Given such an absolute value on a field K, the following topology can be defined on K: for a positive real number m, define the subset Bm of K by
Then, the b+Bm make up a neighbourhood basis of b in K.
Conversely, a topological field with a non-discrete locally compact topology has an absolute value defining its topology. It can be constructed using the Haar measure of the additive group of the field.
For a non-Archimedean local field F (with absolute value denoted by |·|), the following objects are important:
Every non-zero element a of F can be written as a = ϖnu with u a unit, and n a unique integer. The normalized valuation of F is the surjective function v : F → Z ∪ {∞} defined by sending a non-zero a to the unique integer n such that a = ϖnu with u a unit, and by sending 0 to ∞. If q is the cardinality of the residue field, the absolute value on F induced by its structure as a local field is given by:7
An equivalent and very important definition of a non-Archimedean local field is that it is a field that is complete with respect to a discrete valuation and whose residue field is finite.
The nth higher unit group of a non-Archimedean local field F is
for n ≥ 1. The group U(1) is called the group of principal units, and any element of it is called a principal unit. The full unit group O × {\displaystyle {\mathcal {O}}^{\times }} is denoted U(0).
The higher unit groups form a decreasing filtration of the unit group
whose quotients are given by
for n ≥ 1.8 (Here " ≈ {\displaystyle \approx } " means a non-canonical isomorphism.)
The multiplicative group of non-zero elements of a non-Archimedean local field F is isomorphic to
where q is the order of the residue field, and μq−1 is the group of (q−1)st roots of unity (in F). Its structure as an abelian group depends on its characteristic:
This theory includes the study of types of local fields, extensions of local fields using Hensel's lemma, Galois extensions of local fields, ramification groups filtrations of Galois groups of local fields, the behavior of the norm map on local fields, the local reciprocity homomorphism and existence theorem in local class field theory, local Langlands correspondence, Hodge-Tate theory (also called p-adic Hodge theory), explicit formulas for the Hilbert symbol in local class field theory, see e.g.10
Main article: Higher local field
A local field is sometimes called a one-dimensional local field.
A non-Archimedean local field can be viewed as the field of fractions of the completion of the local ring of a one-dimensional arithmetic scheme of rank 1 at its non-singular point.
For a non-negative integer n, an n-dimensional local field is a complete discrete valuation field whose residue field is an (n − 1)-dimensional local field.11 Depending on the definition of local field, a zero-dimensional local field is then either a finite field (with the definition used in this article), or a perfect field of positive characteristic.
From the geometric point of view, n-dimensional local fields with last finite residue field are naturally associated to a complete flag of subschemes of an n-dimensional arithmetic scheme.
Cassels & Fröhlich 1967, p. 129, Ch. VI, Intro.. - Cassels, J.W.S.; Fröhlich, Albrecht, eds. (1967), Algebraic Number Theory, Academic Press, Zbl 0153.07403 https://zbmath.org/?format=complete&q=an:0153.07403 ↩
Weil 1995, p. 20. - Weil, André (1995), Basic number theory, Classics in Mathematics, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, ISBN 3-540-58655-5 ↩
Milne 2020, p. 127, Remark 7.49. - Milne, James S. (2020), Algebraic Number Theory (3.08 ed.) https://www.jmilne.org/math/CourseNotes/ant.html ↩
Neukirch 1999, p. 134, Sec. 5. - Neukirch, Jürgen (1999). Algebraic Number Theory. Vol. 322. Translated by Schappacher, Norbert. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 978-3-540-65399-8. MR 1697859. Zbl 0956.11021. https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1697859 ↩
Fesenko & Vostokov 2002, Def. 1.4.6. - Fesenko, Ivan B.; Vostokov, Sergei V. (2002), Local fields and their extensions, Translations of Mathematical Monographs, vol. 121 (Second ed.), Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society, ISBN 978-0-8218-3259-2, MR 1915966 https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1915966 ↩
Weil 1995, Ch. I, Theorem 6. - Weil, André (1995), Basic number theory, Classics in Mathematics, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, ISBN 3-540-58655-5 ↩
Neukirch 1999, p. 122. - Neukirch, Jürgen (1999). Algebraic Number Theory. Vol. 322. Translated by Schappacher, Norbert. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 978-3-540-65399-8. MR 1697859. Zbl 0956.11021. https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1697859 ↩
Neukirch 1999, Theorem II.5.7. - Neukirch, Jürgen (1999). Algebraic Number Theory. Vol. 322. Translated by Schappacher, Norbert. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 978-3-540-65399-8. MR 1697859. Zbl 0956.11021. https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1697859 ↩
Fesenko & Vostokov 2002, Chapters 1-4, 7. - Fesenko, Ivan B.; Vostokov, Sergei V. (2002), Local fields and their extensions, Translations of Mathematical Monographs, vol. 121 (Second ed.), Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society, ISBN 978-0-8218-3259-2, MR 1915966 https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1915966 ↩