• No se han encontrado resultados

ρ∈Gal(H/Q). Given an idealbofO prime to the conductorgof the Grössencharacter ϕK, letσb prime tog, letσb be the Artin symbol of bin H/K. Then in view of Lemma 3.1.9, there exists a uniqueH-isogeny

λEσ(b) :EσEσσb

whose kernel is Ebσ. This is obtained by restricting the Serre–Tate character of the abelian varietyB/K [18, Theorem 10], which is the restriction of scalars ofE from H toK. See [13] for more detailed account.

E(H) is isomorphic to the −1 eigenspace for the action of Gal(M/H) onA(M), i.e.

the points on A(M) on which τ acts as −1. But we haveλ(v)(−P) =−λ(v)(P) since isogeny preserves the group law, and also we clearly have χM(τ) =−1. Hence λ(v) is independent of twist by χM.

This induces a homomorphism

λbE(v) :EbEbσv,

of formal groups of the curves E and Eσv at v, defined over the ring of integersOv of Hv. Thus, we can view λbE(v) as an element ofOv[[t]] satisfying

λbE(v)(t)≡Λ(v)tmod degree 2, λbE(v)≡tq modv,

where Λ(v) is an element ofOv andq denotes the cardinality of the residue field of the restriction w of v toK. Now, we can applyσvi for i= 1, . . . , fv, wherefv denotes the residue degree of v in H/K, to λE(v) and λbE(v). Then we see that

NHv/KwΛ(v) =ψE/H(v),

since Qfi=1v σviλE(v) is the unique element of EndH(E) =O which reduces modulo v to the Frobenius endomorphism at v. Thus Eb is not itself a Lubin–Tate group, but Eb together with the homomorphism λbE(v) : EbEbσv is a relative Lubin–Tate group, which was studied by de Shalit in [8, I §1]. The theory of Lubin–Tate groups generalises to relative Lubin–Tate groups, and in particular, we have the following:

Theorem 3.2.1. Letv be any place of H where E has good reduction, and let w be its restriction to K. Then for any n >1, the extension Hv(Ewn)/Hv is totally ramified, and its Galois group is isormphic to (O/wn)×.

Now, E has good ordinary reduction at the primes of H above p. We define Fn=H(Epn), andF =F2 or F1, according as p= 2 or p >2. Set

F =H(Ep), H= Gal(F/H).

Then by Theorem 3.2.1, we have a characterχp:H→ Op×= Z×p giving the action ofH onEp, which is an isomorphism. We writeH= ∆×Γ, where ∆ = Gal (F/H), is cyclic of order 2 or p−1 according as p= 2 or p >2 by Theorem 3.2.1 and Γ = Gal (F/F) is isomorphic to Zp.

Theorem 3.2.2. E has good reduction everywhere over F.

Proof. LetεE/H (resp. εE/F) be the Serre–Tate homomorphisms attached to E over H (resp. F). Thus εE/F =εE/H ◦NF /H, where NF/H :A×F →A×H is the norm map from the idèle group ofF to the idèle group of H. Now, E has good reduction at all places of F above pby hypothesis. Let v be any place of F which does not lie above p, and let Uv be the units of the ring of integers of the completion of F at v. Then by [18, §7, Corollary 1] E will have good reduction at v if and only ifεE/F(Uv) = 1. Let wbe the restriction of v toH. Then

εE/F(Uv) = εE/H(NFv/HwUv).

Let ξH : A×H → Gal(Hab/H) denote Artin’s global recipricity map. Then, by class field theory, ξH(NFv/HwUv) fixes F. Hence our lemma will follow from the following lemma.

Lemma 3.2.3. If xis a unit in the ring of integers Uw of Hw and ξH(x) fixes F, then εE/H(x) = 1.

Proof. By local class field theory, ξH(Uw) is the inertia subgroup ofw in Gal(Hab/H).

Since E has potential good reduction at w, it follows that χp(ξH(x)) is a root of unity inO×p for all x inUw by the criterion of Néron–Ogg–Shafarevich. On the other hand, for all xin A×H which fix F, we must have χp(ξH(x)) belongs to 1 +pi where i= 2 if p= 2 and i= 1 otherwise. But 1 +pi contains no root of unity other than 1. Hence we have χp(ξH(x)) = 1 when x lies in Uw. ButεE/H(x) =χp(ξH(x)), completing the proof.

For each n >1, we introduce the following Selmer groups:

Selπn(E/H) = ker H1(H, Eπn)→Y

v

(H1(Hv, E))πn

!

Selπn(E/H) = ker

H1(H, Eπn)→ Y

v /P

(H1(Hv, E))πn

.

We define

Selp(E/H) = lim

−→Selπn(E/H) Selp(E/H) = lim

−→Selπn(E/H),

where the inductive limits are taken with respect to the inclusions EπnEπn+1.

We also letT =PB whereB denotes the set of primes of H where E has bad reduction, and similarly define

Sel(Tπn)(E/H) = ker

H1(H, Eπn)→ Y

v /T

(H1(Hv, E))πn

Sel(Tp)(E/H) = lim

−→Sel(Tπn)(E/H).

Lemma 3.2.4. If vT, then #(H1(Hv, E)(p)) = #(Ep∗∞(Hv)), and:

(i) If vB, #(H1(Hv, E)(p)) = 2 or 1, according as p= 2 or p >2.

(ii) If vP, then #(H1(Hv, E)(p)) =1− ψE/HNv(v)−1

p .

