Restrictions on endomorphism rings of jacobians and their minimal fields of definition
Pip Goodman

TL;DR
This paper investigates how the structure of Galois groups, especially those with large prime order elements, influences the endomorphism rings and minimal fields of definition of Jacobians, extending previous results on their restrictions.
Contribution
It provides a partial converse to existing theorems by analyzing Jacobians with Galois groups containing large prime order elements, broadening understanding of endomorphism restrictions.
Findings
Galois groups with large prime order elements impose specific restrictions on Jacobian endomorphism rings.
Partial converse to Guralnick and Kedlaya's results on endomorphism fields.
Extensions of Zarhin's work to cases with less restrictive Galois group conditions.
Abstract
Zarhin has extensively studied restrictions placed on the endomorphism algebras of Jacobians for which the Galois group associated to their 2-torsion is insoluble and 'large' (relative to the dimension of ). In this paper we examine what happens when this Galois group merely contains an element of 'large' prime order. In doing so we obtain a partial converse to a result by Guralnick and Kedlaya on the endomorphism field.
| Endomorphism field | |
|---|---|
Peer Reviews
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.
Restrictions on endomorphism rings of jacobians and their minimal fields of definition
Pip Goodman
Abstract.
Zarhin has extensively studied restrictions placed on the endomorphism algebras of Jacobians for which the Galois group associated to their 2-torsion is insoluble and “large”. Here, we examine what happens when this Galois group merely contains an element of “large” prime order. As part of this we obtain a partial converse to a result by Guralnick and Kedlaya on the endomorphism field.
Key words and phrases:
abelian varieties, endomorphism algebras
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
11G10, 14H40, 14K15
1. Introduction
Let be a number field, and a polynomial of degree with no repeated roots. Let be a smooth projective model of the smooth affine curve
[TABLE]
Denote the Jacobian of by , and the splitting field of by .
Zarhin has extensively studied restrictions placed on the endomorphism ring of , when the Galois group is insoluble and large with respect to , the dimension of [Zar00] [Zar01] [Zar05]. As part of an algorithm to compute the endomorphism algebra of a genus 2 Jacobian, Lombardo proves that if is irreducible and has degree 5, then is absolutely simple [Lom19, Proposition 4.7].
Inspired by the results of Lombardo and Zarhin, we investigate restrictions placed on the endomorphism algebra of when merely contains an element of “large” prime order. Most of our results in fact hold for more general abelian varieties, but for the sake of exposition we state them in this section for odd degree hyperelliptic Jacobians.
We write for the ring of -endomorphisms of and for its endomorphism algebra. Let denote a primitive -th root of unity.
Theorem 1.1**.**
Let be a prime such that is a primitive root modulo . Suppose is irreducible of degree . Then one of the following holds:
- (1)
* is a number field, and both*
- a)
* is totally inert in ,* 2. b)
the order is -maximal in . 2. (2)
* is isogenous over to the self product of an absolutely simple abelian variety with complex multiplication by a proper subfield of .*
We prove the above theorem in a more general context in §2, see Theorem 2.10. A major step in the proof of Theorem 2.10 is to obtain a partial converse to a theorem of Guralnick and Kedlaya on the possible degrees of the minimal extension over which all endomorphisms of are defined, see Theorem 2.6 and the remark afterwards.
It should also be noted that if the Galois group of is known, we can often find restrictions on using Remark 2.3.
When the dimension of is odd, we are able to relax the condition on the order of modulo .
Theorem 1.2**.**
Let be odd, and a prime such the index of in is at most 2. Suppose is irreducible of degree . Then one of the following holds:
- (1)
* is a number field, and provided is -maximal, either*
- a)
* is totally inert in , or* 2. b)
there are two distinct primes above with equal inertia degree in . 2. (2)
* is isogenous over to the self product of an absolutely simple abelian variety with complex multiplication by a proper subfield of .*
Again, we prove a more general statement in §2, see Theorem 2.16. We also prove the following extension of Lombardo’s result mentioned earlier. For the more general case of abelian surfaces, see Theorem 2.11.
