Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am reading the proof in Marcus' number fields of the following fact:

Let $p$ be a prime in $\Bbb{Z}$ and suppose $p$ is ramified in a number ring $R$ (of some number field $K$). Then $p | \textrm{disc} (R)$.

The proof goes as follows. Suppose $\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_n$ are the number of embeddings of $K$ into $\Bbb{C}$ and extend all $\sigma_i's$ to the Galois closure $L$ of $K$. Now if $p$ is ramified in $R$ then we can write $pR = IP$ where $I$ is divisible by all primes lying over $p$ and $P$ some prime of $R$ lying over $p$. Choose some $\alpha \in I - pR$ (we can do this since $I$ properly contains $pR$). We see that $\alpha$ is in every prime lying over $p$ in $R$. Now let $S = \mathcal{O}_L$ and $Q$ a prime of $S$ that lies over $p \in \Bbb{Z}$.

My question is: Why should $\sigma(\alpha) \in Q$ for every $\sigma \in \textrm{Gal}(L/K)?$

In Marcus he claims to show this as follows: "To see this, notice that $\sigma^{-1}(\alpha)$ is a prime of $\sigma^{-1}(S) = S$ lying over $p$, and hence contains $\alpha$. In particular we have $\sigma_i(\alpha) \in Q$ for all $i$."

I am confused because what does he mean by "$\sigma^{-1}(\alpha)$ being a prime lying over $p$"? $\sigma^{-1}(\alpha)$ is just an element of $L$ no?

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 3 down vote accepted

It seems to be a typo in Marcus. It should read

... $\sigma^{-1}(Q)$ is a prime of $\sigma^{-1}(S)=S$ lying over $p$ ...

share|improve this answer
add comment

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.