This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

The unit norm index and pp-class group in certain degree \ell extensions

Ariella Kirsch
Abstract.

We examine when units in a field are the norms of elements in an extension field, given certain conditions. We apply these results to the study of the \ell-class groups in lifts of the anti-cyclotomic 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension of (i)\mathbb{Q}(i).

1. Introduction

In [iwasawa1973mu], Iwasawa showed that there exist p\mathbb{Z}_{p}-extensions in which the μ\mu-invariant is non-zero. In [washington1975class], Washington showed that there are p\mathbb{Z}_{p}-extensions in which the \ell-part of the class group is unbounded, where p\ell\neq p is prime. Both of these results began with a p\mathbb{Z}_{p}-extension K/K0K_{\infty}/K_{0} and then lifted it via a cyclic extension L0/K0L_{0}/K_{0} to a p\mathbb{Z}_{p}-extension L/L0L_{\infty}/L_{0} where L=KL0L_{\infty}=K_{\infty}L_{0}. Then Chevalley’s Formula (see 3.1) was applied to the intermediate fields Ln/KnL_{n}/K_{n}.

Chevalley’s Formula relies on the unit index

[EKn:EKnNLn/Kn(Ln×)][E_{K_{n}}:E_{K_{n}}\cap N_{L_{n}/K_{n}}(L_{n}^{\times})]

where Ln/KnL_{n}/K_{n} is a cyclic extension, EKnE_{K_{n}} is the unit group of KnK_{n} and NLn/KnN_{L_{n}/K_{n}} is the norm map from LnL_{n} to KnK_{n}. This index is in general difficult to compute, but fortunately trivial estimates were sufficient for the results above. In this paper, inspired by the work of Wittmann [wittmann2004] and Gerth [gerth1976], we study this index in the case where L0/K0L_{0}/K_{0} is a degree \ell extension (2\ell\neq 2) and K/K0K_{\infty}/K_{0} is the anti-cyclotomic 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension of an imaginary quadratic field.

We show that given certain conditions on \ell and the ramified primes in Ln/KnL_{n}/K_{n}, either all of the units in KnK_{n} are norms of elements in LnL_{n} modulo th\ell^{th} powers or none of them are. We then give heuristics that indicate that in general, the difference between the actual value of the index and the trivial estimate is probably bounded. Therefore the principal cause of an unbounded \ell-class number in L/L0L_{\infty}/L_{0} should be due to the contribution from Chevalley’s Formula and not from some other unexplained phenomenon.

2. The anti-cyclotomic 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension

Let K0K_{0} be an imaginary quadratic field. Let KnK_{n} be the nthn^{th} layer, n1n\geq 1, of the anti-cyclotomic 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension of K0K_{0}. We fix \ell an odd prime. If K0=(3)K_{0}=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-3}), then we require that 3\ell\neq 3. This ensures that KnK_{n} does not contain th\ell^{th} roots of unity.

In this section, we present results on the units and primes in KnK_{n}, which we will then use to prove our main result, Theorem 4.2.

2.1. The Units of KnK_{n}

Since KnK_{n} is a totally imaginary field of degree 2n+12^{n+1} over \mathbb{Q}, it has no real embeddings (r1=0r_{1}=0) and 2n2^{n} pairs of complex embeddings (r2=2nr_{2}=2^{n}). By Dirichlet’s unit theorem, KnK_{n} has

r1+r21=2n1r_{1}+r_{2}-1=2^{n}-1

fundamental units.

Let EnE_{n} be the unit group of KnK_{n} and let UnU_{n} be the units of KnK_{n} modulo th\ell^{th} powers.

We also have Gal(Kn/)Dn\textrm{Gal}(K_{n}/\mathbb{Q})\simeq D_{n}. Let σ\sigma and τ\tau be generators of the Galois group where σ\sigma has order 2n2^{n} and τ\tau has order 2. Let τ\tau be complex conjugation under some embedding KnK_{n}\hookrightarrow\mathbb{C}. We then have the following relation:

τσi=σiτ.\tau\sigma^{i}=\sigma^{-i}\tau.
Proposition 2.1.

At least one unit of KnK_{n} that is not a unit in Kn1K_{n-1} is fixed by τ\tau:

uEKn\EKn1 such that τu=u.\exists\hskip 7.22743ptu\in E_{K_{n}}\big{\backslash}E_{K_{n-1}}\text{ such that }\tau u=u.
Proof.

Let FnF_{n} be the fixed field of τ\tau. This field is of degree 2n2^{n} over \mathbb{Q}. Consider the embeddings σi\sigma^{i} applied to FnF_{n}. Since τ\tau fixes FnF_{n}, we now determine which of the Galois elements stabilize FnF_{n}, since these will be the real embeddings. Since

τσi(Fn)=σiτ(Fn)=σi(Fn),\tau\sigma^{i}(F_{n})=\sigma^{-i}\tau(F_{n})=\sigma^{-i}(F_{n}),

it’s sufficient to consider just the elements of the form σi\sigma^{i}. Let xFnx\in F_{n}. Say σi\sigma^{i} stabilizes FnF_{n} and therefore τσi(x)=σi(x)\tau\sigma^{i}(x)=\sigma^{i}(x). Then

σi(x)=τσi(x)=σiτ(x)=σi(x)σ2i(x)=x.\sigma^{i}(x)=\tau\sigma^{i}(x)=\sigma^{-i}\tau(x)=\sigma^{-i}(x)\implies\sigma^{2i}(x)=x.

Therefore σ2iGal(Kn/Fn)\sigma^{2i}\in\textrm{Gal}(K_{n}/F_{n}). Since σ2iτ\sigma^{2i}\neq\tau, we have i=0i=0 or i=2n1i=2^{n-1} and so there are exactly two real embeddings. Therefore there are 2n112^{n-1}-1 pairs of complex embeddings and so FnF_{n} has

r1+r21=2+2n111=2n1r_{1}+r_{2}-1=2+2^{n-1}-1-1=2^{n-1}

fundamental units.

The units of Kn1K_{n-1} are embedded into the units of KnK_{n}, and similarly the units of FnF_{n} are also embedded into the units of KnK_{n}. Since FnF_{n} has 2n12^{n-1} independent units and Kn1K_{n-1} has 2n112^{n-1}-1 independent units, this means that at least one unit of KnK_{n} that is not a unit in Kn1K_{n-1} is fixed by τ\tau. ∎

Recall that we use UnU_{n} to represent the units of KnK_{n} modulo th\ell^{th} powers. We now need to understand the structure of the relative units of KnK_{n} modulo th\ell^{th} powers, which we define as

Unrel=ker(NKn/Kn1:UnUn1).U_{n}^{rel}=\ker\left(N_{K_{n}/K_{n-1}}:U_{n}\rightarrow U_{n-1}\right).
Corollary 2.2.

At least one non-trivial relative unit of KnK_{n} is fixed by τ\tau.

Proof.

Let uKnu\in K_{n} be a unit not in Kn1K_{n-1} that is fixed by τ\tau (Proposition 2.1). For ease of notation, let α=σ2n1\alpha=\sigma^{2^{n-1}} and let v=uα1v=u^{\alpha-1}. Since NKn/Kn1=α+1N_{K_{n}/K_{n-1}}=\alpha+1, vv is a relative unit. Since τ\tau and α\alpha commute,

τv=τ(uα1)=(τu)α1=uα1=v.\tau v=\tau(u^{\alpha-1})=(\tau u)^{\alpha-1}=u^{\alpha-1}=v.

Therefore vv is a relative unit that is fixed by τ\tau.

We now need to ensure that the relative unit is non-trivial modulo th\ell^{th} powers. If vv is trivial, then v=wmv=w^{\ell^{m}} for some unit wKnw\in K_{n} and some m>0m>0, where we assume mm is maximal. Then

(τw)m=τv=v=wm.(\tau w)^{\ell^{m}}=\tau v=v=w^{\ell^{m}}.

Since KnK_{n} does not contain th\ell^{th} roots of unity (since we excluded =3\ell=3 when K0=(3)K_{0}=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-3})), we have τw=w\tau w=w. Because mm was maximal, ww is not an th\ell^{th} power and therefore ww is non-trivial in UnU_{n}. Since

(wα+1)m=vα+1=1(w^{\alpha+1})^{\ell^{m}}=v^{\alpha+1}=1

and KnK_{n} does not contain the th\ell^{th} roots of unity, wα+1=1w^{\alpha+1}=1 and so we have found a non-trivial relative unit that is fixed by τ\tau. ∎

We also need the following result on the structure of the relative unit group.

Proposition 2.3.

There exists uUnu\in U_{n} such that the relative units modulo th\ell^{th} powers, UnrelU_{n}^{rel}, are spanned by

{u,σu,σ2u,,σ2n11u}\{u,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma u,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma^{2}u,\hskip 7.22743pt\ldots,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma^{2^{n-1}-1}u\}

and furthermore

σ2n1uu1 mod th powers.\sigma^{2^{n-1}}u\equiv u^{-1}\text{ mod }\ell^{th}\text{ powers}.
Proof.

The Galois group Gal(Kn/)\textrm{Gal}(K_{n}/\mathbb{Q}) has generators σ\sigma and τ\tau, where τ\tau is complex conjugation under some embedding. Then (σj,τσj)(\sigma^{j},\tau\sigma^{j}) are the pairs of complex conjugate embeddings of KnK_{n} into \mathbb{C} for 0j<2n0\leq j<2^{n}. By [washington2012introduction]*Lemma 5.27, there exists a unit εEn\varepsilon\in E_{n} such that

{ε,σε,σ2ε,,σ2n2ε}\{\varepsilon,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma\varepsilon,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma^{2}\varepsilon,\ldots,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma^{2^{n}-2}\varepsilon\}

generates a subgroup HH of finite index in EnE_{n}. Therefore, since

ε1+σ++σ2n1{±1,±i,±ζ3},\varepsilon^{1+\sigma+\ldots+\sigma^{2^{n}-1}}\in\{\pm 1,\pm i,\pm\zeta_{3}\},

we have

En[σ]/(1+σ++σ2n1).E_{n}\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{Q}\simeq\mathbb{Q}[\langle\sigma\rangle]\big{/}(1+\sigma+\ldots+\sigma^{2^{n}-1}).

The units modulo th\ell^{th} powers are

Un=En/EnEn𝔽.U_{n}=E_{n}\big{/}E_{n}^{\ell}\simeq E_{n}\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{F}_{\ell}.

Let gσg\in\langle\sigma\rangle. Since HH is gg-stable, we can calculate the characteristic polynomial fg(x)f_{g}(x) of gg using HH. Since HH is a \mathbb{Z}-module, fg(x)[x]f_{g}(x)\in\mathbb{Z}[x]. We can also compute fg(x)f_{g}(x) using a basis for EnE_{n} modulo torsion, and since HH and EnE_{n} span EnE_{n}\otimes\mathbb{Q}, they yield the same characteristic polynomials. We can reduce fg(x)f_{g}(x) modulo \ell to get the characteristic polynomial of gg on UnU_{n} and on H𝔽H\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{F}_{\ell}.