Theorem 1.3**.**
Let be an irreducible polynomial of degree 5. Then one of the following holds:
- (1)
. 2. (2)
, where , is square-free and . 3. (3)
, where is a 2-maximal order in a degree 4 CM field, which is totally inert at 2.
In particular is absolutely simple and does not have quaternion multiplication over .
Example 1.4**.**
Keeping the notation of Theorem 1.3, we have the following examples:
where is the maximal order of the CM number field with defining polynomial . We note that this field is cyclic, ramified only at 13, and 2 generates a maximal ideal.
Specifying the Galois group of , we are able to refine Theorem 1.3. The proof of the following theorem follows from Corollary 3.6, Propositions 3.8 and 3.12, and Corollary 3.13.
We denote by the minimal extension of over which all endomorphisms of are defined. Following [GK17] we call the endomorphism field of . It is well-known that is finite and Galois [Sil92, Theorem 4.1].
Theorem 1.5**.**
Let be a polynomial of degree 5.
- (1)
Suppose . The following hold:
- (i)
If is a real quadratic field, then is the unique degree 2 extension of contained in . 2. (ii)
If is a degree 4 CM field, then it is cyclic and is the unique degree 4 extension of contained in . Moreover, . 2. (2)
Suppose . If is a degree 4 CM field, then contains the unique degree 2 extension of contained in . 3. (3)
Suppose . Then . Furthermore, if is a degree 4 CM field, then contains a real quadratic field with discriminant congruent to 5 modulo 8.
In particular, if , then we have an explicit list, depending on , for all possible .
Remark 1.6**.**
If has degree , then part (3) of the above theorem remains valid.
Remark 1.7**.**
As the natural action of contains odd permutations, we have in case that , where denotes the discriminant of .
Example 1.8**.**
Using the above remark along with magma we produced the table below of examples of case in Theorem 1.5. Indeed, all polynomials listed are of degree 5, have Galois group over and satisfy .
The examples provided in this paper come from either the database [BSS*+*16], made easily available on [LMF18], or were computed on magma [BCP97] using code from Molin and Neurohr’s article [MN19] and polynomials found in [JLY02] and [SPDyD94], the second of which was also accessed through the LMFDB.
Acknowledgements**.**
The author would like to thank the organisers of the summer school ‘Explicit and computational approaches to Galois representations’ held at the University of Luxembourg, where this work began. The author would also like to thank Tim Dokchitser, Davide Lombardo and the anonymous referee for their useful comments and suggestions. This work was supported by the EPSRC.
2. Upper bounds on endomorphism rings
In what follows is a number field, is an abelian variety over of dimension and is a prime. If is also an abelian variety, then we say is isogenous to and write to mean is isogenous to over . We denote by the ring of -endomorphisms of and for its endomorphism algebra.
The absolute Galois group acts on and hence on . Its invariant subspace is the ring of -endomorphisms of . Likewise we write .
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let be an order in a division algebra of dimension over , where . Then any division algebra contained in has dimension less than or equal to over .
In particular, if is a division algebra then , i.e., is a field.
Proof.
Let be a division algebra of maximal dimension. As is a finite division algebra, we have by Wedderburn’s Theorem that for some . Hence, the elements of have minimal polynomials of degree at most over . In addition, there is , whose minimal polynomial over has degree .
Let us choose such that its image in coincides with . Then is a field, so has dimension over less than or equal to [FD93, Corollary 3.17, page 96]. Hence the minimal polynomial of over has degree at most . Since this must be also hold true for the image of in , we obtain . ∎
We say that an order in a number field is -maximal if does not divide the index of in the ring of integers of .
Proposition 2.2**.**
Suppose that acts irreducibly on . Then the following hold:
- (1)
* is a number field.* 2. (2)
The order is -maximal in . 3. (3)
* is totally inert in .*
In particular, is simple over and does not have quaternion multiplication over .
Proof.
As acts irreducibly on , Schur’s Lemma gives us that the endomorphism algebra is a division algebra. Furthermore, is finite, so by Wedderburn’s Theorem it is a field. Hence the subalgebra of is also a field. It follows that contains no idempotents, and hence is a division algebra. By Lemma 2.1, is a number field.
