How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Prime Ideal Decomposition Ramification and the Different
1 · Prerequisites
- Algebraic Closure, Embeddings, and Separability
- Algebraic Extensions, Extension Degree, and Finite Fields
- Artinian Rings and Length
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Chain Conditions, Semisimple Modules and the Wedderburn–Artin Theorem
- Congruences, the Integers Modulo n and the Chinese Remainder Theorem
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Cosets, Index and Lagrange's Theorem
- Countability and Uncountability
- Cyclic Groups and Direct Products
- Dedekind Domains and Ideal Classes
- Determinants of Matrices over a Commutative Ring
- Divisibility, Euclidean Domains, Principal Ideal Domains and Unique Factorisation
- Divisibility, Greatest Common Divisors and Bézout's Identity
- Dual Spaces, Bilinear and Quadratic Forms, and Sylvester's Law of Inertia
- Eigenvalues, Eigenvectors and the Characteristic Polynomial
- Finite Counting, Factorials and Binomial Coefficients
- Finite Fields and Cyclotomic Extensions
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Free Modules, Exact Sequences, Projective and Injective Modules
- Gaussian Elimination, Elementary Matrices and Reduced Row Echelon Form
- Group Actions, Orbits, Stabilisers and Cayley's Theorem
- Group Homomorphisms and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Ideals, Quotient Rings and the Isomorphism Theorems for Rings
- Integral Extensions and Going Up
- Linear Algebra Methods in Combinatorics
- Linear Independence, Bases and Dimension
- Linear Transformations, Rank-Nullity and Quotient Spaces
- Localisation of Modules and Support
- Matrices, the Matrix of a Linear Map, and Change of Basis
- Modules, Submodules, Quotient Modules and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Noetherian Rings and Hilbert Basis
- Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups
- Number Fields Rings of Integers and Discriminants
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Polynomial Rings, the Division Algorithm and Roots
- Prime Spectra and Radicals
- Primes, Euclid's Lemma and the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- Simple Field Extensions and the Construction of the Complex Numbers
- Solvability by Radicals and Kummer Theory
- Splitting Fields
- Symmetric Groups, Cycle Decomposition and the Sign Homomorphism
- Tensor Products of Modules
- The Determinant of a Linear Operator, Cofactors and Cramer's Rule
- The Field of Fractions and Localisation
- The Fundamental Theorem of Finite Abelian Groups
- The Galois Correspondence
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
- Valuation Rings and Discrete Valuation Rings
- Vector Spaces, Linear Subspaces, Span and Direct Sums
2 · Summary
For number fields, integral ideal factorisation is handled through a finite quotient and finite local data. The different is the inverse trace dual; tame ramification has exponent exactly , while wild ramification has only the stronger lower bound recorded here.
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
The absolute norm of an integral ideal
Definition
For a nonzero integral ideal , define its absolute norm by . The next lemma establishes that this cardinality is finite.
A nonzero number-field ideal has finite quotient
Statement
Every nonzero integral ideal of has finite additive quotient.
Proof
Given: and an integral basis of rank .
Choose . Multiplication by is an injective endomorphism of the free rank- lattice , with nonzero integral determinant.
Its image has finite index, and ; thus is a quotient of the finite group .
Integral ideal factorisation in a number field, in ZF
Statement
Every nonzero integral ideal of has a unique finite factorisation into distinct nonzero prime ideals, with . The finite choices in this construction are least-coded finite choices, so the assertion uses no Choice.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A number field , its ring of integers , and a nonzero integral ideal .
is a free -module of finite rank (The ring of integers has rank the degree).
Every subgroup of is for a unique ; when it is nonzero, is its least positive element (Every subgroup of is for exactly one natural number ).
Every nonzero integral ideal of has finite additive quotient (A nonzero number-field ideal has finite quotient).
