6
$\begingroup$

Is the following proposition true? If yes, how would you prove this?

Proposition Let $f(X) = X^3 + aX + b$ be an irreducible polynomial in $\mathbb{Z}[X]$. Let $d = -(4a^3 + 27b^2)$ be the discriminant of $f(X)$. Let $K = \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{d})$. Let $L$ be the splitting field of $f(X)$ over $\mathbb{Q}$. Suppose the following conditions hold.

(1) $|d| = |4a^3 + 27b^2|$ is a prime number.

(2) The class number of $K$ is 3.

(3) $f(X) \equiv (X - s)^2(X - t)$ (mod $d$), where $s$ and $t$ are distinct rational integers mod $d$.

Then $L$ is the Hilbert class field of $K$.

Examples Each of the following polynomials of negative discriminants satisfies the above conditions.

(1) $f(X) = X^3 - X + 1 \equiv (X - 13)^2(X - 20)$ (mod 23)

(2) $f(X) = X^3 + X + 1 \equiv (X-3)(X-14)^2$ (mod 31)

(3) $f(X) = X^3 + 2X + 1 \equiv (X - 14)^2(X - 31)$ (mod 59)

I could not find a polynomial of positive discriminant satisying the above conditions.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Do you know the standard argument that the splitting field of example 1 is the Hilbert class field of $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-23})$? You should try to mimic it in this generality and see if something goes wrong. Maybe negative discriminant comes up so that the real place of the conductor ramifies. I don't remember, but that seems to me the only thing that could go wrong. My guess is it is true. $\endgroup$ – Matt Aug 19 '12 at 23:27
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ What you want is Acta Arithmetica, volume 57 (1991), pages 131-153, Kenneth S. Williams and Richard R. Hudson, Representation of primes by the principal form of discriminant $-D$ when the classnumber $h(-D)$ is $3.$ I have a pdf. $\endgroup$ – Will Jagy Aug 20 '12 at 0:17
  • $\begingroup$ @WillJagy, I would appreciate it very much if you send me the pdf. Regards, $\endgroup$ – Makoto Kato Aug 20 '12 at 0:42
  • $\begingroup$ Done. ${}{}{} $ $\endgroup$ – Will Jagy Aug 20 '12 at 0:47
  • $\begingroup$ @WillJagy Thank you so much. $\endgroup$ – Makoto Kato Aug 20 '12 at 1:35
3
$\begingroup$

The above proposition is a special case of the following proposition.

Proposition Let $f(X)$ be a monic irreducible polynomial of degree 3 in $\mathbb{Z}[X]$. Let $d$ be the discriminant of $f(X)$. Let $K = \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{d})$. Let $L$ be the splitting field of $f(X)$ over $\mathbb{Q}$. Suppose the following conditions hold.

(1) $|d|$ is a prime number.

(2) The class number of $K$ is 3.

(3) $f(X) \equiv (X - s)^2(X - t)$ (mod $d$), where $s$ and $t$ are rational integers and $s$ and $t$ are distinct mod $d$.

Then $L$ is the Hilbert class field of $K$.

Proof: Since the degree of $f(X)$ is 3, $[L : \mathbb{Q}] \leq 6$. Since $f(X)$ is irreducible, $3|[L : \mathbb{Q}]$. By (1), $[K : \mathbb{Q}] = 2$. Hence $2|[L : \mathbb{Q}]$. Hence $[L : \mathbb{Q}] = 6$. Hence $[L : K] = 3$. Therefore, by (2), it suffices to prove that every prime ideal of $K$ is unramified in $L$.

Let $Q$ be a prime ideal of $K$ lying over a prime number $q \neq p$, where $p = |d|$. By the application of the proposition of this question, $q$ is unramified in $L$. Hence $Q$ is unramified in $L$.

Let $P$ be a prime ideal of $K$ lying over $p$. It remains to prove that $P$ is unramified in $L$.

Let $\theta$ be a root of $f(X)$ in $L$. Let $M = \mathbb{Q}(\theta)$. Since $f(X)$ is irreducible, $[M : \mathbb{Q}] = 3$. Hence $[L : M] = 2$.

We denote by $\mathcal{O}_K, \mathcal{O}_M, \mathcal{O}_L$ the rings of integers in $K$, $M$, $L$ respectively.

Let $D_M$ be the discriminant of $M$. It is well known that $d = k^2 D_M$ for some rational integer $k$. Since $k^2 = 1$ by (1), $d = D_M$. Hence $\mathcal{O}_M = \mathbb{Z}[\theta]$. It is is well known(e.g. Milne's online course note) that $p\mathcal{O}_M = \mathfrak{p}^2\mathfrak{q}$ by (3), where $\mathfrak{p}$ and $\mathfrak{q}$ are distinct prime ideals of $\mathcal{O}_M$.

