Congruences for modular forms mod 2 and quaternionic S-ideal classes
Kimball Martin
Department of Mathematics, University of
Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019
Abstract.
We prove many simultaneous congruences mod 2 for elliptic and Hilbert modular forms
among forms with different Atkin–Lehner eigenvalues. The proofs involve the notion of quaternionic S-ideal classes and the distribution of Atkin–Lehner signs among
newforms.
1. Introduction
In this paper, we use the notion of quaternionic S-ideal classes
and the Jacquet–Langlands correspondence to show certain behavior of
Atkin–Lehner signs yields many simultaneous congruences of newforms mod 2.
We begin by explaining our main results over Q, and will discuss
the extensions to Hilbert modular forms at the end of the introduction.
Let N be a squarefree product of an odd number of primes, M∣N and k∈2N.
By a sign pattern ε for M we mean a collection of signs εp∈{±1}
for each p∣M.
Denote the
sign pattern with εp=−1 for all p∣M by −M.
Let Sknew(N) denote the span of newforms of weight k
for Γ0(N). For a sign pattern ε for M, let Sknew,ε(N) be
the subspace spanned by newforms f
with p-th Atkin–Lehner eigenvalue wp(f)=εp for all p∣M.
The case k=2 is a little different than k≥4, due to the interaction with
the weight 2 Eisenstein series E2,N(z):=∑d∣Nμ(d)dE2(dz).
To state our first result uniformly,
we introduce the augmented space Sknew(N)∗, which is just Sknew(N)
if k≥4 but S2new(N)∗=S2new(N)⊕CE2,N. Similarly,
we set Sknew,ε(N)∗=Sknew,ε(N) if k≥4 or ε=−M
and S2new,−M(N)∗=S2new,−N(N)⊕CE2,N.
Denote the n-th Fourier coefficient of a modular form f by an(f). Our first main result is
Theorem 1.1**.**
Suppose M,N are as above such that, for each divisor d∣M with d>1, there exists an odd
prime p∣MN such that −d\overwithdelims()p=1. If M is even, assume also
MN is divisible by a prime which is 1mod4.
Let f∈Sknew(N)∗ be a newform and ℓ a prime of Qˉ above 2.
Then for any sign pattern ε for M, there exists an eigenform
g∈Sknew,ε(N)∗ such that an(f)≡an(g)modℓ for all n∈N.
Moreover, we may take g∈Sknew(N) to be a cuspidal newform if k=2,
ε=−M, or N is not an even product of 3 primes.
In particular this theorem applies if there exists a prime p∣MN with
p≡1mod4 such that q\overwithdelims()p=1 for each prime q∣M, e.g. M=26
and N=17⋅M.
The theorem also holds with the alternative hypotheses
that M≡7mod8 is prime and N is even (see 4.1).
Quadratic reciprocity implies that if p1p2∣N and p1≡3mod4, then
M=p1 or M=p2 satisfies the hypothesis of this theorem. This yields
Corollary 1.2**.**
Suppose N is composite and divisible by some p≡3mod4.
Let k∈2N with k=2 if N=2p1p2 for some primes p1,p2.
Fix a prime ℓ of Qˉ
above 2. Then for any newform f∈Sknew(N), there exists a non-Galois-conjugate
newform g∈Sknew(N) such that an(f)≡an(g)modℓ for all
n∈N.
Our second main result is
Theorem 1.3**.**
Let f∈S2new(N)⊕CE2,N be an eigenform, and ℓ a prime of
Qˉ above 2. Then there exists
an eigenform g∈S2new,−N(N)⊕CE2,N such that
an(f)≡an(g)modℓ for all n∈N. Moreover,
if N is not an even product of 3 primes, we may take g∈S2new,−N(N).
Note many existing congruence results exclude small primes or primes dividing
the level, e.g. [mazur], [hida] and [yoo],
whereas our method is specific to congruences mod 2 and does not require
2∤N.
Moreover, these results indicate that congruences modulo (primes above) 2 are very
common. Indeed, they seem much more common than congruences modulo odd
primes appear to occur, since (at least large) congruence primes must divide
the special value of an L-function (e.g., see [hida]).