Ideals of correspond by inverse image to ideals of containing (Correspondence theorem: ideals of correspond to ideals of containing ).
is the integral closure of in (Ring of integers), and an integral closure of a domain in a field extension is integrally closed (The integral closure of a domain in a field extension is integrally closed).
Integral closure commutes with localization: if is a domain and its integral closure in a field , then for every multiplicative the integral closure of in is (Integrality and integral closure commute with localisation).
For a prime ideal of a domain, is local with unique maximal ideal ; its units are exactly the fractions whose numerator is outside ( is local with unique maximal ideal ).
In a localization at a prime, implies for some ; this follows from the fraction equality criterion (Equality, vanishing, and the kernel of the localisation map).
For a commutative ring and a positive-sized square matrix , (For every positive-sized square matrix over a commutative ring, ).
The localization fractions have the usual well-defined ring operations, the map is a ring homomorphism, and every denominator class is a unit with inverse (The localisation relation is an equivalence relation and fraction arithmetic is well defined).
Proof
Work temporarily with one finite integral basis of supplied by [F1]; fixing this single existential witness is not a choice from a family. It identifies the additive group of with , on which fix an explicit natural-number code (the usual sign code and a finite tuple-pairing code). An integral basis is -independent: clearing denominators in a rational relation gives an integer relation. Its elements therefore form a -basis of . For any , clearing the finitely many rational coordinates gives a nonzero integer with ; hence . We first prove by induction on that every subgroup has a finite basis. The case is immediate. For , project onto the first coordinate. By [F2], the image is either zero or for its least positive element . In the zero case apply induction to the kernel, viewed in the last coordinates. Otherwise take the least-coded with first coordinate ; the kernel has a finite basis by induction, and that basis together with spans . Their independence follows by taking first coordinates and then using independence in the kernel. This finite induction uses only least natural numbers and one least-coded lift at each nonzero stage.
If , its factorisation is the empty product. A nonempty finite product of proper prime ideals is contained in any one of its factors, so it cannot equal . Hence this factorisation is unique.
Every ideal is an additive subgroup of ; step 1.1 gives it a finite -basis, which also generates it as an -ideal because . If and is an ideal, its contraction is finitely generated by step 1.1, and : for with , the unit gives , and the reverse inclusion is immediate. Consequently every ideal of is finitely generated. Any ascending chain of ideals of stabilizes: its union is an ideal, hence has finitely many generators. If the union is zero, every member is zero. Otherwise its finite generating list is nonempty, and its generators all lie in one common chain member, which then equals the union. No maximal-condition or dependent-choice implication is used.
Now suppose . Put ; [F3] makes finite. The fixed basis code on gives each coset of the least code of its representatives. Order the finite set by these codes. Code each subset of by its bit mask in this ordering; this gives a definite code to every ideal of . The maximal ideals of form a finite nonempty set: among its proper ideals, take the least bit-mask code among those of greatest finite cardinality. List all maximal ideals in increasing bit-mask order. By [F4], their inverse images are exactly the maximal ideals of containing . Every nonzero prime containing is on this list: its quotient is finite by [F3] and is a domain, hence a field, so that prime is maximal. Conversely every maximal ideal is prime. The list is therefore exact, finite, and canonically ordered.
Fix a prime in this list and put and . This is a local domain by [F7], and because contains and localization of the domain is injective. By [F5], is integrally closed; applying [F6] with base domain , field from step 1.1, integral closure from [F5], and multiplicative set shows that is integrally closed in . Step 1.1 also gives a finite generating list for , whose images generate .
Code a fraction in by the least code of a representing pair , using the fixed code on . Thus every nonempty subset of has a least-coded element. Take the least-coded nonzero and write with and ; then . The map from the localization of at the image of to sending to is a surjective ring homomorphism by [F10]. If its value is zero, then ; since is a unit, , and [F8] gives some with . Thus is already zero in that localization, so the map is injective. The source is finite because it is represented by pairs from the two finite sets and the image of , using [F3]. Code its classes by least codes of representing pairs. It is local with maximal ideal : every class outside has a representative outside , hence a unit by [F7]. For any , two powers repeat in this finite ring, say with . Since is outside , it is a unit, so ; necessarily , since . The finite set , ordered by these class codes, has a list ; take for each the least positive nilpotence exponent . Every product of elements of contains some at least times. Thus for some positive , and .
