist 2 or 3 place above it in L. Thus, p cannot be fully ramified in any case.
∎
By Kummer’s theorem [9, Theorem 3.3.7] and Lemma 2.1, we may also obtain the following theorem for places which do not fully ramify.
Theorem 3.7**.**
Let p=3, and let L/K be a purely cubic extension. Given a place p of K that is not fully ramified, one may select a primitive element y with minimal polynomial of the form X3−a where vp(a)=0. Moreover one can find x∈K such that p is a finite place over Fq(x) and the integral closure of Fq[x] in L is a Dedekind Domain (see Remark 3.4). For this place p and choice of a and x, we have:
- (1)
p* is completely split if, and only if, ∣k(p)∣≡1mod3 and a3∣k(p)∣−1≡1modp. Moreover, f(P∣p)=1 for any place P of L above p. The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).*
2. (2)
p* is inert if, and only if, ∣k(p)∣≡1mod3 and a3∣k(p)∣−1\nequiv1modp. Moreover, f(P∣p)=3 for P is a place of L above p. The signature of p is (1,3).*
3. (3)
pOL,x=P1P2* where P1 and P2 are two distinct places of L if, and only if, ∣k(p)∣≡−1mod3. In this case, up to relabelling, the place P1 satisfies f(P1∣p)=1 and is inert in L(r), whereas f(P2∣p)=2 and P2 splits in L(r). The signature of p is (1,1;1,2).*
3.2.2. X3−3X−a, a∈K, p=3
In order to determine the fully ramified places in extensions of this type, we begin with an elementary, but useful, lemma. These criteria and notation will be employed throughout what follows.
Lemma 3.8**.**
Consider the polynomial X2+aX+1 where a∈K, and let c−,c+ denote the roots of this polynomial. Then c+×c−=1, c++c−=−a, and σ(c±)=c∓, where Gal(K(c±)/K)={Id,σ} when c±∈/K. Let p be a place of K and pc± be a place of K(c±) above p. Furthermore, we have:
- (1)
For any place pc± of K(c±),
[TABLE]
2. (2)
For any place pc± of K(c±) above a place p of K such that vp(a)<0,
[TABLE]
and otherwise, vpc±(c±)=0.
Proof.
- (1)
At any place pc± of K(c±), we have
[TABLE]
whence
[TABLE]
2. (2)
As c±2+ac±+1=0, the elements c±′=ac± satisfy
[TABLE]
Thus, for any place pc± of K(c±) above a place p of K such that vp(a)<0, we obtain
[TABLE]
By the non-Archimedean triangle inequality, this is possible if, and only if, vpc±(c±′)>0 or vpc±(c±′)=0. If vpc±(c±′)>0, then
[TABLE]
If on the other hand vpc±(c±′)=0, we obtain vpc±(c±)=vpc±(a).
Thus, the latter together with part (1) of this lemma implies that either
[TABLE]
or vice versa (with the roles of c− and c+ interchanged).
Moreover, note that pc± is unramified in K(c±)/K so that vpc±(a)=vp(a). For if, when p=2, then K(c±)/K has a generator w such that w2=−27(a2−4) and 2∣vp(−27(a2−4)), thus by Kummer theory, p is unramified and when p=2, K(c±)/K has a generator w such that w2−w=a21 and vp(a21)≥0, thus by Artin-Schreier theory, we have that p is unramified in K(c±), thus the first part of (2).
For any place pc± of K(b) above a place p of K such that vp(a)>0. As
[TABLE]
again using the non-Archimedean triangle inequality, we can only have vpc±(c±′2)<0, whence vpc±(c±′2)=−2vpc±(a).
This implies that vpc±(c±)=0. Finally, via the triangle inequality once more, for any pc± such that vpc±(a)=0, we must have
vpc±(c±)=0.
∎
Theorem 3.9**.**
Let p=3, and let L/K be an impurely cubic extension and y primitive element with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−3X−a. Then the fully ramified places of K in L are precisely those p such that vp(a)<0 and (vp(a),3)=1.
Proof.
As usual, we let ξ be a primitive 3rd root of unity. We also let r be a root of the quadratic resolvent R(X)=X2+3aX+(−27+9a2) of the cubic polynomial X3−3X−a in Kˉ. As in [1, Theorem 2.3], we know that L(r)/K(r) is Galois, and by Corollary 1.5, we have that L(ξ,r)/K(ξ,r) is purely cubic. We denote by p a place in K, Pξ,r a place of L(ξ,r) above p, P=Pξ,r∩L, and pξ,r=Pξ,r∩K(ξ,r). By Corollary 1.5, we know that that L(ξ,r)/K(ξ,r) is Kummer; more precisely, there exists v∈K(ξ,r) such that v3=c where c is a root of the polynomial X2+aX+1.
We thus obtain a tower L(ξ,r)/K(ξ,r)/K(ξ)/K with L(ξ,r)/K(ξ,r) Kummer of degree 3, and where K(ξ,r)/K(ξ) and K(ξ)/K are both Kummer extensions of degree 2. As the index of ramification is multiplicative in towers and the degree of L(ξ,r)/K(ξ,r) and K(ξ,r)/K are coprime, the places of K that fully ramify in L are those places of K which lie below those of K(ξ,r) which fully ramify in L(ξ,r)/K(ξ,r). As L(ξ,r)/K(ξ,r) is Kummer, the places of K(ξ,r) that ramify in L(ξ,r) are described precisely by Kummer theory (see for example [10, Example 5.8.9] as those pξ,r in K(ξ,r) such that
[TABLE]
Lemma 3.8 states that if vp(a)<0, then vpξ,r(c±)=±vpξ,r(a) and that otherwise, vpξ,r(c±)=0. Thus, the ramified places of L/F are those places p below a place pξ,r of K(ξ,r) such that (vpξ,r(a),3)=1. Also,
[TABLE]
where e(pξ,r∣p) is the ramification index of a place p of K in K(ξ,r), equal to 1, 2, or 4, and in any case, coprime with 3. Thus, (vpξ,r(a),3)=1 if, and only if, (vp(a),3)=1. As a consequence of the above argument, it therefore follows that a place p of K is fully ramified in L if, and only if, vp(a)<0.
∎
This theorem yields the following corollaries, the first being immediate.
