As the question title asks for, how do others "visualize" Dirichlet’s unit theorem? I just think of it as a result in algebraic number theory and not one in algebraic geometry. Bonus points for pictures.

  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I appreciate this question, and the answers it has garnered. $\endgroup$ Aug 5, 2018 at 2:25

2 Answers 2


What I think of as the standard proof also gives a pretty clear picture. Let $K$ be a number field with $\rho_1$, $\rho_2$, ..., $\rho_r: K \to \mathbb{R}$ the real places and $\sigma_1$, $\sigma_2$, ..., $\sigma_s: K \to \mathbb{C}$ representatives with the complex places up to conjugacy. Define $\lambda: \mathcal{O}_K \to \mathbb{R}^{r+s}$ by $$\lambda(x) = (\log |\rho_1(x)|, \ldots, \log |\rho_r(x)|, 2 \log |\sigma_1(x)|, \ldots, 2 \log |\sigma_s(x)|).$$ Let $H \subset \mathbb{R}^{r+s}$ be the hyperplane where the sum of the coordinates equals $0$. Then $\lambda^{-1}(H)$ is the unit group of $\mathcal{O}_K$. The kernel of $\lambda$ is the roots of unity, and Dirichlet's unit theorem states that $\lambda(\mathcal{O}_K) \cap H$ is a lattice of rank $r+s-1 = \dim H$ in the hyperplane $H$.

enter image description here

Here is an image of $\lambda(\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{2}])$, with the hyperplane $H$ in blue. Notice that translation by a vector in $\lambda(\mathcal{O}_K) \cap H$ is a symmetry of the image; this corresponds to multiplication by a unit.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I took the opportunity to clean up some ugliness in the old image. $\endgroup$ Oct 2, 2020 at 14:39

One viewpoint that is useful is to think of this as a special case of the theory of arithmetic groups via extension of scalars. First I need to describe a proof of the Dirichlet unit theorem via Mahler's compactness theorem.

Given a number field $K=\mathbb{Q}(\alpha)$, where $p(\alpha)=0, p\in \mathbb{Z}[x]$, $p(x)$ a monic irreducible polynomial, we may think $K$ as an algebra over $\mathbb{Q}$ which is a $d=deg(p(x))$-dimensional vector space. In the obvious $\mathbb{Q}$-basis $\{1,\alpha, \ldots, \alpha^{d-1}\}$, multiplication by $\alpha$ becomes the companion matrix $C(p)$ for the polynomial $p(x)$. Instead, let us choose a $\mathbb{Q}$-basis $\{\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_d\}\subset K$ which is also a $\mathbb{Z}$-basis for the ring of integers $\mathcal{O}_K$. Multiplication by elements of $K$ gives a map $\rho: K \to M_d(\mathbb{Q})$.

What is the image $\rho(K)$ in $M_d(\mathbb{Q})$? Well, the image is commutative, so it should be contained in $\{ A\in M_d(\mathbb{Q}), A\cdot \rho(\alpha)=\rho(\alpha)\cdot A\}$. Of course, we also know that the image is $\mathbb{Q}[\rho(\alpha)]\subset M_d(\mathbb{Q})$, and one may check that these two spaces agree by linear algebra.

Then one may consider the subring $M_d(\mathbb{Z}) \cap \rho(K)$. This is a lattice $\rho(\mathcal{O}_K)\subset \rho(K)$.

Now the image of the ring of units is $\rho(\mathcal{O}_K^\times) = \rho(\mathcal{O}_K) \cap GL_d(\mathbb{Q})$. This is equal to $\rho(K)\cap Aut(\mathcal{O}_K)$, where $Aut(\mathcal{O}_K) \cong GL_d(\mathbb{Z})$, making an identification using our preferred basis.

Consider the space $X=GL_d(\mathbb{R})/GL_d(\mathbb{Z})$, which may be regarded as the space of $d-$dimensional lattices in $\mathbb{R}^d$ via $A\cdot \mathbb{Z}^n$, $A\in GL_d(\mathbb{R})$. Inside $GL_d(\mathbb{R})$ we have the subspace $Y'=\mathbb{R}[\rho(\alpha)]\cap det^{-1}(\pm 1)=\{A \in det^{-1}(\pm 1) | [A,\rho(\alpha)]=0\}$. Let $Y$ be the image of $Y'$ in $X$. Note that $\mathbb{R}[\rho(\alpha)]\cong K\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}}\mathbb{R}\cong \mathbb{R}^{r_1}\times \mathbb{C}^{r_2}$ as a tensor product of fields.

Let's check the conditions of Mahler's compactness theorem. The determinant is $=\pm 1$ on $Y'$ and hence on $Y$. We also need to check that there is a neighborhood $N$ of $0\in \mathbb{R}^d$ so that the only lattice point of $\Lambda\in Y$ inside of $N$ is $0$. Suppose that we have a sequence $A_i\in Y', v_i\in \mathbb{Z}^n$ with $A_i v_i \to 0$. Then $\rho(\alpha)^jA_iv_i = A_i \rho(\alpha)^j v_i \in A_i \mathbb{Z}^n$, and hence $\rho(\alpha_j)A_iv_i=A_i\rho(\alpha_j)v_i$. Hence there is a basis for a sublattice of $\Lambda_i=A_i\mathbb{Z}^n$ given by $\{\rho(\alpha_1)v_i, \rho(\alpha_2)v_i,\ldots, \rho(\alpha_d)v_i\}$ which approaches $0$. But this contradicts that the lattice $\Lambda_i=A_i\mathbb{Z}^n$ has covolume $1$ since $det(A_i)=\pm 1$. Hence $Y$ has compact closure in $X$ by Mahler's compactness theorem. But $Y$ itself is closed, since it is characterized by being the lattices $\Lambda$ such that $\rho(\alpha)\Lambda\subset \Lambda$, which is a closed condition. So $Y$ is compact. This implies that $Y$ is a compact torus in $X$, which is $(\mathbb{R}[\rho(\alpha)]\cap det^{-1}(\pm 1) ) / \rho(\mathcal{O}_K^\times)$.

Thus, I think of $\mathcal{O}_K^\times$ as a (multiplicative) lattice (arithmetic subgroup ) in a maximal torus (commutative algebraic subgroup) of $det^{-1}(\pm 1)$ (this Lie group contains $SL_d(\mathbb{R})$ with index $2$). This maximal torus is the $\pm 1$-determinant elements of $\mathbb{R}[\rho(\alpha)]^{\times} \cong (\mathbb{R}^\times)^{r_1} \times (\mathbb{C}^\times)^{r_2}$, where $r_1$ is the number of real places of $K$, and $r_2$ is the number of complex places of $K$. Then Dirichlet's unit theorem follows immediately from this property.

To visualize this for a real quadratic number field, note that $X$ is the space of unit lattices in $\mathbb{R}^2$. Modding out by rotation, $SO(2)\backslash X$ is the modular curve $\mathbb{H}^2/PSL_2(\mathbb{Z})$. Then $Y$ in this case is a closed geodesic. Here is a picture from this paper by recent Fields medalist Akshay Venkatesh (and Einsiedler and Lindenstrauss and Michel):

closed geodesic on modular curve


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.