The non-abelian Brumer–Stark conjecture

Let L/KL/K be a Galois CM-extension with Galois group GG. Let SS be a finite set of places of KK containing all ramified and infinite places. For αL×\alpha\in L^\times, define SαS_\alpha as the finite places dividing NL/K(α)N_{L/K}(\alpha), and call α\alpha an anti-unit when α1+j=1\alpha^{1+j}=1. Let ωL:=nr(μL)\omega_L:=\operatorname{nr}(|\mu_L|), where μL\mu_L is the group of roots of unity in LL. Non-abelian Brumer–Stark conjecture. One has

ωLθS(0)I(G),\omega_L\theta_S(0)\in\mathcal I(G),

and, for every xH(G)x\in\mathcal H(G) and every fractional ideal a\mathfrak a of LL, there is an anti-unit α=α(x,a,S)L×\alpha=\alpha(x,\mathfrak a,S)\in L^\times such that

axωLθS(0)=(α).\mathfrak a^{x\cdot\omega_L\cdot\theta_S(0)}=(\alpha).

Moreover, for every finite set TT such that Hyp(SSα,T)Hyp(S\cup S_\alpha,T) holds, there is an αTESαT\alpha_T\in E_{S_\alpha}^T such that

αzδT(0)=αTzωL\alpha^{z\cdot\delta_T(0)}=\alpha_T^{z\cdot\omega_L}

for every zH(G)z\in\mathcal H(G). This strengthens the non-abelian Brumer conjecture by predicting principalization by anti-units together with a refined relation for admissible auxiliary sets. It is attributed in the source to the cited formulation of the non-abelian Brumer–Stark conjecture.

Equivalent formulations 2

Other statements of this same problem, merged from separate entries. Each is equivalent to the statement above — proving any one settles them all.

  1. Non-abelian Brumer-Stark conjecture

    Let K/kK/k be a finite Galois CM-extension with Galois group GG. Let SS contain all ramified finite places and all infinite places of kk, let ωK=nr(μK)\omega_K=\operatorname{nr}(|\mu_K|), and let H(G)\mathcal H(G) be the associated denominator ideal. For αK×\alpha\in K^{\times}, let SαS_\alpha be the finite places whose primes divide NK/k(α)N_{K/k}(\alpha); call α\alpha an anti-unit when α1+j=1\alpha^{1+j}=1. Non-abelian Brumer-Stark conjecture. For every xH(G)x\in\mathcal H(G) and every fractional ideal a\mathfrak a of KK, there is an anti-unit α=α(x,a,S)K×\alpha=\alpha(x,\mathfrak a,S)\in K^{\times} such that

    axωKθS=(α),\mathfrak a^{x\cdot\omega_K\cdot\theta_S}=(\alpha),

    and, for every finite set TT such that Hyp(SSα,T)Hyp(S\cup S_\alpha,T) holds, there is an αTESαT\alpha_T\in E_{S_\alpha}^T satisfying

    αzδT(0)=αTzωK\alpha^{z\cdot\delta_T(0)}=\alpha_T^{z\cdot\omega_K}

    for every zH(G)z\in\mathcal H(G). This is the non-abelian refinement of the Brumer-Stark conjecture, strengthening ideal annihilation to the principality of explicitly acted-on ideals and compatibility with ray-unit data.

    source: Andreas Nickel, “Equivariant Iwasawa theory and non-abelian Stark-type conjectures”, arXiv:1109.5525 (2012).

  2. Non-abelian Brumer–Stark conjecture

    Let L/KL/K be a Galois CM-extension with Galois group GG, and let SS be a finite set of places of KK containing all archimedean places and all places ramified in L/KL/K. Let H(G)\mathcal H(G), ωL\omega_L, θS\theta_S, EL,SϵTE_{L,S_\epsilon}^T, and Hyp(SSϵ,T)\mathsf{Hyp}(S\cup S_\epsilon,T) have the meanings defined in the paper; an anti-unit satisfies ϵ1+j=1\epsilon^{1+j}=1. Non-abelian Brumer–Stark conjecture. For every xH(G)x\in\mathcal H(G),

    xωLθSζ(Z[G]).x\omega_L\theta_S\in\zeta(\mathbb Z[G]).

    Moreover, for every non-zero fractional ideal a\mathfrak a of LL, there is an anti-unit ϵ=ϵ(x,a,S)L×\epsilon=\epsilon(x,\mathfrak a,S)\in L^\times with

    axωLθS=(ϵ),\mathfrak a^{x\omega_L\theta_S}=(\epsilon),

    and, for every finite set TT satisfying Hyp(SSϵ,T)\mathsf{Hyp}(S\cup S_\epsilon,T), an ϵTEL,SϵT\epsilon_T\in E_{L,S_\epsilon}^T such that

    ϵzδT(0)=ϵTzωL\epsilon^{z\delta_T(0)}=\epsilon_T^{z\omega_L}

    for each zH(G)z\in\mathcal H(G). This is a refined non-abelian form of Brumer–Stark, imposing both principality and explicit unit relations. It is open in general.

    source: Andreas Nickel, “Conjectures of Brumer, Gross and Stark”, arXiv:1707.04432 (2017).

Sources & referencesView supporting material

Primary source

Andreas Nickel, “Integrality of Stickelberger elements and the equivariant Tamagawa number conjecture”, arXiv:1108.1062 (2014).

Progress summary

Never refreshed

Nothing recorded yet. Refresh searches the literature and the public web for attempts on this problem, and writes the first summary here.

Solutions 0

No solutions have been posted yet.