11
$\begingroup$

I thought that the order of the Tate-Shafarevich group should always be a square (it's also supposed to be finite, but for the purposes of this question let's assume we know this) but I don't seem to find a good explanation; Wikipedia is silent on the matter.

While I know it may be an open problem, is there a good argument pro or contra this?

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ It might be nice to start afresh with a new question. As to the answer, I have to give first dibs to Bjorn Poonen (and/or Michael Stoll). $\endgroup$ Dec 28, 2009 at 3:48
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I'll supplement Pete's comment with this link: www-math.mit.edu/~poonen/papers/sha.ps $\endgroup$ Dec 28, 2009 at 7:47

3 Answers 3

35
$\begingroup$

The first example of an abelian variety with nonsquare Sha was discovered in a computation by Michael Stoll in 1996. He emailed it to me and Ed Schaefer, because his calculation depended on a paper that Ed and I had written. At first none of us believed that it was what it was: instead we thought it must be due to either an error in Stoll's calculations or an error in the Poonen-Schaefer paper. Stoll and I worked together over the next few weeks to develop a theory that explained the phenomenon, and this led to the paper http://math.mit.edu/~poonen/papers/sha.ps - that paper contains a detailed answer to your question.

To summarize a few of the key points: If the abelian variety over a global field $k$ has a principal polarization coming from a $k$-rational divisor (as is the case for every elliptic curve), then the order of Sha is a square (if finite), because it carries an alternating pairing - this is what Tate proved, generalizing Cassels' result for elliptic curves. For principally polarized abelian varieties in general, the pairing satisfies the skew-symmetry condition $\langle x,y \rangle = - \langle y,x \rangle$ but not necessarily the stronger, alternating condition $\langle x,x \rangle=0$, so all one can say is that the order of Sha is either a square or twice a square (if finite). Stoll and I gave an explicit example of a genus 2 curve over $\mathbf{Q}$ whose Jacobian had Sha isomorphic to $\mathbf{Z}/2\mathbf{Z}$ unconditionally (in particular, finiteness could be proved in this example).

If the polarization on the abelian variety is not a principal polarization, then the corresponding pairing need not be even skew-symmetric, so there is no reason to expect Sha to be even within a factor of $2$ of a square. And indeed, William Stein eventually found explicit examples and published them in the 2004 paper cited by Simon.

A final remark: Ironically, my result with Stoll quantifying the failure of Sha to be a square is used by Liu-Lorenzini-Raynaud to prove that the Brauer group $\operatorname{Br}(X)$ of a surface over a finite field is a square (if finite)!

$\endgroup$
0
11
$\begingroup$

Brian Conrad told me that this is not always the case; Tate's paper where he claimed this was misunderstood until some counterexamples were found. William Stein has a paper "Shafarevich-Tate groups of nonsquare order'' with counterexamples; it's available online at http://modular.fas.harvard.edu/papers/nonsquaresha/final2.ps.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Okay, that's not an open-problem them, I was wrong :) $\endgroup$ Dec 28, 2009 at 1:46
5
$\begingroup$

Incidentally, it was thought for some time that the Brauer group $B(X)$ of a surface $X$ over a finite field could have order which was not a square. This turned out to be false : if $B(X)$ is finite, then its order is a square (Liu--Lorenzini--Raynaud, Inventiones, 2005). Conjecturally, the group $B(X)$ is always finite.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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