Take the least positive with . If , then . If , choose the least-coded and put . Then and . If , take finite generators of from step 2.3 and take for each the least-coded coefficient tuple with . The matrix kills the column of generators. By [F9] its adjugate shows that for every . Some , so the domain property gives . The polynomial is monic over , making integral over , contrary to its integral closedness and . Thus take the least-coded with . Then is a unit by [F7], and for every , . Hence . In either case for a nonzero nonunit , chosen by the least codes just specified.
Every nonzero has a unique expression with outside and . Divide by whenever the current element lies in ; the quotient is unique because is a domain. If division never stopped, the resulting principal ideals would form a strictly ascending chain: equality at a step would make a unit. Step 2.1 rules out such a chain, so division stops at a unit. Uniqueness follows by cancellation: if two exponents differ, a unit would be a multiple of , which lies in . The recursive divisions are unique, not choices from families.
The ideal is nonzero and finitely generated by step 2.1. Write each nonzero generator in the form of step 5.1 and take the least of the finitely many exponents, say . Among the finite listed generators attaining that exponent take the least-coded one; it yields after multiplying by a unit inverse; every generator is divisible by that power. Thus . Since , this ideal is proper and . If and , cancellation of the nonzero would make a multiple of , impossible because . Thus the exponent is unique.
For every , multiplication by induces a surjection ; its kernel is exactly , since cancellation of the nonzero shows exactly when . Thus each layer is one-dimensional over the residue field. Also the maximal ideal of has nilpotency index exactly : its -th power vanishes, while its preceding power does not, because the powers of are strictly distinct as shown in step 6.1. These local quotient facts support the norm and Dedekind--Kummer uses of the local calculation.
In the canonical finite order of step 2.2 define . This product is nonzero: choose a least-coded nonzero element in each of its finitely many prime factors and multiply them in the domain . At for a listed prime, every other listed prime becomes the unit ideal (distinct maximal ideals are incomparable), so [step 6.1] gives . At any maximal ideal not on the list, ; take the least-coded element of , which becomes a unit. Each listed prime is distinct from , so take its least-coded element outside ; every factor becomes the unit ideal. Thus the same local equality holds there.
If , its class in the finite ring is nonzero, so its annihilator is proper. The finite, nonempty set of proper ideals containing this annihilator includes the annihilator itself. Take the least bit-mask code among its members of greatest finite cardinality; it is inclusion-maximal among proper ideals, hence a maximal ideal of . By [F4], its inverse image is a maximal ideal of containing . The local equality in step 7.2 puts in by [F8], so take the least-coded with . This puts the class of in the annihilator, a contradiction. Hence . For the reverse inclusion, by step 7.2, so [F3] makes finite; for a hypothetical , its nonzero class has a proper annihilator in . The nonempty finite set of proper ideals containing that annihilator includes the annihilator itself. Take the least-bit-mask member of greatest cardinality, using the same quotient coding from step 2.2; it is maximal, and by [F4] its inverse image is a maximal ideal of . The local equality puts in by [F8], so take the least-coded with . Then lies in the annihilator, a contradiction. Thus and .
Suppose a second finite factorisation into distinct nonzero prime ideals is given. Each factor contains , so every such prime is maximal by step 2.2. Localizing at any maximal ideal , all distinct prime factors become units; the product is proper exactly when occurs, and then its local exponent is the unique exponent of the power of . The local equality with therefore forces exactly the same primes and exponents as in step 6.1. The prime list was sorted by least codes, the exponents are unique, and the finite auxiliary choices above were also least-coded. Thus the factorisation is unique and uses no Choice.