The Brauer-Nesbitt Theorem says that the semi-simplification is determined by the characteristic polynomials of gσg\in\langle\sigma\rangle. Observe that |σ|=2n|\langle\sigma\rangle|=2^{n} is relatively prime to \ell, the characteristic of 𝔽\mathbb{F}_{\ell}. Therefore the representations of σ\langle\sigma\rangle on UnU_{n} and on H𝔽H\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{F}_{\ell} are already semi-simple and so these representations are isomorphic:

(2.1) UnH𝔽𝔽[σ]/(1+σ++σ2n1).\displaystyle U_{n}\simeq H\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{F}_{\ell}\simeq\mathbb{F}_{\ell}[\langle\sigma\rangle]\Big{/}(1+\sigma+\ldots+\sigma^{2^{n}-1}).

Now let α=σ2n1\alpha=\sigma^{2^{n-1}}. The norm map is

NKn/Kn1=1+α.N_{K_{n}/K_{n-1}}=1+\alpha.

Let uUnrelu\in U_{n}^{rel}. Then

u2=u1+αu1α=u1αu^{2}=u^{1+\alpha}u^{1-\alpha}=u^{1-\alpha}

since u1+α=1u^{1+\alpha}=1. Since UU has odd order (2\ell\neq 2), this implies that UnrelU_{n}^{rel} is contained in (Unrel)1α(Un)1α(U_{n}^{rel})^{1-\alpha}\subseteq(U_{n})^{1-\alpha}. Now consider uUnu^{\prime}\in U_{n}. Then

((u)1α)1+α=(u)1α2=1((u^{\prime})^{1-\alpha})^{1+\alpha}=(u^{\prime})^{1-\alpha^{2}}=1

and therefore Un1αUnrelU_{n}^{1-\alpha}\subseteq U_{n}^{rel}. Thus Unrel=Un1αU_{n}^{rel}=U_{n}^{1-\alpha}. Let uUnrelu\in U_{n}^{rel} correspond to 1α1-\alpha by the isomorphism in Equation 2.1. Therefore UnrelU_{n}^{rel} is spanned by

{u,σu,σ2u,,σ2n11u}\{u,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma u,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma^{2}u,\ldots,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma^{2^{n-1}-1}u\}

and

σ2n1uu1 mod th powers.\sigma^{2^{n-1}}u\equiv u^{-1}\text{ mod }\ell^{th}\text{ powers}.

Finally, we have the following proposition showing that the only ‘new’ units introduced at the nthn^{th} layer are the relative units.

Proposition 2.4.

UnUnrelUn1U_{n}\simeq U_{n}^{rel}\oplus U_{n-1} as Gal(Kn/)\textrm{Gal}(K_{n}/\mathbb{Q})-modules.

Proof.

As in the previous proof, let α=σ2n1\alpha=\sigma^{2^{n-1}}. Then we can see that UnU_{n} is generated by UnrelU_{n}^{rel} and Un1+αU_{n}^{1+\alpha}, since u2=u1αu1+αu^{2}=u^{1-\alpha}u^{1+\alpha} and u1αUnrelu^{1-\alpha}\in U_{n}^{rel}. Furthermore, if uUnrelUn1+αu\in U_{n}^{rel}\cap U_{n}^{1+\alpha}, then u=v1+αu=v^{1+\alpha} for some vUnv\in U_{n} and NKn/Kn1u=u1+α=1.N_{K_{n}/K_{n-1}}u=u^{1+\alpha}=1. Then

1=u1+α=v2+2α=u21=u^{1+\alpha}=v^{2+2\alpha}=u^{2}

which implies that u=1u=1. Therefore we can prove the proposition by showing that Un1+αUn1U_{n}^{1+\alpha}\simeq U_{n-1}.

Recall that UnU_{n} is the set of units modulo th\ell^{th} powers:

Un=En/En.U_{n}=E_{n}/E_{n}^{\ell}.

We wish to show that (En/En)1+α(En1/En1)(E_{n}/E_{n}^{\ell})^{1+\alpha}\simeq(E_{n-1}/E_{n-1}^{\ell}). We claim that this is an isomorphism via the map

ψ:x1+αmodEnx1+αmodEn1.\psi:x^{1+\alpha}\mod E_{n}^{\ell}\mapsto x^{1+\alpha}\mod E_{n-1}^{\ell}.

First, we show that the map is well-defined. If x1+α=vx^{1+\alpha}=v^{\ell} for some vEnv\in E_{n}, then

(v)α=(x1+α)α=x1+α=v(v^{\ell})^{\alpha}=(x^{1+\alpha})^{\alpha}=x^{1+\alpha}=v^{\ell}

and therefore vv^{\ell} is fixed by α\alpha. Since KnK_{n} does not contain any non-trivial th\ell^{th} roots of unity, this means that vv must be fixed by α\alpha, and so vEn1v\in E_{n-1}.

Now we show that the map is surjective. If yEn1y\in E_{n-1}, then ψ(y1+α)=y2modEn1\psi(y^{1+\alpha})=y^{2}\mod E_{n-1}^{\ell}. Since \ell is odd, the map is surjective.

Finally we show injectivity. Let x1+α=wx^{1+\alpha}=w^{\ell} for some wEn1w\in E_{n-1}. Then

(x1+α)1+α=(x1+α)2(x^{1+\alpha})^{1+\alpha}=(x^{1+\alpha})^{2}

and so (x2/w)1+α=1(x^{2}/w^{\ell})^{1+\alpha}=1. This means that the square of the class of x1+αmodEnx^{1+\alpha}\mod E_{n} is trivial, and therefore the class itself must be trivial. Therefore ψ\psi is an isomorphism. ∎

2.2. Galois Structure of the Primes of KnK_{n}

We need to understand the behavior of the primes in the anti-cyclotomic extension.

Lemma 2.5 (Hubbard-Washington [hubbardwashington2017]*Lemma 1).

Let K0K_{0} be an imaginary quadratic field and let K/K0K_{\infty}/K_{0} be the anti-cyclotomic p\mathbb{Z}_{p}-extension of K0K_{0}. If a prime qpq\neq p is inert in K0/K_{0}/\mathbb{Q} then qq splits completely in K/K0K_{\infty}/K_{0}.

We also require the following lemma relating the σ\sigma action on the primes of KnK_{n} to the τ\tau action.

Lemma 2.6.

Let 𝔭,σ𝔭,,σ2n1𝔭\mathfrak{p},\sigma\mathfrak{p},\ldots,\sigma^{2^{n}-1}\mathfrak{p} be the primes in KnK_{n} lying over a rational prime pp that is inert in K0/K_{0}/\mathbb{Q}. Let τ𝔭=σk𝔭\tau\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{k}\mathfrak{p}. Then kk is even if and only if there is at least one prime lying over pp that is fixed by τ\tau.

Proof.

First, assume kk is even: k=2kk=2k^{\prime}. Then

τσk𝔭=σkτ𝔭=σk+2k𝔭=σk𝔭\tau\sigma^{k^{\prime}}\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{-k^{\prime}}\tau\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{-k^{\prime}+2k^{\prime}}\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{k^{\prime}}\mathfrak{p}

and therefore σk𝔭\sigma^{k^{\prime}}\mathfrak{p} is fixed by τ\tau.

Now assume kk is odd: k=2k+1k=2k^{\prime}+1. Then assume σj𝔭\sigma^{j}\mathfrak{p} is fixed by τ\tau: τσj𝔭=σj𝔭\tau\sigma^{j}\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{j}\mathfrak{p}. But

σj𝔭=τσj𝔭=σjτ𝔭=σj+2k+1𝔭\sigma^{j}\mathfrak{p}=\tau\sigma^{j}\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{-j}\tau\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{-j+2k^{\prime}+1}\mathfrak{p}

which implies

jj+2k+1 mod 2n2k+12j mod 2n.j\equiv-j+2k^{\prime}+1\text{ mod }2^{n}\implies 2k^{\prime}+1\equiv 2j\text{ mod }2^{n}.

This is a contradiction. ∎

From this point forward, we let our imaginary quadratic field K0K_{0} be (i)\mathbb{Q}(i) in order to simplify the already technical proofs. This choice has several important consequences. We will be interested in primes that are inert in K0K_{0} (so that they split completely in K/K0K_{\infty}/K_{0}). For other base fields, we would have different congruence conditions determining which primes ramify in L/L/\mathbb{Q}. We would also have different congruence conditions determining which primes are fixed by elements of the Galois group (see Proposition 2.7). Finally, we will also see that the choice of K0=(i)K_{0}=\mathbb{Q}(i) means that K1K_{1} is a cyclotomic field; this is not true in general.

Proposition 2.7.

Let K0=(i)K_{0}=\mathbb{Q}(i). Let K/K0K_{\infty}/K_{0} be the anti-cyclotomic 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension. Let

Gal(Kn/)Dn=σ,τ\textrm{Gal}(K_{n}/\mathbb{Q})\simeq D_{n}=\langle\sigma,\tau\rangle

where σ\sigma has order 2n2^{n} and τ\tau has order 2 and restricts to the generator of Gal(K0/)\textrm{Gal}(K_{0}/\mathbb{Q}). If p3 mod 8p\equiv 3\text{ mod }8, then none of the primes above pp in KnK_{n} are fixed by τ\tau. If p7 mod 8p\equiv 7\text{ mod }8, then at least one of the primes above pp in KnK_{n} is fixed by τ\tau.

Proof.

For the anti-cyclotomic extension, K1=(ζ8)K_{1}=\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8}). Let FnF_{n} be the fixed field of τ\tau. Then F1=(2)F_{1}=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2}). We are only interested in primes that are 3 mod 43\text{ mod }4, since those are the primes that are inert in (i)/\mathbb{Q}(i)/\mathbb{Q}.

We have the following diagram of fields:

\mathbb{Q}K0K_{0}F1F_{1}K1K_{1}FnF_{n}KnK_{n}22222n12^{n-1}22n12^{n-1}

By Lemma 2.5, primes that are inert in K0K_{0} split completely in Kn/K0K_{n}/K_{0}. Primes that are 3 mod 83\text{ mod }8 are inert in F1/F_{1}/\mathbb{Q} and therefore must split completely in Kn/F1K_{n}/F_{1}. This means there can be no primes in KnK_{n} which are fixed by τ\tau.

Now let 𝔭Kn\mathfrak{p}\in K_{n}, n>1n>1, be a prime ideal lying over pp\in\mathbb{Q}, p7 mod 8p\equiv 7\text{ mod }8. Then

NKn/K1𝔭=𝔭1+σ2+σ4++σ2n2𝔮.N_{K_{n}/K_{1}}\mathfrak{p}=\mathfrak{p}^{1+\sigma^{2}+\sigma^{4}+\ldots+\sigma^{2^{n}-2}}\coloneqq\mathfrak{q}.

Since p7 mod 8p\equiv 7\text{ mod }8, pp splits in F1/F_{1}/\mathbb{Q} and is inert in K1/F1K_{1}/F_{1}. Therefore τ𝔮=𝔮\tau\mathfrak{q}=\mathfrak{q}. Therefore τ𝔭=σ2j𝔭\tau\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{2j}\mathfrak{p} for some jj and so by Lemma 2.6, there must be a prime in KnK_{n} lying over pp that is fixed by τ\tau. ∎

3. Cyclic Extensions of the Anti-Cyclotomic Extension

Let LL be a cyclic degree \ell number field where \ell is an odd prime that is not ramified in L/L/\mathbb{Q}. Let K0=(i)K_{0}=\mathbb{Q}(i) and let K/K0K_{\infty}/K_{0} be the anti-cyclotomic 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension. Then let Ln=KnLL_{n}=K_{n}L so that L/L0L_{\infty}/L_{0} is also a 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension.

