As has been hinted in many previous posts, many facts about algebraic number theory tell us about geometric objects like elliptic curves. For instance, if you are working on a problem which primarily uses the affine geometry of a curve like the semistable reduction theorem for elliptic curves, the scheme you’re working on is opposite to what’s called a Dedekind Domain. We begin a series of posts on Dedekind Domains, beginning today with the very abstract and progressing to the concrete(which would of course be terrible for teaching this material but I mean these posts as more of a reference work).
Definition: A Dedekind Domain is an integral domain which is:
- Krull Dimension 1
- Noetherian
- Integrally Closed(Normal)
Many equivalent criteria exist for characterizing Dedekind domains among one-dimensional noetherian domains, two of which are:
- For each prime
, the localization
is a DVR
- Every nonzero ideal admits a unique factorization into a product of prime ideals
Then an affine ring of an elliptic curve (or any reasonable nonsingular curve) corresponds to a Dedekind domain as they are irreducible(integral) nonsingular(normal) curves(1-dimensional and noetherian). This is already enough to be of interest to any number theorist, but rings of integers of number fields are also Dedekind domains.
Definition: A number field is a finite algebraic extension of
. The ring of integers
is the integral closure of
in
. This is sometimes also called the maximal order of
, in reference to the fact that we call subrings of
that are also free
-modules of rank
contained in
orders of
.
These are 1-dimensional since any prime ideal of an order
intersects with
in an integral prime ideal
so
is a finite extension of
so is a finite integral domain and thus a field. They are clearly noetherian since they are finitely generated
-modules.
From this we can already see that rings of integers are Dedekind domains, but much more is true. The following theorem shows that starting from any order (or affine ring of a geometrically integral algebraic curve which could even be singular) the integral closure is a Dedekind domain. It also holds independent interest regarding the valuative criteria for properness and seperatedness (Hartshorne exercise II.4.11).
Theorem[Krull-Akizuki]:If is a one dimensional noetherian domain with field of fractions
and
is a finite extension of
then the integral closure of
in
is a Dedekind domain.
For a proof consider first that we can simplify by taking by letting
be a basis of
contained in the integral closure
and considering
. This is noetherian because it is a finitely generated
module and
is noetherian. It is one dimensional because
is one-dimensional and if
is a chain of primes in
then their intersections with
give a chain of primes
in
. Since
are nonzero ideals we could say about either of them that they contain a nonzero element
and thus the principal ideal generated by
. Since every element of
is integral over
(since
),
satisfies an irreducible monic polynomial over
so
. Thus
(respectively for
) and so
are nonzero primes of
so they must be equal by dimensionality. On the other hand consider that since
is a finite integral extension so
is also a finite integral extension, or more to the point since
is a maximal ideal, a finite algebraic field extension. We thus arrive at a contradiction under the supposition that there is a chain of primes of length greater than 1 since
has the nonzero prime ideal
. On the other hand,
cannot be dimension zero because
contains nonzero primes and is contained in
. Since a dimension zero domain is a field, if
then
. This is in contradiction to the fact that
is integral over
whereas the minimal polynomial for
over
is
.
Thus we have reduced ourselves to the case that and to the following statement, which is sometimes itself called the Krull-Akizuki Theorem. Let
be a one dimensional noetherian domain with field of fractions
. Then any ring
such that
is also a one dimensional noetherian domain.
The idea of the proof is that if is a nonzero ideal of
and
is a nonzero element of
then we can find an integer
such that
and so as an
submodule
(something), and thus is finitely generated over
so
is finitely generated over
and so over
. Thus by adding
to the list of generators,
is finitely generated over
. For the gritty details of the proof of this statement, I refer the reader to Theorem 4.9.2 in http://books.google.com/books?id=APPtnn84FMIC&lpg=PA83&ots=2L9MiWbIYZ&dq=krull%20akizuki&pg=PA85
Note that I make no claims as the the finite generation of over
. If
is a separable field extension this holds true, but it’s quite possible to cook up an example of an integral closure
which is not finitely generated if the field extension is inseparable(see Theorem 100 of Kaplansky’s book on Commutative Rings, where the example is actually a pair of DVRs). If this happens you’re typically stuck and can’t really do any algebra or geometry, but if we have finite generation( or a finite type morphism if that’s the terminology you prefer) of
then we can have much of what we could possibly want to be true.