Corollary 3.10**.**
Suppose that q≡−1mod3. Let L/K be a Galois cubic extension, so that there exists a primitive element y of L with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−3X−a. Then the (fully) ramified places of K in L are precisely those places p of K such that vp(a)<0 and (vp(a),3)=1.
Corollary 3.11**.**
Suppose that q≡−1mod3. Let L/K be a Galois cubic extension, so that there exists a primitive element y of L with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−3X−a. Then, only those places of K of even degree can (fully) ramify in L. More precisely, any place p of K such that vp(a)<0 is of even degree.
Proof.
In Lemma 3.8, it was noted that σ(c±)=c∓ where Gal(K(c±)/K)={Id,σ}, when c±∈/K. Let ξ again be a primitive 3rd root of unity. We denote by p a place of K and pξ a place of K(ξ) above p. We find that
[TABLE]
Note that if σ(pξ)=pξ, it follows that vpξ(c±)=vpξ(c∓). However, by Lemma 3.8, we have that, for any place pξ of K(ξ) above a place p of K such that vp(a)<0, it holds that vpξ(c±)=±vpξ(a),
and that vpξ(c±)=−vpξ(c∓). Thus, for any place pξ of K(ξ) above a place p of K such that vp(a)<0, we find that vpξ(c±)=vpξ(c∓) and thus σ(pξ)=pξ.
Therefore, by [10, Theorem 6.2.1], we obtain that p is of even degree, for any place p of K such that vp(a)<0.
∎
Corollary 3.12**.**
Suppose that q≡−1mod3. Let L/K be a Galois cubic extension, so that there exists a primitive element y of L with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−3X−a. Then one can choose a single place P∞ at infinity in K such that vP∞(a)≥0.
Proof.
One can choose x∈K\Fq such that the place p∞ at infinity for x has the property that all of the places in K above it are of odd degree. In order to accomplish this, we appeal to a method similar to the proof of [10, Proposition 7.2.6]; because there exists a divisor of degree 1 [10, Theorem 6.3.8], there exists a prime divisor P∞ of K of odd degree; for if all prime divisors of K were of even degree, then the image of the degree function of K would lie in 2Z, which contradicts [10, Theorem 6.3.8]. Let d be this degree. Let m∈N be such that m>2gK−1. Then, by the Riemann-Roch theorem [10, Corollary 3.5.8], it follows that there exists x∈K such that the pole divisor of x in K is equal to P∞m. By definition, the pole divisor of x in k(x) is equal to p∞. It follows that
[TABLE]
from which it follows that P∞ is the unique place of K above p∞, and by supposition that P∞ is of odd degree. From this argument, we obtain that, with this choice of infinity, all places above infinity in k(x) are of odd degree. (We also note that we may very well choose m relatively prime to p, whence K/k(x) is also separable; in general, K/k(x) as chosen will not be Galois.)
As q≡−1mod3, L/K is a Galois extension, and y is a primitive element with minimal polynomial of the form X3−3X−a where a∈K, we know that all of the places p of K such that vp(a)<0, and in particular, all the ramified places, are of even degree (see Corollary 3.11). It follows that the process described in this proof gives the desired construction, and the result follows.
∎
Remark 3.13**.**
We note that when K is a rational function field, one may use Corollary 3.12 to show that the parameter a has nonnegative valuation at p∞ for a choice of x such that K=Fq(x), and thus such p∞ is unramified.
We now turn to a determination of splitting in impurely cubic extensions. We remind the reader that in what follows, as in Remark 3.4, while the integral closure OL,x of Fq[x] in L depends upon the choice of x, the residue field k(p) of a place p of K does not.
Theorem 3.14**.**
Let p=3, let L/K be an impurely cubic extension, so that there exists a primitive element y with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−3X−a. We denote by r∈Kˉ a root of the quadratic resolvent R(X)=X2+3aX+(−27+9a2) of f(X). Let p be a place of K. One can find x∈K such that p is a finite place over Fq(x) and the integral closure of Fq[x] in L is a Dedekind Domain (see Remark 3.4). For this place p and choice of x, we have:
- (1)
When vp(a)≥0, then p splits as follows:
- (a)
p* is completely split in L if, and only if,*
- (i)
f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)(X−γ)modp* with α,β,γ∈k(p) all distinct or*
2. (ii)
f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)2modp* with α,β∈k(p) and either r∈K or, r∈/K and p is totally split in K(r).*
The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).
2. (b)
p* is inert in L if, and only if, f(X) is irreducible modulo p. The signature of p is (1,3).*
3. (c)
pOL,x=P1P2* where Pi, i=1,2 place of L above p if, and only if, r∈/K, f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)2modp with α,β∈k(p) and p is inert in K(r). In this case, up to relabelling, the place P1 satisfies f(P1∣p)=1 and is inert in L(r), whereas f(P2∣p)=2 and P2 splits in L(r). The signature of p is (1,1;1,2).*
4. (d)
pOL,x=P12P2* where Pi, i=1,2 place of L above p if, and only if, r∈/K, f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)2modp with α,β∈k(p) and p is ramified in K(r). Moreover f(Pi∣p)=1, for i=1,2, P1 is splits in L(r) and P2 is ramified in L(r).
The signature of p is (2,1;1,1).*
2. (2)
When vp(a)<0, we denote by πp a prime element for p (i.e., vp(πp)=1). The place p splits as follows:
- (a)
pOL,x=P3, where P is a place of L above p if, and only if, (vp(a),3)=1. That is, p is fully ramified. The signature of p is (3,1).
2. (b)
p* is completely split in L if, and only if, 3∣vp(a), ∣k(p)∣≡1modp and (πp−vp(a)a)(∣k(p)∣−1)/3≡1modp. The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).*
3. (c)
p* is inert if, and only if, 3∣vp(a), ∣k(p)∣≡1modp and (πp−vp(a)a)(∣k(p)∣−1)/3≡ξimodp, where i=1,2. The signature of p is (1,3).*
4. (d)
pOL,x=P1P2* where P1 and P2 are two distinct places of L if, and only if, 3∣vp(a) and ∣k(p)∣≡−1modp. In this case, up to relabelling, the place P1 satisfies f(P1∣p)=1 and is inert in L(r), whereas f(P2∣p)=2 and P2 splits in L(r). The signature of p is (1,1;1,2).*
Proof.
