This paper characterizes the extended genus field of global fields, providing explicit descriptions for both function fields and number fields using class field theory techniques.
Contribution
It introduces the concept of extended genus fields for global fields and derives their descriptions via class field theory, extending previous understanding.
Findings
01
Explicit description of extended genus fields for function fields.
02
Application of function field techniques to number fields.
03
Use of class field theory to characterize these fields.
Abstract
In this paper we obtain the extended genus field of a global field. First we define the extended genus field of a global function field and we obtain, via class field theory, the description of the extended genus field of an arbitrary global function field. In the last part of the paper we use the techniques for function fields to describe the extended genus field of an arbitrary number field.
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.
Taxonomy
TopicsAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory · Advanced Topology and Set Theory
Full text
Genus fields of global fields
Elizabeth Ramírez–Ramírez
Departamento de Control Automático
Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del I.P.N.
In this paper we obtain the extended genus field of a
global field. First we define the extended genus field
of a global function field and we obtain, via class field
theory, the description of the extended genus field of
an arbitrary global function field. In the last part
of the paper we use the techniques for function fields
to describe the extended genus field of an arbitrary
number field.
Key words and phrases:
Global fields, genus fields, extended
genus fields
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 11R58; Secondary 11R60, 11R29
1. Introduction
The study of narrow or extended genus fields goes back to C.F. Gauss
[8] who introduced the genus concept in the context of
quadratic forms. During the first half of the last century, the
concept was imported to quadratic number fields. H. Hasse
[9] studied genus theory of quadratic number fields
by means of class field theory. H.W. Leopoldt [11]
generalized the work of H. Hasse by introducing the concept
of genus field for a finite abelian extension of the rational field. Leopoldt
studied extended genus fields using the arithmetic of abelian fields
by means of Dirichlet characters. The first to introduce
the concept of genus field and of
extended genus field of a nonabelian finite extension of
the rational field was A. Frölich who defined the concept of
genus field of an arbitrary finite extension of Q
[6, 7]. For a number field K, Frölich defined
the genus field K (with respecto to the rational field Q)
as Kge:=KF where F/Q is the maximum abelian
extension such that KF/K is unramified everywhere. Similarly,
the extended genus field is Kgex=KL where L/Q
is the maximum abelian extension such that KL/K
is unramified at the finite primes. Numerous authors have
studied genus fields and extended genus fields for finite
field extensions K/Q over Q.
In the case of number fields, the concepts of Hilbert class field
and of extended Hilbert class field are defined without any
ambiguity. The Hilbert class field KH and the extended Hilbert class
field KH+ of a number field K/Q are defined as the
maximum abelian unramified extension and the maximum abelian extension
unramified at the finite primes of K, respectively. In this way, the concepts of
genus field and of extended genus field are defined depending on the
concept of the Hilbert class field, and of the extended Hilbert class
field respectively. Namely, we have K⊆Kge⊆KH and the Galois group Gal(KH/K) is isomorphic
to the class group ClK of K. The genus field Kge corresponds to a
subgroup GK of ClK and we have Gal(Kge/K)≅ClK/GK. The degree [Kge:K] is called the genus
number of K and Gal(Kge/K) is called the genus group
of K.
Similarly, K⊆Kgex⊆KH+ and Kgex corresponds
to a subgroup GK+ of Gal(Kgex/K)≅ClK+.
For global function fields the picture is different due to
the fact that there are several
concepts of Hilbert class field and of extended Hilbert class field,
depending in which aspect you are interested in. The direct definition
of the Hilbert class field KH of a global function field K over
Fq as the maximum unramified abelian extension of K has
the disadvantage of being of infinite degree over K due to the extensions
of constants. In the extensions of constants, every prime is
eventually inert, so, if we are interested in a definition of a Hilbert
class field of finite degree over the base field, we must impose
some condition on the extension of constants. It seems
that the first one to consider extended genus fields in the case of
function fields was R. Clement in [5], where she considered the
case of a cyclic tame extension K/Fq(T) of prime degree l different
from the characteristic p of Fq. She developed the theory along
the lines of the case studied by Hasse in [9].
Later on, S. Bae and J.K. Koo [3] generalized the results
of Clement following the development given by Frölich. They defined
the extended genus field for extensions of an arbitrary global
function field K defining an analogue to the cyclotomic function
field extensions of Fq(T) given by the Carlitz module.
M. Rosen defined in [15] the Hilbert class field of a global function field
K as the maximum abelian unramified extension of K such that
a fixed nonempty finite set of prime divisors of K decompose
fully. Using this definition of Hilbert class field, G. Peng [14]
found the genus field of a cyclic tame extension of prime degree over
the rational function field k=Fq(T). His method used the
analogue for function fields
of the Conner–Hurrelbrink exact hexagon in number fields. The
wild prime case was presented by S. Hu and Y. Li in [10] where
they described explicitly the genus field of an Artin–Schreier extension of the
rational function field. In
[2, 12, 13] we developed
a theory of genus fields using the same concept of Hilbert class field.
In those papers, the ideas of Leopoldt using Dirichlet characters were
strongly used.
In this paper we are interested in describing, using class field theory,
the extended genus field of a finite separable extension of k.
B. Anglès and J.-F. Jaulent in [1] established the general
theory of extended genus fields of global fields, either function
or numeric. We use a concept of extended genus field
for function fields different from the one defined by Anglès and Jaulent. With
this concept, when we describe the finite abelian extension L
where Kgex=KL, we may write L as the composition of a sort
of P–components, where P runs through the finite primes
of k. We consider these P–components LP
as the composition of EP,
the P–component of the projection E of L in a cyclotomic
function field given by the Carlitz module,
and a field S which codifies the behavior of the infinite
prime. More precisely, S codifies the wild ramification and the inertia
of the infinite prime of k. To this end, we need to consider the
idèle group corresponding to an arbitrary cyclotomic function
field. Finally, we describe the field S.
It turns out, that the same approach works for number fields. Indeed,
in the number field case, the problem is simpler because, by the
Kronecker–Weber theorem, any abelian extension of Q
is cyclotomic, that is, it is contained in a cyclotomic number
field. In the function field case, the maximum abelian extension
of k consists of three components: one cyclotomic, one of constants
and one, also cyclotomic, where the infinite prime is totally and
wildly ramified and it is the only
ramified prime. In the number field case, the “p–components” can be found
explicitly for p≥3 depending only on their degree over
Q. The case p=2 does not depend only on its degree
over Q since, for n≥3, the
cyclotomic field Q(ζ2n) is not cyclic. We give a criterion to
describe the 2–component of Kgex.
Finally, we present some results on the behavior of the genus
field of a composition. For number fields, a similar result was
obtained by M. Bhaskaran in [4] and by X. Zhang [18].
