2
$\begingroup$

Let $F$ be a field of characteristic 0 complete for a discrete non-archimedean valuation.

Let $G$ be a commutative smooth algebraic group over $F$.

Let us put on $G(F)$ the topology induced by the topology of $F$, and let us consider it as a topological abelian group.

My question is the following: can we say that $G(F)$ is countably prodiscrete as a topological abelian group?

Some remarks: This is the case, for example, if $G$ is a torus (since $F^{\times}$ is countably prodiscrete), if $G$ is a unipotent group (since $F$ is countably prodiscrete), or if $G$ is an abelian variety (in this case it can be seen thanks to the Néron model of $A$).

Also, I think that the answer is yes whenever $G$ admits a lft-Néron model over $O_F$ (this happens exactly when $G$ does not admit a subgroup of type $\mathbb{G}_a$).

Thank you in advance for your help!

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ To save other people some effort, "countably prodiscrete" means "can be embedded into the Tychonoff product of countably many countable discrete groups", at least according to arxiv.org/pdf/2302.08988 . I think this is the same as "there are countably many continuous maps $\phi_i : G \to H_i$ with countable discrete targets such that, for any non-identity element $g \in G$, there exists $i$ with $\phi_i(g) \neq e$." $\endgroup$ Commented May 30 at 13:33
  • $\begingroup$ I note that this is false for $\text{PSL}_2$: Because $\text{PSL}_2(F)$ is simple, the only maps from it are injective, but the topology on $\text{PSL}_2(F)$ is not the discrete topology. However, the OP asked about abelian examples; I don't see any obstacle there. $\endgroup$ Commented May 30 at 13:35
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Maybe the two definitions coincide, but I meant that a topological abelian group is countably prodiscrete if it is isomorphic (as topological abelian groups) to the cofiltered limit of discrete topological abelian groups, where the index set of the cofiltered limit is $\mathbb{N}$. $\endgroup$
    – rtwo
    Commented May 30 at 13:37
  • $\begingroup$ Hmmm. By "my" definition, if $G$ is countably prodiscrete, then any subgroup of $G$ is also countably prodiscrete (with the induced topology). But it sounds like, for your definition, $\mathbb{Z}$ topologized as a subgroup of $\mathbb{Z}_p$ is not countably prodiscrete. $\endgroup$ Commented May 30 at 13:42
  • $\begingroup$ I guess I was thinking more about my definition then. I think that (Countably) Prodiscrete means (first countable) complete linearly topologised abelian group, see for example here (stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/07E7). A closed subgroup of a prodiscrete should be prodiscrete, but for $\mathbb{Z}$ in $\mathbb{Z}_p$ this is not the case for my definition, I guess. If "countably" creates confusion, maybe we could just drop it and just consider "prodiscrete". $\endgroup$
    – rtwo
    Commented May 30 at 13:54

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

Yes, and none of the theory of group schemes is needed.

Let $\mathcal O_F$ be the ring of integers of $F$ and $\pi$ the uniformizer.

Express $G$ as a scheme $\mathcal G$ over $\mathcal O_F$ such that the identity is an integral point, take an affine chart around the identity, choose coordinates, and let $U_i$ be the subset of $\mathcal G(\mathcal O_F) \subseteq G(F)$ consisting of integral points congruent to the identity modulo $\pi^i$. Then $U_i$ is open, and the $U_i$ form a neighborhood basis of the identity (because this is how the topology on $F$-points of a scheme is defined).

Let $H_i$ be the subset of $G(F_i)$ consisting of elements such that $g U_i = U_i$. Then $H_i$ is a subgroup of $G(F_i)$ since it's the stabilizer of $U_i$ under the translation action on subsets of the group. Furthermore $H_i$ is contained in $U_i$ since $g\in H_i$ implies $ g = ge \in g U_i = U_i$.

Let's check $H_i$ is open. If the residue field of $\mathcal O_F$ is finite then $U_i$ is compact and we can use a topological argument to verify this.