The norm of a principal integral ideal
Statement
For , .
Proof
Given: and an integral basis.
Multiplication by is an injective integer matrix on the integral lattice, and its image is .
The index of the image of an injective integer matrix is the absolute determinant; that determinant is the field norm. Hence the quotient cardinality has the asserted value.
Ideal norm is multiplicative
Statement
For nonzero integral ideals of , .
Proof
Given: nonzero integral ideals .
Factor both ideals over their finite union of prime supports. The DVR calculation in the factorisation proof makes one-dimensional over , so every successive quotient has cardinality .
Hence at every prime; multiply over the finite support to obtain the claim.
The norm of a prime ideal
Statement
For a nonzero prime , there is a rational prime and an integer with and .
Proof
Given: a nonzero prime ideal .
The finite domain is a finite field; its characteristic is a rational prime and its kernel on is .
As a finite-dimensional vector space over , that field has elements for some , which is exactly .
Primes above and residue degree
Definition
For finite , a nonzero prime lies above when . Its residue degree is .
Ramification index
Definition
Let be a finite extension of number fields and let be a nonzero prime of . In the factorisation the positive exponent is the ramification index of over .
Here means contraction to , as in Primes above and residue degree. The factorisation exists and its exponents are unique by Integral ideal factorisation in a number field, in ZF. For completeness, the extended ideal is proper: a finite integral basis of over also generates it over (The ring of integers has rank the degree). If , these generators satisfy with all entries of in . The adjugate identity makes annihilate , hence ; this contradicts . Every prime factor contains , so its contraction contains and equals it by maximality. Conversely, a prime above contains that finite product, hence contains one of its prime factors and equals it. Here nonzero primes are maximal because their quotient rings are finite domains. Thus the displayed product indexes exactly the primes above , using only finite algebra.
The fundamental identity for primes
Statement
For finite and nonzero ,
Proof
Given: the finite factorisation of .
Localise at . It is a finite torsion-free module over the DVR , hence free of rank . Filtering its reduction modulo by the finite prime-power factors, the layers at are copies of its residue field.
Taking dimensions over gives the left side, while the free rank in step 1.1 gives for the same quotient.
Splitting and ramification terminology
Definition
A prime is unramified in if every , and ramified otherwise. It splits completely if it is unramified and every residue degree is ; it is inert if there is one prime above it and its residue degree is .
Ramification and residue degrees in towers
Statement
For and ,
Proof
Given: the indicated tower and primes.
Substitute the prime factorisation of into its extension to and compare the exponent of .
The three residue fields form a finite tower, so the dimensions multiply. These are exactly the two asserted equalities.
Dedekind--Kummer prime factorisation
Statement
Let be a finite extension of number fields, let with , and let be its monic minimal polynomial over . Let be a nonzero prime ideal of , not dividing the index of this power order (the index is under the stated monogeneity hypothesis). If with distinct monic irreducibles over , then Here are any monic lifts of , and the last denotes the residue degree from Primes above and residue degree.
Proof
Given: monogeneity, the index hypothesis, and the displayed factorisation.
Put , and . Monic division by shows that the kernel of , , is : a remainder of degree less than vanishing at is zero by minimality over . Monogeneity gives surjectivity, hence .
The maximal ideals of this quotient are exactly those generated by the ; their inverse images in are . They are independent of the chosen lifts. Their residue fields are , of degree , and their contractions are . Thus they are exactly the primes above .
The local factorisation theorem Integral ideal factorisation in a number field, in ZF writes . In the DVR used in that theorem's proof, the maximal ideal of has nilpotency index exactly . On the polynomial side of step 1.1, localisation at gives , whose maximal ideal has nilpotency index exactly : its -th power vanishes and its -st power does not. Thus , proving the ideal factorisation and the stated ramification and residue degrees.