- (1)
Let p be a place of K. Suppose that vp(a)≥0.
By Lemma 2.2, f(X) can only be one of the following forms modulo p:
- (I)
f(X) is irreducible;
2. (II)
f(X)=(X−α)Q(X) where α∈k(p) and Q(X) irreducible quadratic polynomial;
3. (III)
f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)2 with α,β∈k(p) and α=β ;
4. (IV)
f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)(X−γ) with α,β,γ∈k(p) all distinct.
In case (I), by Kummer’s theorem [9, Theorem 3.3.7], p is inert. In case (II), by Kummer’s theorem, pOL,x=P1P2, where Pi with i=1,2 are the places above p. In case (IV), by Kummer’s theorem, p splits completely.
Case (III) is thus the only case where Kummer’s theorem is not enough to decide. Suppose that f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)2 with α,β∈k(p) and α=β, by Kummer’s theorem, we know that there is at least two place above p in L thus either
- (a)
pOL,x=P1P2 where Pi, i=1,2 place of L above p, or
2. (b)
pOL,x=P12P2 where Pi, i=1,2 place of L above p, or
3. (c)
pOL,x=P1P2P3 where Pi, i=1,2,3 place of L above p.
We now work on the tower L(r)/K(r)/K, where r is a root the quadratic resolvent of X3−3X−a.
Since X3−3X−a has a root modulo p then it has also a root modulo pr a place in K(r) above p, and since L(r)/K(r) is Galois, it follows by [1, Theorem 2.3] that pr is completely split in L(r).
In particular, if r∈K, i.e., L/K is Galois, then p is completely split in L.
Suppose now that r∈/K. By [5, p. 55], we know that p is completely split in L if, and only if, (1) p is completely split in K(r) and (2) pr completely split in L(r). If p ramifies in K(r), then
[TABLE]
where Pi,r, i=1,2,3 are places above p in L(r). Again via [5, p. 55], p cannot be completely split in L. Thus, either pOL,x=P1P2 or pOL,x=P12P2 where each Pi (i=1,2) is a place of L above p. Note that 2∣e(Pr∣p) for any places Pr in L(r) above p.
If pOL,x=P1P2, then as e(Pi∣p)=1, we have that 2∣e(Pi,r∣Pi)
and pOL,x=P1,r2P2,r2, where Pi,r, i=1,2 are places above p in L(r), which is impossible, as pOL(r)=(P1,rP2,rP3,r)2. Thus, in this case, we must have pOL,x=P12P2 and P1 is split in K(r) and P2 ramifies in K(r).
If p is inert in K(r), then by [5, p. 55], p is not completely split in L, and
[TABLE]
Pi,r, i=1,2,3 are places above p in L(r).
Thus, the only possibility is pOL,x=P1P2 where each Pi (i=1,2) is a place of L above p. Moreover, up to relabelling, P1 is inert in L(r) and P2 is split in L(r). Hence the result.
2. (2)
Suppose vp(a)<0. When (vp(a),3)=1, it is a consequence of Theorem 3.9. When 3∣vp(a), we let t∈N be such that vp(a)=−3t. Then z=πpty is a root of the polynomial X3−3πp2tX−πp−vp(a)a, and vp(πp−vp(a)a)=0. In particular, we have
[TABLE]
Thus the theorem is a consequence of Lemma 2.1.
The inertia degrees are a direct consequence of the fundamental equality [9, Proposition]. ∎
We now determine the splitting only in terms of a. For the purpose of clarity, we split the the argument into cases p=2 and p=2, as the proofs are different in each case.
Corollary 3.15**.**
Suppose that p=2,3. Let L/K be an impurely cubic extension, so that there exists a primitive element y with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−3X−a. We denote Δ=−27(a2−4) the discriminant of X3−3X−a, δ∈K such that δ2=a2−4, and r∈K a root of the quadratic resolvent R(X)=X2+3aX+(−27+9a2) of f(X). Let p be a place of K. One can find x∈K such that p is a finite place over Fq(x) and the integral closure of Fq[x] in L is a Dedekind Domain (see Remark 3.4). For this place p and choice of a and x, we have:
- (1)
When vp(a)≥0, then p splits as follows:
- (a)
p* is completely split in L if, and only if,*
- (i)
Δ* is not a square in K, a≡±2modp, and there is a w∈K such that both vp(Δw2)=0 and Δw2 a square modulo p, or*
2. (ii)
Δ* is a square in K and*
∣k(p)∣≡1mod3* and 21(a±δ) is a cube modulo p, or*
∣k(p)∣=5* and a\nequiv±1modp.*
The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).
2. (b)
p* is inert in L if, and only if,*
∣k(p)∣≡1mod3, Δ is a nonzero square modulo p and 21(a±δ) is not a cube in k(p), or
∣k(p)∣=5* and a≡±1modp.*
The signature of p is (1,3).
3. (c)
pOL,x=P1P2* where Pi, i=1,2 place of L above p if, and only if,*
- (i)
Δ* is not a square in K, a≡±2modp, and there is no w∈K such that both vp(Δw2)=0 and Δw2 is a square modulo p;*
2. (ii)
Δ* is a not square modulo p.*
In this case, up to relabelling, the place P1 satisfies f(P1∣p)=1 and is inert in L(r), whereas f(P2∣p)=2 and P2 splits in L(r). The signature of p is (1,1;1,2).
4. (d)
pOL,x=P12P2* where Pi, i=1,2 place of L above p if, and only if, Δ is not a square in K, a≡±2modp, and (vp(Δ),2)=1. Moreover, f(Pi∣p)=1, for i=1,2, P1 is split in L(r), and P2 is ramified in L(r). The signature of p is (2,1;1,1).*
2. (2)
When vp(a)<0, we denote by πp a prime element for p (i.e., vp(πp)=1). The place p splits as follows:
- (a)
pOL,x=P3, where P is a place of L above p if, and only if, (vp(a),3)=1. That is, p is fully ramified. The signature of p is (3,1).