2. Preliminaries and notations
We denote by k=Fq(T) the global rational function
filed with field of constants the finite field of q elements Fq.
Let RT=Fq[T] be the ring of polynomials, that is, the
ring of integers of k with respect to the pole of T, the
infinite prime p∞. Let RT+:={P∈RT∣P is monic and irreducible}. The elements of RT+ are the
finite primes of k and p∞ is the infinite prime of k.
For N∈RT, ΛN denotes the N–th torsion of
the Carlitz module. A finite extension F/k will be called
cyclotomic if there exists N∈RT such that
k⊆F⊆k(ΛN).
Given a cyclotomic function field E, the group of Dirichlet characters
X corresponding to E is the group X such that
X\subseteq\widehat{(R_{T}/\langle N\rangle)^{*}}\cong\widehat{\operatorname{Gal}(k(\Lambda_{{N}})/k)}=\operatorname{Hom}\big{(}(R_{T}/\langle N\rangle)^{*},{\mathbb{C}}^{*}\big{)}
and E=k(ΛN)H where H=∩χ∈Xkerχ.
For the basic results on Dirichlet characters, we refer to
[17, §12.6].
For a group of Dirichlet characters X, let
Y=∏P∈RTXP where XP={χP∣χ∈X} and χP is the P–th component of χ:
χ=∏P∈RT+χP. If E is the field corresponding
to X, we define Egex as the field corresponding
to Y. We have that Egex is the maximum
unramified extension at the finite
primes of E contained in a cyclotomic function field.
The infinite prime p∞ might be ramified in Egex/k
(see [12]).
Let Ln=k(Λ1/Tn+1)Fq∗, n∈N∪{0}
where {\mathbb{F}}_{q}^{*}\subseteq\Big{(}R_{1/T}/\langle 1/T^{n+1}\rangle\Big{)}^{*}, is isomorphic to the inertia group of
the prime corresponding to T in k\big{(}\Lambda_{1/T^{n+1}}\big{)}/k. The prime
p∞ is the only ramified prime in Ln/k and it is totally and
wildly ramified. For m∈N, and for any finite extension
F/k, Fm denotes the extension of constants: Fm=FFqm. In particular km=Fqm(T).
Given a finite abelian extension K/k, there exist n∈N∪{0}, m∈N and N∈RT such that K⊆Lnk(ΛN)km=:nk(ΛN)m (see [17, Theorem 12.8.31]).
We define M:=Lnkm. In M/k no finite prime of k is
ramified.
For any extension E/F of global fields and for any place P
of E and p=P∩F, the ramification index is denoted by
eE/F(P∣p)=e(P∣p) and the inertia degree is denoted
by fE/F(P∣p)=f(P∣p). When the extension is Galois
we denote ep(E∣F)=eE/F(P∣p) and fp(E∣F)=fE/F(P∣p). In particular for any abelian extension E/k,
eP(E/k) and fP(E/k) denote the ramification index and the inertia
degree of P∈RT+ in E/k respectively, and we denote by
e∞(E/k) and f∞(E/k) the ramification index and
the inertia degree of p∞ in E/k. The symbol e∞wild(E∣F) denotes
the wild ramification part of the infinite primes in E/F.
Similarly, IE/F(P∣p)
denotes the inertia group and DE/F(P∣p) the decomposition
group.
For any finite separable extension K/k the finite primes
of K are the primes over the primes P in RT+
and the infinite primes of K are the primes over p∞.
The Hilbert class fieldKH of K is the maximum
abelian extension of K
unramified at every finite prime of K and where all the infinite
primes of K are fully decomposed. The genus fieldKge
of K/k is the maximum extension of K contained in KH
and such that it is the composite Kge=KF where F/k is abelian.
We choose F the maximum possible. In other words, F is
the maximum abelian extension of k contained in KH.
Let K/k be a finite abelian extension. We know that
Kge=KEgeH is the genus field of K where H is the
decomposition group of the infinite primes in
KE/K and E:=KM∩k(ΛN) (see [2]).
We also know that KEge/Kge and KE/K are extensions
of constants.
For a local field F with prime p, we denote by F(p)≅Fq the residue field of F, Up(n)=1+pn
the n–th units of F, n∈N∪{0}.
Let π=πF=πp be a uniformizer element for p, that is,
vp(π)=1. Then the multiplicative group of F
satisfies F∗≅⟨π⟩×Up≅⟨π⟩×Fq∗×Up(1) as groups.
3. Extended genus field of a global function field
Let K/k be a finite abelian extension. Let n∈N∪{0},
m∈N and N∈RT be such that K⊆nk(ΛN)m.
Let E=KM∩k(ΛN).
Define the extended genus field of K as
[TABLE]
Note that Kgex/K is unramified at
the finite primes since Egex/E is unramified at the finite primes,
so that KEgex/KE is unramified at the finite primes and
we also know that KE/K
is unramified at the finite primes ([2]).
[TABLE]
Now KM=EM/E is ramified at most at the infinite prime p∞ and
the inertia of p∞ in the extension EM=KM/E
is contained in M. Hence EM/E is unramified
at the finite primes. The same holds for KM/K and we have K⊆KE⊆KM=EM. In short, Kgex/K is unramified at the
finite primes. We also have that Kgex/K is tamely ramified at p∞
since Egex/k is tamely ramified at p∞ so that KEgex/K is tamely
ramified at p∞ and Kgex=KEgex.
We also have [Egex:EgeH]∣q−1 since e∞(Egex∣E)∣q−1
where in general, for a finite abelian extension L/F,
e∞(L/F) denotes the ramification index of
the infinite primes of F in L, and H⊆I∞(Egex∣k), where
in general I∞(L∣F) denotes the inertia group of
the infinite primes in the Galois
extension L/F. In other words, the infinite primes of
EgeH are fully ramified in the extension
Egex/EgeH. Thus we have
[TABLE]
Therefore we have that Kgex=KEgex/KEgeH=Kge is unramified
at the finite primes, the infinite primes are
tamely ramified, and [Kgex:Kge]∣q−1.
Now let K/k be a finite and separable extension. We define Kgex
as KFgex where Kge=KF, that is,
F is the maximum abelian extension of k contained
in the Hilbert class field KH of K
(see [2]). Note that Fge=F.
Note that [Kgex:Kge]∣[Fgex:Fge]∣q−1 and the only possible
ramified primes in Kgex/Kge are the infinite primes
and they are tamely ramified.
Definition 3.1**.**
For a finite separable extension K/k, we define the extended
genus field of K as Kgex=KFgex=KL where L=Fgex. We stress that
we choose F to be the maximum abelian extension of k such
that Kge=KF.
Remark 3.2**.**
For a finite prime P∈RT+, the tame part of the ramification of P in
Kgex/k can be obtained in the following way. Let dP=degP
and let eP(L∣k)=eP(0)eP(w)=etame(P)eP(w) where gcd(p,eP(0))=1 and eP(w)=pαP for some
integer αP≥0.
