6
$\begingroup$

Let $G$ be a linear algebraic group defined over a finite field $\mathbb{F}_q$ as a variety of dimension $d$. What would be a good, simple lower bound for $G(F_q)$?

One can get something fairly nice from a general lower bound on the number of points on a variety over $\mathbb{F}_q$, in the style of Lang-Weil (Cafure-Matera 2006, Thm 7.5, is the best result I know). However - perhaps one can do something better for a group?

Example: for a Chevalley group, we have $|G(\mathbb{F}_q)|\geq q^d - d q^{d-1}$. Perhaps something like that is also true in general?

$\endgroup$
12
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ uh... I think I started with "an easy". $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 15, 2023 at 16:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What method did you use for Chevalley groups, and how would you define Chevalley groups? Certainly the lower bound $(q-1)^{d}$ works for all tori and I would be surprised if that isn't a valid lower bound in general. $\endgroup$
    – Will Sawin
    Commented Apr 15, 2023 at 18:54
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I should have said "classical groups" - $\mathrm{SL}_n$, $\mathrm{SO}_n$, $\mathrm{Sp}_{2 n}$; for them, you can prove the lower bound $\geq q^d - d q^{d-1}$ (in fact, $\geq (q-1)^d$) simply by counting. I am also guessing $(q-1)^d$ is valid in general, but how does one prove it, other than by a tedious case-by-case-check? $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 15, 2023 at 19:27
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It's not what you're asking, but it shouldn't be left out of the discussion of numbers of rational points of groups—Steinberg proved that $\lvert G(\mathbb F_q)\rvert = q^N\prod_d (q^d - 1)$, where $G$ is a simply connected, split, finite group of Lie type over $\mathbb F_q$ (i.e., a "universal Chevalley group"), $N = \sum_d (d - 1)$ is the number of positive roots (i.e., $\frac1 2(\dim(G) - \operatorname{rank}(G))$, and $d$ runs over the degrees of the Weyl group. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Apr 15, 2023 at 19:37
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ The formula for |G(F_q)| quoted above doesn't require the simply connected assumption, only connected. If we remove the split adjective, then the point count is still known - you have to replace each occurrence of -1 by -zeta for some root of unity zeta. So the split case is the worst, in the sense that it has the fewest elements. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 16, 2023 at 5:05

1 Answer 1

7
$\begingroup$

Since we reduce points without changing dimension if we pass to identity components, we may, and do, assume that $G$ is connected. I will say just "rational points" in place of "$\mathbb F_q$-rational points".

If $G$ is smooth and unipotent, then it is split unipotent, and hence has $q^d$ rational points.

If $G$ is connected and reductive, then let $B^\pm$ be opposite Borel subgroups of $G$, with unipotent radicals $U^\pm$ and common maximal torus $T$. Write $r$ for the dimension of $T$. As @WillSawin observes, $T$ has at least $(q - 1)^r$ rational points.

@DanielLoughran suggested giving more detail on this bound. I can do no better than to reproduce an argument by @DanielLitt and @DavidESpeyer at my question Pointless groups III, in the spirit of @PeterMcNamara's observation above. Namely, if $F$ is a topological generator of the absolute Galois group of $\mathbb F_q$, then $\lvert T(\mathbb F_q)\rvert$ is the determinant of the action of $q - F$ on the absolute cocharacter lattice $Y \mathrel{:=} X_*(T_{\overline{\mathbb F_q}})$, which has dimension $r$. Since some power of $F$ acts trivially on $Y$, all of its eigenvalues are roots of unity, so $\det(q - F)$ is at least $(q - 1)^r$.

Now the multiplication map $U^- \times T \times U^+ \to G$ is an isomorphism of varieties onto an open subvariety of $G$, we have that $G$ has at least $q^{\dim(U^-)}(q - 1)^r q^{\dim(U^+)} = q^{d - r}(q - 1)^r$ rational points.

We have that $G$ is an extension of a reductive group $G^\text{red}$ by the unipotent radical $\operatorname R_u(G)$ of $G$. If we continue to write $r$ for the dimension of some (hence every) maximal torus in $G$, and put $d_\text u = \dim(\operatorname R_u(G))$ and $d_\text s = \dim(G^\text{red}) - r$, then the special cases that we have already handled show that $G$ has at least $q^{d_\text s}(q - 1)^r q^{d_\text u} = q^{d - r}(q - 1)^r$ rational points. In particular, as @WillSawin conjectured, $G$ always has at least $(q - 1)^d$ rational points. This is obviously sharp if our bound is to depend only on dimension, since equality holds for $G = \operatorname{GL}_1^d$.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If you're willing for the bound to depend also on $d_\text s$ and $r$, then you can probably do even better than $q^{d - r}(q - 1)^r$ by observing that (whether or not $G$ is reductive) $G/B^+$ is a projective variety of dimension $\frac1 2 d_\text s$; but I don't know much about point counts on projective varieties. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Apr 16, 2023 at 1:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I take it is easy to see that all of these maps are defined over the ground field? $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 16, 2023 at 7:30
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @HAHelfgott, re, which maps? The map $U^- \times T \times U^+ \to G$ is just the restriction of the multiplication $G \times G \times G \to G$, which is certainly rational. Groups possess maximal tori by Grothendieck's theorem, geometric unipotent radicals are rational (and split) because finite fields are perfect, and groups over finite fields have rational Borels essentially because Galois cohomology vanishes by Lang–Steinberg. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Apr 16, 2023 at 13:55
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ For completeness it would also be nice to explain how to prove the lower bound for algebraic tori, which seems to be the key case. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 16, 2023 at 20:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DanielLoughran, re, thanks for the suggestion! I have done so. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Apr 16, 2023 at 20:52

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .