ScalingStacks

1.3.2. Scalar extension of norms [025G]

Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.

Complete original source context · Original author HTML

1.3.2. Scalar extension of norms

Let V′V^{\prime} be a vector space over kk and ‖.‖′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|^{\prime} a norm of V′V^{\prime}.

Lemma 1.5.

For ϕ∈Homk​(V,V′)\phi\in\mathrm{Hom}_{k}(V,V^{\prime}), the set {‖ϕ⁡(v)‖′‖v‖|v∈V∖{0}}\left\{\frac{\|\phi(v)\|^{\prime}}{\|v\|}\,\Big|\,v\in V\setminus\{0\}\right\} is bounded from above.

Proof.

Fix α∈(0,1)\alpha\in(0,1). Let (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}) be an α\alpha-orthogonal basis of VV (cf. Proposition 1.3). We set

C1=max⁡{‖ϕ⁡(e1)‖′,…,‖ϕ⁡(er)‖′}andC2=min⁡{‖e1‖,…,‖er‖}.C_{1}=\max\{\|\phi(e_{1})\|^{\prime},\ldots,\|\phi(e_{r})\|^{\prime}\}\quad\text{and}\quad C_{2}=\min\{\|e_{1}\|,\ldots,\|e_{r}\|\}.

Then, for v=a1​e1+⋯+ar​er∈V∖{0}v=a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{r}e_{r}\in V\setminus\{0\},

‖ϕ⁡(v)‖′‖v‖\displaystyle\frac{\|\phi(v)\|^{\prime}}{\|v\|} ≤max⁡{|a1|​‖ϕ⁡(e1)‖′,…,|ar|​‖ϕ⁡(er)‖′}α​max⁡{|a1|​‖e1‖,…,|ar|​‖er‖}\displaystyle\leq\frac{\max\{|a_{1}|\|\phi(e_{1})\|^{\prime},\ldots,|a_{r}|\|\phi(e_{r})\|^{\prime}\}}{\alpha\max\{|a_{1}|\|e_{1}\|,\ldots,|a_{r}|\|e_{r}\|\}}
≤max⁡{|a1|​C1,…,|ar|​C1}α​max⁡{|a1|​C2,…,|ar|​C2}=C1α​C2,\displaystyle\leq\frac{\max\{|a_{1}|C_{1},\ldots,|a_{r}|C_{1}\}}{\alpha\max\{|a_{1}|C_{2},\ldots,|a_{r}|C_{2}\}}=\frac{C_{1}}{\alpha C_{2}},

as desired. ∎

By the above lemma, we define ‖ϕ‖Homk​(V,V′)\|\phi\|_{\mathrm{Hom}_{k}(V,V^{\prime})} to be

‖ϕ‖Homk​(V,V′):=sup{‖ϕ⁡(v)‖′‖v‖∣v∈V∖{0}}.\|\phi\|_{\mathrm{Hom}_{k}(V,V^{\prime})}:=\sup\left\{\frac{\|\phi(v)\|^{\prime}}{\|v\|}\mid v\in V\setminus\{0\}\right\}.

Note that ‖.‖Homk​(V,V′)\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{\mathrm{Hom}_{k}(V,V^{\prime})} yields a norm on Homk​(V,V′)\mathrm{Hom}_{k}(V,V^{\prime}). We denote ‖.‖Homk​(V,k)\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{\mathrm{Hom}_{k}(V,k)} by ‖.‖∨\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|^{\vee} (i.e. the case where V′=kV^{\prime}=k and ‖.‖′=|.|\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|^{\prime}=|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|).

Lemma 1.6.

Let WW be a subspace of VV and ψ∈W∨:=Homk​(W,k)\psi\in W^{\vee}:=\mathrm{Hom}_{k}(W,k). For any α∈(0,1)\alpha\in(0,1), there is φ∈V∨:=Homk​(V,k)\varphi\in V^{\vee}:=\mathrm{Hom}_{k}(V,k) such that φ|W=ψ\left.{\varphi}\right|_{{W}}=\psi and

‖ψ‖∨≤‖φ‖∨≤α−1​‖ψ‖∨.\|\psi\|^{\vee}\leq\|\varphi\|^{\vee}\leq\alpha^{-1}\|\psi\|^{\vee}.
Proof.