Since L/k is abelian, we have e(0)∣qdP−1 (see
[16, Proposición 10.4.8]).
Consider the extension kP(0)/k where P is the only finite prime ramified,
kP(0)⊆L and eP(0)∣[kP(0):k].
Note that [k(ΛP):k]=qdP−1.
Then KkP(0)⊆Kgex and KkP(0)/K is
unramfied at the finite primes. Thus, by Abhyankar Lemma,
[TABLE]
We now obtain Kgex=KL where L satisfies
Lgex=L, L/k
abelian and L is the maximum with respect to this property.
Let L⊆nk(ΛN)m. If necessary, we may assume
n,m,N are minimum, where m∈N is the conductor of constants
(see [2]), N∈RT and n∈N∪{0}.
In this situation we define the conductor of L as (m,N,n).
Let E:=LM∩k(ΛN). Then EM=LM and
Lgex=L=EgexL so that Egex⊆L and E=Egex. In fact, Egex⊆L⊆LM=EM, hence
EgexM⊆EM and from the Galois correspondence, Egex⊆E. Thus Egex=E.
[TABLE]
Let S:=L∩M, S⊆M=Lnkm.
Let X=Y=∏P∈RT+XP be the group of Dirichlet characters
associated to Egex=E. Then if EP is the field associated to XP,
with P∈RT+, E=∏P∈RT+EP where EP=k for
almost all P and if P1,…,Pr are the finite primes ramified in
E/k, XPi={1}, EPi=k, EPi∩∏j=iEPj=k, 1≤i≤r and E=EP1⋯EPr, Gal(E/k)≅X=Y=∏P∈RT+XP=∏P∈RT+Gal(EP/k)≅∏i=1rGal(EPi/k). Thus
[TABLE]
For any nonempty finite subset A⊆RT+, we
define EA:=∏P∈AEP.
We may consider EP as the “P–th primary component”
of E.
[TABLE]
We define LP:=EPM∩L. We have that EP⊆E⊆L and EP⊆EPM. Therefore EP⊆LP. From the Galois correspondence,
we have
[TABLE]
For any nonempty finite subset A⊆RT+, we let LA:=EAM∩k(ΛN).
From the Galois correspondence we obtain LA=EAS and in particular
[TABLE]
We have
Proposition 3.3**.**
For any A,B∈RT∖{0}, let LA:=EAM∩L, where EA:=P∣AP∈RT+∏EP, that is, EA=EA and LA=LA, where A={P∈RT+∣P∣A}. Then we have
[TABLE]
Furthermore, if gcd(A,B)=1 we have LA∩LB=S=L∩M.
Proof.
It remains to consider the case gcd(A,B)=1.
We have EA=∏P∣AEP, EB=∏P∣BEP
and {P∈RT+∣P∣A}∩{P∈RT+∣P∣B}=∅. Therefore EA∩EB=k and kL∩M=L∩M=S. The result follows from the Galois
correspondence.
∎
Now, for P∈RT+, LP=EPM∩L⊇M∩L=S and LP=S⟺P∈{P1,…,Pr}. In fact,
LP=EPM∩L=S⟺EPM=M⟺EP=k⟺P∈{P1,…,Pr}.
Finally, E=∏P∈RT+EP=∏i=1rEPi.
Therefore, since EM=LM, in particular L⊆EM. We have
[TABLE]
We have proved
Theorem 3.4**.**
For A∈RT, we define
LA=EAM∩L. Let S=L∩M. We have
(1)
For all A,B∈RT, LAB=LALB.
(2)
LA⊇S* for all A∈RT and LA=S⟺Pi∤A for all 1≤i≤r.*
In order to compute L we need to know S, that is, the behavior
of p∞, and also each EP for P∈RT+. First, we have that if
P∈RT+ is unramified in K/k, then P is unramified in E/k
and therefore in L/k. Indeed, if P were ramified in L/k, then
we would have
[TABLE]
so that eP(KL∣K)>1 contrary to the definition of L.
[TABLE]
Thus, it suffices to know EPi, 1≤i≤r where
P1,…,Pr are the finite primes ramified in K/k and
therefore these are the only possible finite primes ramified in
E/k and in L/k.
Now, in EP/k the only finite prime ramified is P
and p∞ is tamely ramified. Note that the tame ramification
index of p∞ in E/k and in L/k is the same. This is
a consequence of L=ES.
In general
we consider an arbitrary global function field F. Let JF be the
idèle group of F and let CF=JF/F∗ be the idèle class group
of F. To find EP for P∈{P1,…,Pr},
we must find the idèle subgroup of Jk corresponding to
EP. Now, since EP is cyclotomic and P is the only
finite prime ramified, there exists t∈N such that EP⊆k(ΛPt). Therefore, the idèle group corresponding to
EP contains the idèle group corresponding to k(ΛPt).
Theorem 3.5**.**
Let N∈RT, N=P1α1⋯Prαr with P1,…,Pr∈RT+ distinct. Set
RT′:=RT+∖{P1,…,Pr}. Then,
the idèle group corresponding to k(ΛN) is
[TABLE]
where π=1/T is a uniformizer for p∞.
Proof.
Let U′:=∏Q∈RT+UQ×[(π)×U∞(1)].
We will give an epimorphism
[TABLE]
such that kerψN=XN
and hence, U′/XN≅GN.
Let ξ∈U′. Then
ξPi∈UPi={∑j=0∞ajPij∣aj∈RT/⟨Pi⟩}, 1≤i≤r. Since k is dense in
the local field kPi,
there exists Qi∈RT such that
Qi≡ξPimodPiαi. By the Chinese
Residue Theorem, we have that there exists
C∈RT such that
C≡QimodPiαi, 1≤i≤r
and so C≡ξPimodPiαi, 1≤i≤r
Now, if C1∈RT satisfies C1≡ξPimodPiαi, 1≤i≤r, we have that Piαi∣C−C1 for 1≤i≤r. It follows that N∣C−C1 and thus
C∈RT is unique modulo N. On the other hand,
vPi(ξPi)=0, so that Pi∤ξPi
and so we obtain that gcd(C,N)=1. In this way we have that
CmodN defines an element of GN=Gal(k(ΛN)/k).
Given σ∈GN, there exists C∈RT such that σλN=λNC where λN
is a generator de ΛN. Let ξ∈U′
with ξPi=C, 1≤i≤r and ξP=1=ξ∞
for all P∈RT′. Therefore ξ↦CmodN and ψN es onto. Finally, kerψN={ξ∈U′∣ξPi≡1modPiαi,1≤i≤r}=XN. So we have that ψN is
an epimorphism and kerψN=XN.
