On nonarchimedean Banach fields (Q1753321)

From the text: ``Just as classical (commutative) Banach algebras over the real and complex numbers play a key role in analytic geometry, commutative nonarchimedean Banach algebras lie at the heart of nonarchimedean analytic geometry. When one compares algebraic geometry (in the form of the theory of schemes) to nonarchimedean analytic geometry, the role of fields in the former is best analogized in the latter by the role of fields complete with respect to multiplicative norms (commonly known as nonarchimedean fields). However, in certain settings, one naturally encounters a commutative nonarchimedean Banach ring whose underlying ring is a field, which for short we call a Banach field. For example, if one starts with any commutative nonarchimedean Banach ring \(R\), any maximal ideal \(I\) is closed, so the quotient \(R/I\) is a Banach field. One is thus led to ask whether any Banach field is a nonarchimedean field. This fails in general (Example 2.15); however, we show that this holds in some other classes of cases, such as uniform Banach algebras over fields with nondiscrete valuations (Theorem 3.7) and perfectoid rings (Theorem 4.2)''.