Maths > Abelian varieties > Polarisations, dual abelian varieties and the Weil pairing
Weil pairings: the skew-symmetric pairing
Posted by Martin Orr on Tuesday, 06 September 2011 at 13:52
Last time, we defined a pairing
By composing this with a polarisation, we get a pairing of 
with itself.
This pairing is symplectic; the proof of this will occupy most of the post.
We will also see that the action of the Galois group on this pairing is given by the (inverse of the) cyclotomic character,
as I promised a long time ago (in the comments).
This tells us that the image of the -adic Galois representation of 
is contained in 
.
This is the end of my series on Mumford-Tate groups and 
-adic representations attached to abelian varieties.
Definition of the pairing
Let be a polarisation.
We define 
by
![e_m^\phi : A[m] \times A[m] \to \mu_m](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1638.png)
where 
is the Weil pairing defined last time.![e_m : A[m] \times A^\vee[m] \to \mu_m](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1640.png)
Taking the inverse limit over powers of , we get the 
-adic pairing


The theta group
We would like to show that the pairings are symplectic.
The elegant way to do this is by introducing the theta group of a line bundle.
Let be a line bundle on 
.
We define the theta group of 
to be

This is a group under the operation

The inverse is given by

(The formula for 
is functorial in 
, so really this is not just a group but the functor of points of a group scheme.)
Projection onto the first factor gives a surjection
where 
.
We are mainly interested in non-degenerate line bundles i.e. those for which 
is finite;
we have already proved that ample line bundles are non-degenerate.
The kernel of is the group of automorphisms of 
, which is the scalars.
So we have a short exact sequence of group schemes


This short exact sequence has the following two properties:
is contained in the centre of
.
is commutative.
These two properties imply that the commutator of any ![[x, y] = xyx^{-1}y^{-1}](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1653.png)
lies in 
, and that 
depends only on ![[x, y]](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1655.png)
and 
.
So the commutator induces a function 
,
and a calculation shows that this is a bihomomorphism.
An explicit calculation of the commutator gives
where 
and 
are in 
.
The commutator pairing is obviously symplectic.
So in order to show that is symplectic, it will suffice to relate it to 
.
Theorem. Let
be a polarisation. Ifandsuch that, thenProof. We must first check that
so thatis defined. Since, we haveSo. Likewiseso that.Choose an isomorphism
. Thanks to the canonical isomorphismswe can also interpretas an isomorphism. Hence, by the definition of the Weil pairing, we haveSince the line bundles
andare not just isomorphic but equal, we have.Substituting
andin the commutator formula gives
The Galois action
All the pairings we have defined are compatible with the Galois action in that if , then


Now is a free 
-module of rank 1,
traditionally written as 
.
The Galois action on this module is given by a character 
called the 
-adic cyclotomic character.
Concretely


Meanwhile the natural action of on the space 
of symplectic forms on 
is given by

So we see that


The representation of on 
preserves the non-degenerate symplectic pairing 
up to a scalar,
so the image of this representation is contained in 
.
We saw long ago that the Mumford-Tate group is contained in 
,
so this was expected.

![x, y \in A[m]](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1664.png)
![z \in A[m^2]](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1665.png)

![e_m^{\phi}(x, y) = e^{[m]^* \mathcal{L}}(x, z).](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1667.png)
![x, z \in K([m]^* \mathcal{L})](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1668.png)
![e^{[m]^* \mathcal{L}}(x, z)](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1669.png)
![[m] \circ t_z = t_y \circ [m]](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1670.png)
![[m]^*\mathcal{L}^{-1} \otimes t_z^* [m]^* \mathcal{L}
\,\cong\, [m]^* \mathcal{L}^{-1} \otimes [m]^* t_y^* \mathcal{L}
\,\cong\, [m]^* \phi(y)
\,\cong\, \phi(y)^m
\,\cong\, \mathcal{O}.](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1671.png)
![z \in K([m]^* \mathcal{L})](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1672.png)
![[m] = [m] \circ t_x](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1673.png)
![x \in K([m]^* \mathcal{L})](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1674.png)
![g : [m]^* \mathcal{L} \to t_z^* [m]^* \mathcal{L}](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1675.png)
![\operatorname{Hom}([m]^* \mathcal{L}, t_z^* [m]^* \mathcal{L})
\,\cong\, [m]^* \mathcal{L}^{-1} \otimes t_z^* [m]^* \mathcal{L}
\,\cong\, [m]^* \phi(y)
\,\cong\, \operatorname{Hom}(\mathcal{O}, [m]^* \phi(y)),](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1676.png)

![\mathcal{O} \to [m]^* \phi(y)](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1677.png)

![[m]^* \mathcal{L}](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1679.png)
![t_x^* [m]^* \mathcal{L}](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1680.png)



![e^{[m]^* \mathcal{L}}(x, z) = t_x^* g^{-1} \circ g.](http://www.martinorr.name/blog/images/mathtex/1684.png)