5
$\begingroup$

Sorry, maybe this is a really stupid question. Let $\mathbb{C}_p$ be the completion of the algebraic closure $\overline{\mathbb{Q}_p}$ of the field of $p$-adic numbers. We know that there exists a way to extend the $p$-adic valuation to $\mathbb{C}_p$, and in this way it is possible to define the ring of integers $\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{C}_p}$ given by elements of valuation greater or equal than $0$. It is also possible to define the maximal ideal of this valuation ring given by elements of valuation strictly greater than $0$. Now, is this ideal finitely generated?

$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Hint: elements of the maximal ideal can have valuations arbitrarily close to $0$. $\endgroup$ – Wojowu Dec 28 '18 at 17:12
  • $\begingroup$ Let $K^{unr} = \mathbf{Q}_p(\zeta_{p^\infty-1})$ the maximal unramified extension of $\mathbf{Q}_p$ (so that $(p)$ is the unique maximal ideal of both rings of integers). Since $O_{K^{unr}}/(p)$ is algebraically closed then for any finite extension $L/K$ of degree $n$ you'll have $|\pi_L|_L= |p|_L^{1/n}$. Thus only finite extensions of $K$ are local fields and any infinite extension of $K$ will be dense in $\mathbb{C}_p$. $\endgroup$ – reuns Dec 28 '18 at 18:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @reuns, I do not believe that any infinite extension of $K=K^{unr}$ is dense in $\Bbb C_p$. What about the maximal tame extension of $K$? $\endgroup$ – Lubin Dec 29 '18 at 22:21
  • $\begingroup$ @Lubin Thank you. You are saying that $p \nmid n = [K^{unr}(a):K^{unr}]$ implies that $|a|= p^{l/n}$ so $|a| \ne |p^{1/p}|$ and $|p^{1/p}-a| \ge |p^{1/p}|$ ? Whence with $L$ the maximal tame extension of $K^{unr}$ then $\inf_{a \in L} |p^{1/p} - a| = |p^{1/p}|$ and my last sentence was a big mistake and $\mathbb{C}_p$ is very different to $\mathbb{C}$ in this regard. $\endgroup$ – reuns Dec 30 '18 at 17:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Right you are. I’m pretty sure that even if your valuation group was all of $\Bbb Q$, that would not be enough to guarantee that the completion was all of $\Bbb C$. Wild ramification is truly a wild phenomenon! $\endgroup$ – Lubin Dec 30 '18 at 18:15
7
$\begingroup$

No it isn't - indeed, suppose it were, say $\mathfrak{m}_{\mathbb{C}_p} = (x_1,\ldots,x_n)$. Then $v(x) \geq \min v(x_i) > 0$ for any $x\in\mathfrak{m}_{\mathbb{C}_p}$. However, this is a contradiction as there exist elements of $\mathfrak{m}_{\mathbb{C}_p}$ with valuation strictly less than $\min v(x_i)$ (for example, one of the $\sqrt{x_i}$).

$\endgroup$

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.