How does topology enter Number theory and how we can grasp its essence?How does Dedekind's Theorem work for a prime dividing the discriminant of a number field?Maximal p-subgroup of inertia group.Local reciprocity map applied to normExamples for abstract class field theory?A second course in modular formsExercises for local class field theoryResidue field of completion of a field finite type over the prime fieldReferences for Algebraic Number Theory and Class Field TheoryLocal Artin map and the Weil groupNon-Galois finite extensions of $F^operatornameur$
Look through the portal of every day
Why is this plane circling around the Lucknow airport every day?
Should QA ask requirements to developers?
Space in array system equations
Does "variables should live in the smallest scope as possible" include the case "variables should not exist if possible"?
Does splitting a potentially monolithic application into several smaller ones help prevent bugs?
What does a stand alone "T" index value do?
If the Captain's screens are out, does he switch seats with the co-pilot?
Good allowance savings plan?
A three room house but a three headED dog
How do you like my writing?
Latest web browser compatible with Windows 98
Set and print content of environment variable in cmd.exe subshell?
Do Bugbears' arms literally get longer when it's their turn?
Can someone explain what is being said here in color publishing in the American Mathematical Monthly?
Do items de-spawn in Diablo?
Examples of a statistic that is not independent of sample's distribution?
Finding algorithms of QGIS commands?
Why does Deadpool say "You're welcome, Canada," after shooting Ryan Reynolds in the end credits?
My story is written in English, but is set in my home country. What language should I use for the dialogue?
Should I take out a loan for a friend to invest on my behalf?
How to create a hard link to an inode (ext4)?
PTIJ: Why can't I eat anything?
Is it true that real estate prices mainly go up?
How does topology enter Number theory and how we can grasp its essence?
How does Dedekind's Theorem work for a prime dividing the discriminant of a number field?Maximal p-subgroup of inertia group.Local reciprocity map applied to normExamples for abstract class field theory?A second course in modular formsExercises for local class field theoryResidue field of completion of a field finite type over the prime fieldReferences for Algebraic Number Theory and Class Field TheoryLocal Artin map and the Weil groupNon-Galois finite extensions of $F^operatornameur$
$begingroup$
In infinite Galois theory,main theorem failed and we get a "Krull topology" to mend the main theorem, we even generalized that to make definition for profinite group.
In local class field theory, the multiplicative group modulo the norm group is isomorphic to the Galois group both algebraically and topologically. So is the topology we just defined on infinite Galois group is "forced to define" because of that isomorphism? If you teach such a course in Galois theory, how would you convince your students that this topology comes out in "natural"?
There is another way topology arise: by study prime $p$, we deduce the $p$-adic topology, we complete the space we get local field and also a topological field. Can we realize that all the topologies that arise in number theory are just a mimic of that?
Since I am not a math major, I get into math since my teacher teach me quadratic reciprocity when I was a high schooler, I led all the way myself to class field theory and get lost when I encounter the "modern language" such as Galois cohomology and schemes.
I saw a remark that in order to gain arithmetic information we need a ground base: the direct product of all $mathbbQ_p$ ($p$-adic number field), but since it is not locally compact, we can not apply analysis on it, so we make restricted product and get idèles and adèles.
I know little about analysis and I get puzzled. Hecke proved quadratic reciprocity for number field using Fourier analysis and Tate has a famous "Thesis", both of which confused me.
Can someone explain that to me, what led these guys to do that,and what were they doing?
Finally I summarize my odd words:
Why we introduce topology to various group such as a Galois group, and how do we realize that topology?
Why, in doing arithmetic, do we need a locally compact group or field to apply "analysis"? what is "apply analysis" all about? (If it is not that easy to explain for a outsider, give me a link to some elementary resource as well; thanks!)
analysis algebraic-geometry galois-theory algebraic-number-theory class-field-theory
edited 2 days ago
Andrews
1,2691421
asked Jan 31 '12 at 4:54
Yoshinobu OsawaYoshinobu Osawa
31819
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In infinite Galois theory,main theorem failed and we get a "Krull topology" to mend the main theorem, we even generalized that to make definition for profinite group.
In local class field theory, the multiplicative group modulo the norm group is isomorphic to the Galois group both algebraically and topologically. So is the topology we just defined on infinite Galois group is "forced to define" because of that isomorphism? If you teach such a course in Galois theory, how would you convince your students that this topology comes out in "natural"?
There is another way topology arise: by study prime $p$, we deduce the $p$-adic topology, we complete the space we get local field and also a topological field. Can we realize that all the topologies that arise in number theory are just a mimic of that?
Since I am not a math major, I get into math since my teacher teach me quadratic reciprocity when I was a high schooler, I led all the way myself to class field theory and get lost when I encounter the "modern language" such as Galois cohomology and schemes.
I saw a remark that in order to gain arithmetic information we need a ground base: the direct product of all $mathbbQ_p$ ($p$-adic number field), but since it is not locally compact, we can not apply analysis on it, so we make restricted product and get idèles and adèles.
I know little about analysis and I get puzzled. Hecke proved quadratic reciprocity for number field using Fourier analysis and Tate has a famous "Thesis", both of which confused me.
Can someone explain that to me, what led these guys to do that,and what were they doing?
Finally I summarize my odd words:
Why we introduce topology to various group such as a Galois group, and how do we realize that topology?
Why, in doing arithmetic, do we need a locally compact group or field to apply "analysis"? what is "apply analysis" all about? (If it is not that easy to explain for a outsider, give me a link to some elementary resource as well; thanks!)
analysis algebraic-geometry galois-theory algebraic-number-theory class-field-theory
edited 2 days ago
Andrews
1,2691421
asked Jan 31 '12 at 4:54
Yoshinobu OsawaYoshinobu Osawa
31819
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
It seems like you answered your own first question -- the topology on profinite Galois groups certainly isn't forced by class field theory, but it's forced if you want Galois theory to work right. Specifically, the fundamental of Galois theory (the bijection between subextensions and subgroups) fails for infinite Galois groups considered as discrete groups, but is fixed by topologizing the subgroups via the Krull topology. For your other question, if you search this site, you'll see a nice answer to a question on Tate's thesis by Matt E which is well worth reading.
$endgroup$
– Cam McLeman
Jan 31 '12 at 5:12
$begingroup$
did you mean we define closed sets just the topology that make Galois main theorem work?Like in algebraic geometry,we study Zar-topology just defined to link with polynomial functions,so that topology is the same thing with polynomials and their defining domain,just a way of speaking mimic general topology such as in a manifold?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:25
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In infinite Galois theory,main theorem failed and we get a "Krull topology" to mend the main theorem, we even generalized that to make definition for profinite group.
In local class field theory, the multiplicative group modulo the norm group is isomorphic to the Galois group both algebraically and topologically. So is the topology we just defined on infinite Galois group is "forced to define" because of that isomorphism? If you teach such a course in Galois theory, how would you convince your students that this topology comes out in "natural"?
There is another way topology arise: by study prime $p$, we deduce the $p$-adic topology, we complete the space we get local field and also a topological field. Can we realize that all the topologies that arise in number theory are just a mimic of that?
Since I am not a math major, I get into math since my teacher teach me quadratic reciprocity when I was a high schooler, I led all the way myself to class field theory and get lost when I encounter the "modern language" such as Galois cohomology and schemes.
I saw a remark that in order to gain arithmetic information we need a ground base: the direct product of all $mathbbQ_p$ ($p$-adic number field), but since it is not locally compact, we can not apply analysis on it, so we make restricted product and get idèles and adèles.
I know little about analysis and I get puzzled. Hecke proved quadratic reciprocity for number field using Fourier analysis and Tate has a famous "Thesis", both of which confused me.
Can someone explain that to me, what led these guys to do that,and what were they doing?
Finally I summarize my odd words:
Why we introduce topology to various group such as a Galois group, and how do we realize that topology?
Why, in doing arithmetic, do we need a locally compact group or field to apply "analysis"? what is "apply analysis" all about? (If it is not that easy to explain for a outsider, give me a link to some elementary resource as well; thanks!)
analysis algebraic-geometry galois-theory algebraic-number-theory class-field-theory
edited 2 days ago
Andrews
1,2691421
asked Jan 31 '12 at 4:54
Yoshinobu OsawaYoshinobu Osawa
31819
$endgroup$
In infinite Galois theory,main theorem failed and we get a "Krull topology" to mend the main theorem, we even generalized that to make definition for profinite group.