\mathbb{Q}K0K_{0}KnK_{n}KK_{\infty}LLL0L_{0}LnL_{n}LL_{\infty}222n2^{n}\ell222n2^{n}\ell\ell\ell

We wish to study the \ell-class groups of LnL_{n}. One of our primary tools is Chevalley’s formula, given below.

Theorem 3.1 (Chevalley’s Formula, [chevalleypaper]).

Let L/KL/K be a cyclic extension of number fields; Δ=Gal(L/K)\Delta=\textrm{Gal}(L/K); n=[L:K]n=[L:K]; CLC_{L} be the ideal class group of LL; h(K)h(K) be the class number of KK; e(L/K)=PePe(L/K)=\prod_{P}e_{P} be the product over all primes PP of KK, including archimedean ones, where ePe_{P} is the ramification index of PP in L/KL/K; and E(L/K)=[EK:EKNL/K(L×)]E(L/K)=[E_{K}:E_{K}\cap N_{L/K}(L^{\times})], where EKE_{K} is the group of units of KK. Then

|CLΔ|=h(K)e(L/K)nE(L/K).\displaystyle\big{|}C_{L}^{\Delta}\big{|}=\frac{h(K)\cdot e(L/K)}{n\cdot E(L/K)}.

Let AnA_{n} be the \ell-class group of LnL_{n} and let h(Kn)h_{\ell}(K_{n}) be the \ell-part of the class number of KnK_{n}. Assume there are tt rational primes that ramify in L/L/\mathbb{Q} and that they are all inert in K0/K_{0}/\mathbb{Q}. Therefore there are 2nt2^{n}t primes in KnK_{n} that ramify in Ln/KnL_{n}/K_{n} (Lemma 2.5). So

e(Ln/Kn)=2nt.e(L_{n}/K_{n})=\ell^{2^{n}t}.

Letting h(Kn)h_{\ell}(K_{n}) be the \ell-class number of KnK_{n},

|AnΔ|=h(Kn)2nt1E(Ln/Kn).\big{|}A_{n}^{\Delta}\big{|}=\frac{h_{\ell}(K_{n})\cdot\ell^{2^{n}t-1}}{E(L_{n}/K_{n})}.

As discussed in §2, there are 2n12^{n}-1 fundamental units in KnK_{n} and no non-trivial th\ell^{th} roots of unity. Therefore

1E(Ln/Kn)2n1.1\leq E(L_{n}/K_{n})\leq\ell^{2^{n}-1}.

So we know immediately that

|An||AnΔ|2nt2n.\big{|}A_{n}\big{|}\geq\big{|}A_{n}^{\Delta}\big{|}\geq\ell^{2^{n}t-2^{n}}.

For t>1t>1, we therefore can see that the order of the \ell-class group grows with nn.

This is the motivation for this paper. We’ve shown that there exist 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extensions where the \ell-part of the class number is unbounded using a trivial estimate for the unit norm index. But in order to understand the causes of such examples, we need to study the unit norm index more closely.

4. Norms of Units

We now address the behavior of the unit norm index E(Ln/Kn)E(L_{n}/K_{n}).

Let Ln/KnL_{n}/K_{n} be a cyclic prime extension of degree \ell. We have the following proposition which tells us that we only need to worry about the ‘new units’ at each stage.

Lemma 4.1.

For n1,m1n\geq 1,m\geq 1, let uu be a unit in KnK_{n} regarded as a unit in Kn+mK_{n+m}. Then uu is the norm of an element in Ln+mL_{n+m} if and only if it is the norm of an element in LnL_{n}.

Proof.

Suppose uKn+mu\in K_{n+m} is the norm of an element aLn+ma\in L_{n+m}:

NLn+m/Kn+m(a)=u.N_{L_{n+m}/K_{n+m}}(a)=u.

Then

NLn+m/Kn(a)=NKn+m/KnNLn+m/Kn+m(a)=u2m.N_{L_{n+m}/K_{n}}(a)=N_{K_{n+m}/K_{n}}N_{L_{n+m}/K_{n+m}}(a)=u^{2^{m}}.

Since 2m2^{m} is prime to \ell and we have a degree \ell extension, this implies uu is a norm. Therefore uu is the norm of an element in LnL_{n}. The converse is trivial. ∎

Recall that by the Hasse Norm Theorem, a unit uKnu\in K_{n} is the norm of an element in LnL_{n} if and only if it is a local norm at all primes that ramify in Ln/KnL_{n}/K_{n}. Therefore we can determine if the units of KnK_{n} are norms from LnL_{n} by constructing a matrix of norm residue symbols where the (i,j)th(i,j)^{th} entry of the matrix is the symbol (uj𝔭i)\left(\frac{u_{j}}{\mathfrak{p}_{i}}\right). We will use this matrix to prove the following theorem, our main result.

Theorem 4.2.

Let n2n\geq 2 and 3 or 5 mod 8\ell\equiv 3\text{ or }5\text{ mod }8. Let KnK_{n} be the nthn^{th} layer in the anti-cyclotomic 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension of K0=(i)K_{0}=\mathbb{Q}(i). Let Ln/KnL_{n}/K_{n} be a cyclic degree \ell extension that is a lift of a cyclic degree \ell extension L/L/\mathbb{Q}. Assume that the ramified primes in L/L/\mathbb{Q} are 3 mod 43\text{ mod }4 and assume \ell is unramified in L/L/\mathbb{Q}. Let UnrelU_{n}^{rel} be the units in KnK_{n} that have norm 1 in Kn1K_{n-1} modulo th\ell^{th} powers. Then either all of the relative units in KnK_{n} are norms of elements in LnL_{n} or none of them are (or more precisely, the only elements that are norms are th\ell^{th} powers).

In order to prove this theorem, we need some results concerning skew circulant matrices. We present these results in §4.1 followed by the proof in §4.2.

4.1. Skew Circulant Matrices

The matrices of norm residue symbols will turn out to have a special form: they will be skew circulant matrices.

Definition 4.3.

A skew circulant matrix is an n×nn\times n matrix of the form

(a0a1an2an1an1a0an3an2an2an1an4an3a2a3a0a1a1a2an1a0)\begin{pmatrix}a_{0}&a_{1}&\ldots&a_{n-2}&a_{n-1}\\ -a_{n-1}&a_{0}&\ldots&a_{n-3}&a_{n-2}\\ -a_{n-2}&-a_{n-1}&\ldots&a_{n-4}&a_{n-3}\\ \vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots\\ -a_{2}&-a_{3}&\ldots&a_{0}&a_{1}\\ -a_{1}&-a_{2}&\ldots&-a_{n-1}&a_{0}\\ \end{pmatrix}

The associated polynomial to a skew circulant matrix is

g(x)=a0+a1x++an1xn1.g(x)=a_{0}+a_{1}x+\ldots+a_{n-1}x^{n-1}.

Then for 0in10\leq i\leq n-1, each row of the matrix is given by

xig(x) mod (xn+1).x^{i}g(x)\text{ mod }(x^{n}+1).
Proposition 4.4.

Let ζ\zeta be a solution to xn+1=0x^{n}+1=0 (ζ\zeta is a (2n)th(2n)^{th} root of unity, not necessarily primitive). Each ζ\zeta gives an eigenvector of a skew circulant matrix

(1,ζ,ζ2,,ζn1)(1,\zeta,\zeta^{2},\ldots,\zeta^{n-1})

and the eigenvalues are g(ζ)g(\zeta) where gg is the associated polynomial.

Proof.

Consider an n×nn\times n skew circulant matrix. Then

(a0a1an2an1an1a0an3an2a1a2an1a0)(1ζζn1)\displaystyle\begin{pmatrix}a_{0}&a_{1}&\ldots&a_{n-2}&a_{n-1}\\ -a_{n-1}&a_{0}&\ldots&a_{n-3}&a_{n-2}\\ \vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots\\ -a_{1}&-a_{2}&\ldots&-a_{n-1}&a_{0}\\ \end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}1\\ \zeta\\ \vdots\\ \zeta^{n-1}\end{pmatrix}
=(a0+a1ζ++an2ζn2+an1ζn1an1+a0ζ++an3ζn2+an2ζn1a1a2ζan1ζn2+a0ζn1)\displaystyle=\begin{pmatrix}a_{0}+a_{1}\zeta+\ldots+a_{n-2}\zeta^{n-2}+a_{n-1}\zeta^{n-1}\\ -a_{n-1}+a_{0}\zeta+\ldots+a_{n-3}\zeta^{n-2}+a_{n-2}\zeta^{n-1}\\ \vdots\\ -a_{1}-a_{2}\zeta-\ldots-a_{n-1}\zeta^{n-2}+a_{0}\zeta^{n-1}\\ \end{pmatrix}
=(a0+a1ζ++an2ζn2+an1ζn1)(1ζζn1)\displaystyle=(a_{0}+a_{1}\zeta+\ldots+a_{n-2}\zeta^{n-2}+a_{n-1}\zeta^{n-1})\begin{pmatrix}1\\ \zeta\\ \vdots\\ \zeta^{n-1}\end{pmatrix}

4.2. Proof of Theorem 4.2

We’re now ready to prove the theorem.

There are 2n12^{n-1} generators of the relative units modulo th\ell^{th} powers in KnK_{n}. By Corollary 2.2, at least one relative unit is fixed by τ\tau. By Proposition 2.3, we may choose uu to be a generator that is fixed by τ\tau and then

{u,σu,σ2u,,σ2n11u}\{u,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma u,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma^{2}u,\ldots,\hskip 7.22743pt\sigma^{2^{n-1}-1}u\}

is a set of generators for UnrelU_{n}^{rel}. These are the units in KnK_{n} that have norm 1 in Kn1K_{n-1} modulo th\ell^{th} powers. By Proposition 2.4 and Lemma 4.1, these are the only units we need to consider, as we can assume we already know if units from fields lower in the tower are norms.

A unit uKnu\in K_{n} is the norm of an element in LnL_{n} if and only if its norm residue symbols for each prime that ramifies in Ln/KnL_{n}/K_{n} are trivial. Let uj=σjuu_{j}=\sigma^{j}u. Observe that this implies

τuj=τσju=σjτu=σ2nju=(σ2n1ju)1=u2n1j1\tau u_{j}=\tau\sigma^{j}u=\sigma^{-j}\tau u=\sigma^{2^{n}-j}u=(\sigma^{2^{n-1}-j}u)^{-1}=u_{2^{n-1}-j}^{-1}

since σ2n1u=u1\sigma^{2^{n-1}}u=u^{-1} (Proposition 2.3).

We can consider each set of conjugate primes separately, so we’ll first look only at primes that all lie over the same rational prime pp. Write these primes as

𝔭0=𝔭,𝔭1=σ𝔭,,𝔭2n1=σ2n1𝔭.\mathfrak{p}_{0}=\mathfrak{p},\hskip 7.22743pt\mathfrak{p}_{1}=\sigma\mathfrak{p},\hskip 7.22743pt\ldots,\hskip 7.22743pt\mathfrak{p}_{2^{n}-1}=\sigma^{2^{n}-1}\mathfrak{p}.

We know there are 2n2^{n} primes in KnK_{n} lying over pp, using Lemma 2.5 and our assumption that p3 mod 4p\equiv 3\text{ mod }4.

We will make use of the following lemma:

Lemma 4.5.

Let n>2n>2.

