12
$\begingroup$

Let $A, B, C$ and $D$ be abelian varieties (over $\mathbb{C}$) such that $A \times B \cong C \times D$, and $A \cong C$. From the irreducibility of abelian varieties, we can say that $B$ and $D$ are isogeneous. But do we actually have $B \cong D$?

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ I think that rather than "irreducibility" you mean "complete reducibility" or "Poincare's complete reducibility theorem". As for the question itself: I seem to recall that it is famously false for supersingular abelian varieties, i.e., in positive characteristic. Over C, I might guess that it's true, but that's just a guess. $\endgroup$ Apr 9, 2010 at 0:21
  • $\begingroup$ I meant the complete reducibility theorem. Thanks. $\endgroup$
    – Tuan
    Apr 9, 2010 at 3:23
  • $\begingroup$ It is false also in characteristic $0$ though there it is true for elliptic curves (see Angelo's reply). It is a question of finding an example of non-cancellation for projective modules over a suitable ring and then mirror it for abelian varieties. See Poonen, "The Grothendieck ring of varieties is not a domain" for an example. (Bjorn's example is somewhat involved as he wants an example over $\mathbb Q$. An example over $\mathbb C$ is easier to construct.) $\endgroup$ Apr 9, 2010 at 4:04
  • $\begingroup$ @Torsten: I think the example in my paper was of something slightly different, namely A x A = B x B with A and B not isomorphic. $\endgroup$ Apr 10, 2010 at 1:02
  • $\begingroup$ @Bjorn: You are right of course, I misremembered. (In my defence, an example of non-cancellation also gives examples of zero-divisors in the Grothendieck ring, the tricky thing is to get an example over $\mathbb Q$.) $\endgroup$ Apr 11, 2010 at 18:39

1 Answer 1

20
$\begingroup$

This is false even for elliptic curves over $\mathbb{C}$. This was proved by T. Shioda in "Some remarks on abelian varieties" J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. IA Math. 24 (1977), no. 1, 11-21, http://repository.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2261/6164/1/jfs240102.pdf.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ This is a very interesting paper. I look forward to reading it carefully. $\endgroup$ Apr 9, 2010 at 5:04

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.