In local class field theory, the multiplicative group modulo the norm group is isomorphic to the Galois group both algebraically and topologically. So is the topology we just defined on infinite Galois group is "forced to define" because of that isomorphism? If you teach such a course in Galois theory, how would you convince your students that this topology comes out in "natural"?
There is another way topology arise: by study prime $p$, we deduce the $p$-adic topology, we complete the space we get local field and also a topological field. Can we realize that all the topologies that arise in number theory are just a mimic of that?
Since I am not a math major, I get into math since my teacher teach me quadratic reciprocity when I was a high schooler, I led all the way myself to class field theory and get lost when I encounter the "modern language" such as Galois cohomology and schemes.
I saw a remark that in order to gain arithmetic information we need a ground base: the direct product of all $mathbbQ_p$ ($p$-adic number field), but since it is not locally compact, we can not apply analysis on it, so we make restricted product and get idèles and adèles.
I know little about analysis and I get puzzled. Hecke proved quadratic reciprocity for number field using Fourier analysis and Tate has a famous "Thesis", both of which confused me.
Can someone explain that to me, what led these guys to do that,and what were they doing?
Finally I summarize my odd words:
Why we introduce topology to various group such as a Galois group, and how do we realize that topology?
Why, in doing arithmetic, do we need a locally compact group or field to apply "analysis"? what is "apply analysis" all about? (If it is not that easy to explain for a outsider, give me a link to some elementary resource as well; thanks!)
analysis algebraic-geometry galois-theory algebraic-number-theory class-field-theory
analysis algebraic-geometry galois-theory algebraic-number-theory class-field-theory
edited 2 days ago
Andrews
1,2691421
asked Jan 31 '12 at 4:54
Yoshinobu OsawaYoshinobu Osawa
31819
edited 2 days ago
Andrews
1,2691421
asked Jan 31 '12 at 4:54
Yoshinobu OsawaYoshinobu Osawa
31819
edited 2 days ago
Andrews
1,2691421
edited 2 days ago
Andrews
1,2691421
edited 2 days ago
Andrews
1,2691421
1,2691421
asked Jan 31 '12 at 4:54
Yoshinobu OsawaYoshinobu Osawa
31819
asked Jan 31 '12 at 4:54
Yoshinobu OsawaYoshinobu Osawa
31819
asked Jan 31 '12 at 4:54
Yoshinobu OsawaYoshinobu Osawa
31819
31819
2
$begingroup$
It seems like you answered your own first question -- the topology on profinite Galois groups certainly isn't forced by class field theory, but it's forced if you want Galois theory to work right. Specifically, the fundamental of Galois theory (the bijection between subextensions and subgroups) fails for infinite Galois groups considered as discrete groups, but is fixed by topologizing the subgroups via the Krull topology. For your other question, if you search this site, you'll see a nice answer to a question on Tate's thesis by Matt E which is well worth reading.
$endgroup$
– Cam McLeman
Jan 31 '12 at 5:12
$begingroup$
did you mean we define closed sets just the topology that make Galois main theorem work?Like in algebraic geometry,we study Zar-topology just defined to link with polynomial functions,so that topology is the same thing with polynomials and their defining domain,just a way of speaking mimic general topology such as in a manifold?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:25
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
It seems like you answered your own first question -- the topology on profinite Galois groups certainly isn't forced by class field theory, but it's forced if you want Galois theory to work right. Specifically, the fundamental of Galois theory (the bijection between subextensions and subgroups) fails for infinite Galois groups considered as discrete groups, but is fixed by topologizing the subgroups via the Krull topology. For your other question, if you search this site, you'll see a nice answer to a question on Tate's thesis by Matt E which is well worth reading.
$endgroup$
– Cam McLeman
Jan 31 '12 at 5:12
$begingroup$
did you mean we define closed sets just the topology that make Galois main theorem work?Like in algebraic geometry,we study Zar-topology just defined to link with polynomial functions,so that topology is the same thing with polynomials and their defining domain,just a way of speaking mimic general topology such as in a manifold?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:25
2
2
$begingroup$
It seems like you answered your own first question -- the topology on profinite Galois groups certainly isn't forced by class field theory, but it's forced if you want Galois theory to work right. Specifically, the fundamental of Galois theory (the bijection between subextensions and subgroups) fails for infinite Galois groups considered as discrete groups, but is fixed by topologizing the subgroups via the Krull topology. For your other question, if you search this site, you'll see a nice answer to a question on Tate's thesis by Matt E which is well worth reading.