As is a finite field of characteristic , we have where . Hence contains elements of degree . As the preimages of these elements in must also have minimal polynomials of degree . Let be one such element, and be its minimal polynomial. Note that satisfies , the reduction of modulo , and as has degree over , we have that is irreducible. Since is a perfect field, does not have repeated roots, hence . Thus is an -maximal order in , and so is .
Let be a prime above in . As we are considering endomorphisms defined over , we have is a non-zero submodule of . But acts irreducibly on , so . We conclude is totally inert in , see [Shi98, §5.1, Prop 2, pg 36]. ∎
Remark 2.3**.**
In the proof of Proposition 2.2, we show is a field and is a subfield of . As is a free -module, this shows divides . It follows that if we can determine , then we can also limit the possible values of .
We now briefly discuss the endomorphism field of an abelian variety, that is, the minimal extension of the base field over which all endomorphisms are defined.
The action of the absolute Galois group on induces a representation
[TABLE]
with kernel , where is the endomorphism field of . In particular, we obtain an injection of abstract groups
[TABLE]
Thus if is large with respect to , the dimension of , then one might expect the structure of to be constrained. The following theorem shows this is indeed the case. But first we need a couple of lemmas.
For a division ring , we shall write for the invertible elements in , and for the quotient of by its centre.
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let be a division ring, and a maximal subfield of . Write . Suppose contains an element of order , with coprime to . Then contains an element of order .
Proof.
Let be a lift of to . We have for some . Taking the reduced norm gives . As and are coprime there exists integers such that . Let , then and as we have . The element then has order . Indeed, , and if for some , then would not have order . ∎
Lemma 2.5**.**
Let be prime, a divisor of , and be a division algebra of dimension less than or equal to over . Suppose contains an element of order . Then is isomorphic to a subfield of and has degree .
Proof.
Let be an element of order . This element acts trivially on , the centre of , as has order less than . Thus belongs to , which by the Skolem-Noether Theorem, is isomorphic to . Applying Lemma 2.4, we obtain an element of order in .
Let be a maximal subfield of , then is a finite extension of in some fixed algebraic closure of . We have , where , see [FD93, Corollary 3.17, page 96]. Hence we have an element of order in . Now consider in our fixed algebraic closure . The Galois group cyclically permutes the eigenvalues of , which gives us that . The inequality
[TABLE]
coupled with
[TABLE]
shows is isomorphic to a field of dimension over contained in . Furthermore, as is a cyclic extension, there is a unique such subfield. In particular all maximal subfields of are isomorphic. But finite dimensional non-commutative division algebras over have non-isomorphic maximal subfields [Sch68, Theorem 5.4], thus is a field. ∎
Theorem 2.6**.**
Suppose is a prime divisor of . Then is isogenous over to the self product of an absolutely simple abelian variety with complex multiplication by a proper subfield of .
Proof.
Let be a simple factor of , so that over and has no factor isogenous to . In this way, corresponds to a primitive central idempotent of the algebra satisfying . In addition, there is some positive integer such that .
The Galois group acts on the (finite) set of primitive central idempotents in . By assumption the order of is divisible by , and so contains an element of order . Either fixes or the orbit of under the action of has size . But has dimension less than , so the latter is not possible, hence fixes . It follows that fixes . Indeed, for , we have . This also shows is defined over , for .
As acts non-trivially on , we may, after possibly exchanging for a different simple factor of , assume acts non-trivially on . Thus the cyclic group of order acts faithfully on . Viewing as an abelian variety over , we see the minimal extension over which all its endomorphisms are defined has degree divisible by . Applying [Sil92, Theorem 4.1], we obtain the dimension of is at least . Thus we find that . Since , we have . By [Sil92, Proposition 4.3], the dimension of over is at least , in particular is not absolutely simple, thus .
Albert’s Classification [Mum70, Page 202] tells us that has dimension less than or equal to over , so by Lemma 2.5, is isomorphic to a subfield of of degree . Finally, we observe is a CM abelian variety as is a field and . ∎
Remark 2.7**.**
The above theorem gives a partial converse to the main theorem of [GK17]. Indeed, there the authors give an upper bound on the powers of primes dividing in terms of , and show it is the best possible by exhibiting families of abelian varieties which achieve this bound.
