9 Elliptic Curves over Local Fields

Let K be a field, complete with respect to discrete valuation v:K∗→ℤ.

Notation. Valuation ring (= ring of integers) will be denoted by

OK={x∈K∗|v(x)≥0}∪{0}.

Unit group will be denoted by

OK∗={x∈K∗|v(x)=0}.

The maximal ideal will be denoted by πOK where v(π)=1.

The residue field will be denoted by k=OK∕πOK.

We assume char⁡K=0 and char⁡k=p>0. For example, K=ℚp, OK=ℤp, k=𝔽p.

Let E∕K be an elliptic curve.

Definition (Integral / minimal Weierstrass equation). A Weierstrass equation for E with coefficients a1,…,a6∈K is integral if a1,…,a6∈OK and minimal if v(Δ) is minimal among all integral Weierstrass equations for E.

Remark.

Lemma 9.1. Assuming that:

Then either x,y∈OK or
{v(x)=−2sv(y)=−3s

for some s≥1.

(Compare with Q5 from Example Sheet 1)

Proof. Throughout this proof, LHS and RHS refer to the Weierstrass equation of the curve.

Case v(x)≥0:. If v(y)<0 then v(LHS⁡)<0 and v(RHS⁡)≥0. Therefore x,y∈OK.

Case v(x)<0: v(LHS⁡)≥min⁡(2v(y),v(x)+v(y),v(y)) and v(RHS⁡)=3v(x). We get 3 possible inequalities from this, and each of them gives v(y)<v(x).

Now

v(LHS⁡)=2v(y)v(RHS⁡)=3v(x)

so

{v(x)=−2sv(y)=−3s

for some s≥1. □

If K is complete, then OK is complete with respect to πrOK (for any r≥1).

We fix a minimal Weierstrass equation for E∕K. Get formal group Ê over OK.

Taking I=πrOK (with r≥1) in Lemma 8.2 gives

Ê(I)={(x,y)∈E(K) | −xy,−1y∈πrOK}∪{0}={(x,y)∈E(K) | v(xy)≥r,v(1y)≥r}∪{0}={(x,y)∈E(K)|v(x)=−2s,v(y)=−3s for s≥r}∪{0}(using Lemma 9.1)={(x,y)∈E(K)|v(x)≤−2r,v(y)≤−3r}∪{0}(using Lemma 9.1)

By Lemma 8.2 this is a subgroup of E(K), say Er(K).

⋯⊂E2(K)⊂E1(K)⊂E(K).

More generally, for F a formal group over OK

⋯⊂F(π2OK)⊂F(πOK).

We claim that

Reminder: char⁡K=0, char⁡k=p>0.

Theorem 9.2. Assuming that:

  • K a local field with char⁡K=0, char⁡k=p>0

  • F a formal group over OK

  • e=v(p)

  • r>ep−1

Then
log⁡:F(πrOK) →≅𝔾^a(πrOK)

is an isomorphism of groups with inverse

exp⁡:𝔾^a(πrOK) →≅F(πrOK).

Remark. 𝔾^a(πrOK)=(πrOK,+)≅(OK,+), x↔π−rx.

Proof. For x∈πrOK we must show the power series log⁡(x) and exp⁡(x) converge to elements in πrOK.

Recall

exp⁡(T)=T+b22!T2+b33!T3+⋯

for some bi∈OK.

Claim: vp(n!)≤n−1p−1.

Proof of claim:

vp(n!)=∑r=1∞⌊npr⌋<∑r=1∞npr=n⋅1p1−1p=np−1.

Therefore

(p−1)vp(n!)<n(p−1)vp(n!)≤n−1

(we go from < to ≤∙−1 by noting that the LHS is in ℤ).

This proves the claim.

Now

v(bnxnn!)≥nr−e(n−1p−1)=(n−1)(r−ep−1)⏟>0+r

This is always ≥r and →∞ as n→∞. Therefore exp⁡(x) converges to an element in πrOK.