If 3 mod 8\ell\equiv 3\text{ mod }8,

x2n1+1(x2n2+2x2n31)(x2n22x2n31) mod .x^{2^{n-1}}+1\equiv(x^{2^{n-2}}+\sqrt{-2}x^{2^{n-3}}-1)(x^{2^{n-2}}-\sqrt{-2}x^{2^{n-3}}-1)\text{ mod }\ell.

If 5 mod 8\ell\equiv 5\text{ mod }8,

x2n1+1(x2n2+1)(x2n21) mod .x^{2^{n-1}}+1\equiv(x^{2^{n-2}}+\sqrt{-1})(x^{2^{n-2}}-\sqrt{-1})\text{ mod }\ell.
Proof.

Since 2𝔽\sqrt{-2}\in\mathbb{F}_{\ell} for 3 mod 8\ell\equiv 3\text{ mod }8 and 1𝔽\sqrt{-1}\in\mathbb{F}_{\ell} for 5 mod 8\ell\equiv 5\text{ mod }8, the proof is a straightforward computation. ∎

We’ll address four cases independently: we treat 3 mod 8\ell\equiv 3\text{ mod }8 and 5 mod 8\ell\equiv 5\text{ mod }8 separately, and we treat p7 mod 8p\equiv 7\text{ mod }8 and p3 mod 8p\equiv 3\text{ mod }8 separately.

p7 mod 8\bullet\hskip 10.00002ptp\equiv 7\text{ mod }8, 3 mod 8\ell\equiv 3\text{ mod }8:

If p7 mod 8p\equiv 7\text{ mod }8, then by Proposition 2.7 at least one of the primes above pp is fixed by τ\tau. Let 𝔭\mathfrak{p} be the fixed prime: τ𝔭=𝔭\tau\mathfrak{p}=\mathfrak{p}. Then

τσj𝔭=σjτ𝔭=σj𝔭.\tau\sigma^{j}\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{-j}\tau\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{-j}\mathfrak{p}.

Construct a matrix (aij)(a_{ij}) using the norm residue symbols:

(uj𝔭i)uj(N𝔭i1)/ωaij mod 𝔭i\displaystyle\left(\frac{u_{j}}{\mathfrak{p}_{i}}\right)\equiv u_{j}^{(N\mathfrak{p}_{i}-1)/\ell}\equiv\omega^{a_{ij}}\text{ mod }\mathfrak{p}_{i}

where ω\omega is a fixed primitive th\ell^{th} root of unity. We extend τ\tau and σ\sigma such that ω\omega is fixed by both. Since each 𝔭i\mathfrak{p}_{i} is inert in K0/K_{0}/\mathbb{Q} and totally split in Kn/K0K_{n}/K_{0}, N𝔭i=p2N\mathfrak{p}_{i}=p^{2}. Since we’re considering the powers of th\ell^{th} roots of unity, the matrix entries aija_{ij} are in 𝔽\mathbb{F}_{\ell}.

If the matrix is trivial, then all of the norm residue symbols are trivial, and therefore all of the units are norms modulo th\ell^{th} powers. If the matrix has full rank, then none of the units are norms modulo th\ell^{th} powers.

First consider 𝔭0=𝔭\mathfrak{p}_{0}=\mathfrak{p}. Write

(uj𝔭)=ωaj.\left(\frac{u_{j}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\omega^{a_{j}}.

For 0j2n110\leq j\leq 2^{n-1}-1, apply τ\tau, using τuj=u2n1j1\tau u_{j}=u_{2^{n-1}-j}^{-1}, τω=ω\tau\omega=\omega and τ𝔭=𝔭\tau\mathfrak{p}=\mathfrak{p}:

ωaj=(uj𝔭)=τ(uj𝔭)=(u2n1j1𝔭)=ωa2n1jaj=a2n1j.\displaystyle\omega^{a_{j}}=\left(\frac{u_{j}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\tau\left(\frac{u_{j}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\left(\frac{u_{2^{n-1}-j}^{-1}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\omega^{-a_{2^{n-1}-j}}\implies a_{j}=-a_{2^{n-1}-j}.

We want to pay special attention to what happens when j=2n1jj=2^{n-1}-j, or j=2n2j=2^{n-2}. Then

a2n2=a2n2a2n2=0.a_{2^{n-2}}=-a_{2^{n-2}}\implies a_{2^{n-2}}=0.

We can use the above relations to write the first row of the matrix (aij)(a_{ij}) in terms of aja_{j}, 0j<2n20\leq j<2^{n-2}:

(a0a1a2n210a2n21a1).\begin{pmatrix}a_{0}&a_{1}&\ldots&a_{2^{n-2}-1}&0&-a_{2^{n-2}-1}&\ldots&-a_{1}\end{pmatrix}.

To get the next row, we can apply σ\sigma. Then

ωaj=(uj𝔭)=σ(uj𝔭)=(uj+1σ𝔭)\omega^{a_{j}}=\left(\frac{u_{j}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\sigma\left(\frac{u_{j}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\left(\frac{u_{j+1}}{\sigma\mathfrak{p}}\right)

for 0j<2n110\leq j<2^{n-1}-1 and

ωa1=(u2n111𝔭)=σ(u2n111𝔭)=(u0σ𝔭).\omega^{a_{1}}=\left(\frac{u^{-1}_{2^{n-1}-1}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\sigma\left(\frac{u^{-1}_{2^{n-1}-1}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\left(\frac{u_{0}}{\sigma\mathfrak{p}}\right).

If we continue in this manner, we can construct a 2n×2n12^{n}\times 2^{n-1} matrix, where the top half and bottom half are both skew circulant:

(4.1) (a0a1a2n210a2n21a1a1a0a2n22a2n210a2a2a1a2n23a2n22a2n21a3a1a20a2n21a2n22a0a0a1a2n210a2n21a1a2a3a2n21a2n22a2n23a1a1a20a2n21a2n22a0)\begin{pmatrix}a_{0}&a_{1}&\ldots&a_{2^{n-2}-1}&0&-a_{2^{n-2}-1}&\ldots&-a_{1}\\ a_{1}&a_{0}&\ldots&a_{2^{n-2}-2}&a_{2^{n-2}-1}&0&\ldots&-a_{2}\\ a_{2}&a_{1}&\ldots&a_{2^{n-2}-3}&a_{2^{n-2}-2}&a_{2^{n-2}-1}&\ldots&-a_{3}\\ \vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots\\ -a_{1}&-a_{2}&\ldots&0&a_{2^{n-2}-1}&a_{2^{n-2}-2}&\ldots&a_{0}\\ -a_{0}&-a_{1}&\ldots&-a_{2^{n-2}-1}&0&a_{2^{n-2}-1}&\ldots&a_{1}\\ \vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots\\ a_{2}&a_{3}&\ldots&-a_{2^{n-2}-1}&-a_{2^{n-2}-2}&-a_{2^{n-2}-3}&\ldots&-a_{1}\\ a_{1}&a_{2}&\ldots&0&-a_{2^{n-2}-1}&-a_{2^{n-2}-2}&\ldots&-a_{0}\\ \end{pmatrix}

If n=2n=2, we have the matrix

(a000a0a000a0)\begin{pmatrix}a_{0}&0\\ 0&a_{0}\\ -a_{0}&0\\ 0&-a_{0}\end{pmatrix}

which has rank 0 if a0=0a_{0}=0 and rank 22 if a00a_{0}\neq 0. This means that either both units are local norms at all four primes or neither of them are.

Now we consider n>2n>2. By Proposition 4.4, the top half of the matrix has eigenvectors

(1,ζ,,ζ2n11)(1,\zeta,\ldots,\zeta^{2^{n-1}-1})

where ζ\zeta is one of the 2n12^{n-1} distinct solutions to x2n1+1=0x^{2^{n-1}}+1=0. Note that

[𝔽(ζ2n):𝔽]=2n2[\mathbb{F}_{\ell}(\zeta_{2^{n}}):\mathbb{F}_{\ell}]=2^{n-2}

for ±3 mod 8\ell\equiv\pm 3\text{ mod }8. The corresponding eigenvalue is

a0+a1ζ++a2n21ζ2n21a2n21ζ2n2+1a1ζ2n11\displaystyle a_{0}+a_{1}\zeta+\ldots+a_{2^{n-2}-1}\zeta^{2^{n-2}-1}-a_{2^{n-2}-1}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+1}-\ldots-a_{1}\zeta^{2^{n-1}-1}
=j=02n21ajζjj=12n21a2n2jζ2n2+j.\displaystyle=\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{j}\zeta^{j}-\sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{2^{n-2}-j}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+j}.

We want to show that the eigenvalues are all non-zero unless the matrix identically zero.

By Lemma 4.5, ζ2n2±2ζ2n3+1\zeta^{2^{n-2}}\equiv\pm\sqrt{-2}\zeta^{2^{n-3}}+1. Without loss of generality, we can assume

ζ2n22ζ2n3+1\zeta^{2^{n-2}}\equiv\sqrt{-2}\zeta^{2^{n-3}}+1

by choosing the sign of 2\sqrt{-2}.

Then

ζ2n2+2n32ζ2n2+ζ2n3ζ2n3+2.\zeta^{2^{n-2}+2^{n-3}}\equiv\sqrt{-2}\zeta^{2^{n-2}}+\zeta^{2^{n-3}}\equiv-\zeta^{2^{n-3}}+\sqrt{-2}.

We can use this to reduce the eigenvalue to lower terms.

j=02n21ajζjj=12n21a2n2jζ2n2+j\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{j}\zeta^{j}-\sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{2^{n-2}-j}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+j}
=a0+a2n3ζ2n3+j=12n31(ajζj+a2n3+jζ2n3+j)\displaystyle=a_{0}+a_{2^{n-3}}\zeta^{2^{n-3}}+\sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-3}-1}(a_{j}\zeta^{j}+a_{2^{n-3}+j}\zeta^{2^{n-3}+j})
a2n3ζ2n2+2n3j=12n31(a2n2jζ2n2+j+a2n3jζ2n2+2n3+j)\displaystyle\hskip 7.22743pt-a_{2^{n-3}}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+2^{n-3}}-\sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-3}-1}(a_{2^{n-2}-j}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+j}+a_{2^{n-3}-j}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+2^{n-3}+j})
=a02a2n3+2a2n3ζ2n3+j=12n31((aja2n2j2a2n3j)ζj)\displaystyle=a_{0}-\sqrt{-2}a_{2^{n-3}}+2a_{2^{n-3}}\zeta^{2^{n-3}}+\sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-3}-1}\big{(}(a_{j}-a_{2^{n-2}-j}-\sqrt{-2}a_{2^{n-3}-j})\zeta^{j}\big{)}
+j=12n31((a2n3+j2a2n2j+a2n3j)ζ2n3+j)\displaystyle\hskip 14.45377pt+\sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-3}-1}\big{(}(a_{2^{n-3}+j}-\sqrt{-2}a_{2^{n-2}-j}+a_{2^{n-3}-j})\zeta^{2^{n-3}+j}\big{)}

The eigenvalue is a polynomial in ζ\zeta of degree 2n212^{n-2}-1. Therefore we can write the eigenvalue as a 2n2×2n22^{n-2}\times 2^{n-2} matrix, which we’ll call BB, multiplied by the column vector (a0,a1,,a2n21)(a_{0},a_{1},\ldots,a_{2^{n-2}-1}). Row jj corresponds to the coefficient of ζj\zeta^{j}. We write II to represent the identity matrix and JJ to represent the anti-identity matrix. The anti-identity matrix is all zero except for ones on the diagonal that goes from the upper right corner to the lower left corner.