We will show that U′/XN≅Jk/XNk∗.
We have the composition
[TABLE]
with imμ=U′XNk∗/XNk∗ and kerμ=U′∩XNk∗.
Now, XN⊆U′ so that XN⊆U′∩XNk∗. Conversely, if ξ∈U′∩XNk∗, the components of
ξ are given as
[TABLE]
Since ξP,βP∈UP we have vP(ξP)=vP(βP)=0 for all P∈RT. It follows that
vP(a)=0 for all P∈RT. Furthermore, since
dega=0 we have v∞(a)=0 and so a∈Fq∗.
Now ξ∞,β∞∈(π)×U∞(1)=kerϕ∞, where
ϕ∞:k∞∗⟶Fq∗ is the sign function
of k∞∗ defined as ϕ∞(λπnu)=λ where λ∈Fq∗, n∈N and
u∈U∞(1).
Thus 1=ϕ∞(ξ∞)=ϕ∞(a)ϕ∞(β∞)=ϕ∞(a) and so
a=1. It follows that ξ∈XN.
Therefore kerμ=XN and we obtain a monomorphism
U′/XN\lhook\joinrel⟶θJk/XNk∗.
It remains to prove that θ is surjective. So, we
must prove that Jk=U′XNk∗=U′k∗. We have that U′ corresponds
to the maximum unramified extension at every finite prime.
Let L/k be this extension. Since U∞(1) corresponds to the first ramification group, and in
this way it corresponds to the wild ramification of p∞,
it follows that in L/k there is at most a ramified prime (p∞),
being tamely ramified and of degree 1.
From [16, Proposición 10.4.11], we obtain that
L/k is an extension of constants.
Finally, since 1=min{n∈N∣degα=n,α∈U′}, the field of constants of L is
Fq (see [16, Teorema 17.8.6])
and therefore L=k. It follows that Ck≅U′, that is, Jk/k∗≅U′ and thus
Jk=U′k∗.
∎
Corollary 3.6**.**
With the above notations, we have that
for a cyclotomic field k⊆F⊆k(ΛN), the
idèle group corresponding to F is of the form RF×∏Q∈RT′UQ×[(π)×U∞(1)] with
RF a group satisfying ∏i=1rUPi(αi)⊆RF⊆∏i=1rUPi.
Proof.
Let Δ be the idèle group corresponding to F. Thus
Δ⊇XN. Now
[TABLE]
Therefore
Gal(k(ΛN)/F)≅∏i=1rUPi(αi)Θ<Gal(k(ΛN)/k)
for a group Θ⊆∏i=1rUPi. The group
Θ corresponds to RF. The result follows.
∎
Corollary 3.7**.**
Let P∈RT+. Then
the idèle group corresponding to EP is of the form
[TABLE]
where UP(t)⊆HP⊆UP for some t∈N.
Proof.
Since EP is cyclotomic and the only
finite prime ramified is P, there exists t∈N such that
EP⊆k(ΛPt). The result follows from
Corollary 3.6
∎
For each P∈RT+, kP denotes
the completion of k at P and k∞ denotes the
completion of k at p∞.
We recall the following result of class field theory.
Theorem 3.8**.**
Let F be a global field and let R/F be the class field extension
corresponding to H, that is, H is the open subgroup of CF
such that H=NR/FCR and Gal(R/F)≅CF/H. Let
E/F be a finite separable extension. Then ER/E is the class
field extension corresponding to the subgroup NE/F−1(H) of CE.
[TABLE]
Proof.
We have that if E/F and E′/F′ are two finite abelian extensions
of global fields with F⊆F′ and E⊆E′ of global fields, and
if ψE/F denotes the Artin map of the extension E/F
then we have the following commutative diagram
[TABLE]
where rest denotes the restriction map (see [16, Proposición
17.6.39]).
We apply this result to our situation, that is, we have the commutative
diagram
[TABLE]
Let ψER/E:CE⟶Gal(ER/E) be the Artin map. The norm group corresponding
to ER/E is kerψER/E, that is, CE/kerψER/E≅Gal(ER/E). Now the restriction map is injective and we have
that is, KEP is the class field of NK/k−1(ΔP).
Since EP is maximum in the sense that P is the only
finite prime ramified in EP/k and KEP/K unramified at
every finite prime, we have that ΔP satisfies
[TABLE]
Let α∈∏Q∈RT+∏p∣QUp×∏P∞∣p∞KP∞∗, α=(αp)p.
Then
[TABLE]
For Q=P, Q is unramified in LP/k, therefore,
for Q∣Q, KQ/kQ is unramified and in particular
it is a cyclic extension. Then NKQ/kQUQ=UQ (see [16, Teorema 17.2.17]).
For Q=P, we have
[TABLE]
where conk/KP=p1e1⋯pmPemP.
It follows that ∏j=1mPNKpj/kPαpj∈HP. In other words, if
[TABLE]
we have
[TABLE]
Now, if Sj is the norm group of the field Rj⊆nk(ΛPcj)m for some n∈N∪{0},m∈N
and cj∈N, then ∏j=1mPSj is the norm
group of ∩j=1mPRj.
It follows that [Ck:k∗Sj]=[UP:NKpj/kPUpj]
and Gal(Rj/k)≅Ck/k∗Sj. Therefore [Rj:k]=[Ck:k∗Sj]=[UP:NKpj/kPUpj]. Finally, we have
[TABLE]
We have proved our main result.
Theorem 3.9**.**
Let K/k be a finite and separable extension, where k=Fq(T).
With the notations as above, let Kgex=KL. Then L=∏P∈RT+LP where LP=EPS, S=L∩M
and k⊆EP⊆k(ΛPcP) corresponds to
∏j=1mPNKpj/kPUpj. In particular
[TABLE]
where conk/KP=p1e1⋯pmPemP.
The tamely ramified part of LP/K is given by
[TABLE]
with dP=degkP.
\hfill\qed\vskip12.0ptplus4.0ptminus4.0pt
3.1. The field S
To study S, recall that for a finite extension K/k, the genus
field is Kge=KF where F/k is the maximum abelian extension
contained in the Hilbert class field and the extended genus field is
Kgex=KL, where L satisfies Lgex=L, L/k is abelian
and L is the maximum with respecto to this property. We have
Fge=F, L=Fgex and Lgex=L. Let L⊆nk(ΛN)m
with (m,N,n) the conductor of L. Then M=Lnkm
and S=L∩M.
Proposition 3.10**.**
We have that L/F is totally ramified at the infinite primes, unramified
at the finite primes and [L:F]∣q−1. In particular, L/F is tamely
ramified.
Proof.
We have that F/k is abelian. Let F⊆nk(ΛN)m and
E=FM∩k(ΛN). Then EgeM=FgeM=FM=EM
(see [2]) and therefore Ege=E.
