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 $E_1$ and $E_2$ be elliptic curves and $T_l(E_i)\cong \mathbb{Z}_l \oplus \mathbb{Z}_l$ the $l$-adic Tate module.

Given $ \varphi \in Hom(E_1,E_2)$ this induces $\varphi_l \in Hom(T_l(E_1),T_l(E_2))$ and the map $\varphi \mapsto \varphi_l$ is injective.

Why is the natural map $ Hom(E_1,E_2)\otimes \mathbb{Z}_l \longrightarrow Hom(T_l(E_1),T_l(E_2))$ being injective a stronger statement?

(This appears in Silverman's Arithmetic of elliptic curves p89)

share|cite|improve this question

You have two injections
$\hom(E_1,E_2) \longrightarrow \hom(E_1,E_2) \otimes_{\mathbb Z} \mathbb Z_l \longrightarrow \hom(T_l(E_1),T_l(E_2)) $

Since $\hom(E_1,E_2) \otimes \mathbb Z_l$ is strictly bigger than the image of $\hom(E_1,E_2)$, it is better to know that each map is injective than to know that their composition is injective.

share|cite|improve this answer

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.