We shall use the following corollary in our proof of Theorem 1.3. We note that it may be deduced from results of [FKRS12] (see also [Lom19, Definition 2.7] for a summary), since they show the endomorphism field of an abelian surface is an extension of the ground field with degree dividing 48. Likewise, another proof of this fact is given in [GK17]. But for the convenience of the reader we provide a direct proof using Theorem 2.6.
Corollary 2.8**.**
Suppose , then does not divide .
Proof.
Suppose divides . Then by Theorem 2.6, is isogenous to the square of an elliptic curve with CM by a proper subfield of . But all proper subfields of are totally real, so we have a contradiction. ∎
Our next lemma provides us with a useful criterion for the action of on to be irreducible.
Lemma 2.9**.**
Let and be primes and suppose the multiplicative order of modulo is . Let be a faithful representation of over . Then is irreducible if and only if has dimension .
Proof.
Let be the largest submodule of not containing a copy of the trivial representation. The smallest extension of which contains an element of multiplicative order is . It follows that is the smallest extension of over which all irreducible characteristic representations of are linear. The -module , being semisimple thanks to Maschke’s Theorem, is a sum of irreducible faithful linear -representations of . As the character attached to takes values in , the Galois group permutes the irreducible constituents of , so has dimension for some . Furthermore, as Schur indices in positive characteristic are trivial [Isa94, Theorem 9.14], each orbit under the action of is an irreducible -module. Thus is equal to the number of irreducible -modules in . It follows that is irreducible if and only if and , i.e., has dimension . ∎
Theorem 2.10**.**
Let and be primes with a primitive root modulo . Suppose contains an element of order . Then one of the following holds:
- (1)
* is a number field, and both*
- a)
* is totally inert in ,* 2. b)
the order is -maximal in . 2. (2)
* contains an element of order , and is isogenous over to the self product of an absolutely simple abelian variety with complex multiplication by a proper subfield of .*
Proof.
Suppose does not divide . Then contains an element of order . The action of on the dimensional vector space over is faithful, and thus irreducible by Lemma 2.9. Applying Proposition 2.2 we deduce the first case.
Suppose now divides . Then contains an element of order , so we can apply Theorem 2.6 to conclude. ∎
Theorem 1.1 now follows by taking and observing that , see [Zar01, Theorem 5.1].
Theorem 2.11**.**
Suppose , and contains an element of order . Then one of the following holds:
- (1)
. 2. (2)
, where , is square-free and . 3. (3)
, where is a 2-maximal order in a degree 4 CM field, which is totally inert at 2.
In particular is absolutely simple and does not have quaternion multiplication over .
Proof.
Observe 2 is a primitive root modulo 5, so we may apply Theorem 2.10. Furthermore, by Corollary 2.8, we are in the first case of Theorem 2.10. Thus is a field, 2 is totally inert in the extension , and is a 2-maximal order in .
As is a field, we have divides . If , then we are in case 1. If , then is a CM field.
If , then we may write for some square-free . Since 2 is totally inert in the extension , we find that . The centre of the endomorphism algebra of an abelian surface cannot contain an imaginary quadratic field (see §4 of [Shi63]), so we have . Finally as , and is a 2-maximal order, we find with . ∎
It is clear that Theorem 1.3 follows from Theorem 2.11, since if is irreducible and has degree 5, then the Jacobian is an abelian surface and contains an element of order .
We now start working towards the proof of Theorem 1.2.
Lemma 2.12**.**
Let and be distinct primes such that is odd and the multiplicative order of modulo is . Let be a symplectic space of dimension over , and a faithful representation which preserves the symplectic pairing on .
Then there exist irreducible non-isomorphic -submodules of dimension such that .
Proof.
Let denote a generator of . As is a faithful -module, and has prime order , there exists a faithful irreducible -submodule of which by Lemma 2.9 has odd dimension . By Maschke’s Theorem we have a decomposition of -modules . As is irreducible and its dimension is odd, it follows from [BG16, Lemma 3.1.6] that is a totally isotropic subspace of with respect to the symplectic pairing. In order to preserve the pairing, we have that if acts on as the matrix , then acts on as (see [BG16, Lemma 2.2.17]). Thus acts irreducibly on and .