$endgroup$
– Cam McLeman
Jan 31 '12 at 5:12
$begingroup$
It seems like you answered your own first question -- the topology on profinite Galois groups certainly isn't forced by class field theory, but it's forced if you want Galois theory to work right. Specifically, the fundamental of Galois theory (the bijection between subextensions and subgroups) fails for infinite Galois groups considered as discrete groups, but is fixed by topologizing the subgroups via the Krull topology. For your other question, if you search this site, you'll see a nice answer to a question on Tate's thesis by Matt E which is well worth reading.
$endgroup$
– Cam McLeman
Jan 31 '12 at 5:12
$begingroup$
did you mean we define closed sets just the topology that make Galois main theorem work?Like in algebraic geometry,we study Zar-topology just defined to link with polynomial functions,so that topology is the same thing with polynomials and their defining domain,just a way of speaking mimic general topology such as in a manifold?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:25
$begingroup$
did you mean we define closed sets just the topology that make Galois main theorem work?Like in algebraic geometry,we study Zar-topology just defined to link with polynomial functions,so that topology is the same thing with polynomials and their defining domain,just a way of speaking mimic general topology such as in a manifold?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:25
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I think a basic observation is that one can obtain a topology on a ring $R$ simply from the data of an ideal $I subset R$; this is the $I$-adic topology, where a neighborhood basis at the identity consists of the powers of the ideals $I^i$. The nice thing about doing so is that, in essence, solving a polynomial equation mod a high power of $I$ essentially amounts to finding an "approximate solution" in $R$ itself: the notion of "approximate" solution is made valid by the existence of a topology.
In the case where $I $ is the ideal $p mathbbZ$ inside the ring $mathbbZ$,
then the point of this discussion is that one has translated (purely arithmetic) questions of the form "When does there exist an integer $x$ such that $P(x) equiv 0 mod p^N$?" into more analysis-y questions of the form "When does there exist an integer $x$ such that $P(x) $ is close to zero?" So far, we have just moved words around without content, but we can make a big step forward by noting that analysis actually works pretty well only when one has a completeness property (like the completeness property of the real numbers). Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance.
Anyway, one does not usually have completeness of the topology induced on the ring $R$ given by an ideal $I$, but there is a mathematical procedure that enables you to replace $R$ by something where the completeness process is true: this process is called completion. When applied to the integers with the ideal $p mathbbZ$, one gets the ring of $p$-adic integers, and more generally applied to rings of integers in number fields one can get rings of integers in local fields.
Again, one of the things that is nice about completion is that one can in fact do analysis in a reasonable way. A standard example is given by Hensel's lemma, which allows you to lift approximate solutions to exact solutions (in the completion).
The completions turn out to provide information about the integers themselves (the starting point): for instance, it is a general principle that if something is true over $mathbbR$ and all the $p$-adic fields $mathbbQ_p$, then it should be true over $mathbbQ$. The usual example is the Hasse-Minkowski theorem for quadratic forms, but the analog for other polynomials is false.
As for the infinite Galois group: the answer is that it is an inverse
limit of the Galois groups of finite subextensions, and as such inherits a topology in a similar way as the completion.
answered Jan 31 '12 at 5:17
Akhil MathewAkhil Mathew
24k471124
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
dear Akhil,thanks a lot for the answer,but can you be more specific by your words"Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance. " and more ,what is doing anlysis in various field?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:20
$begingroup$
@Yoshinobu: Most of the basic theorems of analysis (e.g. things like the intermediate value theorem) rely intrinsically on the completeness of the real numbers; this is what guarantees that $mathbbR$ is a well-behaved topological space (e.g. locally compact, connected -- these are the properties that underlie many of these theorems). As for your latter question, you may wish to look at $p$-adic analysis.
$endgroup$
– Akhil Mathew
Feb 1 '12 at 6:26
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f104160%2fhow-does-topology-enter-number-theory-and-how-we-can-grasp-its-essence%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I think a basic observation is that one can obtain a topology on a ring $R$ simply from the data of an ideal $I subset R$; this is the $I$-adic topology, where a neighborhood basis at the identity consists of the powers of the ideals $I^i$. The nice thing about doing so is that, in essence, solving a polynomial equation mod a high power of $I$ essentially amounts to finding an "approximate solution" in $R$ itself: the notion of "approximate" solution is made valid by the existence of a topology.