Further, while many congruence results are known, simultaneous congruence
results seem harder to come by. However, our results exhibit many simultaneous
congruences.
Namely, if ω(M) is the number
of prime factors of M, 1.1 gives conditions for all newforms as well as
E2,N to be congruent to at least 2ω(M) (non-Galois-conjugate) eigenforms. Further, 1.3
says that for any squarefree level N with ω(N) odd, there are at most
1+dimS2new,−N(N) congruence classes in S2new(N). An exact
formula for dimS2new,−N(N) is given in [me:dim] and is approximately
2−ω(N)dimS2new(N), so there must be at least one congruence class
containing many newforms when ω(N) is large.
In weight 2, we note there have been some recent results giving simultaneous
congruences. Le Hung and Li [lehung-li], in their investigations on level raising mod
2, have shown for certain forms
in S2(N) one gets congruences with forms with prescribed Atkin–Lehner signs.
Specifically, under the assumption that f is not congruent to an Eisenstein series mod 2, the methods in [lehung-li] give both 1.3, and a version of 1.1 (at
least in weight 2) where one can prescribe all but one Atkin–Lehner sign for g.
We note that our methods seem quite different, though both make use of the Jacquet–Langlands correspondence.
On the other hand, Ribet and later Yoo (see [yoo]) have investigated
congruences of newforms in S2(N) with Eisenstein series modulo primes p>3
with prescribed Atkin–Lehner signs, which gives simultaneous Eisenstein
congruences under certain conditions. Taking f=E2,N in 1.1 gives an
analogue of the sufficient conditions in [yoo] for an Eisenstein congruence with
prescribed Atkin–Lehner signs mod 2. However we cannot specify signs at all places
(except when all signs are −1 by taking f=E2,N in 1.3).
Now let us discuss the proofs, which have a couple of features we find interesting,
such as the connection with distributions of Atkin–Lehner signs and the
connection between certain eigenspaces of quaternionic modular forms and
quaternionic S-ideal class.
First we discuss the distribution of Atkin–Lehner signs.
Let us say the sign patterns ε for M are perfectly equidistributed in weight
k and level N if dimSknew,ε(N)∗ is independent of ε. We
will find that perfect equidistribution
in weight 2 implies perfect equidistribution in weight k. (This is also evident from
[me:dim] under the hypotheses of 1.1.) Then we will prove
that this perfect equidistribution implies the congruences in 1.1, and
use [me:dim] to see the above hypotheses are sufficient for perfect
equidistribution.
1.3 is related to a different fact about distribution of sign patterns.
In [me:dim], we showed that although the sign patterns are equidistributed
asymptotically as the weight or level grows, there is a bias toward or against
certain sign patterns in fixed spaces Sknew(N). In particular, when k=2
and ω(N) is odd, there is a bias towards −N in the sense that
dimS2new,ε(N)≤dimS2new,−N(N)∗ for any sign pattern ε
for N. Below we will give a simple proof of this using quaternion algebras, and
the idea behind this proof is what allows us to construct the congruences
in 1.3.
The overall strategy to get our theorems is the use of arithmetic of definite quaternion
algebras to construct congruences between quaternionic modular forms, and then use the
Jacquet–Langlands correspondence to deduce congruences for elliptic or
Hilbert modular forms. This is why we restrict to ω(N) odd over Q.
We also used this idea in [me:cong] to get Eisenstein congruences in weight 2,
generalizing results from [mazur] and [yoo]. Whereas in that paper we
used mass formulas for quaternionic orders to get Eisenstein congruences, here we use
the structure of quaternionic S-ideal classes to get our congruences.
In Section 2, we define the notion of S-ideal classes for
quaternion algebras in an analogous way to the definition of
S-ideal classes for number fields. The S-ideal class numbers interpolate
between the usual class number and the type number of a quaternion algebra.
In Section 3 we review the theory of (definite) quaternionic modular forms.
If B is a definite quaternion algebra of discriminant N and
O is a maximal order of B, then the space
Sknew(N)∗ corresponds to a space of Mk−2(O)
of quaternionic modular forms. These can be viewed as certain
vector-valued functions on the set of right O-ideal classes Cl(O).
In the case k=2, S2new(N)∗ simply
corresponds to the space of all C-valued functions on Cl(O).