It rests to show and are not isomorphic as -modules. Indeed, suppose they were, so we have an isomorphism of -modules. Let be an eigenvector of with eigenvalue . Then by extending linearly to an homomorphism, we have
[TABLE]
But as and are odd, and have no common eigenvalues [BG16, Lemma 3.1.13]. Thus we have a contradiction. Hence and are not isomorphic as -modules. ∎
The following lemma is Proposition 1.3 of [Rém20].
Lemma 2.13**.**
Let and be abelian varieties defined over , and an isogeny. Suppose . Then is defined over an extension of of (relative) degree dividing the order of the torsion multiplicative subgroup of the centre of .
Lemma 2.14**.**
Suppose is odd and . Furthermore, suppose contains an element of prime order such that as -modules, where both and are irreducible of dimension .
Then the endomorphism algebra of is not isomorphic to the product of two division algebras.
Proof.
We first show any non-zero submodule of has dimension or . Let be the intersection of with a non-zero submodule of . The image of in is a non-zero module, and thus equal to one of , , and . It follows that has dimension or .
Suppose , for some division algebras , , so is isogenous to a product of non-isogenous, absolutely simple, abelian varieties . As is odd, one of and , has dimension less than or equal to and the other has dimension at least . Thus must fix both and , so and are defined over , and in particular contains a non-zero submodule of dimension less than . We shall show this is not possible.
Due to and being simple we have the bound
[TABLE]
from which we deduce neither the centre of nor the centre of can contain a -th root of unity. Thus by Lemma 2.13 we may, after replacing by a finite extension of degree not divisible by , assume is isogenous to over . But this implies there is an isomorphism of modules , which is not possible since has no non-zero submodule of dimension less than . ∎
Theorem 2.15**.**
Suppose is odd, is prime and the order of modulo is . Suppose is principally polarised and divides the order of . Then one of the following holds:
- (1)
* is a number field, and when is -maximal, either*
- a)
* is totally inert in , or* 2. b)
there are two distinct primes above with equal inertia degree in . 2. (2)
* contains an element of order , and is isogenous over to the self product of an absolutely simple abelian variety with complex multiplication by a proper subfield of .*
Proof.
If the endomorphism field of has degree divisible by , then by Theorem 2.6 we are in case 2.
Suppose now the extension does not have degree divisible by . By enlarging , we may assume contains , is cyclic of order generated by an element , and in particular .
As is principally polarised, the Weil pairing is a symplectic pairing on . Furthermore, is a faithful -module, so we may apply Lemma 2.12. Thus , where and are irreducible non-isomorphic -modules of dimension over . Hence we have the following decomposition . By Schur’s Lemma, we have that both and are division algebras. It follows that contains exactly two non-trivial idempotents.
Let us now consider , a subalgebra of . By the above , and hence , contains exactly zero or two non-trivial idempotents. If contains no non-trivial idempotents, then is absolutely simple. Let us show that this is always the case. Suppose contains two non-trivial idempotents. Then for some absolutely simple abelian varieties . But this implies is isomorphic to the product of two division algebras, which is not possible by Lemma 2.14.
So far we have proven that is a division algebra, and contains a field of dimension at least , so by Lemma 2.1, we have . Thus either is a number field, or is a quaternion algebra over [FD93, Exrecise 31, page 106]. But the later is not possible by Albert’s Classification since is odd.
Let us now show the conditions on the primes above when is an -maximal order. Let be a prime above in . Then is a non-trivial -submodule of . Thus must intersect at least one of and non-trivially, say . By irreducibility of we have . If also intersects non-trivially, then for the same reason, we find , and so which implies is totally inert [Shi98, §5.1, Prop 2, pg 36]. Else, and is not totally inert. In this second case, let us first note that is not ramified since, and , the Jordan-Hölder factors of are not isomorphic as -modules. Let be another prime above . Then , and so by the above argument it follows that . Hence and case 1b is satisfied [Shi98, §5.1, Prop 2, pg 36]. ∎
Theorem 1.2 is an immediate consequence of the following.
