Quick help finishing off a proof: extension of p-adic fields

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on proving the ramification index of the composite extension L_1 L_2/K of p-adic fields, where L_1/K and L_2/K are extensions with coprime ramification indices e_1 and e_2. The proof demonstrates that e_1 e_2 divides the ramification index e of the composite extension. The challenge lies in establishing that the ramification indices e_1' and e_2' of the intermediate extensions also divide e_1 and e_2, respectively, particularly when one of the extensions is Galois.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of p-adic fields and their properties
  • Familiarity with Galois theory and its implications on ramification
  • Knowledge of ramification indices and their multiplicative properties
  • Ability to manipulate inequalities in the context of field extensions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Galois extensions in relation to ramification indices
  • Learn about the multiplicative property of ramification indices in field extensions
  • Research the implications of coprimality on ramification indices in algebraic number theory
  • Explore examples of p-adic field extensions to solidify understanding of the concepts
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, algebraic number theorists, and graduate students studying field theory and ramification in p-adic fields.

simba31415
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let [itex]L_1/K,\,L_2/K[/itex] be extensions of p-adic fields, at least one of which is Galois, with ramification indices [itex]e_1,\,e_2[/itex]. Suppose that [itex](e_1,\,e_2) = 1[/itex]. Show that [itex]L_1 L_2/K[/itex] has ramification index [itex]e_1 e_2[/itex].

Homework Equations


I have most of the proof done: I'm trying to show [itex]e_1 e_2 | e[/itex] where [itex]e[/itex] is the ramification index of [itex]L_1 L_2/K[/itex], and then show [itex]e | e_1 e_2[/itex]. It's easy enough to show that [itex]e_1 e_2 | e[/itex]: if we define [itex]e_1 '[/itex] to be the ramification index between [itex]L_2, \, L_1 L_2[/itex] and likewise [itex]e_2 '[/itex] between [itex]L_1, \, L_1 L_2[/itex], then [itex]e = e_1 e_2' = e_2 e_1'[/itex] by multiplicative property of ramification indices. So both [itex]e_1,\,e_2[/itex] divide [itex]e[/itex] and are coprime so [itex]e_1 e_2 | e[/itex].

All I need now is to show that [itex]e_1' | e_1[/itex], then [itex]e_1' e_2 = e | e_1 e_2[/itex] (or alternatively to show [itex]e_2' | e_2[/itex]). However, I can't seem to manage this: indeed quite the opposite, I keep deducing [itex]e_1 | e_1'[/itex] and [itex]e_2 | e_2'[/itex] by using the 2 forms of [itex]e[/itex] and coprimality. I also, as far as I know, haven't used the fact one of the extensions is Galois (or that they are of p-adic fields) yet, unless I have forgotten a precondition for one of the results I've used. Could anyone help complete my proof? Thanks! -S
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would try to show that [itex]e\leq e_1e_2[/itex]. If L_1/K is Galois, what kind of inequality does that impose on e_1?
 
morphism said:
I would try to show that [itex]e\leq e_1e_2[/itex]. If L_1/K is Galois, what kind of inequality does that impose on e_1?

Hi morphism, sorry it took me so long to reply - I didn't see anyone had responded to me. I've been having a think, but I can't think of any obvious inequalities which we can deduce for e_1: presumably we want [itex]e_1 \geq[/itex] something for this. I know all the ramification indices for any prime splitting downstairs must be the same in this case, but I don't think that helps us here.

So it would suffice to show that [itex]e_1 \geq e_1'[/itex], but while I could believe it I don't know if I could prove it. Do you think you could give me another hint perhaps? Sorry, it's probably something very obvious I'm overlooking!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K