Let (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}) be an α\alpha-orthogonal basis of VV such that W=k​e1+⋯+k​elW=ke_{1}+\cdots+ke_{l} (cf. Proposition 1.3). We define φ∈V∨\varphi\in V^{\vee} to be

φ⁡(a1​e1+⋯+ar​er):=ψ⁡(a1​e1+⋯+al​el)\varphi(a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{r}e_{r}):=\psi(a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{l}e_{l})

for a1,…,ar∈ka_{1},\ldots,a_{r}\in k. Then φ|W=ψ\left.{\varphi}\right|_{{W}}=\psi. Moreover, note that

α​‖a1​e1+⋯+al​el‖≤α​max⁡{|a1|​‖e1‖,…,|al|​‖el‖}≤α​max⁡{|a1|​‖e1‖,…,|ar|​‖er‖}≤‖a1​e1+⋯+ar​er‖,\alpha\|a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{l}e_{l}\|\leq\alpha\max\{|a_{1}|\|e_{1}\|,\ldots,|a_{l}|\|e_{l}\|\}\\ \leq\alpha\max\{|a_{1}|\|e_{1}\|,\ldots,|a_{r}|\|e_{r}\|\}\leq\|a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{r}e_{r}\|,

so that

|φ⁡(a1​e1+⋯+ar​er)|‖a1​e1+⋯+ar​er‖≤α−1​|ψ⁡(a1​e1+⋯+al​el)|‖a1​e1+⋯+al​el‖≤α−1​‖ψ‖∨\frac{|\varphi(a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{r}e_{r})|}{\|a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{r}e_{r}\|}\leq\alpha^{-1}\frac{|\psi(a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{l}e_{l})|}{\|a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{l}e_{l}\|}\leq\alpha^{-1}\|\psi\|^{\vee}

for all a1,…,ar∈ka_{1},\ldots,a_{r}\in k with (a1,…,al)≠(0,…,0)(a_{1},\ldots,a_{l})\not=(0,\ldots,0). Thus the assertion follows. ∎

Corollary 1.7.

The natural homomorphism V→(V∨)∨V\to(V^{\vee})^{\vee} is an isometry.

Proof.

We denote the norm of (V∨)∨(V^{\vee})^{\vee} by ‖.‖′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|^{\prime}, that is,

‖v‖′=sup{|ϕ⁡(v)|‖ϕ‖∨∣ϕ∈V∨∖{0}}.\|v\|^{\prime}=\sup\left\{\frac{|\phi(v)|}{\|\phi\|^{\vee}}\mid\phi\in V^{\vee}\setminus\{0\}\right\}.

Note that |ϕ⁡(v)|≤‖v‖​‖ϕ‖∨|\phi(v)|\leq\|v\|\|\phi\|^{\vee} for all v∈Vv\in V and ϕ∈V∨\phi\in V^{\vee}. In particular, ‖v‖′≤‖v‖\|v\|^{\prime}\leq\|v\|. For v∈V∖{0}v\in V\setminus\{0\}, we set W:=k​vW:=kv and choose ψ∈W∨\psi\in W^{\vee} with ψ⁡(v)=1\psi(v)=1. Then ‖ψ‖∨=1/‖v‖\|\psi\|^{\vee}=1/\|v\|. For any α∈(0,1)\alpha\in(0,1), by Lemma 1.6, there is φ∈V∨\varphi\in V^{\vee} such that φ|W=ψ\left.{\varphi}\right|_{{W}}=\psi and ‖φ‖∨≤α−1​‖ψ‖∨\|\varphi\|^{\vee}\leq\alpha^{-1}\|\psi\|^{\vee}. As |φ⁡(v)|/‖φ‖∨≤‖v‖′|\varphi(v)|/\|\varphi\|^{\vee}\leq\|v\|^{\prime}, we have α​‖v‖≤‖v‖′\alpha\|v\|\leq\|v\|^{\prime}. Thus we obtain ‖v‖≤‖v‖′\|v\|\leq\|v\|^{\prime} by taking α→1\alpha\to 1. ∎

Definition 1.8.