Theorem 2.16**.**
Suppose is odd and is a prime such the index of in is at most 2. Suppose is principally polarised and there is an element of order in . Then one of the following holds:
- (1)
* is a number field, and either*
- a)
* is totally inert in , or* 2. b)
there are two distinct primes above with equal inertia degree in . 2. (2)
* contains an element of order , and is isogenous over to the self product of an absolutely simple abelian variety with complex multiplication by a proper subfield of .*
Furthermore, if , then case 1b) does not occur.
Proof.
Immediate from Theorems 2.10 and 2.15. ∎
3. Bounds on the endomorphism field
In order to prove Theorem 1.5, we shall need some results from the representation theory of finite groups.
Let be a finite group. Let be a finite set which acts on transitively. Suppose does not divide . Let denote the permutation module associated to this action over . The submodule given by is easily seen to be isomorphic to the trivial module, and owing to the fact that , we have a direct sum decomposition of -modules:
[TABLE]
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let and suppose the stabiliser of has orbits on . Then .
Proof.
By Lemma 7.1 of [Pas68], we have that . Now due to the isomorphism of -modules,
[TABLE]
we have . ∎
In the following we shall denote the roots of a polynomial by , and if is square-free, then we denote by a smooth projective model of the smooth affine curve , and its Jacobian by .
The following result may be deduced from [Mor77, Proposition 3], but we include a proof here for the convenience of the reader.
Proposition 3.2**.**
Let be a polynomial of odd degree such that acts transitively on . Suppose and its stabiliser has orbits on .
Then . In particular, if acts doubly transitively on the roots of , then .
Proof.
First, let us note . As acts transitively on and has orbits on , with odd, we may apply Theorem 5.1 of [Zar01] and Lemma 3.1 to find that . Observe
[TABLE]
It follows that . Thus as is a free -module, we deduce . ∎
Before proving our next result, we shall recall some standard facts on Frobenius groups and make a few remarks on the endomorphism field of an abelian variety.
A finite group is said to be a Frobenius group if contains a subgroup called the Frobenius complement such that
[TABLE]
Frobenius proved that for such groups there exists a normal subgroup of such that . We call the Frobenius kernel. Left multiplication by elements of on , the set of left cosets of , gives rise to a transitive action and the above condition tells us the identity is the only element which fixes two or more elements of . Hence, this action is at most doubly transitive and the stabiliser of a point has no fixed points in . Applying Burnside’s Lemma to and (or ) shows this action is doubly transitive if and only if , that is, . In this case, it can be shown that is a -elementary group [Pas68, Propositon 8.4], and hence may be regarded as an vector space and as a subgroup of the affine general linear group on this vector space.
Examples of Frobenius groups include , for odd, and , with Frobenius complements , a subgroup of order 2 and respectively.
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let be a Frobenius group with complement and order . Suppose is a subgroup of with index dividing .
Then acts transitively on , the set of left cosets of , and a point stabiliser has exactly orbits on .
Proof.
As , we have acts transitively on . For the second statement, observe that the non-identity elements of act fixed point freely on . Thus applying Burnside’s Lemma, we find the number of orbits of on is equal to
[TABLE]
∎
Lemma 3.4**.**
Let be a Frobenius group of order with Frobenius kernel of odd order. Suppose is a subgroup of with index dividing .
Then the restriction of to is semisimple with non-isomorphic simple constituents.
Proof.
As acts 2-transitively on the cosets , the module is irreducible by [Isa94, Cor. 5.17] and has dimension . It is thus irreducible and of 2-defect zero, so its associated module in characteristic 2 is also irreducible [Isa94, Thm 15.29]. Furthermore, as the Frobenius kernel acts non-trivially on , we have by [Isa94, Thm 6.34] that the restriction of to is isomorphic to the direct sum of distinct non-trivial linear representations. Since does not divide the order of , this also holds for the restriction of to . Putting this together with the fact that is a normal subgroup, we see the restriction of to is semisimple with non-isomorphic irreducible consituents, by Clifford’s Theorem [Isa94, Thm 6.5]. ∎
Recall that we have an injection of abstract groups
[TABLE]
where is the minimal extension over which all endomorphisms of are defined. In particular if is a number field, then and so divides . Recall also that if is a number field then divides .