In the case where $I $ is the ideal $p mathbbZ$ inside the ring $mathbbZ$,
then the point of this discussion is that one has translated (purely arithmetic) questions of the form "When does there exist an integer $x$ such that $P(x) equiv 0 mod p^N$?" into more analysis-y questions of the form "When does there exist an integer $x$ such that $P(x) $ is close to zero?" So far, we have just moved words around without content, but we can make a big step forward by noting that analysis actually works pretty well only when one has a completeness property (like the completeness property of the real numbers). Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance.
Anyway, one does not usually have completeness of the topology induced on the ring $R$ given by an ideal $I$, but there is a mathematical procedure that enables you to replace $R$ by something where the completeness process is true: this process is called completion. When applied to the integers with the ideal $p mathbbZ$, one gets the ring of $p$-adic integers, and more generally applied to rings of integers in number fields one can get rings of integers in local fields.
Again, one of the things that is nice about completion is that one can in fact do analysis in a reasonable way. A standard example is given by Hensel's lemma, which allows you to lift approximate solutions to exact solutions (in the completion).
The completions turn out to provide information about the integers themselves (the starting point): for instance, it is a general principle that if something is true over $mathbbR$ and all the $p$-adic fields $mathbbQ_p$, then it should be true over $mathbbQ$. The usual example is the Hasse-Minkowski theorem for quadratic forms, but the analog for other polynomials is false.
As for the infinite Galois group: the answer is that it is an inverse
limit of the Galois groups of finite subextensions, and as such inherits a topology in a similar way as the completion.
answered Jan 31 '12 at 5:17
Akhil MathewAkhil Mathew
24k471124
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
dear Akhil,thanks a lot for the answer,but can you be more specific by your words"Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance. " and more ,what is doing anlysis in various field?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:20
$begingroup$
@Yoshinobu: Most of the basic theorems of analysis (e.g. things like the intermediate value theorem) rely intrinsically on the completeness of the real numbers; this is what guarantees that $mathbbR$ is a well-behaved topological space (e.g. locally compact, connected -- these are the properties that underlie many of these theorems). As for your latter question, you may wish to look at $p$-adic analysis.
$endgroup$
– Akhil Mathew
Feb 1 '12 at 6:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think a basic observation is that one can obtain a topology on a ring $R$ simply from the data of an ideal $I subset R$; this is the $I$-adic topology, where a neighborhood basis at the identity consists of the powers of the ideals $I^i$. The nice thing about doing so is that, in essence, solving a polynomial equation mod a high power of $I$ essentially amounts to finding an "approximate solution" in $R$ itself: the notion of "approximate" solution is made valid by the existence of a topology.
In the case where $I $ is the ideal $p mathbbZ$ inside the ring $mathbbZ$,
then the point of this discussion is that one has translated (purely arithmetic) questions of the form "When does there exist an integer $x$ such that $P(x) equiv 0 mod p^N$?" into more analysis-y questions of the form "When does there exist an integer $x$ such that $P(x) $ is close to zero?" So far, we have just moved words around without content, but we can make a big step forward by noting that analysis actually works pretty well only when one has a completeness property (like the completeness property of the real numbers). Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance.
Anyway, one does not usually have completeness of the topology induced on the ring $R$ given by an ideal $I$, but there is a mathematical procedure that enables you to replace $R$ by something where the completeness process is true: this process is called completion. When applied to the integers with the ideal $p mathbbZ$, one gets the ring of $p$-adic integers, and more generally applied to rings of integers in number fields one can get rings of integers in local fields.
Again, one of the things that is nice about completion is that one can in fact do analysis in a reasonable way. A standard example is given by Hensel's lemma, which allows you to lift approximate solutions to exact solutions (in the completion).
The completions turn out to provide information about the integers themselves (the starting point): for instance, it is a general principle that if something is true over $mathbbR$ and all the $p$-adic fields $mathbbQ_p$, then it should be true over $mathbbQ$. The usual example is the Hasse-Minkowski theorem for quadratic forms, but the analog for other polynomials is false.