Since e∞(Egex∣Ege)∣q−1 and e∞(M∣k)=qn, it follows
that e∞(EgexM/EgeM)=e∞(Egex∣Ege)=[Egex:Ege].
[TABLE]
Hence, e∞(Fgex∣Fge)=e∞(FgexM∣FgeM)=e∞(EgexM∣EgeM)=[Egex:Ege]=[EgexF:EgeF]=[Fgex:Fge]. So, the
infinite primes are total and tamely ramified in L=Fgex/Fge=F.
On the other hand, Egex/Ege is unramified at the finite primes,
thus EgexF=Fgex=L/F=Fge=EgeF is unramified at the finite
primes.
∎
Proposition 3.11**.**
We have
[TABLE]
Furthermore, S=L∩M=F∩M.
Proof.
We have e∞wild(L∣k)=e∞wild(L∣K)=e∞wild(L∣F)e∞wild(F∣k)=e∞wild(F∣k).
By the definition of S, we have e∞wild(S∣k)=e∞(S∣k) since
e∞(S∣k)∣qn. Now, L=EgexS, Egex∩S=k and
e∞wild(Egex∣k)=1. Therefore
[TABLE]
since e∞wild(EgexS∣S)∣e∞wild(Egex∣k)=1.
We have F∩M⊆L∩M=S and F∩(L∩M)=F∩M.
[TABLE]
It follows that [L∩M:F∩M]=[F(L∩M):F]∣[L:F]∣q−1. We have
that L/F
is totally ramified at the infinite primes and therefore F(L∩M)/F is
also fully ramified at the infinite primes. It follows that S=L∩M/F∩M
is fully ramified at the infinite primes (see [16, Corolario 10.4.15]).
Thus, [S:F∩M]∣qn and [S:F∩M]∣q−1 so that
[S:F∩M]=1 and F∩M=L∩M.
∎
Proposition 3.12**.**
The field of constants of S, of L and of F is the same.
Proof.
If Fqt0 is the field of constants of L then Fqt0⊆S=L∩M and since S⊆F⊆L, the
result follows.
∎
Proposition 3.13**.**
Let conk/Kp∞=P1e1⋯Prer and let ti=degK(Pi). Then the field of constants of Kge is Fqt0 where
t0=gcd(t1,…,tr).
The field of constants of S,L and F is Fqt0.
\hfill\qed\vskip12.0ptplus4.0ptminus4.0pt
Now we consider a finite abelian extension J/k such that KJ/K is
unramified and the infinite primes decompose fully. Let P∣p∞ be a
prime divisor of KJ, P∩K=Pi for some 1≤i≤r and
P∩J=Q. Taking the completions we have
[TABLE]
Let Hi:=NJQ/k∞JQ∗, that is,
Hi is the norm group of JQ. Therefore, the norm
group corresponding to (KJ)P=KPi is
NKPi/k∞−1(Hi) (see Theorem 3.8). Hence
NKPi/k∞−1(Hi)=KPi∗. That is, Hi=NKPi/k∞(KPi∗).
The maximum global abelian extension J/k satisfying that KJ/K
is unramified and the infinite primes decompose fully, satisfies,
locally at ∞, that its norm gorup is
[TABLE]
In this way, if R/k∞ is the maximum abelian extension
with (KR)P=KPi for some i. Thus R corresponds
to ∏i=1rHi, that is, Gal(R/k∞)=k∞∗/(∏i=1rHi) and [R:k∞]=[k∞∗:∏i=1rHi].
Let [R:k∞]=pαa with α∈N∪{0}
and p∤a. Since S is the
maximum abelian extension of k such that the only ramified
prime is p∞, it is fully ramified and S⊆L, and since
f∞(L∣S)=1, it follows that if P∞ is the only prime
in S dividing p∞ (recall that the number of primes
in S that lie above p∞ is h∞(S∣k)=1), then
[SP∞:k∞]=[S:k]=pα. In particular, the
norm group corresponding to S∞=SP∞ in k∞ is the
group S⊇∏i=1rHi,
which is the minimum such that
[k∞∗:S]=pα is a p–group.
The conductor p∞n0 of S∞ is such that n0 is the
minimum nonnegative integer such that U∞(n0)⊆S. The conductor of constants m0 of S,
that is, m0 is the minimum natural number such that
S⊆km0Ln0 is given as follows
(see [2]). Let t=f∞(S∣k), d∗=f∞(R′S∣S) where R′=Sm0∩Ln0 and
d∗=e∞(S∣F′) where F′=S∩n0k(Λ1)=S∩Ln0.
Therefore
[TABLE]
Proposition 3.15**.**
Let f∞(S∣k)=t. Then Fqt is the field of constants
of S. That is, t=t0.
Proof.
We have Fqt0(T)=kt0⊆S. Let m0,n0
be minimum such that S⊆km0Ln0. Then S∩km0=kt0.
[TABLE]
We have Skt0Ln0=SLn0, kt0Ln0⊆SLn0⊆km0Ln0. Let SLn0∩km0=km′. From the Galois correspondence we obtain that
km′kt0Ln0=km′Ln0=SLn0⊇S.
It follows that m′≥m0. Hence m′=m0 and SLn0=km0Ln0.
Now e∞(km0Ln0∣kt0)=qn and km0⊆km0S⊆km0Ln0. Then
[TABLE]
It follows that S/kt0 is fully ramified at the infinite prime.
In particular f∞(S∣kt0)=1 so that f∞(S∣k)=f∞(S∣kt0)f∞(kt0∣k)=f∞(kt0∣k)=t0.
∎
We collect the above discussion in the following theorem.
Theorem 3.16**.**
Let S=L∩M. Let conk/Kp∞=P1e1⋯Prer and let ti=degK(Pi), 1≤i≤r. Then the
field of constants of S is Fqt0.
Let n0 be the
minimum nonnegative integer with U∞(n0)⊆S where S⊇∏i=1rHi=∏i=1rNKPi/k∞(KPi∗) and S is the minimum
such that [k∞∗:S]=pα is a p–group. Then
the conductor of constants of S is m0=f∞(S∣k)e∞(S∣S∩Ln0)=t0e∞(S∣S∩Ln0) and S
is the local norm group corresponding to S. In particular
Fqt0⊆S⊆km0Ln0.
\hfill\qed\vskip12.0ptplus4.0ptminus4.0pt
4. Number fields
The results of Section 3 can be developed in the number
field case. In fact, for a number field, the extended genus field
is more transparent than in the function field case.
Definition 4.1**.**
Let K be an arbitrary number field, that is, a finite extension
of the rational field Q. Let KH+ be the extended
or narrow Hilbert class field of K, that is, KH+ is
the maximum abelian extension of K unramified at every
finite prime of K. We define the extended genus
field Kgex of K as the maximum extension of K
contained in KH+ such that it is of the form KL
with L/Q abelian.
