whose second map is injective (Proposition and composition is the canonical
homomorphism that is injective. It therefore suffices to show that the composite
map is an isomorphism. But M is free of rank 1 as an OL,-module, so it is
equivalent to show that the natural map
OL, EndOL, (A[

is an isomorphism for all .
The case = char(K) is trivial, as then the -adic Tate module T (A) is free
of rank 1 over OL, (since V (A) is free of rank 1 over L , due to faithfulness and
Q -dimension reasons). Now assume char(K) = p 0 and = p. Decomposing
A[p∞] according to the primitive idempotents of OL,p, for each p-adic place v of L
the v-factor has height at least [Lv : Qp] (by Proposition and hence height
exactly [Lv : Qp]. Thus, it suffices to prove more generally that if X is a p-divisible
group over K of height h 0 and F is a p-adic field of degree h over Qp such that
OF End(X) then OF is its own centralizer in End(X).
We may and do assume that K is algebraically closed, so the Dieudonn´ e module
makes sense and is free of rank 1 as a W (K) ⊗Zp OF -module (Proposition Thus, any OF -linear endomorphism f of X gives rise to a W (K) ⊗Zp OF -
linear endomorphism of
must be multiplication by some c
W (K) ⊗Zp OF . But
commutes with the F operator on
so c is
invariant under the absolute Frobenius automorphism σ of W (K). This forces
c W
⊗Zp OF = OF , so f is an OF -multiplier, as desired. Remark. The O-linear projectivity hypothesis on M in the construction
of M ⊗O A cannot be dropped, even when the base is the spectrum of a discrete
valuation ring. For example, if R is a p-adic discrete valuation ring and E is an
elliptic curve over R with endomorphism ring O = Z[p

−p] (as can be easily con-
structed using classical CM theory for elliptic curves), then for the non-projective
O-module M = Z[

−p] the fppf sheafification of the functor T M ⊗O E(T ) on
R-schemes is not representable. (The idea is as follows. First one proves that a
representing object, if one exists, must be an elliptic curve E . By presenting M
over O using two generators and two relations, we get a quotient homomorphism
E × E E whose kernel must be an R-flat divisor in E × E. Studying its defining
equation in the formal group of E × E leads to a contradiction.)
For any homomorphism f : A A between abelian varieties over a field,
the image f(A) is an abelian subvariety over A and the map A f(A) is flat.
Such good properties for f(A) generally fail for homomorphisms between abelian
schemes over a more general base, but their availability over fields enables us to
push through the initial cokernel idea for the Serre tensor construction over fields.
In this way we can avoid dualizing M and hence make the construction work with
weaker hypotheses on M than projectivity. We shall now give a version of this for
abelian varieties (and in 4.3.1 there is a version for p-divisible groups), but first we
require a general lemma: Lemma. For an abelian variety B over a field K and an abelian subvari-
ety B , the quotient sheaf B/B for the fppf topology on the category of K-schemes
is represented by an abelian variety.
Previous Page Next Page