2. (b)
p* is completely split in L if, and only if, 3∣vp(a), ∣k(p)∣≡1modp and (πp−vp(a)a)(∣k(p)∣−1)/3≡1modp. The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).*
3. (c)
p* is inert if, and only if, 3∣vp(a), ∣k(p)∣≡1modp and (πp−vp(a)a)(∣k(p)∣−1)/3≡ξimodp, where i=1,2. The signature of p is (1,3).*
4. (d)
pOL,x=P1P2* where P1 and P2 are two distinct places of L if, and only if, 3∣vp(a) and ∣k(p)∣≡−1modp. In this case, up to relabelling, the place P1 satisfies f(P1∣p)=1 and is inert in L(r), whereas f(P2∣p)=2 and P2 splits in L(r). The signature of p is (1,1;1,2).*
Proof.
This is a consequence of Theorem 3.14, Lemma 2.2, and the following remark:
Note that when p=2, K(r) is a quadratic Kummer extension of K with a generator y such that y2=Δ. Moreover, by a study of how a polynomial of the form X2−d modulo p decomposes over a finite field of characteristic not 2, using again Kummer’s threorem [9, Theorem 3.3.7] and general Kummer Theory [9, Proposition 3.7.3], one may find that:
- ∙
p is ramified in K(r) if, and only if, (vp(Δ),2)=1;
2. ∙
p is completely split in K(r) if, and only if, there is a w∈K such that vp(Δw2)=0 and Δw2 is a square modulo p;
3. ∙
p is inert in K(r) if, and only if, there is no w∈K such that vp(Δw2)=0 and Δw2 is a square modulo p.
∎
We now turn to the case p=2.
Corollary 3.16**.**
Suppose that p=2. Let L/K be an impurely cubic extension, so that there exists a primitive element y with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−3X−a. We denote by ∣k(p)∣=2m the cardinality of the residue field at p and r∈K a root of the quadratic resolvent R(X)=X2+3aX+(−27+9a2) of the cubic polynomial X3−3X−a. Let p be a place of K and Tr the trace map from k(p) into the prime field Fp (§2). One can find x∈K such that p is a finite place over Fq(x) and the integral closure of Fq[x] in L is a Dedekind Domain (see Remark 3.4). For this place p and choice of x, we have:
- (1)
When vp(a)≥0, then p splits as follows:
- (a)
p* is completely split in L if, and only if,*
- (i)
a≡0modp* and r∈K, or*
2. (ii)
a≡0modp, r∈/K and there is w∈K such that vp(a21+1−w2+w)≥0 and Tr(a21+1−w2+w)=0modp.
3. (iii)
a\nequiv0modp, Tr(1/a2)≡Tr(1)modp and the roots of T2+aT+1modp are cubes in F2m, when m is even (resp. in F22m, when m is odd).
The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).
2. (b)
p* is inert in L if, and only if, a\nequiv0mod p, Tr(1/a2)≡Tr(1)modp and the roots of T2+aT+1modp are non-cubes in F2m, when m is even (resp. in F22m, when m is odd).
The signature of p is (1,3).*
3. (c)
pOL,x=P1P2* where Pi, i=1,2 place of L above p if, and only if, r∈/K and either*
a≡0modp, there is w∈K such that vp(a21+1−w2+w)≥0 and Tr(a21+1−w2+w)≡0modp, or
a\nequiv0modp* and
Tr(1/a2)≡Tr(1)modp.*
In this case, up to relabelling, the place P1 satisfies f(P1∣p)=1 and is inert in L(r), whereas f(P2∣p)=2 and P2 splits in L(r). The signature of p is (1,1;1,2).
4. (d)
pOL,x=P12P2* where Pi, i=1,2 place of L above p if, and only if, r∈/K, a≡0modp and there is w∈K such that (vp(a21+1−w2+w),2)=1 and vp(a21+1−w2+w)<0. Moreover f(Pi∣p)=1, for i=1,2, P1 is split in L(r), and P2 is ramified in L(r). The signature of p is (2,1;1,1).*
2. (2)
When vp(a)<0, we denote by πp a prime element for p (i.e., vp(πp)=1). The place p splits as follows:
- (a)
pOL,x=P3, where P is a place of L above p if, and only if, (vp(a),3)=1. That is, p is fully ramified. The signature of p is (3,1).
2. (b)
p* is completely split in L if, and only if, 3∣vp(a), ∣k(p)∣≡1modp and (πp−vp(a)a)(∣k(p)∣−1)/3≡1modp. The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).*
3. (c)
p* is inert if, and only if, 3∣vp(a), ∣k(p)∣≡1modp and (πp−vp(a)a)(∣k(p)∣−1)/3≡ξimodp, where i=1,2. The signature of p is (1,3).*
4. (d)
pOL,x=P1P2* where P1 and P2 are two distinct places of L if, and only if, 3∣vp(a) and ∣k(p)∣≡−1modp. In this case, up to relabelling, the place P1 satisfies f(P1∣p)=1 and is inert in L(r), whereas f(P2∣p)=2 and P2 splits in L(r). The signature of p is (1,1;1,2).*
Proof.
This is a consequence of Theorem 3.14, Lemma 2.2, and the following remark: Note that when p=2, K(r) is a quadratic Artin-Schreier extension of K with a generator y such that y2−y=1+a21. Moreover, studying the decomposition of a polynomial of the form X2−X−d, d∈K decomposes over a finite field of characteristic 2 (see, for example, [6, Proposition 1]), using Kummer’s theorem [9, Theorem 3.3.7] and Artin-Schreier theory [9, Proposition 3.7.8], we find that:
p is ramified in K(r) if, and only if, there is w∈K such that (vp(a21+1−w2+w),2)=1 and vp(a21+1−w2+w)<0,
p is completely split in K(r) if, and only if, there is w∈K such that vp(a21+1−w2+w)≥0 and Tr(a21+1−w2+w)≡0modp, and
p is inert in K(r) if, and only if, there is w∈K such that vp(a21+1−w2+w)≥0 and Tr(a21+1−w2+w)≡0modp.
Hence the result.
∎
We may then conclude the splitting for Galois extensions using the form found in Corollary 1.18.
Corollary 3.17**.**
Suppose that q≡−1mod3. Let L/K be a Galois cubic extension, so that there is a primitive element y with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−3X−a. As a consequence of Theorem 1.18, we may write the minimal polynomial
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
for some A,B∈OK. Let p be a place of K. One can find x∈K such that p is a finite place over Fq(x) and the integral closure of Fq[x] in L is a Dedekind Domain (see Remark 3.4). For this place p and choice of x, we have:
- (1)
When vp(a)>0, then p completely split. The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).