In Section 4 we describe the action of ramified Hecke operators
on quaternionic modular forms in terms of local involutions acting on Cl(O).
This gives a realization of the space of quaternionic forms corresponding to
Sknew,ε(N)∗ as certain functions on the set of S-ideal classes
ClS(O) for O. However, the precise description of this space
in general is somewhat complicated as it involves both the way the local
involutions for different primes interact globally as well as the way they
interact with the weight and the signs εp.
There are two situations where we can make this description simpler. One is
if the local involutions act on Cl(O) both without fixed points as well
as without fixing orbits of points under the other local involutions. This corresponds
to the S-class numbers being as small as possible, which corresponds
to perfect equidistribution of sign patterns in weight 2. From our description
of quaternionic forms corresponding to Sknew,ε(N),
we can deduce that perfect equidistribution in weight 2 implies it in all weights.
In this situation, this is enough construct the quaternionic congruences which imply
1.1, excluding the cuspidal condition in weight 2, upon applying our
dimension formulas for Sknew,ε(N) in [me:dim] to determine when we have
perfect equidistribution of signs.
The other situation where this description becomes simpler is in weight 2, so
one only needs to understand how the local involutions interact.
Namely, if k=2, these forms are
just the C-valued functions on the set of S-ideal classes which are
“admissible for −ε.” Since all S-ideal classes are admissible when
ε=−N, this immediately gives bias towards the sign pattern −N
in weight 2. This description also yields relations between type numbers or generally
S-ideal class numbers and dimensions of of spaces of newforms, and allows
us to construct the quaternionic congruences needed for the first part of 1.3.
To show one can take g to be a cusp form in 1.3 (and thus also
1.1) when N is not an even product of 3 primes, we prove two auxiliary
results. By a variant of our argument in [me:cong], we show in 5.4 that
E2,N is congruent to a newform in S2new,−N(N) under certain
conditions; in particular if ω(N)>3 or N is a product of 3 odd primes.
We treat the N prime case by showing that lack of perfect equidistribution of Atkin–Lehner
signs means the congruent quaternionic modular form we construct must be
cuspidal (5.5). Using dimension formulas from [me:dim], we see that
lack of perfect equidistribution is automatic for N prime.
These auxiliary results in fact give other conditions when
N=2p1p2 where we can still take g cuspidal in 1.3—for instance, if
p1 or p2 is 1mod4 and N>258. See Section 5.3 for details.
We note that some exceptions to taking g cuspidal when N=2p1p2
are in fact necessary, e.g., S2new(42) and S2new(70) are 1-dimensional
but not all Atkin–Lehner operators act by −1.
Now we summarize what we can say in the case of Hilbert modular forms.
For simplicity, we only work over totally real fields F of narrow class number
hF+=1, however we expect that our arguments can be suitably modified
to remove this restriction. (See Section 3 for comments on what needs to be
modified.) The proofs we have described above then go through for Hilbert
modular forms over F with the exception of the explicit determination of
when we have perfect equidistribution of signs, as we have not worked out
an analogue of [me:dim] over totally real fields. In other words, one
does not have the explicit criteria in terms of quadratic residue symbols for
the Hilbert analogue of 1.1 (see 5.2), nor does one have
exactly analogous conditions on the level for when one can take g cuspidal in
the analogue of 1.3 (see 5.3). However, we can still give some
conditions on when we can take g cuspidal in 5.3 by 5.4
which gives Eisenstein congruences under certain hypotheses.
Lastly, we remark in [me:cong] we worked with quaternionic orders which were
not necessarily maximal (or even Eichler), which allowed us to get Eisenstein congruences
for any level N which is not a perfect square, though we could not always say
the congruent cusp form is new. We expect that our basic strategy here should be
generalizable to non-maximal orders, so we would not need to assume ω(N) is
odd (when F=Q) or N is squarefree. However, our dimension formulas from
[me:dim] are only for squarefree level because the trace formula we used is significantly
more complicated for non-squarefree level, though the method should apply to
arbitrary level. Potentially, this could make the hypotheses for a non-squarefree
analogue of 1.1 considerably more complicated.
Acknowledgements.
