6 Extensions of complete valued fields

Theorem 6.1. Assuming that:

Then
  • (i) |∙| extends uniquely to an absolute value |∙|L on L defined by
    |y|L=|NL∕L(y)|1n∀⁡y∈L.
  • (ii) L is complete with respect to |∙|L.

Recall: If L∕K is finite, NL∕K:L→K is defined by NL∕K(y)=det⁡K(mult(y) where mult(y):L→L is the K-linear map induced by multiplication by y.

Facts:

Definition 6.2 (Norm). Let (K,|∙|) be a non-archimedean valued field, V a vector space over K. A normon V is a function ∥∙∥:V→ℝ≥0 satisfying:

  • (i) ∥x∥=0⟺x=0.
  • (ii) ∥λx∥=∥λ∥∥x∥ for all λ∈K, x∈V.
  • (iii) ∥x+y∥≤max⁡(∥x∥,∥y∥) for all x,y∈V.

Example. If V is finite dimensional and e1,…,en is a basis of V. The supremum ∥∙∥sup⁡ on V is defined by

∥x∥sup⁡=max⁡i|xi|,

where x=∑⁡i=1nxiei.

Exercise: ∥∙∥sup⁡ is a norm.

Definition 6.3 (Equivalent norms). Two norms ∥∙∥1 and ∥∙∥2 on V are equivalent if there exists C,D∈ℝ>0 such that

C∥x∥1≤∥x∥2≤D∥x∥1∀⁡x∈V.

Fact: A norm defines a topology on V, and equivalent norms induce the same topology.

Proposition 6.4. Assuming that:

Then V is complete with respect to ∥∙∥sup⁡.

Proof. Let (vi)i=1∞ be a Cauchy sequence in V, and let e1,…,en be a basis for V.

Write vi=∑⁡j=1nxjiej. Then (xji)i=1∞ is a Cauchy sequence in K. Let xji→xj∈K, then vi→v:=∑⁡j=1nxjej. □

Theorem 6.5. Assuming that:

Then any two norms on K are equivalent. In particular, V is complete with respect to any norm (using Proposition 6.4).

Proof. Since equivalence defines an equivalence relation on the set of norms, it suffices to show that any norm ∥∙∥ is equivalent to ∥∙∥sup⁡.

Let e1,…,en be a basis for V, and set D:=max⁡i∥ei∥>0. Then for x=∑⁡i=1nxiei, we have

∥x∥≤max⁡i∥xiei∥=max⁡i|xi|∥ei∥≤Dmax⁡i|xi|=D∥x∥sup⁡.

To find C such that C∥∙∥sup⁡≤∥∙∥, we induct on n=dim⁡V.

For n=1: ∥x∥=∥x1e1∥=|x1|∥e1∥, so take C=∥e1∥.

For n>1: set Vi=span⁡⟨e1,…⁡,ei−1,ei+1,…⁡,en⟩. By induction, Vi is complete with respect to ∥∙∥, hence closed.

Then ei+Vi is closed for all i, and hence

S:=⋃i=1nei+Vi

is a closed subset not containing 0. Thus there exists c>0 such that B(0,C)∩S=∅ where B(0,C)={x∈V|∥x∥<C}.

Let 0≠x=∑⁡i=1nxiei and suppose |xj|=max⁡i|xi|. Then ∥x∥sup⁡=|xj|, and 1xj∈S. Thus ∥xixj∥≥C, and hence

∥x∥≥C|xj|=C∥x∥sup⁡.

V is complete since it is complete with respect to ∥∙∥sup⁡ (see Proposition 6.4). □

Definition 6.6 (Integral closure). Let R be a subring of S. We say s∈S is integral over R if there exists a monic polynomial f(X)∈R[X] such that f(s)=0.

The integral closure Rint(S) of R inside S is defined to be

Rint(S)={s∈S|s integral over R}.

We say R is integrally closed in S if Rint(S)=R.

Proposition 6.7. Rint⁡(S) is a subring of S. Moreover, Rint⁡(S) is integrally closed in S.

Proof. Example Sheet 2. □

Lemma 6.8. Assuming that:

Then OK is integrally closed in K.

Proof. Let x∈K be integral over OK. Without loss of generality, x≠0. Let f(X)=Xn+an−1Xn−1+⋯+a0∈OK[X] such that f(x)=0. Then

x=−an−11x−⋯−a01xn−1.

If |x|>1, we have |−an−11x−⋯−a01xn−1|<1. Thus |x|≤1⟹x∈OK. □

Lemma 6.9. OL is the integral closure of OK inside L.

Proof. Let 0≠y∈L and let

f(X)=Xd+ad−1Xd−1+⋯+a0∈K[X]

be the minimal (monic) polynomial of y.

Claim: y integral over OK if and only if f(X)∈ℚK[X].

  • ⇒ Clear.
  • ⇐ Let g(X)∈OK[X] monic such that g(y)=0. Then f|g (in K[X]), and hence every root of f is a root of g. So every root of f in K¯ is integral over OK, so ai are integral over OK for i=0,…,d−1.