An Eisenstein prime is totally ramified
Statement
If is generated by a monic Eisenstein polynomial of degree at , then for one prime ; thus it is totally ramified.
Proof
Given: the Eisenstein polynomial at .
Let have ramification index . Comparing the valuations of the terms in the Eisenstein equation forces ; in particular .
The inequalities in step 1.1 are therefore equalities, so and . The resulting factorisation is ; hence this is the unique prime factor and the prime is totally ramified.
Ramification is detected by the number-field discriminant
Statement
A rational prime ramifies in if and only if .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A number field and a rational prime .
The ring of integers is a commutative ring and is a free -module of rank ; any integral basis is also a -basis of (Number field, Ring of integers, Integral elements over a nonzero base ring form a subring, The ring of integers has rank the degree).
For prime , is a field with elements (Prime and composite integers: is prime when and its only positive divisors are and , For every prime , the two operations on make it a field, For every , the congruence-class ring is the quotient ring , Finite fields and their order, The canonical projection is a surjective ring homomorphism with kernel ).
For every finite field extension , the field trace is the trace of the -linear multiplication map ; below this is applied to and to finite extensions of (The norm and trace of a finite field extension).
For an integral basis, the discriminant is the determinant of its trace-pairing matrix, independent of the chosen integral basis (Discriminant of a basis and order).
Every nonzero integral ideal of has a unique finite factorisation into powers of distinct nonzero prime ideals, constructed in ZF. For , the are exactly the primes above , , and is unramified exactly when every (Integral ideal factorisation in a number field, in ZF, Primes above and residue degree, Ramification index, Splitting and ramification terminology).
A nonzero ideal quotient of is finite; quotienting by a prime ideal gives an integral domain, and a quotient is a field exactly when the ideal is maximal (A nonzero number-field ideal has finite quotient, A subset of a finite set is finite, with , and equality holds if and only if , is an integral domain if and only if is a prime ideal, is a field if and only if is a maximal ideal, Prime ideals and maximal ideals in a commutative ring).
Pairwise comaximal ideals satisfy the Chinese remainder theorem (Chinese remainder theorem for pairwise comaximal ideals).
If is a finite extension of finite fields of degree , then its Galois group is cyclic of order , generated by the relative Frobenius (A finite extension of a finite field of order is Galois with cyclic Galois group generated by , The relative Frobenius of an extension of finite fields).
A finite family of distinct homomorphisms from a group into a field's multiplicative group is linearly independent over the field (Dedekind's linear independence theorem for distinct characters).
A -dimensional vector space over a field of elements has elements; a nonzero degree- polynomial over a field has at most roots (A -dimensional vector space over a field with elements has exactly elements, A nonzero polynomial of degree over an integral domain has at most distinct roots).
Endomorphism trace is basis-independent and invariant under similarity (The basis-independent trace of an endomorphism of a finite-dimensional vector space, Similar matrices have the same trace).
In finite dimension, an independent set extends to a basis of any containing subspace without a choice principle; a bilinear form is nondegenerate exactly when its matrix is invertible, and a square matrix is invertible exactly when its determinant is a unit (If and is a linear subspace of , then is finite-dimensional, , and if and only if , The matrix, left and right radicals, rank, and nondegeneracy of a bilinear form on a finite-dimensional space, A positive-sized square matrix over a commutative ring is invertible if and only if its determinant is a unit).
The field trace of every algebraic integer in a number field is an integer (Trace and norm of an algebraic integer).
Proof
Fix an integral basis as in [F1], and put . The classes form an -basis of , since is free over with that basis. Thus , so is proper; it is nonzero because in the characteristic zero field . By [F5], write with distinct nonzero prime ideals and positive exponents. The list is nonempty because is proper. Define for the -linear multiplication map on , and ; matrix-trace linearity makes a bilinear form.