Let k′k^{\prime} be an extension field of kk, and let |.|′|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|^{\prime} be a complete absolute value of k′k^{\prime} which is an extension of |.||\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|. We set Vk′:=V⊗kk′V_{k^{\prime}}:=V\otimes_{k}k^{\prime}. Identifying Vk′V_{k^{\prime}} with

Homk​(Homk​(V,k),k′),\mathrm{Hom}_{k}(\mathrm{Hom}_{k}(V,k),k^{\prime}),

we can give a norm ‖.‖k′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime}} of Vk′V_{k^{\prime}}, that is,

‖v′‖k′=sup{|(ϕ⊗1)​(v′)|′‖ϕ‖∨|ϕ∈V∨}.\|v^{\prime}\|_{k^{\prime}}=\sup\left\{\frac{|(\phi\otimes 1)(v^{\prime})|^{\prime}}{\|\phi\|^{\vee}}\,\Big|\,\phi\in V^{\vee}\right\}.

The norm ‖.‖k′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime}} is called the scalar extension of ‖.‖\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|. Note that ‖v⊗1‖k′=‖v‖\|v\otimes 1\|_{k^{\prime}}=\|v\| for v∈Vv\in V. Indeed, by Corollary 1.7,

‖v⊗1‖k′=sup{|ϕ⁡(v)|‖ϕ‖∨|ϕ∈V∨}=‖v‖.\|v\otimes 1\|_{k^{\prime}}=\sup\left\{\frac{|\phi(v)|}{\|\phi\|^{\vee}}\,\Big|\,\phi\in V^{\vee}\right\}=\|v\|.
Proposition 1.9.

For α∈(0,1]\alpha\in(0,1], let (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}) be an α\alpha-orthogonal basis of VV with respect to ‖.‖\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|. Then (e1⊗1,…,er⊗1)(e_{1}\otimes 1,\ldots,e_{r}\otimes 1) also yields an α\alpha-orthogonal basis of Vk′V_{k^{\prime}} with respect to ‖.‖k′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime}}.

Proof.

Let (e1∨,…,er∨)(e_{1}^{\vee},\ldots,e_{r}^{\vee}) be the dual basis of (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}). For a1,…,ar∈ka_{1},\ldots,a_{r}\in k with ai≠0a_{i}\not=0,

|(ei∨)​(a1​e1+⋯+ar​er)|‖a1​e1+⋯+ar​er‖≤|ai|α​max⁡{|a1|​‖e1‖,…,|ar|​‖er‖}≤|ai|α​|ai|​‖ei‖=1α​‖ei‖,\frac{|(e_{i}^{\vee})(a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{r}e_{r})|}{\|a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{r}e_{r}\|}\leq\frac{|a_{i}|}{\alpha\max\{|a_{1}|\|e_{1}\|,\ldots,|a_{r}|\|e_{r}\|\}}\leq\frac{|a_{i}|}{\alpha|a_{i}|\|e_{i}\|}=\frac{1}{\alpha\|e_{i}\|},

and hence ‖ei∨‖∨≤(α​‖ei‖)−1\|e_{i}^{\vee}\|^{\vee}\leq(\alpha\|e_{i}\|)^{-1}. Therefore, for a1′,…,ar′∈k′a^{\prime}_{1},\ldots,a^{\prime}_{r}\in k^{\prime},

‖a1′​e1+⋯+ar′​er‖\displaystyle\|a^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}\| ≥|(ei∨⊗1)​(a1′​e1+⋯+ar′​er)|′‖ei∨‖∨\displaystyle\geq\frac{|(e_{i}^{\vee}\otimes 1)(a^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a^{\prime}_{r}e_{r})|^{\prime}}{\|e_{i}^{\vee}\|^{\vee}}
=|ai′|′‖ei∨‖∨≥|ai′|′(α​‖ei‖)−1=α​|ai′|′​‖ei‖.\displaystyle=\frac{|a^{\prime}_{i}|^{\prime}}{\|e_{i}^{\vee}\|^{\vee}}\geq\frac{|a^{\prime}_{i}|^{\prime}}{(\alpha\|e_{i}\|)^{-1}}=\alpha|a^{\prime}_{i}|^{\prime}\|e_{i}\|.