Then

B=(12I2JJ02JI2J)B=\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c|c|c}1&&-\sqrt{-2}&\\ \hline\cr&I-\sqrt{-2}J&&-J\\ \hline\cr 0&&2&\\ \hline\cr&J&&I-\sqrt{-2}J\end{array}\right)

where the II and JJ matrices are both of size (2n31)×(2n31)(2^{n-3}-1)\times(2^{n-3}-1). The eigenvalue is zero if and only if the product of BB and the column vector (a0,a1,,a2n21)(a_{0},a_{1},\ldots,a_{2^{n-2}-1}) is zero.

Lemma 4.6.

The matrix

(I2JJJI2J)\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I-\sqrt{-2}J&-J\\ \hline\cr J&I-\sqrt{-2}J\end{array}\right)

has full rank.

Proof.

We have the following chain of row operations:

(I2JJJI2J)\displaystyle\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I-\sqrt{-2}J&-J\\ \hline\cr J&I-\sqrt{-2}J\end{array}\right)
(I2JJ2J2I+2J)(multiply 2nd row by 2)\displaystyle\rightarrow\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I-\sqrt{-2}J&-J\\ \hline\cr\sqrt{-2}J&\sqrt{-2}I+2J\end{array}\right)\hskip 21.68121pt\text{(multiply 2nd row by }\sqrt{-2}\text{)}
(I2I+J2J2I+2J)(add 2nd row to 1st)\displaystyle\rightarrow\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I&\sqrt{-2}I+J\\ \hline\cr\sqrt{-2}J&\sqrt{-2}I+2J\end{array}\right)\hskip 21.68121pt\text{(add 2nd row to 1st)}
(I2I+JIJ2I)(multiply 2nd row by 12J)\displaystyle\rightarrow\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I&\sqrt{-2}I+J\\ \hline\cr I&J-\sqrt{-2}I\end{array}\right)\hskip 21.68121pt\text{(multiply 2nd row by }\frac{1}{\sqrt{-2}}J\text{)}
(II+J022I)(2nd row - 1st row )\displaystyle\rightarrow\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I&I+J\\ \hline\cr 0&-2\sqrt{-2}I\end{array}\right)\hskip 21.68121pt\text{(2nd row - 1st row }\text{)}

This matrix has non-zero determinant, and therefore BB has non-zero determinant. ∎

Therefore BB has full rank, and so there are no non-trivial solutions to

B(a0,,a2n21)T=(0,,0).B\cdot(a_{0},\ldots,a_{2^{n-2}-1})^{T}=(0,\ldots,0).

Therefore the eigenvalue equals zero only if aj=0a_{j}=0 for all jj. So either the matrix of norm residue symbols (Equation 4.1) is identically zero or it has full rank.

p3 mod 8\bullet\hskip 10.00002ptp\equiv 3\text{ mod }8, 3 mod 8\ell\equiv 3\text{ mod }8:

Since p3 mod 8p\equiv 3\text{ mod }8, no primes lying over pp are fixed by τ\tau. Without loss of generality, we can choose 𝔭\mathfrak{p} so that τ𝔭=σ𝔭\tau\mathfrak{p}=\sigma\mathfrak{p}. Then

τσj𝔭=σjτ𝔭=σj+1𝔭.\tau\sigma^{j}\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{-j}\tau\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{-j+1}\mathfrak{p}.

Again construct a matrix aija_{ij} over 𝔽\mathbb{F}_{\ell} using the norm residue symbols:

(uj𝔭i)ωaij mod 𝔭i\left(\frac{u_{j}}{\mathfrak{p}_{i}}\right)\equiv\omega^{a_{ij}}\text{ mod }\mathfrak{p}_{i}

where ω\omega is a fixed primitive th\ell^{th} root of unity.

We’ll again start by considering 𝔭0=𝔭\mathfrak{p}_{0}=\mathfrak{p}. Write

(uj𝔭)=ωaj.\left(\frac{u_{j}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\omega^{a_{j}}.

Then using τuj=u2n1j1\tau u_{j}=u_{2^{n-1}-j}^{-1} and the assumption that τ𝔭=σ𝔭\tau\mathfrak{p}=\sigma\mathfrak{p}, for 0j<2n20\leq j<2^{n-2},

ωaj=(uj𝔭)=τ(uj𝔭)=(u2n1jσ𝔭)1.\omega^{a_{j}}=\left(\frac{u_{j}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\tau\left(\frac{u_{j}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\left(\frac{u_{2^{n-1}-j}}{\sigma\mathfrak{p}}\right)^{-1}.

Apply σ2n1\sigma^{2^{n}-1}:

ωaj=σ2n1(ωaj)=(u2n1j11𝔭)=ωa2n1j1.\omega^{a_{j}}=\sigma^{2^{n}-1}(\omega^{a_{j}})=\left(\frac{u^{-1}_{2^{n-1}-j-1}}{\mathfrak{p}}\right)=\omega^{-a_{2^{n-1}-j-1}}.

Therefore the first row of the matrix is

(a0a1a2n21a2n21a0).\begin{pmatrix}a_{0}&a_{1}&\ldots&a_{2^{n-2}-1}&-a_{2^{n-2}-1}&\ldots&-a_{0}\end{pmatrix}.

We can again apply σ\sigma to get the full matrix:

(4.2) (a0a1a2n21a2n21a0a0a0a2n22a2n21a1a1a0a2n23a2n22a2a2a3a2n22a2n23a1a1a2a2n21a2n22a0)\begin{pmatrix}a_{0}&a_{1}&\ldots&a_{2^{n-2}-1}&-a_{2^{n-2}-1}&\ldots&-a_{0}\\ a_{0}&a_{0}&\ldots&a_{2^{n-2}-2}&a_{2^{n-2}-1}&\ldots&-a_{1}\\ a_{1}&a_{0}&\ldots&a_{2^{n-2}-3}&a_{2^{n-2}-2}&\ldots&-a_{2}\\ \vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots\\ a_{2}&a_{3}&\ldots&-a_{2^{n-2}-2}&-a_{2^{n-2}-3}&\ldots&-a_{1}\\ a_{1}&a_{2}&\ldots&-a_{2^{n-2}-1}&-a_{2^{n-2}-2}&\ldots&-a_{0}\\ \end{pmatrix}

If n=2n=2, we have the matrix

(a0a0a0a0a0a0a0a0)\begin{pmatrix}a_{0}&-a_{0}\\ a_{0}&a_{0}\\ -a_{0}&a_{0}\\ -a_{0}&-a_{0}\end{pmatrix}

which has rank 0 if a0=0a_{0}=0 and rank 22 if a00a_{0}\neq 0.

For n>2n>2, we again apply Proposition 4.4. The top half of the matrix has eigenvectors

(1,ζ,,ζ2n11)(1,\zeta,\ldots,\zeta^{2^{n-1}-1})

where ζ\zeta is one of the 2n12^{n-1} distinct solutions to x2n1+1=0x^{2^{n-1}}+1=0. The corresponding eigenvalue is

a0+a1ζ++a2n21ζ2n21a2n21ζ2n2a0ζ2n11\displaystyle a_{0}+a_{1}\zeta+\ldots+a_{2^{n-2}-1}\zeta^{2^{n-2}-1}-a_{2^{n-2}-1}\zeta^{2^{n-2}}-\ldots-a_{0}\zeta^{2^{n-1}-1}
=j=02n21ajζjj=02n21a2n21jζ2n2+j.\displaystyle=\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{j}\zeta^{j}-\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{2^{n-2}-1-j}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+j}.

For n>2n>2, we again have

x2n1+1\displaystyle x^{2^{n-1}}+1 (x2n2+2x2n31)(x2n22x2n31),\displaystyle\equiv(x^{2^{n-2}}+\sqrt{-2}x^{2^{n-3}}-1)(x^{2^{n-2}}-\sqrt{-2}x^{2^{n-3}}-1),
ζ2n2\displaystyle\zeta^{2^{n-2}} 2ζ2n3+1,\displaystyle\equiv\sqrt{-2}\zeta^{2^{n-3}}+1,
ζ2n2+2n3\displaystyle\zeta^{2^{n-2}+2^{n-3}} ζ2n3+2.\displaystyle\equiv-\zeta^{2^{n-3}}+\sqrt{-2}.

We can use this to reduce the eigenvalue to lower terms.

j=02n21ajζjj=02n21a2n21jζ2n2+j\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{j}\zeta^{j}-\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{2^{n-2}-1-j}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+j}
=j=02n31(ajζj+a2n3+jζ2n3+ja2n21jζ2n2+ja2n31jζ2n2+2n3+j)\displaystyle=\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-3}-1}\left(a_{j}\zeta^{j}+a_{2^{n-3}+j}\zeta^{2^{n-3}+j}-a_{2^{n-2}-1-j}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+j}-a_{2^{n-3}-1-j}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+2^{n-3}+j}\right)
j=02n31((aja2n21j2a2n31j)ζj\displaystyle\equiv\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-3}-1}\big{(}(a_{j}-a_{2^{n-2}-1-j}-\sqrt{-2}a_{2^{n-3}-1-j})\zeta^{j}
+(a2n3+j2a2n21j+a2n31j)ζ2n3+j)\displaystyle\hskip 7.22743pt+(a_{2^{n-3}+j}-\sqrt{-2}a_{2^{n-2}-1-j}+a_{2^{n-3}-1-j})\zeta^{2^{n-3}+j}\big{)}

Writing the matrix BB corresponding to the eigenvector as in the previous case, we obtain

B=(I2JJJI2J)B=\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I-\sqrt{-2}J&-J\\ \hline\cr J&I-\sqrt{-2}J\end{array}\right)

where the II and JJ matrices are both of size (2n3)×(2n3)(2^{n-3})\times(2^{n-3}). So by Lemma 4.6, the matrix has full rank and so there are no non-trivial solutions for the {aj}\{a_{j}\} that yield a zero eigenvalue.

p7 mod 8\bullet\hskip 10.00002ptp\equiv 7\text{ mod }8, 5 mod 8\ell\equiv 5\text{ mod }8:

In this case, we again have a fixed prime: τ𝔭=𝔭\tau\mathfrak{p}=\mathfrak{p}. Then

τσj𝔭=σjτ𝔭=σj𝔭.\tau\sigma^{j}\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{-j}\tau\mathfrak{p}=\sigma^{-j}\mathfrak{p}.

We then construct the matrix (aij)(a_{ij}) using the norm residue symbols to get the same skew circulant matrix as in Equation 4.1.

The eigenvalues of the matrix are of the form

j=02n21ajζjj=12n21a2n2jζ2n2+j.\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{j}\zeta^{j}-\sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{2^{n-2}-j}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+j}.

for ζ\zeta a solution to x2n1+1=0x^{2^{n-1}}+1=0. We want to show that the eigenvalues are all non-zero unless the matrix is the zero matrix.

The case n=2n=2 is again trivial. For n>2n>2, we use Lemma 4.5, which tells us that ζ2n2±1\zeta^{2^{n-2}}\equiv\pm\sqrt{-1}. Again, we assume without loss of generality that ζ2n21\zeta^{2^{n-2}}\equiv\sqrt{-1}.

