3
$\begingroup$

Let K be a field of characteristic 0, E/K an elliptic curve. The "Lefschetz principle" implies that $E[m] \simeq \mathbb{Z}/m \times \mathbb{Z}/m$, but for this to follow from the result for complex elliptic curves, one has to know that the $m$-torsion points of $E$ are in fact defined over $\overline{K}$.

Silverman gives an argument for this in his book on elliptic curves, which I don't understand. He says: "For $P \in E(\overline{K})$, the set $[m]^{-1}(P)$ is finite and invariant under $G_{\overline{K}/K}$, so every point in $[m]^{-1}(P)$ is defined over $\overline{K}$."

First, it seems to me that one has to take $P \in E(K)$ for the pre-image under $[m]$ to be invariant under $G_{\overline{K}/K}$: $P^{\sigma} = ([m](Q))^{\sigma} = [m](Q^{\sigma})$, so $Q^{\sigma}$ is still in the pre-image if and only if $P^{\sigma} = P$.

Second, I don't see how this implies the desired result, as one would have the same invariance under Galois if $\overline{K}$ were replaced by any field extension.

Can someone enlighten me?

  • 0
    @M Turgeon - still, I believe my comment shows that $\sigma$ takes a point in the pre-image of $P$ to a point in the pre-image of $P^{\sigma}$, hence can't possibly preserve the set if $P \neq P^{\sigma}$. @Lubin - I'm not objecting so much as asking how the invariance of the set under Galois would imply that it's defined over $\overline{K}$; the sentence seems phrased as if this followed from the remark that it's invariant under $G_{\overline{K}/K}$, but something additional must be needed.2012-05-30

1 Answers 1

2

I think it is not necessary to invoke Galois group. For $P\in E(K)$, $[m]^{-1}(P)$ is a finite algebraic variety over $K$, so all its points have coordinates in $\overline{K}$.