Since $[L : M] = 2$, We have the following patterns of the prime decompositions in $L$.

(1) $\mathfrak{p}\mathcal{O}_L = \mathfrak{P}$.

(2) $\mathfrak{p}\mathcal{O}_L = \mathfrak{P_1}\mathfrak{P_2}$, where $\mathfrak{P_1} \neq \mathfrak{P_2}$.

(3) $\mathfrak{p}\mathcal{O}_L = \mathfrak{P}^2$.

(1)' $\mathfrak{q}\mathcal{O}_L = \mathfrak{Q}$.

(2)' $\mathfrak{q}\mathcal{O}_L = \mathfrak{Q_1}\mathfrak{Q_2}$, where $\mathfrak{Q_1} \neq \mathfrak{Q_2}$.

(3)' $\mathfrak{q}\mathcal{O}_L = \mathfrak{Q}^2$.

Since $L/\mathbb{Q}$ is Galois, each ramification index of prime ideals of $L$ lying over $p$ is the same. Hence only the combination of (2) and (3)' is possible. Hence $p\mathfrak{O}_L = \mathfrak{P_1}^2\mathfrak{P_2}^2\mathfrak{Q}^2$.

Since $p$ ramifies in $K$, $p\mathfrak{O}_K = P^2$. Hence by the above result, $P$ is unramified in $L$. QED

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ As a reminder, you should specify that $p=|d|$, in order not to confuse the reader. Regards. $\endgroup$ – awllower May 1 '13 at 13:56
  • $\begingroup$ @awllower I edited the answer. Thanks. $\endgroup$ – Makoto Kato May 2 '13 at 6:12
  • $\begingroup$ Good to see that. :D $\endgroup$ – awllower May 2 '13 at 6:57
2
$\begingroup$

You can be even more lenient on the assumptions.

Proposition.
If $K$ is a cubic number field for which $\Delta_K=\Delta(\mathcal{O}_K)$ is squarefree then $3|h(\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{\Delta_K)})$.

Remark: note that when $K=\mathbb{Q}(\alpha)$ with $\alpha$ a root of an irreducible monic cubic polynomial $f\in\mathbb{Z}[X]$ with $\Delta(f)$ squarefree, then the above hypotheses are satisfied: we have

$$ \Delta(f)=\Delta(\mathbb{Z}[\alpha])=[\mathcal{O}_K:\mathbb{Z}[\alpha]]^2\cdot\Delta_K, $$ from which we see that $\mathcal{O}_K=\mathbb{Z}[\alpha]$ and $\Delta_K=\Delta(f)$.

Proof. As $\Delta_K$ is not a square in $\mathbb{Q}$ it follows that the normal closure $N$ of $K/\mathbb{Q}$ has degree $6$ over $\mathbb{Q}$ and that $[\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{\Delta_K}):\mathbb{Q}]=2$. Then $N/\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{\Delta_K})$ is an Abelian extension of degree $3$. I claim that it is also unramified, so that it is contained in the Hilbert class field of $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{\Delta_K})$, proving the proposition.

To see this, let $(r,s)$ be the signature of $K$. Since $r+2s=3$ we have either $(r,s)=(1,1)$ or $(r,s)=(3,0)$. When $(r,s)=(1,1)$ we have that $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{\Delta_K})$ is complex as $\mathrm{sign}(\Delta_K)=(-1)^s$ so it is unramified at the infinite primes. When $(r,s)=(3,0)$ we see that $K$ and $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{\Delta_K})$ are both totally real, hence their compositum $N$ is also totally real. Thus $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{\Delta_K})$ is unramified at the infinite primes in that case as well.

Now suppose that a finite prime $\mathfrak{p}$ of $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{\Delta_K})$ ramifies in $N$. As $N/\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{\Delta_K})$ is Galois of prime degree, we must have that $\mathfrak{p}$ is in fact totally ramified in $N$. The ram-rel identity $efg=6$ for the extension $N/\mathbb{Q}$ yields that $3|e$ and by multiplicativity of the ramification index it follows that the rational prime $p$ lying under $\mathfrak{p}$ ramifies totally in $K$, say $p\mathcal{O}_K=\mathfrak{q}^3$. But this implies that $\mathfrak{q}^2|\mathfrak{D}_K$, and hence upon taking norms that $p^2|\Delta_K$, which is a contradiction and hence $N/\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{\Delta_K})$ is unramified at the finite primes.

$\endgroup$

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.