Thus we have the assertion. ∎

Lemma 1.10.

Let k′′k^{\prime\prime} be an extension field of k′k^{\prime}, and let |.|′′|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|^{\prime\prime} be a complete absolute value of k′′k^{\prime\prime} as an extension of |.|′|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|^{\prime}. We set Vk′′:=V⊗kk′′V_{k^{\prime\prime}}:=V\otimes_{k}k^{\prime\prime}. Note that Vk′′=Vk′⊗k′k′′V_{k^{\prime\prime}}=V_{k^{\prime}}\otimes_{k^{\prime}}k^{\prime\prime}. Let ‖.‖k′′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime\prime}} (resp. ‖.‖k′,k′′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime},k^{\prime\prime}}) be a norm of Vk′′V_{k^{\prime\prime}} obtained by the scalar extension of ‖.‖\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\| on VV (resp. the scalar extension of ‖.‖k′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime}} on Vk′V_{k^{\prime}}). Then ‖.‖k′′=‖.‖k′,k′′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime\prime}}=\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime},k^{\prime\prime}}.

Proof.

For ϵ>0\epsilon>0, let (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}) be an e−ϵe^{-\epsilon}-orthogonal basis of VV with respect to ‖.‖\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|. Then, by Proposition 1.9, (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}) forms an e−ϵe^{-\epsilon}-orthogonal basis of Vk′V_{k^{\prime}} and Vk′′V_{k^{\prime\prime}} with respect to ‖.‖k′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime}} and ‖.‖k′′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime\prime}}, respectively, so that (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}) is also an e−ϵe^{-\epsilon}-orthogonal basis of Vk′′V_{k^{\prime\prime}} with respect to ‖.‖k′,k′′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime},k^{\prime\prime}}. Note that ‖ei‖=‖ei‖k′′=‖ei‖k′,k′′\|e_{i}\|=\|e_{i}\|_{k^{\prime\prime}}=\|e_{i}\|_{k^{\prime},k^{\prime\prime}} for all i=1,…,ri=1,\ldots,r. Thus, for a1′′,…,ar′′∈k′′a^{\prime\prime}_{1},\ldots,a^{\prime\prime}_{r}\in k^{\prime\prime},

‖a1′′​e1+…+ar′′​er‖k′,k′′≤max⁡{|a1′′|′′​‖e1‖,…,|ar′′|′′​‖er‖}≤eϵ​‖a1′′​e1+…+ar′′​er‖k′′\|a^{\prime\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\ldots+a^{\prime\prime}_{r}e_{r}\|_{k^{\prime},k^{\prime\prime}}\leq\max\{|a^{\prime\prime}_{1}|^{\prime\prime}\|e_{1}\|,\ldots,|a^{\prime\prime}_{r}|^{\prime\prime}\|e_{r}\|\}\\ \leq e^{\epsilon}\|a^{\prime\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\ldots+a^{\prime\prime}_{r}e_{r}\|_{k^{\prime\prime}}

and

‖a1′′​e1+…+ar′′​er‖k′′≤max⁡{|a1′′|′′​‖e1‖,…,|ar′′|′′​‖er‖}≤eϵ​‖a1′′​e1+…+ar′′​er‖k′,k′′.\|a^{\prime\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\ldots+a^{\prime\prime}_{r}e_{r}\|_{k^{\prime\prime}}\leq\max\{|a^{\prime\prime}_{1}|^{\prime\prime}\|e_{1}\|,\ldots,|a^{\prime\prime}_{r}|^{\prime\prime}\|e_{r}\|\}\\ \leq e^{\epsilon}\|a^{\prime\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\ldots+a^{\prime\prime}_{r}e_{r}\|_{k^{\prime},k^{\prime\prime}}.

Thus, we have the assertion by taking ϵ→0\epsilon\to 0. ∎

Lemma 1.11.