Theorem 3.5**.**
Let be a polynomial of odd degree with Galois group isomorphic to a Frobenius group of order .
Suppose is a number field of dimension over . Then is Galois with isomorphic to a quotient of the Frobenius complement of .
Furthermore, is an extension of degree contained in , and as abstract groups, . Moreover, if , then .
Finally, if is -maximal, then is unramified at 2.
Proof.
By the above, we have that divides . Thus and for some , where is an extension of degree contained in .
Let . By the above an extension contained in of degree for some dividing . Since is a field, is absolutely simple and so divides . We may apply Lemma 3.3, to find the group acts transitively on , and the stabiliser of a point , has many orbits on . Thus, by Proposition 3.2 we have that
[TABLE]
Hence , and . But and , so we find that .
Since the injection of abstract groups from above is an isomorphism. Whence we deduce that and so is Galois. We now conclude is isomorphic to a quotient of the Frobenius complement of .
If , then is a CM abelian variety. Furthermore, as is Galois the reflex field is a subfield of [Shi98, Prop. 28, pg62]. Since is absolutely simple its CM type is primitive. Proposition 30 on page 65 of [Shi98] applies to tell us the endomorphism field equals . In particular, . It follows and .
It remains to show is unramified at 2 when is 2-maximal. To this end, note that by Lemma 3.4 above and Theorem 5.1 of [Zar01] we have is semisimple as a -module, with no repeated simple constituents. Thus also has no repeated simple constituents as a -module. The result now follows since if ramified in , then would have repeated factors. ∎
Corollary 3.6**.**
Let be an odd prime power. Let be a polynomial of degree with Galois group .
Suppose is a number field of dimension over . Then is cyclic Galois and is the unique extension of degree contained in . If furthermore, , then .
Proof.
This follows immediately from Theorem 3.5 by noting that is a 2-transitive Frobenius group with cyclic Frobenius complement.
∎
Example 3.7**.**
In the table below we give examples of the above theorem. We denote by the maximal totally real subfield of the -th cyclotomic field . We also write for the endomorphism field of .
See also the table at the end of Section 1 for more examples of Corollary 3.6.
Proposition 3.8**.**
Let be an irreducible polynomial of odd degree with Galois group .
Suppose is a number field of dimension over . Then is the unique extension of degree contained in .
Proof.
The proof is similar to that of Theorem 3.5. Indeed, divides , and , so divides . As has a unique normal subgroup of index 2, we deduce the Galois extension is a subfield of the unique degree 2 extension contained in .
Let . By the above either or thus is an extension of degree diving . As is a Frobenius group, acts transitively on , and the stabiliser of a point , is cyclic of order , and has many orbits on . Thus, by Proposition 3.2 we have that
[TABLE]
Hence , and . ∎
To finish the proof of Theorem 1.5, we require the following observation.
Proposition 3.9**.**
The Galois group of , the minimal extension over which all endomorphisms of are defined, fits into the exact sequence
[TABLE]
where is a (possibly trivial) elementary abelian 2-group.
Proof.
By Silverberg’s result [Sil92, Theorem 4.1], we have that is contained in . Furthermore, and are subgroups of and respectively. Thus, as the following sequence is exact
[TABLE]
and is an elementary abelian 2-group (under addition) we are done. ∎
Corollary 3.10**.**
Let be an irreducible polynomial of degree with Galois group and .
Suppose is a number field of dimension over . Then is the unique extension of degree contained in .
Proof.
As is a number field, the discussion preceding Theorem 3.5 shows divides . But the order of is , so by Proposition 3.9 we have that is a 2-group.
Since does not divide , it does not divide either. Thus . Hence, applying Proposition 3.8 we find . ∎
Proposition 3.11**.**
Suppose is an abelian surface with CM by a degree 4 field and . Then and contains a real quadratic field.
Proof.
By assumption is a degree 4 CM field. Let us note that as is absolutely simple it has primitive CM type [Shi98, §8.2, page 60]. By [Shi98, §8.4 Examples, pages 63-65] there are only two such CM types for a genus 2 curve. One of which is not Galois and the other is cyclic of degree 4. The minimal field of definition of the endomorphisms is the compositum of and the reflex field of , see [Shi98, Proposition 30, page 65].
