MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

An elliptic curve $E$ with complex multiplication by an imaginary quadratic field $F$ has $\ell$-adic Galois representations that essentially encode the class field theory of $F$ - in other words, the reciprocity in abelian extensions of $F$, or equivalently, in extensions generated by the division points of $E$. For me, "reciprocity" means a way of determining the splitting of primes in an extension.

As Shimura (c.f. A Reciprocity Law in Non-Solvable Extensions) and many others have shown, one can use modularity to deduce reciprocity laws in extensions generated by torsion points of non-CM elliptic curves.

In another direction, Lubin and Tate showed that the theory of complex multiplication can be constructed formally for $p$-adic fields in order to generate the class field theory of any $p$-adic field.

My question is: can one generalize Lubin and Tate to non-abelian extensions and get a formal analogue of the reciprocity laws given by non-CM elliptic curves?

share|cite|improve this question
I think this is exactly what people call "non-Abelian Lubin-Tate theory." – Moosbrugger Jun 19 '12 at 4:09
Dear Moosbrugger and Davidac, The direct analogue of passing from a CM elliptic curve to a non-CM elliptic curve would be passing from a Lubin--Tate formal group to some more general kind of formal group. This is not what happens in non-abelian LT theory. Rather, one looks at the moduli space of Lubin--Tate formal groups (and its congruence covers), and looks at its higher cohomology. (The $H^0$ recovers Lubin--Tate formal CM theory.) So this is more like using modular curves to construct non-abelian reciprocity laws than random elliptic curves. (Note that Shimura's paper is also ... – Emerton Jun 19 '12 at 4:48
... about the modular elliptic curve $X_0(11)$.) Apologies to Moosbrugger, who surely knows all this; Davidac, if you want to pursue this, you could look at Carayol's paper in the Ann Arbor volumes (available on Milne's web-page) and then follow up the more recent literature (Harris and Taylor's book is probably the most significant more recent contribution). Regards, – Emerton Jun 19 '12 at 4:51
Dear Emerton, is not reasonable to ask if the galois representation afforded by the Tate module of a specific Lubin-Tate formal group of height 2 appears in the cohomology of some moduli space with level? If it is, wouldn't this be a reasonable direct analogue? – Dror Speiser Jun 19 '12 at 11:02

Your Answer


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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.