Let f:V→Wf:V\to W be a surjective homomorphism of finite-dimensional vector spaces over kk. Let ‖.‖V\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{V} and ‖.‖W\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{W} be norms of VV and WW, respectively. We assume that dimkW=1\dim_{k}W=1 and ‖.‖W\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{W} is the quotient norm of ‖.‖V\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{V} in terms of the surjection f:V→Wf:V\to W. We set Vk′:=V⊗kk′V_{k^{\prime}}:=V\otimes_{k}k^{\prime} and Wk′:=W⊗kk′W_{k^{\prime}}:=W\otimes_{k}k^{\prime}. Let ‖.‖V,k′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{V,k^{\prime}} and ‖.‖W,k′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{W,k^{\prime}} be the norms of Vk′V_{k^{\prime}} and Wk′W_{k^{\prime}} obtained by the scalar extensions of ‖.‖V\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{V} and ‖.‖W\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{W}, respectively. Then ‖.‖W,k′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{W,k^{\prime}} is the quotient norm of ‖.‖V,k′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{V,k^{\prime}} in terms of the surjection fk′:=f⊗idk′:Vk′→Wk′f_{k^{\prime}}:=f\otimes\mathrm{id}_{k^{\prime}}:V_{k^{\prime}}\to W_{k^{\prime}}.

Proof.

Let ‖.‖Wk′′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|^{\prime}_{W_{k^{\prime}}} be the quotient norm of ‖.‖V,k′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{V,k^{\prime}} with respect to the surjection fk′:Vk′→Wk′f_{k^{\prime}}:V_{k^{\prime}}\to W_{k^{\prime}}. Let ee be an non-zero element of WW. As ‖e‖W,k′=‖e‖W\|e\|_{W,k^{\prime}}=\|e\|_{W}, it is sufficient to show that ‖e‖Wk′′=‖e‖W\|e\|^{\prime}_{W_{k^{\prime}}}=\|e\|_{W}. Note that

{v∈V∣f⁡(v)=e}⊆{v′∈Vk′∣fk′​(v′)=e},\{v\in V\mid f(v)=e\}\subseteq\{v^{\prime}\in V_{k^{\prime}}\mid f_{k^{\prime}}(v^{\prime})=e\},

so that we have ‖e‖W≥‖e‖Wk′′\|e\|_{W}\geq\|e\|^{\prime}_{W_{k^{\prime}}}. Let us consider an inequality ‖e‖W≤‖e‖Wk′′\|e\|_{W}\leq\|e\|^{\prime}_{W_{k^{\prime}}}. For ϵ>0\epsilon>0, let (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}) be an e−ϵe^{-\epsilon}-orthogonal basis of VV such that (e2,…,er)(e_{2},\ldots,e_{r}) forms a basis of Ker⁡(f)\operatorname{Ker}(f). Clearly we may assume that f⁡(e1)=ef(e_{1})=e. Then

‖e‖Wk′′\displaystyle\|e\|^{\prime}_{W_{k^{\prime}}} =inf{∥e1+a2′e2+⋯+ar′er∥V,k′∣a2′,…,ar′∈k′}\displaystyle=\inf\{\|e_{1}+a^{\prime}_{2}e_{2}+\cdots+a^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}\|_{V,k^{\prime}}\mid a^{\prime}_{2},\ldots,a^{\prime}_{r}\in k^{\prime}\}
≥inf{e−ϵmax{∥e1∥,|a2′|′∥e2∥V,…,|ar′|′∥er∥V}∣a2′,…,ar′∈k′}\displaystyle\geq\inf\{e^{-\epsilon}\max\{\|e_{1}\|,|a^{\prime}_{2}|^{\prime}\|e_{2}\|_{V},\ldots,|a^{\prime}_{r}|^{\prime}\|e_{r}\|_{V}\}\mid a^{\prime}_{2},\ldots,a^{\prime}_{r}\in k^{\prime}\}
≥e−ϵ​‖e1‖≥e−ϵ​‖e‖W.\displaystyle\geq e^{-\epsilon}\|e_{1}\|\geq e^{-\epsilon}\|e\|_{W}.