For instance, take the case that we have a degree morphism of curves
over an algebraically closed field
. Then if
are the preimages of
with multiplicities
in
it is well-known that
. We have a corresponding result once we allow for non-closed points.
Theorem: Let be a Dedekind Domain with fraction field
. Let
be a finite field extension and
the integral closure of
in
. Then if
is finitely generated over
if a prime ideal
of
factors in
as
then if
.
For a detailed proof we refer the reader to either Dino Lorenzini’s Invitation to Arithmetic Geometry Theorem III.3.5. The idea is that if is a P.I.D. then we can use classical techniques, like the structure theorem on finitely generated modules over a PID to get
and the chinese remainder theorem to decompose
into a product of finite field extensions of
. Then we can reduce to the case of a PID by localization.
Having considered ideals and how they factor, we come to fractional ideals: a key point in algebraic number theory. An -module
contained in the fraction field
is called a fractional ideal if it is finitely generated over
or equivalently if there is a denominator
such that
.
A fractional ideal is called invertible if there exists another fractional ideal
such that the module product
for some
. We call ideals of the form
for
principal fractional ideals. Note that invertible fractional ideals are projective
-modules of rank 1 and any projective
-module of rank 1 is isomorphic to a fractional ideal. Also note that two fractional ideals
are isomorphic as
-modules iff there is
such that
. By definition the invertible fractional ideals of a ring form a group, and likewise after we mod out by the normal subgroup of principal fractional ideals. We call this quotient group the Picard Group
and if the reader proves the above claims about projective modules of rank 1 this name makes sense in a wider context.
The Picard Group of a Dedekind Domain(which we sometimes call the ideal class group to distinguish how nice it is) is particularly nice because of the following characterization:
- A one dimensional noetherian domain
is Dedekind if and only if every fractional ideal is invertible.
This is easy enough to prove with the following lemma.
Lemma: A fractional ideal of a one-dimensional noetherian domain
is invertible if and only if for all
,
is a principal ideal of
.
For a proof, see page 17 of http://math.uga.edu/~pete/8430notes2.pdf or else Neukirch’s book, section I.12.
We bring this up because if is a one-dimensional noetherian domain with field of fractions
and
is the integral closure of
in
and
is finitely generated over
then we can relate the Picard group of
(which might not be so easy to understand) with the Picard group of
(which by the above is easier to understand).
Theorem: If we let , there is an exact sequence
.
To prove this first note that surjects onto the group of principal fractional ideals in the obvious way and that if
then
for some
. Thus the principal fractional ideals are isomorphic to
.
Moreover by the above Lemma, the invertible fractional ideals are isomorphic to the direct sum over all primes of the principal ideals of
. Thus the group of invertible fractional ideals is isomorphic to
.
Thus we have the exact sequence
Likewise if we do the same for we get the sequence
Now consider that consists only of (the finitely many) primes lying above
. It is not hard to prove that the localization of a Dedekind domain is Dedekind, and to use the Chinese Remainder Theorem to prove that a Dedekind domain with finitely many primes is a PID. If we let
denote the group of principal fractional ideals of a ring
, we have:
and thus since every prime of
lies over a prime of
,
. Therefore our sequence for
becomes the following:
Then we also have natural (surjective) quotient maps and
which commute and thus give a natural surjective quotient map
. Then we just apply the snake lemma for our result.
Next time we see what we can do with Dedekind Domains in separable extensions.
Dear Jim,
A very nice post!
I am not convinced that proceeding from the abstract to the concrete is a terrible way to teach Dedekind domains (or anything else, for that matter). I think it is possible to a good (and also a bad) job either way.
In case you don’t know, I have some notes on Dedekind domains at the end of a long (but not yet long enough) set of notes on commutative algebra: see the end of
Click to access integral.pdf
Specifically, some of the characterizations of Dedekind domains you give can be strengthened: see Theorem 238 on p. 127.
(I also have a whole section devoted to the Krull-Akizuki theorem. Unfortunately it is currently blank…)
So, does this mean the Picard group defined here is then just the same as the “Picard group” of invertible sheaves on Spec R?
Yes.
OK, thanks for the clarification. The ideal class group tends to pop up in various forms under different names, which is always interesting.
Pingback: DVRs II « Delta Epsilons