Proof. By Tate local duality, the dual of the discrete group H1(Hv, E) is E(Hv), and this induces the duality between H1(Hv, E)πn andE(Hv)nE(Hv) for any positive integer n. On the other hand, letl be the prime number belowv. Then by [20, V.II 6.3], E(Hv) contains a subgroup of finite index isomorphic to (Ov,+). Hence we have E(Hv) =E(Hv)tor⊕Z[Hl v:Ql], and v -π soE(Hv)nE(Hv)≃Eπn(Hv). Taking the inductive limit proves the first statement.

Assume first that vB. Let m be such that Ep(Hv) = Epm. In particular, Hv = Hv(Epm), so v splits completely in H(Epm)/H. But Theorem 3.2.2 tells us that v ramifies in F/H, since the reduction type is stable under unramified field extensions [20][§5, Proposition 5.4]. It follows that m 6 0 (resp. m 6 1) if p > 2 (resp. p = 2). Hence if p >2, we have m = 0, and in the case p = 2, we also have

Ep =Ep(H)⊂Ep(Hv) so m>1, proving m= 1 in this case.

Now assumevP. Then πn is an automorphism of the formal group of E atv, and reduction modulo v induces an isomorphism

lim←−E(Hv)nE(Hv)∼=E(ke v)(p),

whereE/ke v denotes the reduction of E modulov. Now,ψE/H(v) is the unique element of O whose reduction modulo v is the Frobenius endomorphism ofE. Hencee

#(E(ke v)) = (ψE/H(v)−1)(ψE/H(v)−1),

whereψE/H denotes the complex conjugate of ψE/H. But ψE/H−1 is a unit at p since (ψE/H(v)) =pfv, wherefv = [kv :Fp]. Thus

ordp(#(E(ke v))) = ordp(ψE/H(v)−1).

The result follows by dividing this through byψE/H(v) and noting Nv = ψE/H(v)ψE/H(v).

We have an exact sequence

0→Selp(E/H)→Sel(Tp)(E/H)−→ϕ Y

vT

H1(Hv, E)(p). (3.2.1) Thus we have shown the following.

Corollary 3.2.5. Selp(E/H) is finite if and only if Sel(Tp)(E/H) is finite.

From now on, we make the following assumptions.

Assumption. L(E/H,1)̸= 0 and Selp(E/H) is finite.

The second assumtion will be guaranteed by the first when combined with the main conjecture for E/H, which we will discuss in Chapter 7. Note also that the finiteness of Selp(E/H) implies the finiteness of Selp(E/H).

Lemma 3.2.6. For any n>1, we have

#(Selπn(E/H)) =

#(Ep)#(X(E/H))πn if p= 2

#(X(E/H))πn if p >2.

Proof. We show This follows immediately from the exact sequence

0→E(H)nE(H)→Selπn(E/H)→X(E/H)πn →0 (3.2.2) and the fact that Ep(H) =Ep if p= 2 andEp(H) is trivial if p >2 which follows from the fact that ∆ has order 2 whenp= 2 and ∆ = (O/p)× whenp > 2.

Proposition 3.2.7.

Selp(E/H) =X(E/H)(p)

Proof. By passing (3.2.2) to the direct limit, we find the exact sequence 0→E(H)⊗(Kp/Op)→Selp(E/H)→X(E/H)(p)→0,

where E(H)⊗(Kp/Op) is equal to the direct sum of rank(E(H)) copies ofKp/Op. But Selp(E/H) is assumed to be finite so E(H) is finite, so the direct sum is equal to zero.

Hence it follows from (3.2.1) that

#(Sel(Tp)(E/H)) = #(X(E/H)(p))#(imϕ).

Now,

#(imϕ) = #(Y

vT

H1(Hv, E)(p))/#(cokerϕ), and we calculated #(H1(Hv, E)(p)) for vT in Lemma 3.2.4.

Lemma 3.2.8.

#(cokerϕ) = #(Ep∗∞(H)), which is equal to 2 if p= 2 and 1 if p > 2.

Proof. By Corollary 3 on p.123 of [16], cokerϕis isomorphic to the dual of Selπ∗∞(E/H), which we denote bySπ∗∞(E/H). Now, by passing (3.2.2) to the projective limit, we find Sπ∗∞(E/H) fits in the exact sequece

0→E(H)⊗ Op →Sπ∗∞(E/H)→Tp(X(E/H))→0,

whereTp(X(E/H)) is the projective limit ofX(E/H)πn. SinceX(E/H) is assumed to be finite, this is equal to zero. Also, E(H)⊗ Op is equal to the direct sum of rank(E(H)) copies of Op and the finite group Ep∗∞(H). But E(H) is assumed to be finite, hence E(H)⊗ Op is equal to Ep∗∞(H). The rest is clear since Ep∗∞(H) =Ep if p= 2 and trivial if p >2.

Theorem 3.2.9. We have (i) If p= 2, then

#(Sel(Tp)(E/H)) = 2b−1· Y

vP

1− ψE/H(v) Nv

!

−1

p

·#(X(E/H)(p)), where b= #(B)

(ii) if p > 2, then

#(Sel(Tp)(E/H)) = Y

vP

1− ψE/H(v) Nv

!

−1

p

·#(X(E/H)(p)).

Proof. By Lemma 3.2.4, we have

#(Y

vT

H1(Hv, E)(p)) =

2b ·QvP1− ψE/HNv(v)−1

p if p= 2

Q

vP

1− ψE/HNv(v)−1

p if p >2.

In addition, by Lemma 3.2.8

#(Sel(Tp)(E/H)) = #(X(E/H)(p))·#(Y

vT

H1(Hv, E)(p))/#(Ep∗∞(H)), and #(Ep) is equal to 2 if p= 2 and 1 if p >2. Hence the result follows.