Therefore, we have ‖e‖Wk′′≥‖e‖W\|e\|^{\prime}_{W_{k^{\prime}}}\geq\|e\|_{W} by taking ϵ→0\epsilon\to 0. ∎

Lemma 1.12.

We assume that the absolute value |.||\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}| of kk is trivial. Let (V,‖.‖)(V,\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|) be a finite-dimensional normed vector space over (k,|.|)(k,|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|). Then we have the following:

  1. (1)

    The set {‖v‖∣v∈V}\{\|v\|\mid v\in V\} is a finite set.

  2. (2)

    Let k′k^{\prime} be a field and |.|′|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|^{\prime} a complete and non-trivial absolute value of k′k^{\prime} such that k⊆k′k\subseteq k^{\prime} and |.|′|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|^{\prime} is an extension of |.||\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|. Let 𝔬k′\mathfrak{o}_{k^{\prime}} be the valuation ring of (k′,|.|′)(k^{\prime},|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|^{\prime}) and 𝔪k′\mathfrak{m}_{k^{\prime}} the maximal ideal of 𝔬k′\mathfrak{o}_{k^{\prime}}. We assume the following:

    1. (i)

      The natural map k→𝔬k′k\to\mathfrak{o}_{k^{\prime}} induces an isomorphism k​⟶∼​𝔬k′/𝔪k′k\overset{\sim}{\longrightarrow}\mathfrak{o}_{k^{\prime}}/\mathfrak{m}_{k^{\prime}}.

    2. (ii)

      If an equation |a′|′=‖v‖/‖v′‖|a^{\prime}|^{\prime}=\|v\|/\|v^{\prime}\| holds for some a′∈k′×a^{\prime}\in{k^{\prime}}^{\times} and v,v′∈V∖{0}v,v^{\prime}\in V\setminus\{0\}, then ‖v‖=‖v′‖\|v\|=\|v^{\prime}\|.

    Let ‖.‖′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|^{\prime} be a norm of Vk′:=V⊗kk′V_{k^{\prime}}:=V\otimes_{k}k^{\prime} over (k′,|.|′)(k^{\prime},|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|^{\prime}) such that ‖v‖=‖v⊗1‖′\|v\|=\|v\otimes 1\|^{\prime} for all v∈Vv\in V. If (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}) is an orthogonal basis of (V,‖.‖)(V,\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|), then (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}) forms an orthogonal basis of (Vk′,‖.‖′)(V_{k^{\prime}},\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|^{\prime}). In particular, ‖.‖′=‖.‖k′\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|^{\prime}=\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|_{k^{\prime}}.

Proof.

(1) Let (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}) be an orthogonal basis of (V,‖.‖)(V,\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|) (cf. Proposition 1.3). Then

‖a1​e1+⋯+ar​er‖=max⁡{|a1|​‖e1‖,…,|ar|​‖er‖}\|a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{r}e_{r}\|=\max\{|a_{1}|\|e_{1}\|,\ldots,|a_{r}|\|e_{r}\|\}

for all a1,…,ar∈ka_{1},\ldots,a_{r}\in k, so that

‖a1​e1+⋯+ar​er‖∈{0,‖e1‖,…,‖er‖}.\|a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{r}e_{r}\|\in\{0,\|e_{1}\|,\ldots,\|e_{r}\|\}.

(2) First we assume that

‖e1‖=⋯=‖er‖=c.\|e_{1}\|=\cdots=\|e_{r}\|=c.

Then, for any v∈Vv\in V,

‖v‖={cif v≠0,0if v=0.\|v\|=\begin{cases}c&\text{if $v\not=0$},\\ 0&\text{if $v=0$}.\end{cases}

Let us see that

‖a1′​e1+⋯+ar′​er‖′=c​max⁡{|a1′|′,…,|ar′|′}\|a^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}\|^{\prime}=c\max\{|a^{\prime}_{1}|^{\prime},\ldots,|a^{\prime}_{r}|^{\prime}\}

for a1′,…,ar′∈k′a^{\prime}_{1},\ldots,a^{\prime}_{r}\in k^{\prime}. Clearly we may assume that

(a1′,…,ar′)≠(0,…,0).(a^{\prime}_{1},\ldots,a^{\prime}_{r})\not=(0,\ldots,0).