Equivalently, if L is the maximum abelian extension of Q
contained in KH+, the extended genus field of K is
Kgex=KL.
Again, we stress that we choose L maximum.
As in the function field case, we have
Proposition 4.2**.**
Let K/Q be a finite abelian extension and let X be
the group of Dirichlet characters corresponding to K. Then
Y:=∏p primeXp is the group of Dirichlet
characters corresponding to Kgex.
\hfill\qed\vskip12.0ptplus4.0ptminus4.0pt
In particular, if K/Q is any finite extension and Kgex=KL, then L=Lgex.
We want to describe Kgex for a general number field K.
Let K/Q be a finite extension.
Let p be a prime in Q and let
[TABLE]
that is, ei=eK∣Q(pi∣p), 1≤i≤r.
Let Kp1,…,Kpr be the completions
of K at the primes above p. Let Kgex=KL with
L/Q the maximum abelian extension
such that K⊆Kgex⊆KH+.
[TABLE]
Since L=Lgex, we let Lp be the field corresponding to Xp.
We have that L=∏p primeLp and Lp∩Lq=Q for any primes p,q such that p=q.
We have that Lp is the maximum abelian extension of Q
with p the only possible finite prime ramified and such that
KLp/K is unramified at every finite prime.
Let p be a fixed prime and let Lp⊆Q(ζpmp). Lor
any n∈N, the idèle group corresponding to Q(ζn) is
[TABLE]
where n=∏i=1tpiαi. As in the case of function
fields, it follows that the idèle group corresponding to Lp is
of the form
[TABLE]
where Up(mp)⊆Hp⊆Up.
We have eKpi∣Qp=eK∣Q(pi∣p)=ei. The extension Lp/Q is totally ramified at p and even
we could mix up Lp with the completion of L at p.
We have, with both meanings of Lp, that
[Lp:Q]=[Lp:Qp]=ep(Lp∣Q).
By Theorem 3.8 we have that the norm group of
the abelian extension KLp/K is NK/Q−1(Δp).
Since Lp is maximum, we want Δp to be such that
(see [16, Corolario 17.6.47])
[TABLE]
Let α∈∏p finiteUp×∏p realR∗⊆JK, α=(αp)p. Then
[TABLE]
As in the case of function fields we obtain that
[TABLE]
In other words, let
[TABLE]
Now
Si corresponds to a field
Ri⊆Q(ζpnp) and from
[16, Teorema 17.6.49] it follows
that ∏i=1rSi
corresponds to ⋂i=1rRi. Thus Lp=⋂i=1rRi. Furthermore, since Ri
corresponds to Si, we have
[TABLE]
When p≥3, we have that Q(ζpm) is cyclic for every
m∈N, however, when p=2, Q(ζ2m) is not cyclic
for m≥3. We study the two cases.
Let G=⟨σ⟩≅Cn be a finite cyclic group of order n∈N and
let Hi=⟨σji⟩<G where ji∣n, i=1,2.
Let H1∩H2=⟨σt⟩ and H1H2=⟨σs⟩ with s,t∣n.
We have σt∈Hi, i=1,2 so that there exist ai∈Z such that σt=σjiai, i=1,2. Therefore
t≡jiaimodn, i=1,2, that is, t=jiai+lin, i=1,2.
Hence ji∣t, i=1,2 so that lcm[j1,j2]∣t.
Let u=lcm[j1,j2], ji∣u. Set u=jibi. Then σu=σjibi∈Hi, i=1,2. Thus σu∈H1∩H2=⟨σt⟩ and σu=σtc for some c
and u=tc+ln. It follows that t∣u=lcm[j1,j2]. Therefore t=u.
In other words, H1∩H2=⟨σlcm[j1,j2]⟩.
Now, H1H2=⟨σs⟩, sn=∣H1H2∣=∣H1∩H2∣∣H1∣∣H2∣=tnj1nj2n=j1j2nt. Therefore st=j1j2 and
j1j2=gcd(j1,j2)lcm[j1,j2]=gcd(j1,j2)t=st.
Hence s=gcd(j1,j2).
In short, we have
Proposition 4.3**.**
Let G=⟨σ⟩ be a cyclic group of order n and let
Hi=⟨σji⟩ with ji∣n, i=1,2 be two subgroups
of G. Then
If p>2 is a prime number and Hi<Zp∗, i=1,2 are
two subgroups of finite index, then [{\mathbb{Z}}_{p}^{*}:H_{1}H_{2}]=\gcd\big{(}\big{[}{\mathbb{Z}}_{p}^{*}:H_{1}\big{]},\big{[}{\mathbb{Z}}_{p}^{*}:H_{2}]\big{)}.
Proof.
We have that Zp∗≅Cp−1×Zp where
Cp−1 is the cyclic group of order p−1. Let Hi=Hi′×pniZp where Hi′ is the torsion of Hi, i=1,2.
Then H1H2=H1′H2′×pmin{n1,n2}Zp.
Therefore
[TABLE]
∎
We apply the previous discussion to the case p>2.
Proposition 4.6**.**
If p>2, Q(ζpmp)/Q is a cyclic extension and Lp/Q is a cyclic extension. For F1,F2 contained in
Q(ζpmp), we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
We consider F1F2/Q which is cyclic since Q(ζpmp)/Q is a cyclic extension. We have
[TABLE]
Let a=[F1∩F2:Q], b=[F1:Q] and
c=[F2:Q]. We have that a∣b and a∣c so that
a∣gcd(b,c). Now, since gcd(b,c)∣b and gcd(b,c)∣c,
there exists a unique field F0 satisfying [F0:Q]=gcd(b,c), F0⊆F1 and F0⊆F2.
Hence F0⊆F1∩F2. This implies gcd(b,c)=[F0:Q]∣[F1∩F2:Q]=a. Thus
a=gcd(b,c).
∎
Corollary 4.7**.**
With the conditions of Proposition 4.6,
if p>2 and F1,…,Ft⊆Q(ζpmp), we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Use induction.
∎
Remark 4.8**.**
If p=2, Proposition 4.6 is not longer true. For instance, if
F1=Q(2), F2=Q(i), then
[F1:Q]=[F2:Q]=2 and since F1∩F2=Q, we have [F1∩F2:Q]=1.
**
Remark 4.9**.**
Since
[TABLE]
The main result on number fields is the following.
Theorem 4.10**.**
Let K/Q be a finite extension. With the above notations, we have
Kgex=KL where L=∏p finiteLp and Lp is a
subfield of Q(ζpmp) satisfying
[TABLE]
where
conQ/Kp=p1e1⋯prer.
Furthermore, if p>2,
[TABLE]
The tame ramification degree of the extension [Lp:Q] is
[TABLE]
Proof.
