Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $\phi:C_1\to C_2$ be a nonconstant map of two smooth curves over some algebraically closed field $K$ and let $P\in C_1$. $\phi$ gives us an induced map of fields $\phi^*:K(C_2)\to K(C_1)$, $\phi^*:f \mapsto f\circ \phi$. Silverman defines in his book on elliptic curves that the ramification degree of this map is defined as


where the order is just the normalized valuation of the DVR $K[C_1]_P$ and $t_{\phi(P)}$ denotes a uniformizer of $K[C_2]_Q$, where $Q=\phi(P)$. I'm trying to explicitly write down the connection between this and the corresponding ramification degree in the Dedekind domains, since Silverman seems to hint that they agree.

Let $\mathfrak{m}_Q$ denote the maximal ideal of $A=\phi^*K[C_2]_Q$ and let $B$ be the integral closure of $A$ in $K(C_1)$. Since, $A$ is a DVR, we know that $B$ is Dedekind and we have a factorization

$$\mathfrak{m}_QB = \mathfrak{P}_1^{e_1}\cdots \mathfrak{P}_n^{e_n}.$$

To get a nice description of the ramification degree in the setting of these Dedekind rings, I would need to show that:

  1. There's a bijection between the primes $\mathfrak{P}_i$ and the points $P\in \phi^{-1}(Q)$.

  2. If $P$ corresponds to some $\mathfrak{P}_i$, then $e_\phi(P)=e_i$.

Does anyone know how this is done? My guess is that both should be simple applications of the Nullstellensatz. I'm getting stuck here with the issue I had in a question I asked yesterday:

Trying to parse a definition in Silverman's EC book

The problem being that I don't know how to concretely compute the map $\phi^*$ and I also have trouble figuring out what $\mathfrak{m}_Q$ should look like. By the Nullstellensatz, we know that it's of the form:


I take it that in projective space $Q=[a_1,\ldots,1,\ldots,a_n]$, where the $1$ is in position $i$ corresponding to the embedding of $\mathbb{A}^n$ into $\mathbb{P}^n$? But then one would have to express $\phi^*\mathfrak{m}_Q$ explicitly and here one is again left with the problem of concretely writing down what $\phi^*$ is in order to use the Nullstellensatz in $B$.

share|cite|improve this question

I should know this stuff more thoroughly but if my memory serves me the realms of algebraic geometry we can view spec$(\mathfrak{O}_K)$ as a kind of curve. This is just the collection of prime ideals of $\mathfrak{O}_K$.

Now given an extension of number fields $L/K$ we have the map from spec$(\mathfrak{O}_L)$ to spec$(\mathfrak{O}_K)$ that sends a prime ideal $\mathfrak{P}$ to prime ideal $\mathfrak{P}\cap\mathfrak{O}_L = \mathfrak{p}$.

The pullback of a uniformizer is then the same notion as pulling back $\mathfrak{p}$ to an ideal $\mathfrak{p}\mathfrak{O}_L$ of $\mathfrak{O}_L$.

Then the notion of order at $P$ translates to the order at $\mathfrak{P}$, i.e. the ramification index.

So here $\text{ord}_P (\phi^{\star}t_{\phi(P)})$ is the same thing as $\text{ord} _{\mathfrak{P}}(\mathfrak{p}\mathfrak{O}_L)$.

share|cite|improve this answer
That's right. In fact $\text{spec} \mathcal{O}_K$ isn't a curve but rather like a $0$-dimensional algebraic variety over $\mathbb{Q}$ (as opposed to a one-dimensional algebraic variety). – Bruno Joyal Mar 27 '12 at 18:58
Yes, that is better! – fretty Mar 27 '12 at 20:28

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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