Each is maximal. Indeed, [F6] makes finite, and [F6] also makes it an integral domain. For any nonzero class, multiplication by it is injective on this finite set, hence surjective, so the class has an inverse and the quotient is a field; [F6] then gives maximality. Therefore distinct are comaximal. Choose and with . In the expansion of , a term lies in if , and otherwise its exponent of is at least , so it lies in . The sum is ; hence the powers and are comaximal.
Put . Applying [F7] to the pairwise comaximal powers gives If , then is a finite field. Since lies above , the map induced by inclusion of is injective: its kernel is . Thus is a finite field extension, of degree by definition.
We first prove that the trace pairing of every finite extension of finite fields is nondegenerate, without passing to an algebraic closure. Let and . By [F8], are the distinct automorphisms of over . Fix an -basis and form the square matrix . If a row combination with coefficients vanishes, then for each basis vector. Each is -linear, so for every , and in particular for every . The restrictions are distinct group homomorphisms ; [F9] makes them -linearly independent, so every . Hence is invertible.
For , let be the matrix of multiplication by in this basis and let be diagonal with entries . Since every entry of lies in , each fixes those entries, and applying to gives . Thus . By [F11] and the definition of field trace, The polynomial is nonzero of degree . By [F10], and this polynomial has at most roots, so there is with . For any , taking gives . This proves nondegeneracy of the trace pairing on . The argument includes and . [F3, F8, F9, F10, F11, algebra]
If every , then [F7] identifies with the product of the finite fields from step 1.3. Multiplication by on this product is block diagonal, so its trace is . The form on is therefore the orthogonal direct sum of the finite field trace pairings from step 1.4. Each is nondegenerate, so the product pairing is nondegenerate: for a nonzero vector, choose a nonzero component and pair it with a witness in that factor, taking zero in all other factors.
If some , then . The containment is immediate; equality would contradict uniqueness in [F5], because the factorizations of and have exponents and . Choose . Its class in is nonzero and nilpotent, since its -th power is zero. Through the product isomorphism in step 1.3, it gives a nonzero nilpotent . For any , is nilpotent, so multiplication on the finite-dimensional -space is nilpotent.
To compute its trace without eigenvalues, let and set for , with and . Successively extend a basis of to a basis of ; these are finite-dimensional subspaces, so [F12] provides each extension without a choice principle. Order the resulting basis by these layers. Since , each new basis vector maps into the span of earlier vectors. The matrix of is strictly triangular and has trace zero. Therefore for every , so the nonzero lies in the radical of the trace pairing on . The pairing is degenerate. [F12, step 1.3, algebra]
Steps 2.1 and 2.2 show that the trace pairing on is nondegenerate exactly when every . By [F5], this is exactly when is unramified; equivalently, the pairing is degenerate exactly when ramifies.
For , multiplication by on has an integer matrix in the integral basis . Viewed over , the same matrix represents multiplication by on , so [F3] makes its matrix trace . Reducing the integer matrix modulo gives multiplication by on ; hence Consequently the matrix of in the basis is the reduction modulo of . Since each by [F1], [F13] makes every entry of an integer, and [F4] gives . By [F12], the trace pairing is degenerate exactly when its matrix is not invertible, equivalently when ; this is equivalent to . Combining with step 3.1 proves that ramifies exactly when .
Only finitely many primes ramify
Statement
Only finitely many rational primes ramify in a number field.
Proof
Given: the discriminant criterion.
The field discriminant is a fixed nonzero integer.
It has only finitely many prime divisors, and the criterion identifies these exactly with the ramified rational primes.
Trace duals and the codifferent
Definition
For a lattice , set . The codifferent is ; the definition is intrinsic, not basis-dependent.
The codifferent is a fractional ideal
Statement
For every nonzero fractional ideal of , is a fractional ideal and for .
Proof
Given: a fractional ideal and .
In a -basis of the full lattice , nondegeneracy of trace gives a dual basis, so is again a full lattice and is stable under .
The condition is equivalent to , proving and the fractional-ideal claim.