Same method works for log⁡. □

Lemma 9.3. F(πrOK)F(πr+1OK)≅ (k,+) for all r≥1.

Proof. Definition of formal group gives

F(X,Y)=X+Y+XY(⋯).

So if x,y∈OK,

F(πrx,πry)≡πr(x+y)(modπr+1).

Therefore

F(πrOK)→(k,+)πrx↦xmodπ

is a surjective group homomorphism with kernel F(πr+1OK). □

Corollary. Assuming that:

  • |k|<∞

Then F(πOK) has a subgroup of finite index isomorphic to (OK,+).

Notation. Reduction modulo π

OK→OKπOK=kx↦x~

Proposition 9.4. Assuming that:

Then the reduction mod π of any two minimal Weierstrass equations for E define isomorphic curves over k.

Proof. Say Weierstrass equations are related by [u;r,s,t], u∈K∗, r,s,t∈K. Then Δ1=u12Δ2. Both equations minimal gives us that v(Δ1)=v(Δ2), hence u∈OK∗.

Transformation formula for the ai and bi+OK is integrally closed, hence r,s,t∈OK.

The Weierstrass equations obtained by reducing mod π are now related by [ũ;r~,s~,t~], ũ∈k∗, r~,s~,t~∈k. □

Definition. The reduction Ẽ∕k of E∕K is defined by the reduction of a minimal Weierstrass equation.

E has good reduction if Ẽ is non-singular (and so an elliptic curve) otherwise has bad reduction.

For an integral Weierstrass equation,

  • If v(Δ)=0 then good reduction.

  • If 0<v(Δ)<12 then bad reduction.

  • If v(Δ)≥12 then beware that the equation might not be minimal.

There is a well-defined map

ℙ2(K)→ℙ2(k)(x:y:z)↦(x~:ỹ:z~)

(choose a representative with min⁡(v(x),v(y),v(z))=0).

We restrict to give

E(K)→Ẽ(K)P↦P~

If P=(x,y)∈E(K) then by Lemma 9.1 either

Therefore

E1(K)=Ididn′tmanagetowritethisbeforeitwasrubbedoff

“kernel of reduction”.

Notation.

{Ẽif E has good reductionẼ∖{singular point}if E has bad reduction

The chord and tangent process still defines a group law on Ẽns.

In cases of bad reduction, Ẽns≅𝔾m (over k or possibly a quadratic extension of k) or Ẽns≅𝔾a (over k).

For simplicity we suppose char⁡k≠2.

Then Ẽ=y2=f(x), deg⁡f=3.

PIC

Ẽns →≅𝔾a(x,y)↦xy(t−2,t−3)←↤t(point at ∞)←↤0 Let P1,P2,P3 lie on the line ax+by=1. Write Pi=(xi,yi), ti=xiyi. Then xi3=yi2=yi2(axi+byi). So ti3−ati−b=0. So t1,t2,t3 are the roots of T3−aT−b=0.

Looking at coefficient of T2 gives t1+t2+t3=0.

Definition (E0(K)). E0(K)={P∈E(K)|P~∈Ẽns(k)}.

Proposition 9.5. E0(K) is a subgroup of E(K) and reduction modulo π is a surjective group homomorphism E0(K)→Ẽns(k).

Note. If E∕K has good reduction, then this is a surjective group homomorphism E(K)→Ẽ(k).

Proof. Group homomorphism: A line l in ℙ2 defined over K has equation

l:aX+bY+cZ=0a,b,c∈K.

We may assume min⁡(v(a),v(b),v(c))=0. Reduction modulo π gives a line

l~:ãX+b~Y+c~Z=0.

If P1,P2,P3∈E(K) with P1+P2+P3=0 then these points lie on a line l. So P~1,P~2,P~3 lie on the line l~. If P~1,P~2∈(~nsk) then P~3∈(~nsk).

So if P1,P2∈E0(K) then P3∈E0(K) and P~1+P~2+P~3=0.