We set γ:=max⁡{|a1′|′,…,|ar′|′}\gamma:=\max\{|a^{\prime}_{1}|^{\prime},\ldots,|a^{\prime}_{r}|^{\prime}\}. We fix ω∈k′\omega\in k^{\prime} with |ω|′=γ|\omega|^{\prime}=\gamma. By the assumption (i), for each j=1,…,rj=1,\ldots,r, we can find aj∈ka_{j}\in k and bj′∈k′b^{\prime}_{j}\in k^{\prime} such that

aj′=aj​ω+bj′and|bj′|′<γ.a^{\prime}_{j}=a_{j}\omega+b^{\prime}_{j}\quad\text{and}\quad|b^{\prime}_{j}|^{\prime}<\gamma.

Note that

a1′​e1+⋯+ar′​er=ω⁡(∑j=1raj​ej)+b1′​e1+⋯+br′​er.a^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}=\omega\left(\sum\nolimits_{j=1}^{r}a_{j}e_{j}\right)+b^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+b^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}.

Moreover, as ∑j=1raj​ej≠0\sum_{j=1}^{r}a_{j}e_{j}\not=0, we have

‖ω⁡(∑j=1raj​ej)‖′\displaystyle\left\|\omega\left(\sum\nolimits_{j=1}^{r}a_{j}e_{j}\right)\right\|^{\prime} =γ⁡‖∑j=1raj​ej‖=c​γ\displaystyle=\gamma\left\|\sum\nolimits_{j=1}^{r}a_{j}e_{j}\right\|=c\gamma
and
‖b1′​e1+⋯+br′​er‖′\displaystyle\|b^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+b^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}\|^{\prime} ≤c​max⁡{|b1′|′,…,|br′|′}<c​γ.\displaystyle\leq c\max\{|b^{\prime}_{1}|^{\prime},\ldots,|b^{\prime}_{r}|^{\prime}\}<c\gamma.

Therefore,

‖a1′​e1+⋯+ar′​er‖′=c​γ=c​max⁡{|a1′|′,…,|ar′|′}.\|a^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}\|^{\prime}=c\gamma=c\max\{|a^{\prime}_{1}|^{\prime},\ldots,|a^{\prime}_{r}|^{\prime}\}.

In general, we take positive numbers c1<⋯<cbc_{1}<\cdots<c_{b} and non-empty subsets I1,…,IbI_{1},\ldots,I_{b} of {1,…,r}\{1,\ldots,r\} such that {‖el‖∣l∈Is}={cs}\{\|e_{l}\|\mid l\in I_{s}\}=\{c_{s}\} for s=1,…,bs=1,\ldots,b and I1∪⋯∪Ib={1,…,r}I_{1}\cup\cdots\cup I_{b}=\{1,\ldots,r\}. Note that Is∩Is′=∅I_{s}\cap I_{s^{\prime}}=\emptyset for s≠s′s\not=s^{\prime}. Let us consider

x=a1′​e1+⋯+ar′​er=∑s=1bxs∈Vk′(a1′,…,ar′∈k′),x=a^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}=\sum_{s=1}^{b}x_{s}\in V_{k^{\prime}}\quad(a^{\prime}_{1},\ldots,a^{\prime}_{r}\in k^{\prime}),

where xs=∑l∈Isal′​elx_{s}=\sum_{l\in I_{s}}a^{\prime}_{l}e_{l}. Note that (el)l∈Is(e_{l})_{l\in I_{s}} forms an orthogonal basis of ⨁l∈Isk​el\bigoplus_{l\in I_{s}}ke_{l} and ‖el‖=cs\|e_{l}\|=c_{s} for all l∈Isl\in I_{s}. Therefore, by the above observation,

‖xs‖′=cs​maxl∈Is​{|al′|′}=maxl∈Is⁡{‖al′​el‖′},\left\|x_{s}\right\|^{\prime}=c_{s}\max_{l\in I_{s}}\{|a^{\prime}_{l}|^{\prime}\}=\max_{l\in I_{s}}\{\|a^{\prime}_{l}e_{l}\|^{\prime}\},

so that it is sufficient to see that

‖x‖′=maxs=1,…,b⁡{‖xs‖′}.\|x\|^{\prime}=\max_{s=1,\ldots,b}\left\{\left\|x_{s}\right\|^{\prime}\right\}.