Hence ai∈Ok (by Lemma 6.8). By Corollary 4.5, |ai|≤max⁡(|a0|,1) for i=0,…,d−1. By property of NL∕K, we have NL∕K(y)=±a0m for m≥1.

Hence

y∈OL⟺|NL∕K(y)|≤1⟺|a0|≤1⟺Corollary 4.5|ai|≤1∀⁡i,i.e. ai∈OK

Thus msubint⁡(L)=OL and proves the Lemma. □

Proof of Theorem 6.1. We first show |∙|L=|NL∕K(∙)|1n satisfies the three axioms in the definition of absolute value.

  • (i) |y|L=0⟺|NL∕K(y)|1n=0⟺NL∕K(y)=0⟺y=0
  • (ii) |y1y2|L=|NL∕K(y1,y2)|1n=|NL∕K(y1)NL∕K(y2)|1n=|NL∕K(y1)|1n|NL∕K(y2)|1n=|y1|L|y2|L
  • (iii) Set OL={y∈L||y|L≤1}.

    Claim: OL is the integral closure of OK inside L.

    Assuming this, we prove (iii). Let x,y∈L, and without loss of generality assume |x|L≤|y|L. Then |xy|L hence xy∈OL. Since 1∈OL and OLis a ring, we have 1+xy∈OL and hence |1+xy|L≤1. Hence |x+y|L≤|y|L=max⁡(|x|L,|y|L) thus (iii) is satisfied.

So we have proved that |∙|L is an absolute value on L.

Since NL∕K(x)=xn for x∈K, |x|L extends |∙| on K.

If |∙|L′ is another absolute value on L extending |∙|, then |∙|L,|∙|L′ are norms on L.

Theorem 6.5 tells us that |∙|L′,|∙|L induce the same topology on L. Hence |∙|L′=|∙|Lc for some c>0 (by Proposition 1.4) since |∙|L′ extends |∙|, we have c=1.

Now we show that L is complete with respect to |∙|L: this is immediate by Theorem 6.5. □

Let (K,|∙|) be a complete discretely valued field.

Corollary 6.10. Let L∕K be a finite extension. Then

  • (i) L is discretely valued with respect to |∙|L.
  • (ii) OL is the integral closure of OK in L.

Proof.

  • (i) v a valuation on K, vL valuation on L such that vL extends v. Let n=[L:K], and let y∈L×. Then |y|L=|NL∕K(y)|1n hence vL(y)=1nv(NL∕K(y)), hence vL(L×)≤1nv(K×), so vL is discrete.
  • (ii) Lemma 6.9.
□

Corollary 6.11. Let K¯∕K be an algebraic closure of K. Then |∙| extends to a unique absolute value |∙|K¯ on K¯.

Proof. Let x∈K¯, then x∈L for some L∕K finite. Define |x|K¯=|x|L. Well-defined, i.e. independent of L by the uniqueness in Theorem 6.1.

The axioms for |∙|K¯ to be an absolute value can be checked over finite extensions.

Uniqueness: clear. □

Remark. |∙|K¯ on K¯ is never discrete. For example K=ℚp, pn∈ℚp¯ for all n∈ℤ>0. Then

vp(pn)=1nv(p)=1n.

ℚp¯ is not complete with respect to |∙|ℚp.

Example Sheet 2: ℂp:= completion of ℚp¯ with respect to |∙|ℚp¯, then ℂp is algebraically closed.

Proposition 6.12. Assuming that:

  • L∕K finite extension of complete discretely valued fields.

  • (i): OK is compact.

  • (ii): The extension of residue fields kL∕k is finite and separable.

Then there exists α∈OL such that OL=OK[α].

Later we’ll prove that the (i) implies (ii).

Proof. We’ll choose α∈OL such that:

  • there exists β∈OL[α] a uniformiser for OL

  • OK[α]→kL surjective

kL∕k separable tells us that there exists α¯∈kL such that kL=k(α¯).

Let α∈OL a lift of α¯, and g(X)∈OK[X] a monic lift of the minimal polynomial of α¯.

Fix πL∈OL a uniformiser. Then g¯(X)∈k[X] irreducible and separable, hence g(α)≡0modπL and g′(α)⁄≡0modπL.

If g(α)≡0modπL2, then

g(α+πL)≡g(α)+πLg′(α)modπL2.

Thus

vL(g(α+πL))=vL(πLg′(α))=vL(πL)=1.

(vL normalised valuation on L).

Thus either vL(g(α))=1 or vL(g(α+πL))=1. Upon possibly replacing α by α+πL, we may assume vL(g(α))=1.

Set β=g(α)∈OK[α] a uniformiser. Then OK[α]⊆L is the image of a continuous map:

OKn→L(x0,…,xn−1)↦∑i=0nxiai

where n=[K(α):K]. Since OK is compact, OK[α]⊆L is compact, hence closed. Since kL=k(α¯), OK[α] contians a set of coset representatives for kL=OL∕βOL.

Let y∈OL. Then Proposition 3.4 gives us

y=∑i=0∞λiβi,λi∈OK[α]

Then ym=∑⁡i=0mλiβi∈OK[α]. Hence y∈OK[α], since Ok[α] is closed. □