We can use this to reduce the eigenvalue to lower terms.

j=02n21ajζjj=12n21a2n2jζ2n2+j\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{j}\zeta^{j}-\sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{2^{n-2}-j}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+j}
\displaystyle\equiv j=02n21ajζj1j=12n21a2n2jζj\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{j}\zeta^{j}-\sqrt{-1}\sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{2^{n-2}-j}\zeta^{j}
\displaystyle\equiv a0+j=12n21(aj1a2n2j)ζj\displaystyle\hskip 7.22743pta_{0}+\sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-2}-1}(a_{j}-\sqrt{-1}a_{2^{n-2}-j})\zeta^{j}

We write the eigenvalue as a 2n2×2n22^{n-2}\times 2^{n-2} matrix BB multiplied by the column vector (a0,a1,,a2n21)(a_{0},a_{1},\ldots,a_{2^{n-2}-1}) just as in the previous cases.

Then

B=(10I1J0111JI)B=\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c|c|c}1&&0&\\ \hline\cr&I&&-\sqrt{-1}J\\ \hline\cr 0&&1-\sqrt{-1}&\\ \hline\cr&-\sqrt{-1}J&&I\\ \end{array}\right)

where the II and JJ matrices are both of dimension (2n31)×(2n31)(2^{n-3}-1)\times(2^{n-3}-1).

Lemma 4.7.

The matrix

(I1J1JI)\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I&-\sqrt{-1}J\\ \hline\cr-\sqrt{-1}J&I\end{array}\right)

has full rank.

Proof.

We have the following chain of row operations:

(I1J1JI)\displaystyle\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I&-\sqrt{-1}J\\ \hline\cr-\sqrt{-1}J&I\end{array}\right)
(I1JI1J)(multiply 2nd row by 1J)\displaystyle\rightarrow\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I&-\sqrt{-1}J\\ \hline\cr-I&-\sqrt{-1}J\end{array}\right)\hskip 21.68121pt\text{(multiply 2nd row by }-\sqrt{-1}J\text{)}
(I1J021J)(add 1st row to 2nd)\displaystyle\rightarrow\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I&-\sqrt{-1}J\\ \hline\cr 0&-2\sqrt{-1}J\end{array}\right)\hskip 21.68121pt\text{(add 1st row to 2nd)}
(I1J02I)(multiply 2nd row by 1J)\displaystyle\rightarrow\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I&-\sqrt{-1}J\\ \hline\cr 0&2I\end{array}\right)\hskip 21.68121pt\text{(multiply 2nd row by }\sqrt{-1}J\text{)}

This matrix has non-zero determinant. ∎

Therefore BB has full rank and so the only way for the eigenvalue to equal zero is if aj=0a_{j}=0 for all jj.

p3 mod 8\bullet\hskip 10.00002ptp\equiv 3\text{ mod }8, 5 mod 8\ell\equiv 5\text{ mod }8:

Here, the matrix (aij)(a_{ij}) derived from the norm residue symbols is of the same form as in Equation 4.2. Its eigenvalues are of the form

j=02n21ajζjj=02n21a2n21jζ2n2+j.\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{j}\zeta^{j}-\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}a_{2^{n-2}-1-j}\zeta^{2^{n-2}+j}.

By Lemma 4.5, ζ2n21\zeta^{2^{n-2}}\equiv\sqrt{-1}. Therefore the eigenvalue can be reduced to

j=02n21(aj1a2n21j)ζj.\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{2^{n-2}-1}(a_{j}-\sqrt{-1}a_{2^{n-2}-1-j})\zeta^{j}.

This eigenvalue, when embedded into a matrix BB, is of the form

(I1J1JI)\left(\begin{array}[]{c|c}I&-\sqrt{-1}J\\ \hline\cr-\sqrt{-1}J&I\end{array}\right)

where II and JJ have dimension 2n3×2n32^{n-3}\times 2^{n-3}. By Lemma 4.7, we know this matrix has non-zero determinant.

In all four cases, the eigenvalues are all non-zero unless the matrix is identically zero. Therefore the matrix of norm residue symbols is either identically zero or it has full rank.

If primes over more than one rational prime ramify, we can construct matrices for each set of conjugate primes separately. Then each matrix is either full rank or rank zero. Therefore at a given prime, the units are either all local norms or none of them are. If the units are all local norms modulo all of the primes, the units are global norms. Otherwise, none of the units are global norms.                                                                                                                                     ∎

The theorem is false for 1 or 7 mod 8\ell\equiv 1\text{ or }7\text{ mod }8. For example, consider the degree 7 field with defining polynomial

x7x654x5+31x4+558x3+32x21713x1121x^{7}-x^{6}-54x^{5}+31x^{4}+558x^{3}+32x^{2}-1713x-1121

which has discriminant 1276127^{6}. The relative unit group of K3K_{3} has four generators. In this case, the matrix of norm residue symbols has rank 2.

5. The \ell-Class Groups of LnL_{n}

We now develop a model for how often we should expect the units in KnK_{n} to be the norms of elements in LnL_{n}, where KnK_{n} is the nthn^{th} layer of the anti-cyclotomic 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension of (i)\mathbb{Q}(i) and Ln/KnL_{n}/K_{n} is the lift of a cyclic degree \ell extension L/L/\mathbb{Q} of prime degree 2\ell\neq 2. We use the same assumptions as in the statement of Theorem 4.2. We also assume that h(Kn)\ell\nmid h(K_{n}). We expect that the norm residue symbols are equidistributed, and that we can therefore use the results of Theorem 4.2 to derive the probabilities that the units are norms.

5.1. The n=0n=0 Case

The K0K_{0} case is trivial, since there are no fundamental units in K0K_{0}. Therefore by Theorem 3.1, rank A0Δ=0\textrm{rank }A_{0}^{\Delta}=0. We can then apply the following proposition.

Proposition 5.1 (Gras [gras1972], Proposition 4.1).

Let AA be the \ell-class group of a cyclic degree \ell extension L/KL/K with Galois group σ\langle\sigma\rangle and h(K)\ell\nmid h(K). Let

Aj={aA|a(σ1)j=1}A^{j}=\{a\in A|a^{(\sigma-1)^{j}}=1\}

for j0.j\geq 0. Then AjAj+1A^{j}\subseteq A^{j+1} and Aj=Aj+1A^{j}=A^{j+1} if and only if Aj=AA^{j}=A.

Note that A0Δ=A01A_{0}^{\Delta}=A_{0}^{1} Therefore if rank A0Δ=0\textrm{rank }A_{0}^{\Delta}=0 then we must have rank A0=0\textrm{rank }A_{0}=0.

5.2. The n=1n=1 Case

There is one fundamental unit in K1=(ζ8)K_{1}=\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8}). We choose 21\sqrt{2}-1 to be the generator of the unit group. To determine if it is the norm of an element in L1L_{1}, we compute norm residue symbols for the ramified primes. It happens that the n=1n=1 case is special, as seen in the following result.

Proposition 5.2.

Let K1=(ζ8)K_{1}=\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8}) and let L1/K1L_{1}/K_{1} be the lift of a cyclic degree \ell extension L/L/\mathbb{Q}, where \ell is an odd prime and primes lying over \ell do not ramify in L1/K1L_{1}/K_{1}. Let p3 mod 8p\equiv 3\text{ mod }8 be a rational prime that ramifies in L1/K1L_{1}/K_{1}. The norm residue symbols of the units of K1K_{1} are trivial for the primes above pp.

Proof.

To prove the theorem, we let L1/K1L^{\prime}_{1}/K_{1} be the lift of a cyclic degree \ell extension L/L^{\prime}/\mathbb{Q} in which only primes above pp ramify. Since L1L^{\prime}_{1} is the lift of an abelian degree \ell number field, L1(ζ8p)L^{\prime}_{1}\subseteq\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8p}). Since 1ζ8p1-\zeta_{8p} is a unit in (ζ8p)\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8p}), N(ζ8p)/L1(1ζ8p)N_{\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8p})/L^{\prime}_{1}}(1-\zeta_{8p}) is a unit in L1L^{\prime}_{1}.

Note that

NL1/Q(ζ8)N(ζ8p)/L1(1ζ8p)\displaystyle N_{L^{\prime}_{1}/Q(\zeta_{8})}N_{\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8p})/L^{\prime}_{1}}\Big{(}1-\zeta_{8p}\Big{)} =N(ζ8p)/(ζ8)(1ζ8p)\displaystyle=N_{\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8p})/\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8})}\Big{(}1-\zeta_{8p}\Big{)}
=1b<8pb1 mod 8(b,p)=1(1ζ8pb)\displaystyle=\prod_{\begin{subarray}{c}1\leq b<8p\\ b\equiv 1\text{ mod }8\\ (b,p)=1\end{subarray}}\Big{(}1-\zeta_{8p}^{b}\Big{)}
=1b<8pb1 mod 8(1ζ8pb)1b<8pb1 mod 8b0 mod p(1ζ8pb)\displaystyle=\frac{\prod_{\begin{subarray}{c}1\leq b<8p\\ b\equiv 1\text{ mod }8\end{subarray}}\Big{(}1-\zeta_{8p}^{b}\Big{)}}{\prod_{\begin{subarray}{c}1\leq b<8p\\ b\equiv 1\text{ mod }8\\ b\equiv 0\text{ mod }p\end{subarray}}\Big{(}1-\zeta_{8p}^{b}\Big{)}}

We also have

1b<8pb1 mod 8(1ζ8pb)=1ζ8.\prod_{\begin{subarray}{c}1\leq b<8p\\ b\equiv 1\text{ mod }8\end{subarray}}\Big{(}1-\zeta_{8p}^{b}\Big{)}=1-\zeta_{8}.

Since p3 mod 8p\equiv 3\text{ mod }8, the only value of bb between 11 and 8p8p that is 0 mod p0\text{ mod }p and 1 mod 81\text{ mod }8 is 3p3p. Therefore

N(ζ8p)/(ζ8)(1ζ8p)=1ζ81ζ83=ζ81(21)\displaystyle N_{\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8p})/\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8})}\Big{(}1-\zeta_{8p}\Big{)}=\frac{1-\zeta_{8}}{1-\zeta_{8}^{3}}=\zeta_{8}^{-1}(\sqrt{2}-1)

Since L1/K1L^{\prime}_{1}/K_{1} is a degree 2\ell\neq 2 extension, 21\sqrt{2}-1 is the norm of a unit in L1L^{\prime}_{1}.

Now note that L1(ζ8pm)L_{1}\subseteq\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8pm}) for some mm with gcd(p,m)=1\gcd(\ell p,m)=1. Since 1ζ8p1-\zeta_{8p} is a unit in (ζ8p)\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8p}), it is a norm for the unramified extension p(ζ8pm)/p(ζ8p)\mathbb{Q}_{p}(\zeta_{8pm})/\mathbb{Q}_{p}(\zeta_{8p}). Since ζ81(21)\zeta_{8}^{-1}(\sqrt{2}-1) is the norm of 1ζ8p1-\zeta_{8p} for (ζ8p)/(ζ8)\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8p})/\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8}), ζ81(21)\zeta_{8}^{-1}(\sqrt{2}-1) is a norm for p(ζ8pm)/p(ζ8)\mathbb{Q}_{p}(\zeta_{8pm})/\mathbb{Q}_{p}(\zeta_{8}). This means that it is a norm for the subextension obtained by completing L1/(ζ8)L_{1}/\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8}) at a prime above pp. Since \ell is odd, 21\sqrt{2}-1 is a local norm at all primes above pp. ∎

Therefore if all ramified primes in L1/K1L_{1}/K_{1} lie over primes congruent to 3 mod 83\text{ mod }8, then the norm residue symbols of the units of K1K_{1} are all trivial and so by Theorem 3.1 we have rank A1Δ=1\textrm{rank }A_{1}^{\Delta}=1.