The different of a number field
Definition
The different of is Here is a number field and is its nonzero fractional codifferent (The codifferent is a fractional ideal). To justify the inverse using Integral ideal factorisation in a number field, in ZF, let be a nonzero prime and choose . Factor into finitely many nonzero prime ideals. Since their product lies in , one factor lies in and equals it: nonzero primes of are maximal, as their quotients are finite domains. Thus for an integral ideal , and . Factoring an arbitrary nonzero integral ideal now gives an inverse by taking the finite product of these prime inverses; clearing a denominator gives an inverse for every nonzero fractional ideal. All choices are finite. By Invertible fractional ideals this inverse is the displayed colon ideal. Also , since traces of algebraic integers are integers. Multiplying this inclusion by gives , so the different is an integral ideal.
The different in the monogenic case
Statement
If and is the monic minimal polynomial of , then .
Proof
Given: the power integral basis .
Lagrange interpolation in the conjugates shows that the trace-dual lattice has -basis
Thus ; taking its fractional-ideal inverse yields .
The discriminant is the norm of the different
Statement
.
Proof
Given: an integral basis and its trace Gram matrix .
The dual lattice is obtained from the original basis by the inverse matrix , hence its index relative to has absolute determinant .
Since and the different is the inverse codifferent, its norm is that same positive index.
The prime support of the different is ramification
Statement
A nonzero prime of lying over the rational prime divides if and only if , that is, if and only if itself ramifies.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: and .
Theorem 4.13 in the cited source says that the exponent of in the different is when , and is at least when .
Proof
Put . The prime divides the different exactly when .
If , then and [L1] gives . If , then [L1] gives either or , according as or . This proves the stated local equivalence.
Tame and wild ramification
Definition
For , ramification is tame if and wild if .
Different exponents in tame and wild ramification
Statement
For , . Equality holds when ramification is tame; when it is wild, .
Facts & Assumptions
Lemma 4.12 and the proof of Theorem 4.13 in the cited source give the trace criterion for divisibility by powers of and apply it to the filtration of .
Proof
Given: a prime and its ramification index .
That trace criterion first gives . For the next power, the successive quotients are all isomorphic to the residue field as modules, so the relevant trace is
The trace of a finite separable field extension is not the zero map. Hence the display in step 1.1 vanishes identically exactly when . Thus gives exact exponent , while gives exponent at least , which are precisely the tame and wild cases.
Discriminant valuations from different exponents
Statement
For a rational prime ,
Proof
Given: the prime-ideal factorisation of the different.
Factor into its finite prime powers and apply norm multiplicativity, using over .
The norm-of-the-different identity makes the -adic valuation of that product , which is the displayed sum.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
None yet.
Sources
- J. S. Milne, Algebraic Number Theory, Chapter 4
- J. S. Milne, Algebraic Number Theory, Theorem 3.7
- J. S. Milne, Algebraic Number Theory, Proposition 4.1(c)
- J. S. Milne, Algebraic Number Theory, Proposition 4.2(a)
- J. S. Milne, Algebraic Number Theory, §3.3
- J. S. Milne, Algebraic Number Theory, Theorem 3.34
- J. S. Milne, Algebraic Number Theory, Chapter 4, Exercise 4-2
- J. S. Milne, Algebraic Number Theory, Theorem 3.41
- J. S. Milne, Algebraic Number Theory, Proposition 3.53
- J. S. Milne, Algebraic Number Theory, Theorem 3.35
- Keith Conrad, The Different Ideal, Definition 3.2
- Keith Conrad, The Different Ideal, Theorems 3.4 and 3.9
- Keith Conrad, The Different Ideal, Definition 4.1
- Keith Conrad, The Different Ideal, Theorem 4.3
- Keith Conrad, The Different Ideal, Theorem 4.8
- Keith Conrad, The Different Ideal, Theorem 4.13
- Keith Conrad, The Different Ideal, Corollary 4.16