2. (2)
When vp(a)=0, then p splits as follows:
- (a)
p* is inert in L if, and only if,*
- (i)
∣k(p)∣≡1mod3* and A+ξBA+ξ2B is not a cube modulo p;*
2. (ii)
∣k(p)∣=2m, m odd, and A+ξBA+ξ2B is not a cube in F22m; or
3. (iii)
∣k(p)∣=5, A≡±Bmodp, A≡2Bmodp, or A≡0modp.
The signature of p is (1,3).
2. (b)
p* is completely split in L, otherwise. The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).*
3. (3)
When vp(a)<0, we denote by πp a prime element for p (i.e., vp(πp)=1). The place p splits as follows:
- (a)
pOL,x=P3, where P is a place of L above p if, and only if, (vp(a),3)=1. That is, p is fully ramified. The signature of p is (3,1).
2. (b)
p* is completely split in L if, and only if, 3∣vp(a), ∣k(p)∣≡1modp and (πp−vp(a)a)(∣k(p)∣−1)/3≡1modp. The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).*
3. (c)
p* is inert if, and only if, 3∣vp(a), ∣k(p)∣≡1modp and (πp−vp(a)a)(∣k(p)∣−1)/3≡ξimodp, where i=1,2. The signature of p is (1,3).*
4. (d)
pOL,x=P1P2* where P1 and P2 are two distinct places of L if, and only if, 3∣vp(a), ∣k(p)∣≡−1modp. In this case, up to relabelling, the place P1 satisfies f(P1∣p)=1 and is inert in L(r), whereas f(P2∣p)=2 and P2 splits in L(r). The signature of p is (1,1;1,2).*
Proof.
As a consequence of Theorem 1.18, we may write the minimal polynomial
[TABLE]
where a=A2−AB+B22A2−2AB−B2, for some A,B∈OK. Let p be a place of K. Since L/K is Galois, by [1, Theorem 2.3], any root r of the quadratic resolvent R(X)=X2+3aX+(−27+9a2) of the cubic polynomial X3−3X−a in K lies in K. In particular, the discriminant of T(X), Δ=−27(a2−4) (when p=2) is a square in K.
- (1)
When vp(a)>0, then by Kummer’s theorem [9, Theorem 3.3.7], and the splitting of the polynomial X(X2−3)modp, p completely splits.
2. (2)
When vp(a)=0,
- (a), (b)
if ∣k(p)∣≡1mod3, then by Corollary 3.15 and 3.16, p is inert in L if, and only if, the root of the polynomial S(X)=X2+aX+1 are non cubes modulo p. When p=2, ∣k(p)∣=2m, and m odd, p is inert in L if, and only if, the root of the polynomial S(X)=X2+aX+1 are non cubes in F22m. Note that the roots of the polynomial S(X) are −A+ξBA+ξ2B and −A+ξ2BA+ξB, since a=A2−AB+B22A2−2AB−B2. Moreover, −A+ξBA+ξ2B is a cube modulo p if, and only if, −A+ξ2BA+ξB is a cube modulo p. We thus obtain (a) and (b)
2. (c)
when ∣k(p)∣≡−1mod3 and p=2, by Corollary 3.15, p is inert if, and only if, ∣k(p)∣=5 and a≡±1modp.
Moreover, a=A2−AB+B22A2−2AB−B2≡1modp if, and only if, 2A2−2AB−B2=A2−AB+B2modp. Equivalently, A2−AB−2B2=(A−2B)(A+B)≡0modp. That is, A≡2Bmodp or A≡−Bmodp.
Also, a=A2−AB+B22A2−2AB−B2≡−1modp if, and only if, 2A2−2AB−B2=−A2+AB−B2≡0modp. Equivalently, 3A2−3AB=3A(A−B)≡0modp. That is, A≡Bmodp and A≡0modp.
3. (3)
When vp(a)<0, the result is immediate from Theorem 3.14.
∎
3.2.3. X3+aX+a2, a∈K, p=3
As for purely cubic extensions, there exist a local standard form which is useful for a study of splitting and ramification.
Lemma 3.18**.**
Let p=3, and let L/K be a cubic separable extension. Let p be a place of K. Then there is a generator y such that y3+ay+a2=0 such that vp(a)≥0, or
vp(a)<0 and (vp(a),3)=1. Such a y is said to be in local standard form at p.
Proof.
Let p be a place of K. Let y1 be a generator of L/K such that y13+a1y1+a12=0 (this was shown to exist in [4]). By Lemma 1.11, any other generator y2 with a minimal equation of the same form y23+a2y2+a22=0 is such that y2=−β(a1jy1+a11w), and we have
[TABLE]
Suppose that vp(a1)<0, and that 3∣vp(a1). Using the weak approximation theorem, we choose α∈K such that vp(α)=2vp(a1)/3, which exists as 3∣vp(a1). Then
[TABLE]
Let w0∈K be chosen so that w0=−α−3ja12 and
[TABLE]
This may be done via the following simple argument: As vp(α−3ja12)=0, then α−3ja12=0 in k(p).
We then choose some w0=−α−3ja12∈K such that w0=−α−3ja12 in k(p). Note that vp(w0)=0. Thus, α−3ja12+w0=0 in k(p) and vp(α−3ja12+w0)>0. As p=3, it follows that the map X→X3 is an isomorphism of k(p), so we may find an element w1∈K such that w13=w0modp. Hence
[TABLE]
We then let w2=αw1, so that
[TABLE]
Thus, as vp(a1)<0, we obtain
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
We can thus ensure (after possibly repeating this process if needed) that we terminate at an element a2∈K for which vp(a2)≥0 or for which vp(a2)<0 and (vp(a2),3)=1.
∎
Theorem 3.19**.**
Suppose that p=3. Let L/K be a separable cubic extension and y a primitive element with minimal polynomial X3+aX+a2. Let p be a place of K and P a place of L above p. Then p is fully ramified if, and only if, there is w∈K, vp(α)<0 and (vp(α),3)=1 with
[TABLE]
*Equivalently, there is a generator z of L whose minimal polynomial is of the form X3+αX+α2, where vp(α)<0 and (vp(α),3)=1. *
Proof.
