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

The goal of this question is to find a "geometric" definition of Frobenius element in $\text{Gal}(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q})$.

Here are two definitions that don't work, but that should help explain what I mean. Fix an algebraic closure of $\mathbb{Q}$ and, for a prime $p$, fix an algebraic closure of $\mathbb{F}_p$. If there were a canonical morphism $f : \mathbb{Q} \to \mathbb{F}\_p$, then the induced map $f\_{\ast} : \pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{F}_p) \to \pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{Q})$ of étale fundamental groups (basepoints the algebraic closures above, suppressed) would be an obvious way to define Frobenius elements: we would just take the image of a generator of $\pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{F}_p) \simeq \hat{\mathbb{Z}}$. (The general motivation being: "gee, if I had a category $C$ and a functor, let's call it $\pi_1 : C \to \text{Grp}$, wouldn't it be nice if I could find an object, let's call it $S^1$, with $\pi_1(S^1) \simeq \mathbb{Z}$, so I could probe elements of $\pi_1(X)$ using morphisms $S^1 \to X$," and it seems for schemes that $\pi_1(S^1) \simeq \hat{\mathbb{Z}}$ is the next best thing.)

But of course this is nonsense since no such $f$ exists. The next obvious thing (from my perspective, being someone who knows nothing about all this étale stuff) is to look at the canonical morphism $f : \mathbb{Z} \to \mathbb{F}\_p$, which induces a map $f\_{\ast} : \pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{F}_p) \to \pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{Z})$, and then to look at the canonical morphism $g : \mathbb{Z} \to \mathbb{Q}$ and the induced map $g\_{\ast} : \pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{Q}) \to \pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{Z})$. Perhaps the Frobenius elements at $p$ are nothing more than the inverse image under $g\_{\ast}$ of the image of a generator of $\pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{F}_p)$ under $f\_{\ast}$ (up to conjugacy to account for changes in basepoint).

But this is also nonsense since $\pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{Z})$ is trivial.

So what is the correct version of this construction?

Here's my guess: instead of using $\mathbb{Z}$, we have to use the localization $R = \mathbb{Z}_{(p)}$. As before there are morphisms $f : R \to \mathbb{F}_p, g : R \to \mathbb{Q}$ inducing maps $f\_{\ast} : \pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{F}_p) \to \pi_1(\text{Spec } R)$ and $g\_{\ast} : \pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{Q}) \to \pi_1(\text{Spec } R)$, and maybe now something like the statement "the Frobenius elements in $\pi_1(\text{Spec } \mathbb{Q})$ at $p$ are the inverse image under $g\_{\ast}$ of the image of a generator of $\hat{\mathbb{Z}}$ under $f\_{\ast}$ (up to conjugacy)" is finally true. Is it? And what does $g\_{\ast}$ look like?

share|improve this question
Qiaochu: is it helpful to remark that Gal(Q-bar/Q) doesn't have a Frob_p because Q-bar is ramified at p? Usually one looks at the quotient Gal(Q_S/Q)---the maximal extension unramified outside some set of primes S---and then (and only then) you have conj classes Frob_p for all p not in S. –  Kevin Buzzard Feb 2 '11 at 0:09
@Kevin: yes, that is more or less what I'm getting from the other answers. I have read a few expositions which vaguely say things like "well, there are Frobenius elements - only they're not elements, they're conjugacy classes - only they're not conjugacy classes, they're unions of conjugacy classes - but their trace in a Galois representation still makes sense!" and trying to figure out what kind of construction could account for this, and it seems clear-ish now. –  Qiaochu Yuan Feb 2 '11 at 0:35
add comment

3 Answers

up vote 6 down vote accepted

Your guess is right. $\pi_1(Spec(R))$ is the automorphism group of the maximal extension $\mathbb{Q}^{p\textrm{-}ur} \subset \overline{\mathbb{Q}}$ unramified at $p$. (This is a special case of SGA 1 Exp. V Prop 8.2 about the fundamental group of normal schemes). The morphism $g_*$ is simply the restriction map $Gal(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q}) \to Gal(\mathbb{Q}^{p\textrm{-}ur}/\mathbb{Q})$.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I think you must write $\mathbf{Q}$ as $\mathrm{colim}_n \mathbf{Z}[\frac{1}{n}]$.

share|improve this answer
I don't understand why this was down-voted. This answer is correct, if somewhat abbreviated: if $p \nmid n$ then there is a map $\mathbb Z[1/n] \to \mathbb F_p$, as well as a map $\mathbb Z[1/n] \to \mathbb Q$. These induces maps $G_{\mathbb F_p} \to \pi_1(\mathbb Z[1/n])$ and $G_{\mathbb Q} \to \pi_1(\mathbb Z[1/n])$ (the former being injective and the latter surjective), and these are precisely the maps giving rise to the Frobenius elements. –  Emerton Feb 2 '11 at 2:02
add comment

Your picture is right. The one thing I'll say (and this is somewhat tangential to your question) is that, for me, the analogue of $\pi_1(S^1)$ viewed as $\pi_1(\mathbb{C}\setminus\{0\})$ is not quite $\pi_1(\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{F}_p)$, but rather the tame fundamental group of $\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{Z}_p^{nr}$, where $\mathbb{Z}_p^{nr}$ is the maximal unramified extension of $\mathbb{Z}_p$ (i.e. its universal cover: it's simply connected and therefore analogous to a disk around the origin in $\mathbb{C}$). In other words, $\pi_1(S^1)$ classifies $n$-fold covers of the circle (or of a punctured disk around the origin). Similarly, the tame fundamental group classifies $n$-fold covers of the 'punctured disk' $\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{Z}_p^{nr}\setminus{p}$. The only hitch is that $n$ has to be prime to $p$ in this setting. This part of the Galois group is in the `geometric' direction (nothing's happening to the residue field of the point), while the part where the Frobenii live is in the arithmetic direction (all about extensions of $\mathbb{F}_p$).

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer


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.