The norm residue symbols are not necessarily trivial at primes that are 7 mod 87\text{ mod }8. Recall that we let tt be the number of rational primes that ramify in L/L/\mathbb{Q} and that all such primes are inert in K0/K_{0}/\mathbb{Q}. Let 0st0\leq s\leq t be the number of rational primes below the ramified primes in L1/K1L_{1}/K_{1} that are congruent to 7 mod 87\text{ mod }8. There are then ss independent norm residue symbols, all of which must be trivial in order for the fundamental unit to be a global norm. Therefore the probability that rank A1Δ=1\textrm{rank }A_{1}^{\Delta}=1 is s\ell^{-s} and the probability that rank A1Δ=0\textrm{rank }A_{1}^{\Delta}=0 is 1s1-\ell^{-s}.

5.3. Ln/KnL_{n}/K_{n} for n>1n>1

For the general n>1n>1 case, there are 2n12^{n-1} independent elements of UnrelU_{n}^{rel} (see Corollary 2.2). By Theorem 4.2, for n2n\geq 2, either all of these relative units in KnK_{n} are norms of elements in LnL_{n} modulo th\ell^{th} powers or none of them are, and there are 2n22^{n-2} independent norm residue symbols that determine if the units are norms.

Under the assumption that norm residue symbols are equidistributed, we can compute the probabilities that the relative units modulo th\ell^{th} powers are norms. The probability that the relative units in K1K_{1} are all norms of elements in L1L_{1} is 1/s1/\ell^{s}. For n>1n>1, the probability that the relative units in KnK_{n} are all norms of elements in LnL_{n} is 1/2n2t1/\ell^{2^{n-2}t}.

Let AnA_{n} be the \ell-class group of LnL_{n}. By Theorem 3.1, we have

rank AnΔ=2nt1rn\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=2^{n}t-1-r_{n}

where rnr_{n} is the rank of the matrix of norm residue symbols for the units. This assumes that \ell does not divide h(Kn)h(K_{n}), which is quite possibly true. If \ell does divide h(Kn)h(K_{n}), then these heuristics apply to the class group of LnL_{n} excluding the contribution from KnK_{n}.

The probability that none of the units are norms in KnK_{n} is the product of the probabilities that none of the relative units are norms in KjK_{j} for 1jn1\leq j\leq n.

If rnr_{n} is maximal, then rn=2n1r_{n}=2^{n}-1. Therefore

rank AnΔ=2nt2n.\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=2^{n}t-2^{n}.

The probability that the matrix is full rank at each step (which means rnr_{n} is maximal) is

(11/s)j=2n(11/2j2t).(1-1/\ell^{s})\prod_{j=2}^{n}(1-1/\ell^{2^{j-2}t}).

In general, we can determine the rank of the matrix of norm residue symbols by considering the matrices corresponding to the units of Kj+1K_{j+1}, 0jn10\leq j\leq n-1, independently. At each level, the matrix of norm residue symbols is either full rank or identically zero.

For example, suppose we wish to know the probability that the rank of the norm residue matrix is five. Since there are 2n12^{n-1} relative units in KnK_{n}, n>0n>0, and either all relative units at a given level are norms or none of them are, then the only way for the rank of the matrix to be five is for the unit in K1K_{1} and the four relative units of K3K_{3} to be norms.

Consider the case where just one prime ramifies in L/KL/K. If the ramified prime is 7 mod 87\text{ mod }8, then a full rank norm residue symbol matrix implies that rank AnΔ=0\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=0. The probability that rank AnΔ=0\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=0 is

(5.1) (11/)j=2n(11/2j2).\displaystyle(1-1/\ell)\prod_{j=2}^{n}(1-1/\ell^{2^{j-2}}).

So we expect that

limn(11/)j=2n(11/2j2)\displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(1-1/\ell)\prod_{j=2}^{n}(1-1/\ell^{2^{j-2}})

of fields will have AnΔ1A_{n}^{\Delta}\simeq 1 up the tower. We can then apply Proposition 5.1 to see that if AnΔ1A_{n}^{\Delta}\simeq 1, then the \ell-class group AnA_{n} is also trivial up the tower.

Now consider the case where the ramified prime is 3 mod 83\text{ mod }8. Then by Proposition 5.2, the fundamental unit of K1K_{1} is always a norm, and so the probability that rank AnΔ=1\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=1 is

(5.2) j=2n(11/2j2).\displaystyle\prod_{j=2}^{n}(1-1/\ell^{2^{j-2}}).

So we expect in the limit that

limnj=2n(11/2j2)\displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\prod_{j=2}^{n}(1-1/\ell^{2^{j-2}})

of fields will have AnΔ/A_{n}^{\Delta}\simeq\mathbb{Z}/\ell\mathbb{Z} up the tower. Therefore the rank of AnΔA_{n}^{\Delta} is bounded, and so the rank of AnA_{n} is bounded. However, by the following proposition, this implies that the order of AnA_{n} is also bounded.

Proposition 5.3 (Washington [washington1975class], Proposition 1).

Let KK be a number field, let pp be a prime, and let K/KK_{\infty}/K be any p\mathbb{Z}_{p}-extension. KnK_{n} is the unique subfield of KK_{\infty} that is degree pnp^{n} over KK. Let p\ell\neq p be any other prime number and let ene_{n} be such that en\ell^{e_{n}} is the exact power of \ell dividing h(Kn)h(K_{n}). Let AnA_{n} be the \ell-class group of KnK_{n}. Then if rank An\textrm{rank }A_{n} is bounded as nn\rightarrow\infty, then ene_{n} is also bounded.

5.4. Washington’s Conjecture

In a 1975 paper, Washington made the following conjecture.

Conjecture 5.4 (Washington [washington1975class]).

Let p\ell\neq p be primes. Let KK be a number field. Let K/KK_{\infty}/K be a p\mathbb{Z}_{p}-extension and let KnK_{n} be the unique subfield of KK_{\infty} which is degree pnp^{n} over KK. Let h(Kn)=enrh(K_{n})=\ell^{e_{n}}r, r\ell\nmid r be the class number of KnK_{n}. Then there exist β0\beta\geq 0 and γ\gamma independent of nn such that en=βpn+γe_{n}=\beta p^{n}+\gamma for sufficiently large nn.

By Lemma 4.1, we have an increasing sequence

NLn/KnLn×EKnNLn+1/Kn+1Ln+1×EKn+1\ldots\subseteq N_{L_{n}/K_{n}}L_{n}^{\times}\cap E_{K_{n}}\subseteq\hskip 7.22743ptN_{L_{n+1}/K_{n+1}}L_{n+1}^{\times}\cap E_{K_{n+1}}\subseteq\ldots

For n2n\geq 2, the probability that there is a strict increase from step nn to step n+1n+1 is

1/2n1t.1/\ell^{2^{n-1}t}.

Therefore the probability that there is a strict increase infinitely often is bounded above by

j=N1/2j1t\sum_{j=N}^{\infty}1/\ell^{2^{j-1}t}

for every NN, which converges quickly to zero as NN\rightarrow\infty. In other words, the order of

NLn/KnLnEKnN_{L_{n}/K_{n}}L_{n}\cap E_{K_{n}}

stabilizes with probability 1. Therefore by Chevalley’s formula (Theorem 3.1) we expect that there exists an N0N_{0} such that the \ell-rank of AnΔA_{n}^{\Delta} is

β2n+γ\beta\cdot 2^{n}+\gamma

for nN0n\geq N_{0}. Therefore we expect AnΔA_{n}^{\Delta} to satisfy Conjecture 5.4.

6. Data

In this section, we include some computational results on the ranks of class groups in the first few layers in cubic lifts of the anti-cyclotomic 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension of (i)\mathbb{Q}(i). We restrict to the case where just one prime ramifies in L/L/\mathbb{Q}. The class groups were computed using Sage [sagemath] assuming the Generalized Riemann Hypothesis.

From [hubbardwashington2017]*Proposition 5, we have explicit polynomials for the first layers of the anti-cyclotomic 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension of (i)\mathbb{Q}(i). The extension K1/K0K_{1}/K_{0} has defining polynomial x2+2x^{2}+2 and K2/K0K_{2}/K_{0} has defining polynomial x4+2x^{4}+2. For cubic extensions, we can only compute the class group of LnL_{n} for n2n\leq 2 with our current computational resources.

Using the results from §5, we compute the predicted probabilities for the ranks of AnΔA_{n}^{\Delta}.

nn P(rank AnΔ=0)P(\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=0) P(rank AnΔ=1)P(\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=1) P(rank AnΔ=2)P(\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=2) P(rank AnΔ=3)P(\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=3)
0 1 0 0 0
1 2/32/3 1/31/3 0 0
2 4/94/9 2/92/9 2/92/9 1/91/9
Table 1. One prime congruent to 7 mod 87\text{ mod }8 ramifies.
nn P(rank AnΔ=0)P(\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=0) P(rank AnΔ=1)P(\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=1) P(rank AnΔ=2)P(\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=2) P(rank AnΔ=3)P(\textrm{rank }A_{n}^{\Delta}=3)
0 1 0 0 0
1 0 11 0 0
2 0 2/32/3 0 1/31/3
Table 2. One prime congruent to 3 mod 83\text{ mod }8 ramifies.

Tables 3 and 4 give our computational results. We include the number of fields with class group of the given rank and the proportion in parentheses. Recall that if AnΔA_{n}^{\Delta} is trivial then so is AnA_{n}.

nn # fields Rank 0 Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3
0 156 156 (1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)
1 29856 19899 (.6665) 8821 (.2955) 1136 (.0380) 0 (0)
2 25 11 (.44) 4 (0.16) 9 (.36) 1 (.04)
Table 3. Rank of the 33-class group AnA_{n} when one prime congruent to 7 mod 87\text{ mod }8 ramifies in L/L/\mathbb{Q}.
nn # fields Rank 0 Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3 Rank 4
0 155 155 (1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)
1 873 0 (0) 589 (.6747) 284 (.3253) 0 (0) 0 (0)
2 20 0 (0) 10 (0.5) 5 (.25) 2 (.1) 3 (.15)
Table 4. Rank of the 33-class group AnA_{n} when one prime congruent to 3 mod 83\text{ mod }8 ramifies in L/L/\mathbb{Q}.

Heuristics derived from the theory of ambiguous ideals and strongly ambiguous ideals explain the difference between the rank of AnΔA_{n}^{\Delta} and the rank of AnA_{n}. Although details are outside the scope of this paper, they can be found in [kirschthesis]*§6.2.2.

For example, we can explain why 2/32/3 of the class groups of A1A_{1} have rank 0 when the ramified prime is 7 mod 87\text{ mod }8 and why 2/32/3 of the class groups of A1A_{1} have rank 1 when the ramified prime is 3 mod 83\text{ mod }8. The heuristics depend on the behavior of the ambiguous and strongly ambiguous ideals. The fundamental difference between the 3 mod 83\text{ mod }8 case and the 7 mod 87\text{ mod }8 case can be explained via the following proposition.

Proposition 6.1 (Lemmermeyer [lemmermeyer2013ambiguous2], Theorem 1).