Let p be a place of K, and denote by P a place of L above p. When L/F is Galois, this theorem is simply the usual Artin-Schreier theory (see [9, Proposition 3.7.8]). Otherwise, since the discriminant of the polynomial X3+aX+a2 is equal to Δ=−4a3=−a3, by [1, Theorem 2.3], we know that the Galois closure of L/F is equal to L(Δ)=L(b), where b2=−a. Let pb a place of K(b) above p. The extension L(b)/K(b) is an Artin-Schreier extension with Artin-Schreier generator y/b possessing minimal polynomial X3−X+b. As L(b)/K(b) is Galois, if pb is ramified in L(b), then it must be fully ramified. Furthermore, as the degree K(b)/K is equal to 2, which is coprime with 3, and the index of ramification is multiplicative in towers, it follows that the place p is fully ramified in L if, and only if, pb is fully ramified in L(b).
By [9, Proposition 3.7.8],
- (1)
pb is fully ramified in L(b) if, and only if, there is an Artin-Schreier generator z such that z3−z−c with vpb(c)<0 and (vpb(c),3)=1, and
2. (2)
pb is unramified in L(b) if, and only if, there is an Artin-Schreier generator z such that z3−z−c with vpb(c)≥0.
Suppose that there is a generator w such that w3+a1w+a12=0, vp(a1)<0 and (vp(a1),3)=1. Then over K(b1), where b12=−a1, we have an Artin-Schreier generator z of L(b1) such that z3−z+b1. Moreover,
[TABLE]
where e(pb1∣p) is the index of ramification of pb1 over K(b1), whence e(pb1∣p)=1 or 2.
As a consequence,
[TABLE]
and pb1 is fully ramified in L(b1), so that p too must be fully ramified in L.
Suppose that there exists a generator w such that w3+a1w+a12=0, vp(a1)≥0. Then over K(b1), where b12=−a1, we have a generator z of L(b1) such that z3−z+b1 and
[TABLE]
Thus pb is unramified in L(b), so that p cannot be fully ramified in L, since the ramification index is multiplicative in towers. The theorem then follows by Lemma 3.18.
∎
We finish the section describing the splitting of places in characteristic 3.
Theorem 3.20**.**
Suppose that p=3. Let L/K be a separable cubic extension and y a primitive element with minimal polynomial X3+aX+a2. Let p be a place of K. One can find x∈K such that p is a finite place over Fq(x) and the integral closure of Fq[x] in L is a Dedekind Domain (see Remark 3.4). For this place p and choice of x, we have:
- (1)
pOL,x=P3* where P is a place of L above p if, and only if, w∈K, vp(α)<0 and (vp(α),3)=1 with*
[TABLE]
The signature of p is (3,1).
Otherwise, by Lemma 3.18, there is generator z such that z3+cz+c2=0 such that vp(c)≥0. In the following, we choose z to be such a generator and b∈K such that b2=−c. We let Tr denote the trace map from k(p) into the prime field Fp (§2).
- (2)
If vp(c)=0. Then:
- (a)
p* is inert if, and only if, −c is a square modulo p and Tr(b)\nequiv0modp. Moreover, f(P∣p)=3 for the place P of L above p. The signature of p is (1,3).*
2. (b)
p* is completely split if, and only if, −c is a square modulo p and Tr(b)≡0modp. The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).*
3. (c)
pOL,x=P1P2* where Pi, i=1,2 are places of L above p if, and only if, −c is not a square modulo p. In this case, up to relabelling, the place P1 satisfies f(P1∣p)=1 and is inert in L(b), whereas f(P2∣p)=2 and P2 splits in L(b). The signature of p is (1,1;1,2).*
2. (3)
If vp(c)>0. Then:
- (a)
p* is completely split if, and only if, 2∣vp(c) and −s2c is square modulo p for some s∈K such that vp(−s2c)=0. The signature of p is (1,1;1,1;1,1).*
2. (b)
pOL,x=P1P2* where Pi, i=1,2 if, and only if, 2∣vp(c) and −s2c is not square modulo p for some s∈K such that vp(s2c)=0. In this case, up to relabelling, the place P1 satisfies f(P1∣p)=1 and is inert in L(b), whereas f(P2∣p)=2 and P2 splits in L(b). The signature of p is (1,1;1,2).*
3. (c)
pOL,x=P12P2* where Pi, i=1,2 are places of L above p if, and only if, (vp(c),2)=1 and c is not a square modulo p. Moreover f(Pi∣p)=1, for i=1,2, P1 is splits in L(b) and P2 is ramified in L(b). The signature of p is (2,1;1,1).*
Proof.
Let p be a place of K.
- (1)
This is simply Theorem 3.19.
If p does not satisfy the conditions in case (1), then it is not fully ramified, and by Lemma 3.18, there is a generator z such that z3+cz+c2=0 and vp(c)≥0. In the following, we choose z to be such a generator and b∈K such that b2=−c.
-
If vp(c)=0, then c:=cmodp=0 in k(p). By Lemma 2.3, we have that f(X)=X3+cX+c2 splits as follows modulo p:
- (a)
f(X) is irreducible if, and only if, −c is a non-zero square in k(p) and Tr(b)=0
2. (b)
f(X)=(X−α)Q(X) where α∈k(p) and Q(X) is an irreducible quadratic polynomial if, and only if, −c is not a square in ∈k(p).
3. (c)
f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)(X−γ) if, and only if, −c is a non-zero square in k(p) and Tr(b)=0.
According to Kummer’s theorem [9, Theorem 3.3.7],
- (a)
f(X) is irreducible modulo p if, and only if, p is inert;
2. (b)
f(X)=(X−α)Q(X) modulo p where α∈F3m and Q(X) is an irreducible quadratic polynomial if, and only if, pOL,x=P1P2 where Pi, i=1,2 are places of L above p; and
3. (c)
f(X)=(X−α)(X−β)(X−γ) modulo p with α,β,γ∈k(p) all distinct if, and only if, p is completely split.
Together, these equivalences imply the splitting of p in this case.
2. 3.