As for the infinite Galois group: the answer is that it is an inverse
limit of the Galois groups of finite subextensions, and as such inherits a topology in a similar way as the completion.
answered Jan 31 '12 at 5:17
Akhil MathewAkhil Mathew
24k471124
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
dear Akhil,thanks a lot for the answer,but can you be more specific by your words"Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance. " and more ,what is doing anlysis in various field?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:20
$begingroup$
@Yoshinobu: Most of the basic theorems of analysis (e.g. things like the intermediate value theorem) rely intrinsically on the completeness of the real numbers; this is what guarantees that $mathbbR$ is a well-behaved topological space (e.g. locally compact, connected -- these are the properties that underlie many of these theorems). As for your latter question, you may wish to look at $p$-adic analysis.
$endgroup$
– Akhil Mathew
Feb 1 '12 at 6:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think a basic observation is that one can obtain a topology on a ring $R$ simply from the data of an ideal $I subset R$; this is the $I$-adic topology, where a neighborhood basis at the identity consists of the powers of the ideals $I^i$. The nice thing about doing so is that, in essence, solving a polynomial equation mod a high power of $I$ essentially amounts to finding an "approximate solution" in $R$ itself: the notion of "approximate" solution is made valid by the existence of a topology.
In the case where $I $ is the ideal $p mathbbZ$ inside the ring $mathbbZ$,
then the point of this discussion is that one has translated (purely arithmetic) questions of the form "When does there exist an integer $x$ such that $P(x) equiv 0 mod p^N$?" into more analysis-y questions of the form "When does there exist an integer $x$ such that $P(x) $ is close to zero?" So far, we have just moved words around without content, but we can make a big step forward by noting that analysis actually works pretty well only when one has a completeness property (like the completeness property of the real numbers). Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance.
Anyway, one does not usually have completeness of the topology induced on the ring $R$ given by an ideal $I$, but there is a mathematical procedure that enables you to replace $R$ by something where the completeness process is true: this process is called completion. When applied to the integers with the ideal $p mathbbZ$, one gets the ring of $p$-adic integers, and more generally applied to rings of integers in number fields one can get rings of integers in local fields.
Again, one of the things that is nice about completion is that one can in fact do analysis in a reasonable way. A standard example is given by Hensel's lemma, which allows you to lift approximate solutions to exact solutions (in the completion).
The completions turn out to provide information about the integers themselves (the starting point): for instance, it is a general principle that if something is true over $mathbbR$ and all the $p$-adic fields $mathbbQ_p$, then it should be true over $mathbbQ$. The usual example is the Hasse-Minkowski theorem for quadratic forms, but the analog for other polynomials is false.
As for the infinite Galois group: the answer is that it is an inverse
limit of the Galois groups of finite subextensions, and as such inherits a topology in a similar way as the completion.
answered Jan 31 '12 at 5:17
Akhil MathewAkhil Mathew
24k471124
$endgroup$
I think a basic observation is that one can obtain a topology on a ring $R$ simply from the data of an ideal $I subset R$; this is the $I$-adic topology, where a neighborhood basis at the identity consists of the powers of the ideals $I^i$. The nice thing about doing so is that, in essence, solving a polynomial equation mod a high power of $I$ essentially amounts to finding an "approximate solution" in $R$ itself: the notion of "approximate" solution is made valid by the existence of a topology.
In the case where $I $ is the ideal $p mathbbZ$ inside the ring $mathbbZ$,
then the point of this discussion is that one has translated (purely arithmetic) questions of the form "When does there exist an integer $x$ such that $P(x) equiv 0 mod p^N$?" into more analysis-y questions of the form "When does there exist an integer $x$ such that $P(x) $ is close to zero?" So far, we have just moved words around without content, but we can make a big step forward by noting that analysis actually works pretty well only when one has a completeness property (like the completeness property of the real numbers). Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance.
Anyway, one does not usually have completeness of the topology induced on the ring $R$ given by an ideal $I$, but there is a mathematical procedure that enables you to replace $R$ by something where the completeness process is true: this process is called completion. When applied to the integers with the ideal $p mathbbZ$, one gets the ring of $p$-adic integers, and more generally applied to rings of integers in number fields one can get rings of integers in local fields.
Again, one of the things that is nice about completion is that one can in fact do analysis in a reasonable way. A standard example is given by Hensel's lemma, which allows you to lift approximate solutions to exact solutions (in the completion).
