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

Let $k$ be the field $F_2((X,Y))$, where $F_2$ is the field with two elements and $X$ and $Y$ are two indeterminates. Can we describe the Brauer group of $k$, or at least its $2$-torsion?

(My motivation is as one could expect: I have an irreducible representation of a group of dimension 2 over the separable closure of $k$, whose trace is in k, and I am trying to determine whether or not it is realizable over $k$)

share|improve this question
    
The Brauer group of a field of characteristic $p > 0$ is $p$-divisible. Perhaps you can use the (characteristic $p$ version) of the Milnor conjecture. There is also an exact sequence which may help: [Milnor, 1970], p. 327, Lemma 2.6 und [Gille-Szamuely 2006], p. 189, Corollary 7.1.10. –  Timo Keller Oct 15 '11 at 19:11
    
Another idea: If $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ is Henselian (e.g. complete) local, one has $\mathrm{Br}(R) = \mathrm{Br}(R/\mathfrak{m})$. Also $\mathrm{Br}(R) \hookrightarrow \mathrm{Br}(\eta)$. Perhaps this helps, setting $R = \mathbf{F}_2[[X,Y]]$? –  Timo Keller Oct 15 '11 at 19:39
    
If you could relate $\mathrm{Br}(R)$ to the Brauer group of its completion, you could apply Theorem 3.1 of Grothendieck, Dix Exposes, p. 98 to the morphism $\mathrm{Spec}(\mathbf{F}_2[X,Y]) \to \mathrm{Spec}(\mathbf{F}_2[X])$ (if it were proper). –  Timo Keller Oct 15 '11 at 19:53
add comment

1 Answer

You can get a fairly good picture of the elements of order $2$ of the Brauer group in the following way. There is no reason to fixate on characteristic $2$ so I assume that we are dealing with $K:=\mathbb F_p((X,Y))$ and in fact the only reason to stick to the prime field is notational convenience as the Frobenius map on $\mathbb F_p$ is the identity so the relative Frobenius is equal to the absolute one which means that I won't have to distinguish between $Z$ and $Z^{(p)}$. Technically it may be that proper references would require $Z$ to be of finite type over the base but everything I say will be clearly true also for $Z=\text{Spec}\mathbb F_p((X,Y))$. (On the other hand the only thing I will need of $Z$ except for a smoothness/regularity assumption is that it is affine and with trivial Picard group).

We define the sheaf (on the small étale site of $Z$) $\nu$ by the exact sequence $$ 0\rightarrow\mathcal O_Z^\ast\xrightarrow{p}O_Z^\ast\rightarrow\nu\rightarrow0. $$ We have a map $\text{dlog}\colon\mathcal O_Z^\ast\rightarrow\Omega^1_Z$, where $\text{dlog}(f):=df/f$ and it factors to give an injection $\nu\subseteq \Omega^1_Z$. More precisely, it lands in the subsheaf $Z^1$ of closed forms and we have an exact sequence (again on the small étale site): $$ 0\rightarrow\nu\rightarrow Z^1\xrightarrow{C-\iota}\Omega^1_Z\rightarrow0, $$ where $C\colon Z^1/B^1\rightarrow\Omega^1_Z$, is the Cartier isomorphism ($B^1$ being the exact $1$-forms) and $\iota\colon Z^1\subseteq \Omega^1_Z$ is the inclusion.

Now, the first sequence (and the fact that $\text{Pic}(Z)=0$) gives that $H^1(Z,\nu)$ is the kernel of multiplication by $p$ on the Brauer group. The fact that $Z$ is affine gives that $H^1(Z,Z^1)=0$ and hence the second sequence gives that $H^1(Z,\nu)$ is the cokernel of $C-\iota\colon H^0(Z,Z^1)\rightarrow H^0(Z,\Omega^1_Z)$. This cokernel can be made very explicit (and to make it very explicit we temporaritly assume $p=2$):

$H^0(Z,Z^1)$ is a module over $K$, where scalar multiplication is given by the square map $f\cdot\omega=f^2\omega$, and has a basis given by $dX$, $dX/X$, $d(XY)$, $dY$ and $dY/Y$. We have that $C$ is $0$ on $dX$, $d(XY)$ and $dY$ and $C(dX/X)=dX/X$ and $C(dY/Y)=dY/Y$. Furthermore, $C$ is linear in the sense that $C(f^2\omega)=fC(\omega)$. This implies that the relations in the cokernel are given by $f^2dX=0$, $f^2dY=0$, $f^2XY(dX/X+dY/Y)=0$, $(f^2-f)dX/X=0$ and $(f^2-f)dY/Y=0$ (where $dX$, $dY$, $dX/X$, $dY/Y$, $XdY$ and $YdX$ is a $K$-basis for $H^0(Z,\Omega^1_Z)$). This allows for a fairly transparent normal form for elements in $H^1(Z,\nu)$.

If one wants a direct description of the central simple algebra associated to an element $\omega\in H^0(Z,\Omega^1_Z)$ one can apply the What Else Can It Be-principle (a very useful though somewhat dangerous principle, in this case it is probably OK). Recall that we have the algebra $\mathcal D$ of differential operators of order $<p$. It is the ring generated by derivations and elements of $K$ with the relations $DE-ED=[D,E]$, $Df-fD=D(f)$ and $D^p=D^{[p]}$, where $D^{[p]}$ is the $p$'th power as derivation. Note that the center consists of $K^p$, the subfield of $p$'th powers of $K$ and $K$ is in a natural fashion a $\mathcal D$-module giving an isomorphism $\mathcal D\rightarrow\text{End}_{K^p}(K)$ so that it is a central simple algebra (over $K^p$ which however is isomorphic to $K$).

We can then twist this by $\omega$ by replacing the last relation with $D^p=D^{[p]}+\omega(D)^p$. This still gives a central simple algebra and it should (as I said according to the WECIB-principle) be the associated element of ${}_p\text{Br}(K)$.

There is however a different way of getting explicit representatives. For this we realise instead ${}_p\text{Br}(K)$ as $H^2(Z,\mu_p)$ (now in the flat topology). We then have the usual cup product map $H^1(Z,\mathbb Z/p)\bigotimes H^1(Z,\mu_p)\rightarrow H^2(Z,\mu_p)$. We can represent elements of $H^1(Z,\mathbb Z/p)$ by Artin-Schreier extensions $b^p-b=a$, where $a\in K$ and elements of $H^1(Z,\mu_p)$ by $p$'th root extensions $g^p=f$, where $f\in K^\ast$. The central simple algebra associated to the cup product of these two classes is the algebra generated by $K(b)$ and $g$ and relations $gbg^{-1}=b+1$ and $g^p=f$. On the other hand a straightforward computation shows that the class of the cup product in $H^1(Z,\nu)$ is the residue of $adf/f\in H^0(Z,\Omega^1_Z)$. As $H^0(Z,\Omega^1_Z)$ is generated as a group by such elements we get a different description of the class of ${}_p\text{Br}(K)$ associated to elements of $H^0(Z,\Omega^1_Z)$. Note however, that they will not be isomorphic as algebras, the algebra associated by the first procedure to $adf/f$ has $K$-dimension $p^4$ whereas the second construction has dimension $p^2$.

share|improve this answer
    
See also [Gille-Szamuely, 9.2]. –  Timo Keller Oct 18 '11 at 19:49
1  
Now that I have looked at it Gille-Szamuely is indeed a proper reference. I kind of expected there to be a reference but just enjoyed myself with figuring things out and felt that I might as well share... –  Torsten Ekedahl Oct 19 '11 at 8:00
add comment

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.