Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $\mathbb S$ be $\mathbb C^{\times}$'s restriction of scalar to $\mathbb R$. To give a real Hodge structure on an $\mathbb Q$ vector space $V$ is to give a real representation of $\mathbb S$ on $V_{\mathbb R}$. Let $\mathbb G_m\rightarrow \mathbb S\rightarrow GL(V_{\mathbb R})$ be the weight homomorphism. If it is actually defined over $\mathbb Q$ we say the hodge structure is rational. But can we say that the weight homomorphism is always algebraic, that is, defined over $\overline{\mathbb Q}$? Every resource claims this, but I can't see why...

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 6 down vote accepted

It looks false to me. Let $V=\mathbb{Q}^{2}$, and let $V(\mathbb{R})=V^{0}\oplus V^{2}$ where $V^{0}$ is the line defined by $y=ex$ and $V^{2}$ is the line defined by $y=\pi x$. Give $V^{0}$ the unique Hodge structure of type $(0,0)$ and $V^{2}$ the unique Hodge structure of type $(1,1)$. To say that $w$ is defined over the subfield $\mathbb{Q}^{\mathrm{al}}$ of $\mathbb{C}$ means that the gradation $V(\mathbb{R})=V^{0}\oplus V^{2}$ arises from a gradation of $V(\mathbb{Q}{}^{\mathrm{al}})$ by tensoring up, but this isn't true. Perhaps the all the "resources" have additional conditions, or perhaps they are all ...

Added: When you are defining a Shimura variety, the weight homomorphism w factors through a Q-subtorus of GL(V), and then it is true that w is defined over the algebraic closure of Q (because, for tori T,T', the group Hom(T,T') doesn't change when you pass from one algebraically closed field to a larger field).

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks! So when we define a Shimura datum $(G,X)$, the map $\mathbb S\rightarrow G_{\mathbb R}$ is actually defined over $\mathbb Q$, not only over $\mathbb R$? If it is only defined over $\mathbb R$, I still can't assure myself that $\mathbb G_m\rightarrow \mathbb S\rightarrow G_{\mathbb R}$ factors through a $\mathbb Q$ subtorus. –  Taisong Jing Mar 16 '10 at 14:15
    
The maps $\mathbb{S}\to G_{\mathbb{R}}$ are defined over $\mathbb{R}$,not $\mathbb{Q}$. However, one of the axioms (2.1.1.1 in Deligne's Corvallis articles; SV1 in my articles) for Shimura varieties implies that the weight homomorphism $w$ of each $h$ factors through the centre of $G$ (hence through connected centre, which is a torus). As the $h$'s are all conjugate, this implies that the $w$'s are all equal, and that the $w$ is defined over the algebraic closure of $\mathbb{Q}$ (it is a homomorphism between tori defined over $\mathbb{Q}$). –  JS Milne Mar 16 '10 at 19:14
    
I see, thank you. Is it in general true for a homomorphism from a reductive group to a linear group, if it is defined over a bigger algebraic closed field, then we can always descent it to a smaller algebraic closed field? (for unipotent groups one may have a lot of non algebraic homomorphisms, e.g. $x\mapsto \pi x$) –  Taisong Jing Mar 17 '10 at 0:59

Who is every source? If you fix a weight $k$, then to give a real Hodge structure is the same as giving a homomorphism $h:{\mathbb G}_m\to GL(V)$ which is defined over $\mathbb R$. That does not mean it is defined over $\overline{\mathbb Q}$. Indeed, $h$ doesn't know anything about the $\overline{\mathbb Q}$-structure, so why should it respect it?

As an example, let's take $V={\mathbb Q}^2$ and $h$ defined by $$ h(a)=A(^a{}_1)A^{-1},\ \ \ A=(^1_0{}^{\pi}_1). $$ Then $h$ is not defined over $\overline{\mathbb Q}$. But it is conjugate to a homomorphism which is defined over $\mathbb Q$. Maybe that's what you need?

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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