If vp(c)>0, then L(b)/K(b) is an Artin-Schreier extension by [1, Theorem 2.3], and there is an Artin Schreier generator w=bz such that w3−w+b=0 and vpb(b)>0, where pb is a place of K(d) above p. Thus b≡0modpb, and the polynomial
[TABLE]
factors as X(X−1)(X+1) modulo pb. By Kummer’s theorem ([9, Theorem 3.3.7]), we then have that pb is completely split in L(b).
As pb is completely split in L(b), we have that p cannot be inert in L. Indeed, if p were inert in L, then there are at most two places above p in L(b), in contradiction with the proven fact that pb is completely split in L(b).
By [5, p.55], p splits completely in L if, and only if, p is completely split in K(b) and pb is completely split in L(b).
Also, since by the previous argument p cannot be inert in L, we have that either
[TABLE]
where Pi, i=1,2 are places of L above p. Let Pb be a place of L(b) above p. When p is inert in K(b), the index of ramification of e(Pb∣p) of p over L(b) is equal to 1, since pb is completely split in L(b), whence pOL,x=P1P2. When p is ramified in K(b), then the index of ramification at any place above p in L(b) is divisible by 2, since L(b)/K is Galois by [1, Theorem 2.3], whence pOL,x=P1P22.
By studying the decomposition of a polynomial of the form X2−d modulo p over a finite field of characteristic not equal to 2, using again Kummer’s theorem [9, Theorem 3.3.7] and general Kummer Theory [9, Proposition 3.7.3], we therefore find that:
- (a)
p is ramified in K(b) if, and only if, (vp(c),2)=1,
2. (b)
p is completely split in K(b) if, and only if, 2∣vp(c) and −s2c is a square modulo p for some s∈K such that vp(s2c)=0, and
3. (c)
p is inert in K(b) if, and only if, 2∣vp(c) and −s2c is not square modulo p for some s∈K such that vp(s2c)=0.
And the Theorem follows.
The inertia degrees are obtained as a consequence to the fundamental equality [9, Proposition]. The splitting of Pi in L(r) is an easy consequence of the study of the possible splitting of the place p in the tower L(b)/K(b)/K, where L(b)/K(b) is Galois, by [1, Theorem 2.3].
∎
3.3. Riemann-Hurwitz formulae
Using the extension data, it is possible to give the Riemann-Hurwitz theorem for each of our forms in Corollary 1.3. These depend only on information from a single parameter.
3.3.1. X3−a, a∈K, p=3
Lemma 3.21**.**
Let p=3. Let L/K be a purely cubic extension and y a primitive element of L with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−a. Let p be a place of K and P a place of L over p. Then the following are true:
- (1)
d(P∣p)=0* if, and only if, e(P∣p)=1.*
2. (2)
d(P∣p)=2, otherwise. That is, by Theorem 3.7, e(P∣p)=3, which by Theorem 3.6 is equivalent to (vp(a),3)=1.
Proof.
By Theorem 3.7, either e(P∣p)=1 or e(P∣p)=2.
- (1)
As the constant field Fq of K is perfect, all residue field extensions in L/K are automatically separable. The result then follows from [10, Theorem 5.6.3].
2. (2)
If e(P∣p)=3, then as p∤3, it follows again from [Theorem 5.6.3, Ibid.] that d(P∣p)=e(P∣p)−1=2.
∎
We thus find the Riemann-Hurwitz formula as follows for purely cubic extensions when the characteristic is not equal to 3, which resembles that of Kummer extensions, but no assumption is made that the extension is Galois.
Theorem 3.22** (Riemann-Hurwitz I).**
Let p=3. Let L/K be a purely cubic geometric extension, and y a primitive element of L with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−a. Then the genus gL of L is given according to the formula
[TABLE]
Proof.
This follows from Lemma 3.23, [10, Theorem 9.4.2], and the fundamental identity ∑eifi=[L:K]=3.
∎
3.3.2. X3−3X−a, a∈K, p=3
Lemma 3.23**.**
Let p=3. Let L/K be an impurely cubic extension and y a primitive element of L with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−3X−a. Let p be a place of K and P a place of L over p. Let Δ=−27(a2−4) be the discriminant of f(X) and r∈K a root of the quadratic resolvent R(X)=X2+3aX+(−27+9a2) of f(X). Then the following are true:
- (1)
d(P∣p)=0* if, and only if, e(P∣p)=1.*
2. (2)
If e(P∣p)=3, which by Theorem 3.9 is equivalent to vp(a)<0 and (vp(a),3)=1, then d(P∣p)=2.
3. (3)
If e(P∣p)=2,
- (a)
If p=2, by Corollary 3.15, this occurs precisely when Δ is not a square in K, a≡±2modp, (vp(Δ),2)=1, and 2∣vP(Δ). In this case, d(P∣p)=1.
2. (b)
If p=2, by Corollary 3.16, this occurs when r∈/K, a≡0modp, there is wp∈K such that vp((a21+1−wp2+wp),2)=1andvp(a21+1−wp2+wp)<0. Also, in this case, there exists ηP∈L such that vP(a21+1−ηP2+ηP)≥0, and we have for this P that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let p be a place of K, Pr a place of L(r) above p, P=Pr∩L, and pr=Pr∩K(r).
- (1)
As the constant field Fq of K is perfect, all residue field extensions in L/F are automatically separable. The result then follows from [10, Theorem 5.6.3].
2. (2)
If e(P∣p)=3, then as p∤3, it follows again from [Theorem 5.6.3, Ibid.] that d(P∣p)=e(P∣p)−1=2.
3. (3)
When e(P∣p)=2,
- (a)
if p=2, then by [Theorem 5.6.3, Ibid.], d(P∣p)=e(P∣p)−1=1.
2. (b)
if p=2, then we work on the tower L(r)/K(r)/K.
If e(P∣p)=2, then e(pr∣p)=2, e(Pr∣pr)=1 and e(Pr∣P)=1, by Theorem 3.16. As p=2, the extension K(r)/K is Artin-Schreier and is generated by an element α such that α2−α=a21+1. By Artin-Schreier theory (see [9, Theorem 3.7.8]), as e(pr∣p)=2, there exists an element wp∈K such that
[TABLE]
In addition, since e(Pr∣P)=1, there exists ηP∈L such that
[TABLE]
By Artin-Schreier theory (see [9, Theorem 3.7.8]), we obtain
[TABLE]
By [10, Theorem 5.7.15], we then find by equating differential exponents in the towers L(r)/K(r)/K and L(r)/L/K that
[TABLE]
This implies that
[TABLE]
as e(Pr∣P)=e(Pr∣pr)=1 implies d(Pr∣P)=d(Pr∣pr)=0.