In the general case, the multiplication map $G \times G \to G$ can be expressed as a polynomial function in finitely many open charts of $G \times G$, hence a rational function in our fixed coordinates in finitely many ways. The denominators of this function vanish on the closed complements of these charts, whose intersection is empty, so they generate the unit ideal (over F), hence they generate an ideal containing some power $\pi^k$ of $\pi$ (over $\mathcal O_F$). Hence for any pair of points we can choose one of these rational functions such that the denominator has valuation at most $k$. The same is true for the map $(g_1,g_2) \mapsto g_1^{-1} g_2$, and we can choose the same $k$ that works for both. Then if $g \in H_i$ and $g'$ is congruent to $g$ modulo $\pi^{i+2k}$ then for $x\in U_i$, we have $g' x$ congruent to $gx$ modulo $\pi^{i+2k}$ for all $x \in U_i$, and hence $g'x$ lies in $U_i$. Hence $g U_i \subseteq U_i$ The same argument shows if $x\in U_i$ then since $g^{-1} x\in U_i$ we have $g^{'-1} x \in U_i$ Hence $U_i \subseteq g U_i$. Combining these, $U_i =g U_i$ so $g \in H_i$, as desired.

Since $G(F)$ is abelian, $H_i$ is normal, so $G(F)/H_i$ is a discrete group. Then there is a natural continuous map $$G(F) \to \varprojlim G(F)/H_i$$ which is injective since the intersection of the $U_i$ is the identity and thus the intersection of the $H_i$ is the identity.

To check the map is surjective, consider an element of $\varprojlim G(F)/H_i$, i.e. a sequence $g_i$ with $g_i g_j^{-1} \in H_i$ for any $j >i$. We need to show there exists some $g$ such that $g_i g^{-1} \in H_i$ for all $i$. Translating each $g_i$ by $g_1$, we may assume that all $g_i \in H_1$ and thus in particular lie in our affine chart. Now let's check that the coordinates of $g_i$ are congruent to the coordinates of $g_j$ modulo $\pi^{i-2k}$ for all $j \geq i$. This is because $g_i = h g_j$ with $h\in H_i \subseteq U_i$ and we can choose a rational function computing $h g_j$ whose denominator has valuation bounded by $\pi^k$, and the fact that $h$ is congruent to the identity modulo $\pi^{i}$ meaning $h g_j$ and $1 g_j = g_j$ have coordinates differing by a multiple of $\pi^{i-2k}$.

This implies the sequence $g_i \mod \pi^{i-2k}$ gives an element $ g\in G(\mathcal O_F)$. To see that $g_i$ is the image of $g$, use that $g_i$ is in $g_j H_i$ for $j=i+6k$ and then use that $g_j$ is congruent to $g$ modulo $\pi^{i+4k}$ so that $g_j g^{-1}$ lies in $U_{i+2k}$ and thus lies in $H_i$.

Hence the map is a bijection.

Finally, the inverse is continuous since the translates of the $U_i$ are a basis for the topology of $G(F)$ and hence the translates of the $H_i$ are as well.

Thus the map is an isomorphism.

$\endgroup$
16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Compactness arguments only work for locally compact fields, i.e. when the residue field of the valuation is finite. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 2 at 5:29
  • $\begingroup$ @LaurentMoret-Bailly Good point, fixed. $\endgroup$
    – Will Sawin
    Commented Jun 2 at 11:09
  • $\begingroup$ Since $U_i$ isn't (obviously) a group, why is $H_i$? Or did you want $H_i$ to be a set of elements of $G(F)$, not necessarily of $U_i(\mathcal O_F)$? \\ I get a little confused when you're taking rational points. When you write "Since $G(F)$ is abelian, $H_i$ is normal, so $G/H_i$ is a discrete group", you mean "Since $G(F)$ is abelian, $H_i$ is normal [in $G(F)$], so $G(F)/H_i$ is a discrete group", right? And similarly where you refer to $H_i \subseteq U_i$ instead of $H_i \subseteq U_i(\mathcal O_F)$? $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Jun 2 at 14:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LSpice Let me expand that point. $H_i$ is a subset of elements of $G(F)$ which is contained in $U_i$ and is a subgroup. Both claims follow in an elementary way from its definition but I will edit to add details. // $U_i$ is not a scheme for me, its just a set, so I really mean $U_i$ every time you write $U_i(\mathcal O_F)$. But I do mean $G(F)$ when you suggest I do. $\endgroup$
    – Will Sawin
    Commented Jun 2 at 16:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @JackYo Yeah, that's why you can replace it with just using affine coordinates and scaling to make the identity integral. $\endgroup$
    – Will Sawin
    Commented Jun 6 at 1:32

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.