In this series of posts I shall try to sketch (at least statements of) the basic results of global class field theory, following John Tate’s notes from the 1966 Brighton Conference. I begin by emphasising that I am writing them mainly in order to try to learn the material myself rather than really as an exposition to help others. As such, I expect to make countless errors, which expert readers are encouraged to point out.
It was conjectured by Hilbert that there exists, for a number field living inside a fixed algebraic closure, a unique totally unramified Galois extension
with
isomorphic to the ideal class group of
. Such an extension is obviously abelian, and in fact Hilbert conjectured further that it is the maximal totally unramified abelian extension of
. Of course, Hilbert was right, and proving his conjecture is one of our main tasks.
In general, we will be studying a field which is usually a number field (or sometimes the function field of a curve over a finite field). Our overall goal seems to be to come up with a theory relating certain groups connected with the ideal class group of
to the Galois groups of extensions of
. More specifically, we will define the idele group
of
, which fits into an exact sequence
where is the group of fractional ideals and where
is the subgroup of ideles all of whose `prime factors’ correspond to archimedean valuations. In some sense therefore, we want to imagine archimedean valuations as `primes at infinity’ and then ideles are a way to allow ideals to be divisible by these primes. With these defined, our main objects of study will be Artin maps
which give information about the splitting of primes in and provide the desired link between ideal class groups and the Galois groups.
In this first post we take the first tentative steps towards defining the Artin map, but will make no further mention of ideles yet. Let us set up some terminology. Fix a global field (a finite extension of
or some
). A prime of
is defined to be an equivalence class of nontrivial valuations on
. Primes
are either discrete (they correspond to a prime ideal
, by satisfying an ultrametric law) or archimedean. We let
denote the set of all primes of
,
the set of archimedean primes and
the set of discrete primes.
Now take a finite abelian extension, and let
be the subset of
consisting of unramified discrete primes. Our goal in this post will be to find a natural map
which we will extend in future posts to the Artin map . To begin, let us start with some basic facts about how
acts on
and the corresponding local fields.
We define the action of on
by
. With this definition we get a left action
, and if
is discrete it corresponds to the obvious action on prime ideals
and similarly moves the local rings around in a natural fashion.
Now, there is a natural restriction map , and since
for all
,
for all
. Therefore the image of a Galois orbit in
is just a single element of
. In fact we will show that
acts transitively on the primes over a fixed
, so since any such
can be extended to
in at least one way, the restriction map induces a correspondence:
How can we prove this transitivity? Well, let be the decomposition group of
. The orbit of
will simply be
where
, with one prime
corresponding to each coset
. For each
, an element of
gives an isometric automorphism, which extends to an automorphism of the completion
and thus we have a natural embedding
Hence we get, by basic field theory, the bounds
Suppose there are some other primes also extending
. Crucially, the natural map
must be surjective, as an application of the weak approximation theorem. This implies that
Putting our two estimates together, we get that equality holds at every stage, so in particular (the action is transitive).
Note we have also proved that is Galois and has Galois group naturally isomorphic to
. In fact, this group is about to play a key role in another capacity. Under the additional assumptions that
is discrete and unramified over
, this Galois group is canonically isomorphic to the Galois group of residue fields
(where
). So we have canonical isomorphisms
But the residue fields are just finite fields, so letting ,
is generated by
. Since the above isomorphisms are canonical, this corresponds to a canonical generating element
of
, which is as such called the Frobenius automorphism associated with
, characterised by the property
for all
.
Wait! What just happened? We took a prime of
(assumed not to be ramified) and its decomposition group contained a special element
. In other words, we defined a natural mapping
. Recall that we were looking for a map
, so it feels like we are almost done.
But just a minute ago we proved that the Galois orbits of are in bijective correspondence with
, and this correspondence obviously respects the properties of being discrete and unramified, so the obvious thing to hope is that
for all
, since we can then just define
to be this element (the Frobenius automorphism associated with every prime above
).
Oh, but this is obvious, because is abelian, and by the characterising property of
,
must be conjugate to it. So we are done. Provided
is abelian, we have a lovely well-defined map called `take the associated Frobenius automorphism of any prime above
‘
Next time, we will extend this to a group homomorphism and state the Artin reciprocity law, our first deep theorem which tells us a lot about how these maps work. However, before we finish it is worth remarking how the above map relates to the splitting of an unramified prime in
.
Indeed, we saw in the above discussion about the action of on
that the set of primes
dividing
is isomorphic to
. Now,
is actually generated by
, and hence by the symmetry of the action, we know how
splits. If
has order
,
must split into
distinct factors, each of degree
. So knowing
tells us how
splits and gives us a generator for the decomposition group. This is an very nice situation to be in, and hints at some of the wide-reaching consequences of the theory.

2 comments
Comments feed for this article
October 16, 2011 at 5:14 pm
Martin Orr
Is “countless errors” the same as “uncountably many errors”? Here is one correction to the second paragraph:
with
isomorphic to the class group. You need to add the condition that
is unramified for it to be unique.
There can be many extensions
October 16, 2011 at 7:48 pm
tlovering
Done. Thanks. Yeah, I guess if we take any quadratic field of class number 2 it’s pretty obvious there are infinitely many ‘class fields’ if I allow ramification.