∎
We are now able to state and prove the Riemann-Hurwitz formula for this cubic form.
Theorem 3.24** (Riemann-Hurwitz II).**
Let p=3. Let L/K be a cubic geometric extension and y a primitive element of L with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−3X−a. Let Δ=−27(a2−4) be the discriminant of f(X) and r a root of the quadratic resolvent R(X)=X2+3aX+(−27+9a2) of the cubic polynomial X3−3X−a in K.Then the genus gL of L is given according to the formula
- (1)
If p=2, then
[TABLE]
where S is the set of places of K such that both a≡±2modp and vp(Δ,2)=1. Moreover, the set S is empty when Δ is a square in K.
2. (2)
If p=2, then
[TABLE]
where S is the set of places of K such that both a≡0modp and there exists wp∈K such that vp(a21+1−wp2+wp)<0 and (vp(a21+1−wp2+wp),2)=1. Moreover, the set S is empty when r∈K.
Proof.
- (1)
By [10, Theorem 9.4.2], the term associated with a place P of L in the different DL/F contributes 21dL(P)d(P∣p) to the genus of L, where p is the place of K below P, dL(P) is the degree of the place P, and d(P∣p) is the differential exponent of P∣p. By the fundamental identity ∑ieifi=[L:K]=3 for ramification indices ei and inertia degrees fi of all places of L above p, we always have that fi=1 whenever p ramifies in L (fully or partially). Thus from Lemma 3.23, it follows that d(P∣p)=2 if p is fully ramified, whereas d(P∣p)=1 if p is partially ramified. The result then follows by reading off [Theorem 9.4.2, Ibid.] and using the conditions of Lemma 3.23.
2. (2)
This follows in a manner similar to part (1) of this theorem, via Lemma 3.23 for p=2.
∎
We obtain directly the following corollary when the extension L/K is Galois.
Corollary 3.25**.**
Let p=3. Let L/K be a Galois cubic geometric extension and y a primitive element of L with minimal polynomial f(X)=X3−3X−a. Then the genus gL of L is given according to the formula
[TABLE]
3.3.3. X3+aX+a2, a∈K, p=3
Lemma 3.26**.**
Suppose that p=3. Let L/K be a separable cubic extension and y a primitive element with minimal polynomial X3+aX+a2. Let p be a place of K and P a place of L above p.
- (1)
d(P∣p)=0* if, and only if, e(P∣p)=1.*
2. (2)
when e(P∣p)=3, by Theorem 3.19, there is wp∈K such that vp(αp)<0 and (vp(αp),3)=1 with
[TABLE]
Then d(P∣p)=−vp(αp)+2.
3. (3)
d(P∣p)=1* whenever e(P∣p)=2. Moreover, by Lemma 3.18, when e(P∣p)=2, there is generator zp such that zp3+cpzp+cp2=0 and vp(cp)≥0, (vp(cp),2)=1 and 2∣vP(cp).*
Proof.
Let b∈K such that b2=−a, p be a place of K, Pb be a place of L(b) above p, pb=Pb∩K(b), P=Pb∩L.
- (1)
This is an immediate consequence of [10, Theorem 5.6.3].
2. (2)
Suppose that p is ramified in L, whence pb is ramified in L(b).
Moreover, by Theorem 3.19, there exists wp∈K such that vp(αp)<0 and (vp(αp),3)=1,
where
[TABLE]
and furthermore, there exists a generator zp of L such that zp3+αpzp+αp2=0. Again by [Theorem 5.6.3, Ibid.], the differential exponent d(pb∣p)=d(Pb∣P) of p over K(b) (resp. P over L(b)) is equal to
- (a)
1 if p is ramified in K(b), whence e(pb∣p)=e(Pb∣P)=2, and
2. (b)
[math] if p is unramified in K(b), whence e(pb∣p)=e(Pb∣P)=1.
By [1, Theorem 2.3], L(b)/K(b) is Galois and −αp is a square in K(b). We write −αp=βp2. Moreover, wp=βpzp and wp3−wp−βp=0. Moreover,
[TABLE]
with e(pb∣p)=2 or 1, depending on whether p is ramified or not in K(b). Also, vpb(βp)=vp(αp) when p is ramified in K(b), whereas vpb(βp)=2vp(αp) when p is unramified in K(b) (note that in this case 2∣vp(αp)). Thus vpb(βp)<0 and (vpb(βp),3)=1 and by [9, Theorem 3.7.8], we also have that the differential exponent d(Pb∣pb) of pb in L(b) satisfies
[TABLE]
By [10, Theorem 5.7.15], the differential exponent of p in L(b) satisfies
[TABLE]
Thus,
- (a)
if p is ramified in K(b)=K(βp), that is, (vp(αp),2)=1 by [9, Proposition 3.7.3], then 2(−vp(αp)+1)+3=1+2d(P∣p) and
[TABLE]
whereas
2. (b)
if p is unramified in K(b), that is, 2∣vp(αp) again by [9, Proposition 3.7.3], then also
[TABLE]
3. (3)
This is immediate from Theorem 3.20 and [10, Theorem 5.6.3], via application of the same method as in Lemma 3.23 (3).
∎
Finally, we use this to conclude the Riemann-Hurwitz formula for cubic extensions in characteristic 3.
Theorem 3.27** (Riemann-Hurwitz III).**
Suppose that p=3. Let L/K be a separable cubic extension and y a primitive element with minimal polynomial X3+aX+a2. Then the genus gL of L is given according to the formula
[TABLE]
where
- (1)
S* is the set of places of K for which there exists wp∈K such that vp(αp)<0, (vp(αp),3)=1 with*
[TABLE]
and
2. (2)
T* is the set of places of K for which there is generator zp such that zp3+cpzp+cp2=0, vp(cp)≥0 and (vp(cp),2)=1.*
Proof.
This follows from Lemma 3.26, [10, Theorem 9.4.2], and the fundamental identity ∑eifi=[L:K]=3.
∎