4
$\begingroup$

$\DeclareMathOperator\GL{GL}$I'm reading the proof of Serre's open image theorem from his book "Abelian $\ell$-adic representations and elliptic curves". This is chapter IV Section 2.2 of the book. Let's assume that $E$ is an elliptic curve without CM over a number field $K$ and $\rho:G_K \rightarrow \GL(V_\ell)$ the associated Galois representation on $ V_\ell = T_\ell \otimes \mathbb{Q} $ where $ T_\ell $ is the Tate module. Then he proves that the image of the Galois representation is open in $\GL(V_\ell)$ w.r.t the $\ell$-adic topology. The only part that I don't understand from the proof is in the very beginning when he deduces that the ($\ell$-adic) Lie algebra of the image contains $\mathfrak{sl}_2$ from the fact that it's centralizer is $\mathbb{Q}_\ell$. Is he using some sort of classification for the Lie subalgebras here?

My main question is this: To me this seems like a Lie algebra analogue of the double centralizer theorem for simple subalgebras of central simple algebras. I was wondering if such a result exists, namely if from the centralizer of the Lie subalgebra being small we can deduce that the subalgebra itself is large in some sense. I'm not sure what should be the conditions and what's the right formulation but I feel like $\GL_2$ being reductive and $\operatorname{SL}_2$ being semi-simple might play a role here.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ I think this is a duplicate of Reductive subgroups of $\operatorname{GL}_2$ over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Dec 8, 2022 at 15:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LSpice Thanks for the link. From what I understand, this only implies that the Zariski closure of the image contains $SL_2$. How does this imply that the $\ell$-adic Lie algebra (which might not be algebraic) contains $\mathfrak{sl}_2$? $\endgroup$ Dec 11, 2022 at 11:38
  • $\begingroup$ Re, ah, sorry, I had not considered that gap. If it is easy to fix the gap, then I do not know how. I have retracted my close-as-duplicate vote. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Dec 11, 2022 at 16:12
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Since this is Zariski-dense, the Lie algebra is an ideal in $\mathfrak{sl}_2$, hence $\{0\}$ or equal to $\mathfrak{sl}_2$. So if it's not $\mathfrak{sl}_2$, the image has to be finite (since it's compact), hence not Zariski-dense, contradiction. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Dec 12, 2022 at 11:22
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @AlirezaShavali Yes, because the normalizer of the Lie algebra in $\mathrm{SL}_2$ is Zariski-closed (since the action of the group on the Lie algebra is algebraic). So Zariski-density of the group, and the fact that the group normalizes the Lie algebra, implies that the Lie algebra is normalized by $\mathrm{SL}_2$, and hence is $\{0\}$ or $\mathfrak{sl}_2$. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Dec 15, 2022 at 10:42

1 Answer 1

4
$\begingroup$

$\newcommand{\g}{\mathfrak{g}}\newcommand{\sl}{\mathfrak{sl}}$The crucial point in the proof is that the absolute Galois group $G_K$ acts irreducibly on $V_{\ell}$, which is based on a nontrivial Shafarevich finiteness theorem (Sect. 1.4). Applying this result to all finite algebraic extensions of $K$, one gets that the $\ell$-adic Lie algebra $\g_{\ell}$ of the image acts irreducibly (and faithfully) on $V_{\ell}$.

So, $\g_{\ell}$ is an irreducible Lie subalgebra of $\mathrm{End}_{\mathbb{Q}_{\ell}}(V_{\ell})$, whose centralizer consists of scalars $\mathbb{Q}_{\ell}\mathrm{Id}$, i.e., the natural faithful 2-dimensional representation of $\g_{\ell}$ in $V_{\ell}$ is absolutely irreducible. Hence, $\g_{\ell}$ is reductive, i.e., splits into a direct sum $$\g_{\ell}=\g_{\ell}^{0}\oplus c_{\ell}$$ of a semisimple Lie algebra $\g_{\ell}^{0}$ and the center $c_{\ell}$. The absolute irreducibility implies that $c_{\ell}$ is either $0$ or $\mathbb{Q}_{\ell}\mathrm{Id}$. In both cases $V_{\ell}$ is an absolutely irreducible representation of $\g_{\ell}^{0}$; in particular, $\g_{\ell}^{0}\ne \{0\}$. The semisimplicity of $\g_{\ell}^{0}$ implies that
$$\g_{\ell}^{0}\subset \sl(V_{\ell})\cong \sl_2(\mathbb{Q}_{\ell}).$$ Now it follows easily that $\g_{\ell}^{0}= \sl(V_{\ell})$, because no proper Lie subalgebras of $\sl_2$ are semisimple.

$\endgroup$

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.