Let A¯nΔ\bar{A}_{n}^{\Delta} be the strongly ambiguous class group of LnL_{n}. Then

[AnΔ:A¯nΔ]=[EKn:NLn/KnELn]/[EKn:EKnNLn/KnLn×].[A_{n}^{\Delta}:\bar{A}_{n}^{\Delta}]=[E_{K_{n}}:N_{L_{n}/K_{n}}E_{L_{n}}]\big{/}[E_{K_{n}}:E_{K_{n}}\cap N_{L_{n}/K_{n}}L_{n}^{\times}].

From the proof of Proposition 5.2, we can see that for primes above 3 mod 83\text{ mod }8, the fundamental unit of K1K_{1} is the norm of a unit of L1L_{1}. Therefore in this case all ambiguous ideals are strongly ambiguous. However in the 7 mod 87\text{ mod }8 we may have ambiguous ideals that are not strongly ambiguous. To develop the heuristics, we consider the matrices of Artin symbols (as in Wittmann [wittmannthesis]). These matrices have a different form depending on if there are ambiguous ideals that are not strongly ambiguous, and this form is what determines the predicted probabilities of class group rank.

Note that there are more class groups computed for the n=1n=1 case when p7 mod 8p\equiv 7\text{ mod }8. This is because the class group in this case has the same rank as the class group of the real subfield of L1L_{1}, and we can compute class group of larger discriminants when the degree is lower.

Proposition 6.2.

Let K/K0K_{\infty}/K_{0} be the anti-cyclotomic 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension of K0=(i)K_{0}=\mathbb{Q}(i). Let L/L/\mathbb{Q} be a cyclic degree \ell extension in which only primes that are congruent to 7 mod 87\text{ mod }8 ramify. Let L1/K1L_{1}/K_{1} be the lift of L/L/\mathbb{Q} and L^1\hat{L}_{1} be the real subfield of L1L_{1}. Let A(L1)A(L_{1}) be the \ell-class group of L1L_{1} and let A(L^1)A(\hat{L}_{1}) be the \ell-class group of L^1\hat{L}_{1}. Then

A(L^1)A(L1).A(\hat{L}_{1})\simeq A(L_{1}).
Proof.

We have the following diagram of fields:

\mathbb{Q}K0=(i)K_{0}=\mathbb{Q}(i)(2)\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2})L1^\hat{L_{1}}K1=(ζ8)K_{1}=\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8})L1{L_{1}}2\ell22\ell22

Let Δ=Gal(L1/K1)\Delta=\textrm{Gal}(L_{1}/K_{1}) and let Δ^=Gal(L^1/(2))\hat{\Delta}=\textrm{Gal}\big{(}\hat{L}_{1}/\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2})\big{)}. Let

[EK1:EK1NL1/K1(L1×)]=e[E_{K_{1}}:E_{K_{1}}\cap N_{L_{1}/K_{1}}(L_{1}^{\times})]=\ell^{e}

and

[E(2):E(2)NL^1/(2)(L^1×)]=e^.[E_{\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2})}:E_{\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2})}\cap N_{\hat{L}_{1}/\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2})}(\hat{L}_{1}^{\times})]=\ell^{\hat{e}}.

Then by Chevalley’s formula for L1^/(2)\hat{L_{1}}/\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2}),

|A(L1^)Δ|=t1e^|{A}(\hat{L_{1}})^{\Delta}|=\ell^{t-1-\hat{e}}

and similarly for L1/(ζ8)L_{1}/\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8}),

|A(L1)Δ^|=t1e.|{A}({L_{1}})^{\hat{\Delta}}|=\ell^{t-1-e}.

Since there is only one fundamental unit in (ζ8)\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8}) and it is 21\sqrt{2}-1, and since 21\sqrt{2}-1 is a norm from L1L_{1} if and only if it is a norm from L^1\hat{L}_{1}, we have e=e^e=\hat{e}. Therefore |A(L1^)Δ^|=|A(L1)Δ||{A}(\hat{L_{1}})^{\hat{\Delta}}|=|{A}({L_{1}})^{\Delta}|. Since these are both elementary groups, because (2)\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2}) and (ζ8)\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_{8}) both have class number 1, they must be isomorphic.

Using the same notation as Washington [washington2012introduction]*§10.2, let

Gal(L1/L1^)={1,J}\textrm{Gal}(L_{1}/\hat{L_{1}})=\{1,J\}

where JJ is complex conjugation and let

A(L1)±=1±J2A(L1).{A}({L_{1}})^{\pm}=\frac{1\pm J}{2}{A}({L_{1}}).

Then

A(L1)=A(L1)+A(L1).{A}({L_{1}})={A}({L_{1}})^{+}\oplus{A}({L_{1}})^{-}.

Then since A(L1^){A}(\hat{L_{1}}) injects into A(L1)+{A}({L_{1}})^{+}, we have the following sequence of embeddings:

A(L1^)Δ^(A(L1)+)ΔA(L1)ΔA(L1^)Δ^{A}(\hat{L_{1}})^{\hat{\Delta}}\hookrightarrow\left({A}({L_{1}})^{+}\right)^{\Delta}\hookrightarrow{A}({L_{1}})^{\Delta}\simeq{A}(\hat{L_{1}})^{\hat{\Delta}}

and therefore we must have equality. Therefore

(A(L1)+)ΔA(L1)Δ\left({A}({L_{1}})^{+}\right)^{\Delta}\simeq{A}({L_{1}})^{\Delta}

and so (A(L1))Δ\left({A}({L_{1}})^{-}\right)^{\Delta} must be trivial. By Nakayama’s lemma, A(L1){A}({L_{1}})^{-} must also be trivial. Additionally,

A(L1)+=NL1/L^1A(L1)A(L^1)A(L1)+A(L_{1})^{+}=N_{L_{1}/\hat{L}_{1}}A(L_{1})\hookrightarrow A(\hat{L}_{1})\hookrightarrow A(L_{1})^{+}

and therefore

A(L1)A(L1)+A(L^1).A(L_{1})\simeq A(L_{1})^{+}\simeq A(\hat{L}_{1}).

6.1. The Structure Theorem

During the course of this research, we encountered a numerical example that exhibited a phenomenom for the p\ell\neq p case that could not have occured in the =p\ell=p case. We wondered if there could be a uniform algebraic treatment of the cases for all \ell and if there were some undiscovered structure theorem for the p\ell\neq p case. The following indicates that this might not be the case.

First, we review the structure theorem for the \ell-class group in \mathbb{Z}_{\ell}-extensions.

Theorem 6.3.

Let L/LL_{\infty}/L be a \mathbb{Z}_{\ell}-extension. Let en\ell^{e_{n}} be the exact power of \ell dividing the class number of LnL_{n}. Then there exist integers λ0\lambda\geq 0, μ0\mu\geq 0, and ν\nu, all independent of nn, and an integer n0n_{0} such that for all nn0n\geq n_{0},

en=μn+λn+ν.e_{n}=\mu\ell^{n}+\lambda n+\nu.

Let K0K_{0} be an imaginary quadratic field and let L/L/\mathbb{Q} be an extension of degree \ell. Let K/K0K_{\infty}/K_{0} be the anti-cyclotomic \mathbb{Z}_{\ell}-extension and let L/L0L_{\infty}/L_{0} be its lift. Furthermore, let

Λ=[[T]]\Lambda=\mathbb{Z}_{\ell}[[T]]

and

νn=(1+T)n1+(1+T)n2++(1+T)+1.\nu_{n}=(1+T)^{\ell^{n}-1}+(1+T)^{\ell^{n}-2}+\ldots+(1+T)+1.

Then an elementary Λ\Lambda-module EE is defined to be one of the form

E=iΛ/(μi)jΛ/(fj)E=\bigoplus_{i}\Lambda/(\ell^{\mu_{i}})\oplus\bigoplus_{j}\Lambda/(f_{j})

where μi>0\mu_{i}>0 is an integer and fjf_{j} is a distinguished polynomial, which means it is monic and \ell divides each coefficient (except the leading monic coefficient). Let AnA_{n} be the \ell-class group of LnL_{n} and en\ell^{e_{n}} be the exact power of \ell dividing the class number of LnL_{n}.

Proposition 6.4 ([hubbardwashington2017]*Proposition 12).

There exist an elementary Λ\Lambda-module EE and a finite Λ\Lambda-module FF such that

|An|=|A0||F/νnF||E/νnE|e0+μ(n1).|A_{n}|=|A_{0}|\cdot|F/\nu_{n}F|\cdot|E/\nu_{n}E|\geq\ell^{e_{0}+\mu(\ell^{n}-1)}.

In particular,

μene0n1.\mu\leq\frac{e_{n}-e_{0}}{\ell^{n}-1}.

Hubbard and Washington prove the following theorem.

Theorem 6.5 ([hubbardwashington2017]*Theorem 2).

Suppose ss distinct primes qq\neq\ell are inert in K0/K_{0}/\mathbb{Q} and ramify in L0/K0L_{0}/K_{0}, a degree \ell extension. Then μs1\mu\geq s-1 for the \mathbb{Z}_{\ell}-extension L/L0L_{\infty}/L_{0}.

Consider the class groups in the 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-extension (so =2\ell=2). Assume two primes ramify in L0/K0L_{0}/K_{0} and we have e0=1e_{0}=1 and e1=2e_{1}=2. Then by Proposition 6.4

μe1e011=1\mu\leq\frac{e_{1}-e_{0}}{\ell^{1}-1}=1

and by Theorem 6.5,

μ1.\mu\geq 1.

Therefore μ=1\mu=1.

By [hubbardwashington2017]*Proposition 17, there exists a Λ\Lambda-module EE^{\prime} such that

ene0μ(n1)=|F/νnF|×|E/νnE|.\ell^{e_{n}-e_{0}-\mu(\ell^{n}-1)}=|F/\nu_{n}F|\times|E^{\prime}/\nu_{n}E^{\prime}|.

For n=1n=1, the left-hand side is 1, and therefore both orders on the right must be 1. Then by Nakayama’s Lemma, both FF and EE^{\prime} must be trivial.

Therefore ene0μ(n1)=1\ell^{e_{n}-e_{0}-\mu(\ell^{n}-1)}=1 for all nn. Since e0=1e_{0}=1, μ=1\mu=1 and =2\ell=2, we have

(6.1) en=2n.\displaystyle e_{n}=2^{n}.

Now let’s consider the p\ell\neq p situation. Let K0=(i)K_{0}=\mathbb{Q}(i) and consider the cyclic cubic extension L0/K0L_{0}/K_{0} given by

x376x2+1636x7064x^{3}-76x^{2}+1636x-7064

in which only primes over 7 and 31 ramify.

We have the following 3-class groups.

A0\displaystyle A_{0} =/3\displaystyle=\mathbb{Z}/3\mathbb{Z}
A1\displaystyle A_{1} =(/3)2\displaystyle=(\mathbb{Z}/3\mathbb{Z})^{2}
A2\displaystyle A_{2} =(/3)6\displaystyle=(\mathbb{Z}/3\mathbb{Z})^{6}

By Chevalley’s formula, en2n1e_{n}\geq 2^{n}-1, so we are in the analogue of the μ1\mu\geq 1 situation. But using the results above for the =p\ell=p case, the sequence e0=1e_{0}=1, e1=2e_{1}=2, e2=6e_{2}=6 is not possible for the \ell-part of class group (see Equation 6.1). So the theory resulting from the structure theorem for the \ell-class group in \mathbb{Z}_{\ell}-extensions does not extend to the pp-class group in \mathbb{Z}_{\ell}-extensions when pp\neq\ell.

References