0
$\begingroup$

Let $E$ be an elliptic curve over some field $k$, and let $n$ be coprime to the characteristic of $k$. Then I claim that $E(k)$ has a point of order $n$ if and only if $E[n]\cong\mathbb{Z}/n\times\mu_n$ as group schemes over $k$.

Is this correct?

I see this through the Weil Pairing, though it's possible I've made a mistake.

The intuition is - elliptic curves are famously self-dual. Then $E[n]$ should also be self-dual. If $E[n]$ admits a point of order $n$, then it has a subgroup which is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}/n$, and since the dual of $\mathbb{Z}/n$ is $\mu_n$, it should also have a subgroup isomorphic to $\mu_n$, so it must be the direct product?

Is this right? Are there any subtleties I should be careful of?

Okay, I messed up somewhere....thinking about it now.

$\endgroup$
6
$\begingroup$

It's slightly more subtle than you present it here:

Lemma. If $E$ has a $k$-rational $n$-torsion point $P$, then we have a short exact sequence $$0 \to \mathbb Z/n \to E[n] \to \mu_n \to 0.$$ (You can think of this either as a short exact sequence of finite group schemes, or of $\Gamma_k$-modules, where $\Gamma_k = \operatorname{Gal}(\bar k/k)$.)

Proof. The $n$-torsion point $P$ gives an injection $\mathbb Z/n \to E[n]$, so we get a short exact sequence $$0 \to \mathbb Z/n \to E[n] \to G \to 0,$$ for some group $G$ of rank $n$. Cartier duality and the Weil pairing then turn this into a sequence $$0 \to G^\vee \to E[n] \to \mu_n \to 0,$$ realising $\mu_n$ as a quotient of $E[n]$. Since the Weil pairing is alternating, the orthogonal complement of $\mathbb Z/n$ is $\mathbb Z/n$, so $G^\vee = \mathbb Z/n$ (as subgroups of $E[n]$). $\square$

However, the sequence need not be split:

Example. Consider the elliptic curve $E$ over $\mathbb Q$ given by $y^2 = x^3 + x$. Because the polynomial $x^3 + x = x(x^2+1)$ has exactly one rational (even real) root, we have $$E[2](\mathbb Q) = \{O, (0,0)\}.$$ If the sequence splits, then $E[2] \cong \mathbb Z/2 \times \mu_2 = \mathbb Z/2 \times \mathbb Z/2$, since $\mathbb Q$ has a second root of unity. This would force $\# E[2](\mathbb Q) = 4$, which is false. So let's take a closer look:

The other $2$-torsion points are defined over $\mathbb Q(i)$. If we let $P = (0,0)$ and $Q = (i,0)$, then the action of $G = \operatorname{Gal}(\mathbb Q(i)/\mathbb Q)$ on $E[2]$ is given by $$\sigma P = P, \hspace{2cm} \sigma Q = Q + P.$$ Indeed, $\sigma Q$ has to be the other non-rational $2$-torsion point, which is $Q + P$.

Now on the quotient $E[2]/\langle P\rangle$, the Galois action has become trivial: $\sigma Q = Q + P$, which means that $Q$ is fixed mod $P$. This is also what the lemma says, since $\mu_2 = \mathbb Z/2$.

$\endgroup$

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.