A positive Leopoldt defect is inherited by finite extensions
ProvedLeopoldt.defect_pos_of_defect_posThis is part A of Remark 1 of the source.
Let be a prime and let be number fields with a finite extension. If the Leopoldt defect of at is positive, then so is that of :
The reason given in the source is that the linear relations between -generators of the units of which arise upon -adic completion are preserved under the embedding of unit groups .
This is the structural fact that makes a proof by contradiction possible at all: if the conjecture fails for some field, one may pass freely to any convenient finite extension — larger, containing prescribed roots of unity, or with prescribed ramification — and the failure persists. The source uses exactly this to move from a hypothetical counterexample to a well-adapted working base field. Contrapositively, Leopoldt's conjecture for a field implies it for every subfield.
Formalization Note Finiteness of is expressed as being a finite-dimensional -vector space; both fields carry the assumption of being number fields, and is an -algebra, which is how the inclusion is presented. Positivity of a natural-number defect is the same as its non-vanishing.
import Definitions.Def_LeopoldtDefect open NumberField
namespace Leopoldt
theorem defect_pos_of_defect_pos (p : ℕ) [Fact p.Prime]
(F K : Type*) [Field F] [NumberField F] [Field K] [NumberField K]
[Algebra F K] [FiniteDimensional F K] (h : 0 < defect p F) :
0 < defect p K := by sorry
end LeopoldtRead-back
What the Lean code literally says, in plain math · claude-opus-5
Setting and notation. Fix a natural number that is assumed prime (a typeclass hypothesis asserting the primality of is in force throughout). Let and be types, each equipped with a field structure and with the structure of a number field (a characteristic-zero field that is finite-dimensional over ). Assume in addition that is an -algebra and that is finite-dimensional as an -vector space; nothing further is assumed about the extension (no separability, normality, or nontriviality — the case is included, and no compatibility between the -algebra structure on and the canonical -structures on and is imposed beyond what the algebra structure itself gives).
For a number field (which will be and in turn), write for its ring of integers, and define the following quantities, all of which are the unfolded content of the custom definitions used in the statement.
1. The primes above . Let
i.e. the height-one primes of the Dedekind domain that contain the image of the integer . This set is finite (a finiteness instance is supplied, using that ).
2. The semilocal unit group. For let be the completion of at the -adic valuation and let be its valuation subring. Put
the (dependent) product of the unit groups of these local integer rings, with the pointwise group structure and the product topology, where each factor carries the topology induced by the embedding into .
3. The "unit closure" subgroup. Let
be the diagonal homomorphism given componentwise by the structure map . Define
the intersection, over all , of the subgroup of generated by the image of the global units together with the set of -st powers of arbitrary semilocal units. Since is commutative, each term of the intersection is the product subgroup , and the exponents range over (the exponent is not among them).
4. A bounded -rank. Let denote the -adic integers and, for , regard as a group written multiplicatively, carrying the product -adic topology. Define
where requires that be a homomorphism of groups (no -linearity is demanded), that be injective, that be continuous (but not necessarily a topological embedding or a homeomorphism onto its image), and that for every . Here is the -dimension of . The supremum is taken in ; the defining set always contains (the trivial group maps injectively and continuously, with image ) and is bounded above by , so is the largest such and satisfies .
5. The defect. Let be the unit rank of in the sense of Dirichlet's unit theorem (the cardinality of the set of infinite places minus one, computed with truncated natural-number subtraction), and set
again using truncated subtraction on , so that whenever , and holds exactly when strictly.
The assertion. With , , as above, the declaration asserts the implication
that is: if the unit rank of strictly exceeds , then the unit rank of strictly exceeds . The same prime is used on both sides. The hypothesis is a strict positivity of a natural number, i.e. the defect of is nonzero; the conclusion is the corresponding strict positivity for . Because both quantities are differences taken with truncated subtraction, the statement carries no information about the sizes of the differences, only about whether each is nonzero.
Confirmed by the mission captain (proposal self-audit).