In the non-Galois case, [Shi94, Proposition 5.17(5), page 131] gives us that contains the real quadratic subfield of the reflex field, and thus also . In the other case, the reflex field is equal to . As divides the image of in is trivial, thus by Proposition 3.9 we have that has exponent dividing 2. Hence is isomorphic to either the trivial group, , or . If held, then would have Galois group , but this implies the CM type of is not primitive [Shi98, §8.4 Examples, 2A, page 64], contrary to what we have shown. Thus , and as contains a real quadratic subfield, we see that must too. ∎
Proposition 3.12**.**
Suppose is an abelian surface and . Then .
Proof.
By Theorem 2.11, we have that is either isomorphic to , a real quadratic field, or a degree 4 CM field. In the first two cases follows from the discussion before Theorem 3.5, and in the last case it follows from Proposition 3.11. ∎
Corollary 3.13**.**
Let be as in Proposition 3.12. If has CM, then contains a real quadratic field with discriminant congruent to modulo .
Proof.
By Proposition 3.11, contains a real quadratic field. Let us now show the discriminant condition. Recall that discriminant of a real quadratic field is congruent to 5 modulo 8 if and only if 2 is inert. Theorem 1.3 gives us that 2 is inert in , thus in the case that is Galois, the claim follows immediately by the above.
Let us suppose that is not Galois. Write for the real quadratic subfield of , with square-free (and hence equal to the discriminant of ). The reflex field of is also not a Galois extension of , and has a totally real subfield , where is square-free [Shi98, 8.4 Examples, 2C]. By what we have already shown above, it suffices to prove .
The number field obtained as the compositum of and its reflex is a Galois extension of , with Galois group of order 8. We claim that splits in and each prime above 2 has inertia degree 4. As 2 is inert in , it suffices to show splits in . We shall rule out the other possibilities. Let denote the decomposition group of a prime above in . Note that as is not cyclic, is not totally inert in the extension . Next, suppose ramifies in , then by comparing orders, we see is isomorphic to , but as the inertia degree is 4, it also has a cyclic quotient of order 4, which does not. Thus is not ramified in the extension . We deduce that is isomorphic to the unique degree 4 cyclic subgroup of .
By examining the subgroup structure of , we see the subfield fixed by is the quadratic subfield of not contained in or . By definition of we have that 2 splits in . Equivalently, , from which it follows that .
∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[BCP 97] Wieb Bosma, John Cannon, and Catherine Playoust. The Magma algebra system. I. The user language. J. Symbolic Comput. , 24(3-4):235–265, 1997. Computational algebra and number theory (London, 1993).
- 2[BG 16] Timothy C. Burness and Michael Giudici. Classical groups, derangements and primes , volume 25 of Australian Mathematical Society Lecture Series . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016.
- 3[BSS + 16] Andrew R. Booker, Jeroen Sijsling, Andrew V. Sutherland, John Voight, and Dan Yasaki. A database of genus-2 curves over the rational numbers. LMS J. Comput. Math. , 19(suppl. A):235–254, 2016.
- 4[FD 93] Benson Farb and R. Keith Dennis. Noncommutative algebra , volume 144 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics . Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993.
- 5[FKRS 12] Francesc Fité, Kiran S. Kedlaya, Víctor Rotger, and Andrew V. Sutherland. Sato-Tate distributions and Galois endomorphism modules in genus 2. Compos. Math. , 148(5):1390–1442, 2012.
- 6[GK 17] Robert Guralnick and Kiran S. Kedlaya. Endomorphism fields of abelian varieties. Res. Number Theory , 3:Art. 22, 10, 2017.
- 7[Isa 94] I. Martin Isaacs. Character theory of finite groups . Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1994. Corrected reprint of the 1976 original [Academic Press, New York; MR 0460423 (57 #417)].
- 8[JLY 02] Christian U. Jensen, Arne Ledet, and Noriko Yui. Generic polynomials: Constructive aspects of the inverse Galois problem , volume 45 of Mathematical Sciences Research Institute Publications . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002.