It remains to find etame. Note that necessarily, p≥3.
Let Lp′ be the subfield of
Lp of degree bp where [Lp:Q]=papbp and
gcd(p,bp)=1.
For any F⊆Q(ζpmp) with [F:Q]=d and
gcd(p,d)=1, F/Q is tamely ramified. Assume that
KF/K is unramified at p.
[TABLE]
By Abhyankar Lemma, if P is a prime in KF with
P∩Q=(p), P∩K=pi, Q=P∩F, then
[TABLE]
Therefore e(P∣pi)=e(pi∣p)e(P∣p)=eie(P∣p), that is, P is unramified
in KF/K if and only if
e(P∣pi)=1 if and only if e(P∣p)=ei if and only if
d∣ei. Hence, KF/K is unramifed at every finite prime,
if and only if d∣ei for 1≤i≤r if and only if d∣gcd(e1,…,er). Since d∣p−1, this is equivalent to
d∣gcd(e1,…,er,p−1). It follows that bp=gcd(e1,…,er,p−1).
∎
Remark 4.11**.**
Theorem 4.10 was proved by M. Bhaskaran in [4]
and by X. Zhang in [18].
**
4.1. Remarks on L2
For any finite extension K/Q, we have that if Kgex=KL with L/Q the maximum abelian extension contained
in KH+, we have proved that if L=∏q primeLq, then for p≥3, Lp is completely determined by
[TABLE]
This is not so for p=2. We want to study L2.
Let [L2:Q]=2a, a≥1. For a≥2, there are
three possible L2, namely
If L2 is real, then L2=Q(ζ2a+2)+. If L2 has conductor
2a+1 then L2=Q(ζ2a+1). In other words, L2 can be
determined by means of its conductor and whether it is real or not.
If K(ζ2a+1)/K is unramified, we have L2=Q(ζ2a+1). In any case Q(ζ2a+1)+⊆L2, and
therefore KQ(ζ2a+1)+/K is unramified.
[TABLE]
We need to determine the group of idèles corresponding to
each extension: L_{2}\in\big{\{}{\mathbb{Q}}(\zeta_{{2}^{a+1}}),{\mathbb{Q}}(\zeta_{{2}^{a+2}})^{+},{\mathbb{Q}}(\zeta_{{2}^{a+2}})^{-}\big{\}}.
Recall that for a local field K we have K∗≅Fq∗×Up(1)×(π), where π is a uniformizer element, vp(π)=1, Up
are the units of K∗, Up(1) are the units modulo 1,
that is, Up(1)={ξ∈Up∣ξ−1∈(π)}=1+πOK=1+p, and Up(1)×Fq∗=Up where Fq is the
residue field.
In the particular case of K=Qp∗, q=p, Fp∗≅Cp−1=Z/(p−1)Z and U_{p}=\Big{\{}\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}a_{i}p^{i}\mid a_{0}\neq 0,a_{i}\in\{0,1,\ldots,p-1\}\text{\ for all\ }i\Big{\}}\cong{\mathbb{Z}}_{p}^{*}, where Zp denotes the ring of p–adic
integers and Zp∗ is the multiplicative group of Zp.
We have
Proposition 4.12**.**
(1)
If p>2, Zp∗≅Cp−1×Zp as groups.
(2)
If p=2, 1+2Z2≅{±1}×(1+4Z2) and
1+4Z2≅Z2. In particular,
[TABLE]
We are going to identify complex conjugation J with −1 since
J(ζ2n)=ζ2n−1 for all n.
The non–zero closed subgroups of U2=Z2∗≅{±1}×Z2 are: {±1}×2nZ2, 2nZ2
and {±1}⋅2nZ2 with n∈N∪{0}.
The quotient groups are respectively
∙
{±1}×2nZ2{±1}×Z2≅2nZ2Z2≅C2n,
∙
2nZ2{±1}×Z2≅{±1}×2nZ2Z2≅{±1}×C2n,
∙
{±1}⋅2nZ2{±1}×Z2≅H.
Let us study H. Consider b:=1∈Z2.
Then b is a topological
generator of Z2. Let a:=−1 be the unique torsion element
of Z2∗ of order 2. Let H be the procyclic group
with topological generator ab2n: H=⟨ab2n⟩ (topological closure). Denote by
a~ and b~ the classes of a and b modulo
H respectively: a~=amodH; b~=bmodH.
We have G/H=⟨a~,b~⟩ where
G={±1}×Z2≅Z2∗. Since ab2n∈H, b~2n=a~−1modH and a~−1=a~modH (indeed, a−1=a=−1). Therefore
G/H=⟨b~⟩ since a~=b~2n∈⟨b~⟩ so that G/H is a cyclic group.
Note that b2n∈/H since otherwise a∈H but
a is a torsion element and H is torsion free. Therefore
b2n∈/H. On the other hand b2n+1=b2nb2n≡ab2nmodH so that b2n+1∈H. It follows that o(b~)=2n+1. Thus G/H
is a cyclic group of order 2n+1.
Sm:=G/Bm≅Gal(Q(ζ2m+1)/Q)≅C2×C2m−1 since G/Bn is
noncyclic,
∙
Tm:=G/Cm≅Gal(Q(ζ2m+2)−/Q)≅C2m since it is cyclic and −1∈/Cn.
[TABLE]
Since [L2:Q]=2m and \big{[}U_{2}:\prod_{\mathfrak{p}|2}U_{\mathfrak{p}}\big{]}=2^{m}, it follows the following theorem.
Theorem 4.13**.**
If [L2:Q]=2m, then
(1)
L2=Q(ζ2m+2)+⟺* for every place p of K with
p∣2 we have −1∈NKp/Q2Up, that is,
−1∈⋂p∣2NKp/Q2Up.*
(2)
L2=Q(ζ2m+1)⟺⋂p∣2NKp/Q2Up* is not cyclic (automatically we have that −1∈/⋂p∣2NKp/Q2).*
(3)
L2=Q(ζ2m+2)−⟺⋂p∣2NKp/Q2*
is cyclic and −1∈/⋂p∣2NKp/Q2. \hfill\qed\vskip12.0ptplus4.0ptminus4.0pt*
5. Some remarks on genus fields of number
fields
Let L/Q be a finite Galois extension. Since L/Q
is normal, L is either totally real or totally imaginary. Let J:C⟶C be the complex conjugation. Since J∣Q=IdQ and L/Q is normal, we have J(L)=L=Lˉ.
Hence J∣L∈G:=Gal(L/Q). Furthermore J∣L has order
o(J∣L)=1 or 2. Let LJ be the fixed field of L under the
action of J. We have Gal(L∣LJ)=⟨J∣L⟩≅{1} or C2, the cyclic group of order 2 and [L:LJ]∣2.
Furthermore, LJ⊆R.