Clearly we may assume that x≠0x\not=0. We set

Σ:={s∈{1,…,b}∣xs≠0}.\Sigma:=\left\{s\in\{1,\ldots,b\}\mid x_{s}\not=0\right\}.

For s,s′∈Σs,s^{\prime}\in\Sigma with s≠s′s\not=s^{\prime}, we have ‖xs‖′≠‖xs′‖′\|x_{s}\|^{\prime}\not=\|x_{s^{\prime}}\|^{\prime}. Indeed, we choose ls∈Isl_{s}\in I_{s} and ls′∈Is′l_{s^{\prime}}\in I_{s^{\prime}} with ‖xs‖′=‖als′​els‖′\left\|x_{s}\right\|^{\prime}=\|a^{\prime}_{l_{s}}e_{l_{s}}\|^{\prime} and ‖xs′‖′=‖als′′​els′‖′\left\|x_{s^{\prime}}\right\|^{\prime}=\|a^{\prime}_{l_{s^{\prime}}}e_{l_{s^{\prime}}}\|^{\prime}. If ‖xs‖′=‖xs′‖′\|x_{s}\|^{\prime}=\|x_{s^{\prime}}\|^{\prime}, then

|als′/als′′|′=‖els′‖/‖els‖,\left|a^{\prime}_{l_{s}}/a^{\prime}_{l_{s^{\prime}}}\right|^{\prime}=\|e_{l_{s^{\prime}}}\|/\|e_{l_{s}}\|,

so that, by the assumption (ii), ‖els′‖=‖els‖\|e_{l_{s^{\prime}}}\|=\|e_{l_{s}}\|, which is a contradiction. Therefore,

‖x‖′=‖∑s∈Σxs‖′=maxs∈Σ⁡{‖xs‖′}=maxs=1,…,b⁡{‖xs‖′},\|x\|^{\prime}=\left\|\sum\nolimits_{s\in\Sigma}x_{s}\right\|^{\prime}=\max_{s\in\Sigma}\{\|x_{s}\|^{\prime}\}=\max_{s=1,\ldots,b}\{\|x_{s}\|^{\prime}\},

as required. ∎

Remark 1.13.

We assume that |.|′|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}|^{\prime} is discrete and

|a′|′=exp⁡(−α​ord𝔬k′⁡(a′))(a′∈k′)|a^{\prime}|^{\prime}=\exp(-\alpha\operatorname{ord}_{\mathfrak{o}_{k^{\prime}}}(a^{\prime}))\qquad(a^{\prime}\in k^{\prime})

for α∈ℝ>0\alpha\in\mathbb{R}_{>0}. If

α∉⋃v,v′∈V∖{0}ℚ⁡(log⁡‖v‖−log⁡‖v′‖),\alpha\not\in\bigcup_{v,v^{\prime}\in V\setminus\{0\}}\mathbb{Q}(\log\|v\|-\log\|v^{\prime}\|),

then the assumption (ii) holds. Indeed, we suppose that |a′|′=‖v‖/‖v′‖|a^{\prime}|^{\prime}=\|v\|/\|v^{\prime}\| for some a′∈k′×a^{\prime}\in{k^{\prime}}^{\times} and v,v′∈V∖{0}v,v^{\prime}\in V\setminus\{0\}. Then

−α​ord𝔬k′⁡(a′)=log⁡‖v‖−log⁡‖v′‖,-\alpha\operatorname{ord}_{\mathfrak{o}_{k^{\prime}}}(a^{\prime})=\log\|v\|-\log\|v^{\prime}\|,

so that ord𝔬k′⁡(a′)=0\operatorname{ord}_{\mathfrak{o}_{k^{\prime}}}(a^{\prime})=0, and hence ‖v‖=‖v′‖\|v\|=\|v^{\prime}\|, as required.

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source-backed reader collection; mathematical self-containment is not assessed.