[Exercise: check this still works if #{P~1,P~2,P~3}<∞]

Surjective: Let f(x,y)=y2+a1xy+a3y−(x3+⋯). Let P~∈Ẽns(k)∖{0}, say P~=(x~0,ỹ0) for some x0,y0∈OK.

Since P~ non-singular, either:

If (i) then put g(t)=f(t,y0)∈OK[t]. Then

{g(x0)≡0(modπ)g′(x0)∈OK∗

Hensel’s lemma gives us that there exists b∈OK such that

{g(b)=0b≡x0(modπ)

Then (b,y0)∈E(K) has erduction P~. asdfadsf □

Recall that for r≥1 we put

Er(K)={(x,y)|v(x)≤−2r,v(y)≤−3r}∪{0}.

If r>ep−1, these give:

Er(K)⏟≅⁡(OK,+)⊂⋯⊂E2(K)⏟=Ê(π2OK)⊂E1(K)⏟=Ê(πOK)⊂E0(K)⊂E(K),

where for i≥1, each Ei+1(K)⊂Ei(K) gives a quotient isomorphic to (k,+).

We have E0(K)E1(K)≅Ẽns(k).

What about E(K)E0(K)?

Lemma 9.6. Assuming that:

  • |k|<∞

Then E0(K)⊂E(K) has finite index.

Proof. |k|<∞ implies that OKπrOK is finite for all r≥1.

Hence

OK≅lim⁡r[]←OKπrOK

is a profinite group, hence compact.

Then ℙn(K) is the union of sets

{(a0:⋯:ai−1:1:ai+1:⋯:an):aj∈OK}

and hence compact (for the π-adic topology).

Now note E(K)⊂ℙ2(K) is a closed subset, hence compact.

So E(K) is a compact topological group.

If Ẽ has a singular point (x~0,ỹ0) then

E(K)∖E0(K)={(x,y)∈E(K)|v(x−x0)≥1,v(y−y0)≥1}

is a closed subset of E(K) hence E0(K) is an open subgroup of E(K).

The cosets of E0(K) are an open cover of E(K). Hence [E(K):E0(K)]<∞. □

Definition (Tamagawa number). cK(E)=[E(K):E0(K)] is called the Tamagawa number.

Remark.

We deduce:

Theorem 9.7. Assuming that:

  • [K:ℚp]<∞

Then E(K) contains a subgroup of finite index isomorphic to (OK,+).

Let [K:ℚp]<∞ and L∕K a finite extension. Let the residue fields be k′ and k, and let f=[k′:k].

    ∗
   K       ℤ

V⊂×Ve L∗      ℤ
 KL

Facts:

Definition (Unramified). L∕K is unramified if e=1.

Fact: For each m≥1

These extensions are Galois, with cyclic Galois groups.

Definition (Maximal unramified extension). Knr=⋃⁡m≥1Km (inside K¯). “maximal unramified extension”

Theorem 9.8. Assuming that:

Then K([n]−1P)∕K is unramified.

Notation.

[n]−1(P)={Q∈E(K¯):nQ=P},
K({Q1,…,Qr})=K(x1,…,xr,y1,…,yr),

where Qi=(xi,yi).

Proof. For each m≥1 there is a short exact sequence

0→E1(Km)→E(Km)→Ẽ(Km)→0.

Taking ⋃⁡m≥1 gives a commutative diagram with exact rows:

                                     --
0          E1(Knr)     E (Knr)     ˜E(k)    0


0          E1(Knr)     E (Knr)     ˜E(k)    0

PIC

An isomorphism by Corollary 8.5 applied over each Km (using p∤n here).

Snake lemma gives

{E(Knr)[n]≅(ℤ∕nℤ)2E(Knr)nE(Knr)=0

So if P∈E(K) then there exists Q∈E(Knr) such that nQ=P and

[n]−1P={Q+T:T∈E[n]}⊂E(Knr).

Hence K([n]−1P)⊂Knr and so K([n]−1P)∕K is unramified. □