Note that LJ is neither necessarily normal over Q nor
totally real. For instance, if L=Q(ζ3,32).
[TABLE]
Then Gal(L/Q)=⟨α,β⟩=C2⋉C3≅S3, the symmetric group in 3 elements. L is totally imaginary
and LJ=Q(32), the extension Q(32)/Q
is not normal and the 3 embeddings are 32⟶⎩⎨⎧32ζ332ζ3232. In other words, with the usual meaning, r1=1
and r2=1.
When L/Q is abelian, then ⟨J∣L⟩⊲G, LJ/Q is a Galois extension and LJ is totally real.
In the case of genus fields, we consider K/Q a finite extension
and let KH and KH+ be the Hilbert class field and the Hilbert
extended (narrow) class field of K respectively. Then the genus field
Kge is the maximum extension such that K⊆Kge⊆KH with Kge=KF, F/Q abelian. In particular, F=Fge. The
extended or narrow genus field Kgex of K is
the maximum extension such that K⊆Kgex⊆KH+ with Kgex=KL and L/Q is abelian.
In particular, Lgex=L. Recall that Lgex is the maximum abelian
extension of Q such that Lgex/L is unramfied at every finite prime
and Fge is the maximum abelian extension of Q with Fge/K
unramified at every prime.
From the remarks above, it follows that [Kgex:Kge]=1 or 2 for
every finite abelian extension K/Q. Now,
we have KH⊆KH+
and in fact Gal(KH+/KH)≅C2r for some r∈N∪{0}. In our notation, we have that F⊆L since
KF/K is unramified and F/Q is abelian. On the other hand,
LJ is totally real, LJ/Q is abelian and KLJ/K
is unramified at every prime. It follows that
[TABLE]
In short, we have
Proposition 5.1**.**
For a finite extension K/Q, we have [Kgex:Kge]∣2. \hfill\qed\vskip12.0ptplus4.0ptminus4.0pt
Now consider Ki/Q, i=1,2, two finite extensions and let K=K1K2.
We have Ki⊆K for i=1,2. On the other hand (K1)ge/K1 is
unramified and abelian, it follows that K(K1)ge/KK1=K is unramified
and abelian. Hence K(K1)ge⊆Kge. It follows that (K1)ge⊆Kge. Similarly (K2)ge⊆Kge. Therefore
(K1)ge(K2)ge⊆Kge.
Remark 5.2**.**
Not necessarily (K1)ge(K2)ge=Kge.
**
Example 5.3**.**
Let p,q,p1,q1 be four odd distinct primes. Let K1=Q(ζpq)+, K2=Q(ζp1q1)+. Then, using Dirichlet
characters, we have that (K1)ge⊆Q(ζpq) and
Q(ζpq)/Q(ζpq)+ is ramified at ∞, it follows
that (K1)ge=K1. Similarly (K2)ge=K2.
Furthermore, since p=q (respectively p1=q1),
Q(ζpq)/Q(ζpq)+ is ramified only at ∞, that is,
Q(ζpq)/Q(ζpq)+ is unramified at every finite prime
([16, Teorema 5.3.2]).
Now K1K2=K=Q(ζpq)+Q(ζp1q1)+⊆Q(ζpqp1q1).
[TABLE]
The same holds for q,p1 and q1. Now, ∞ is ramified
in Q(ζpqp1q1)/Q(ζpqp1q1)+.
It follows that Kge=Q(ζpqp1q1)+ and that [Kge:(K1)ge(K2)ge]=2>1.
**
Remark 5.4**.**
For any two finite abelian extensions Ki/Q, i=1,2 we
have Kgex=(K1)gex(K2)gex where K=K1K2 (see
[2]).
**
Theorem 5.5**.**
Let Ki/Q, i=1,2 be two
finite abelian extensions and let K=K1K2. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
In general we consider a finite abelian extension K/Q.
Let L=Kgex. We have Kge=L+K (see [2]).
Let K=K1K2. Then Kgex=(K1)gex(K2)gex.
Therefore L=L1L2 and Kge=L+K,
(K1)ge(K2)ge=L1+K1L2+K2=L1+L2+K. Hence
[TABLE]
To prove the result, it suffices to show that for two finite abelian extensions
Li/Q, i=1,2, and for L=L1L2, we have
[L+:L1+L2+]∣2.
In general, we have L+=L∩Q(ζn)+=L∩Q(ζn)J for
L⊆Q(ζn). In particular, if S:=Gal(Q(ζn)/L), L+=L∩Q(ζn)+=Q(ζn)S∩Q(ζn)I=Q(ζn)SI where I=⟨J⟩ and thus Gal(Q(ζn)/L+)=SI.
Let Si:=Gal(Q(ζn)/Li), i=1,2. Since L=L1L2, we have
S=S1∩S2. We also have
[TABLE]
Now
[TABLE]
On the other hand ∣(S1∩S2)I∣=∣SI∣=∣S∩I∣∣S∣∣I∣.
It follows that
[TABLE]
Now S∩I⊆S2∩I. Let α=[S2∩I:S∩I]∈N. Then
[TABLE]
We have S1S2⊆S1S2I. Let β=[S1S2I:S1S2]∈N. It follows that
[TABLE]
with γ=[I:S1∩I]∣∣I∣. Therefore
[S1I∩S2I:(S1∩S2)I]=αβγ∈N
and [S1I∩S2I:(S1∩S2)I]∣∣I∣=1 or 2. It follows
that
[TABLE]
∎
Bibliography18
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] Anglès, Bruno; Jaulent, Jean–François, Théorie des genres des corps globaux , Manuscripta Math. 101 , no. 4, 513–532 (2000).
2[2] Barreto–Castañeda, Jonny Fernando; Montelongo–Vázquez, Carlos; Reyes–Morales Carlos Daniel; Rzedowski–Calderón, Martha & Villa–Salvador, Gabriel Daniel, Genus fields of abelian extensions of rational congruence function fields II , Rocky Mountain Journal of Mathematics, 48 , no. 7, 2099–2133 (2018).
3[3] Bae, Sunghan; Koo, Ja Kyung, Genus theory for function fields , J. Austral. Math. Soc. Ser. A 60 , no. 3, 301–310 (1996).
4[4] Bhaskaran M. Construction of Genus Field and Some Applications , Journal of Number Theory 11 , 488–497 (1979).
5[5] Clement, Rosario, The genus field of an algebraic function field , J. Number Theory 40 , no. 3, 359–375 (1992).
6[6] Fröhlich, Albrecht, The genus field and genus group in finite number fields , Mathematika 6 , 40–46 (1959).
7[7] Fröhlich, Albrecht, The genus field and genus group in finite number fields, II , Mathematika 6 , 142–146 (1959).
8[8] Gauss, Carl Friedrich, Disquisitiones arithmeticae , 1801.