The completions turn out to provide information about the integers themselves (the starting point): for instance, it is a general principle that if something is true over $mathbbR$ and all the $p$-adic fields $mathbbQ_p$, then it should be true over $mathbbQ$. The usual example is the Hasse-Minkowski theorem for quadratic forms, but the analog for other polynomials is false.
As for the infinite Galois group: the answer is that it is an inverse
limit of the Galois groups of finite subextensions, and as such inherits a topology in a similar way as the completion.
answered Jan 31 '12 at 5:17
Akhil MathewAkhil Mathew
24k471124
answered Jan 31 '12 at 5:17
Akhil MathewAkhil Mathew
24k471124
answered Jan 31 '12 at 5:17
Akhil MathewAkhil Mathew
24k471124
answered Jan 31 '12 at 5:17
Akhil MathewAkhil Mathew
24k471124
24k471124
$begingroup$
dear Akhil,thanks a lot for the answer,but can you be more specific by your words"Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance. " and more ,what is doing anlysis in various field?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:20
$begingroup$
@Yoshinobu: Most of the basic theorems of analysis (e.g. things like the intermediate value theorem) rely intrinsically on the completeness of the real numbers; this is what guarantees that $mathbbR$ is a well-behaved topological space (e.g. locally compact, connected -- these are the properties that underlie many of these theorems). As for your latter question, you may wish to look at $p$-adic analysis.
$endgroup$
– Akhil Mathew
Feb 1 '12 at 6:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
dear Akhil,thanks a lot for the answer,but can you be more specific by your words"Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance. " and more ,what is doing anlysis in various field?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:20
$begingroup$
@Yoshinobu: Most of the basic theorems of analysis (e.g. things like the intermediate value theorem) rely intrinsically on the completeness of the real numbers; this is what guarantees that $mathbbR$ is a well-behaved topological space (e.g. locally compact, connected -- these are the properties that underlie many of these theorems). As for your latter question, you may wish to look at $p$-adic analysis.
$endgroup$
– Akhil Mathew
Feb 1 '12 at 6:26
$begingroup$
dear Akhil,thanks a lot for the answer,but can you be more specific by your words"Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance. " and more ,what is doing anlysis in various field?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:20
$begingroup$
dear Akhil,thanks a lot for the answer,but can you be more specific by your words"Without the completeness property of the real numbers, most of ordinary mathematical analysis would fail: try doing integration over the rationals, for instance. " and more ,what is doing anlysis in various field?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:20
$begingroup$
@Yoshinobu: Most of the basic theorems of analysis (e.g. things like the intermediate value theorem) rely intrinsically on the completeness of the real numbers; this is what guarantees that $mathbbR$ is a well-behaved topological space (e.g. locally compact, connected -- these are the properties that underlie many of these theorems). As for your latter question, you may wish to look at $p$-adic analysis.
$endgroup$
– Akhil Mathew
Feb 1 '12 at 6:26
$begingroup$
@Yoshinobu: Most of the basic theorems of analysis (e.g. things like the intermediate value theorem) rely intrinsically on the completeness of the real numbers; this is what guarantees that $mathbbR$ is a well-behaved topological space (e.g. locally compact, connected -- these are the properties that underlie many of these theorems). As for your latter question, you may wish to look at $p$-adic analysis.
$endgroup$
– Akhil Mathew
Feb 1 '12 at 6:26
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f104160%2fhow-does-topology-enter-number-theory-and-how-we-can-grasp-its-essence%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
$begingroup$
It seems like you answered your own first question -- the topology on profinite Galois groups certainly isn't forced by class field theory, but it's forced if you want Galois theory to work right. Specifically, the fundamental of Galois theory (the bijection between subextensions and subgroups) fails for infinite Galois groups considered as discrete groups, but is fixed by topologizing the subgroups via the Krull topology. For your other question, if you search this site, you'll see a nice answer to a question on Tate's thesis by Matt E which is well worth reading.
$endgroup$
– Cam McLeman
Jan 31 '12 at 5:12
$begingroup$
did you mean we define closed sets just the topology that make Galois main theorem work?Like in algebraic geometry,we study Zar-topology just defined to link with polynomial functions,so that topology is the same thing with polynomials and their defining domain,just a way of speaking mimic general topology such as in a manifold?
$endgroup$
– Yoshinobu Osawa
Feb 1 '12 at 4:25