3
$\begingroup$

It was already known to Weil that a sufficiently reasonable cohomology theory for algebraic varieties over $\mathbb{F}_p$ would allow for a possible solution to the Weil conjectures.

It was also understood that such a cohomology theory could not take values in vector spaces over either the rational numbers $\mathbb{Q}$ or the $p$-adic numbers $\mathbb{Q}_p$. The classical argument that I know is that the cohomology of a supersingular elliptic curve should admit an action by a quaternion algebra structure of the endomorphism group of the elliptic curve, and representation theory rules out such an action. (Side question: Due to whom is this reasoning, and was it known to Weil's generation?)

This reasoning does not, however, rule out the possibility of cohomology with coefficients in $\mathbb{Q}_\ell$ with $\ell \neq p$, and indeed $\ell$-adic cohomology would end up being found.

Question. Were there any other historical reasons to believe that looking at cohomology valued in $\mathbb{Q}_\ell$-vector spaces would lead to something fruitful?

N.B. This question was posted on MathSE, but I got advised to post it here instead.

$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ The argument with supersingular elliptic curves and quaternion algebras is due to Serre, I believe. $\endgroup$ – Piotr Achinger Jan 30 at 14:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ (See 1.7, p. 315 in Grothendieck's "Crystals and the de Rham cohomology of schemes", "As Serre has pointed out...") $\endgroup$ – Piotr Achinger Jan 30 at 14:31
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ It is not true that etalé cohomology with coefficients in $\mathbb{Q}_\ell$ is a "good" cohomology. $\ell$-adic cohomology is something more involved that just "cohomology with coefficients": its is the projective limit of some with finite coefficients (and tensoring with $\mathbb{Q}$). $\endgroup$ – Xarles Jan 30 at 14:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Xarles That is of course what I meant. It takes values in $\mathbb{Q}_\ell$-modules, anyway. I'll edit the question accordingly. $\endgroup$ – Mr. Palomar Jan 30 at 15:55
2
$\begingroup$

One historical reason for considering $\ell$-adic cohomology, not completely disconnected from the example you introduce, is that for a curve over a field, we get a natural Galois representation by taking the $\ell$-adic Tate module of the Jacobian (i.e., the projective limit of $\ell$-power torsion). Furthermore, if such a curve is defined over a subfield of the complex numbers, then the rank of the Tate module is equal to the rank of the classical degree 1 cohomology of the complexified curve. We now know that the Tate module is naturally dual to étale cohomology in degree 1.

One might then reasonably hope for a similar relationship between the higher degree classical cohomology of higher dimensional varieties and certain $\ell$-adic Galois representations naturally attached to the variety.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.