I thank Satoshi Wakatsuki for some discussions about mass formulas
which led me to think about the notion of S-ideal classes for quaternion algebras.
Thanks are also due to Dan Fretwell, Catherine Hsu, Bao Viet Le Hung, and Chao Li for
helpful discussions, as well as to the referee for useful comments.
I am grateful to the Simons Foundation for partial support through a
Collaboration Grant.
2. Quaternionic S-ideal classes
Let F be a totally real number field with narrow class number hF+=1,
and B/F be a totally definite quaternion
algebra of discriminant N.
Fix a maximal order O of B. For any (finite) prime p of F, we have
the local completions Bp=B⊗FFp and
Op=O⊗ZoF,p. Then Bp/Fp
is a division algebra if and only if p∣N.
Let O^×=∏pOp×
and B^×=∏p′Bp× denote the finite ideles
of B, i.e., the
restricted direct product of the Bp×’s with respect to the
Op×’s.
When we restrict to F=Q, we write N for N, p for p, and so on.
Recall there is a canonical bijection of
[TABLE]
with the set (not a group) of right (locally principal) ideal classes of O.
The class number hB=∣Cl(O)∣ is independent of the choice of O.
The number of maximal orders in B up to B×-conjugacy is called the type number
tB of B.
The conjugacy classes of maximal orders are in bijection with
[TABLE]
where G^(O)=∏′G(Op) is the stabilizer subgroup
with local components G(Op)={x∈Bp×:xOpx−1=Op}. Here G(Op)=Fp×Op× if
p∤N and G(Op)=Bp× if p∣N.
The latter part follows
as any finite-dimensional p-adic division algebra has a unique maximal order.
Hence G^(O)=F^×O^×⋅∏p∣NBp×.
Since tB is the cardinality
of (2.2) and [Bp×:Fp×Op×]=2 at
ramified places (and hF=1), one deduces that 2ω(N)hB≤tB≤hB, where
ω(N) is the number of prime ideals dividing N.
Let S be a set of primes dividing N. We define the (right) S-ideal classes of O to be
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
This interpolates (2.1) and (2.2), and is analogous to
the definition of the S-ideal class group for number fields:
if S=∅ one gets (2.1), and if S={p:p∣N} one
gets (2.2). (The factor AF× in the quotient (2.2)
makes no difference since hF=1.) The set ClS(O) is always finite.
Denote the S-ideal class number ∣ClS(O)∣ by hB,S.
If M=∏p∈Sp, we sometimes also write
ClS(O)=:ClM(O) and hB,S=:hB,M.
3. Quaternionic modular forms
Let F, B, and O be as above. Let k=(k1,…,kd)∈(2Z≥0)d,
where d=[F:Q]. Let τ1,…,τd denote the embeddings of F into
R, and put B∞×=∏Bτi×. View each Bτi×
as a subgroup of GL2(C). Let (ρki,Vki) be the twist
det−ki/2⊗Symki of the ki-th symmetric
power representation Symki of GL2(C) into GLki+1(C) restricted to
Bτi×. The twist here gives ρki trivial central character.
Put (ρk,Vk)=⨂(ρki,Vki).
We define the space Mk(O) of weight k quaternionic modular forms of level O to be the space of functions
φ:B^××B∞×→Vk
satisfying
[TABLE]
Alternatively, Mk(O) is the space of functions on
B×\B×(A)/O^× on which B∞× acts
on the right by ρk.
We note that a consequence of our assumption hF+=1 is that all forms
in Mk(O) are invariant under translation by the center AF×
of B×(A). Without this assumption,
we could restrict to the subspace of
forms with trivial central character as in [me:cong].
For the invariance conditions on φ to be compatible with the transformation condition on B∞×, it is necessary and sufficient that
φ(x,1)∈VkΓ(x), where Γ(x)=xO^×x−1∩B×.
Write
[TABLE]
for some fixed choice of x1,…,xh in B×(A).
Put Γi=Γ(xi).
Then we can and will view the elements φ∈Mk(O) as precisely the set of functions
[TABLE]
Namely, we can view φ as a function of B^× by φ(x):=φ(x,1).
Since Cl(O) is precisely the set of orbits of
B×\B×(A)/O^× under B∞×, any
φ∈Mk(O) is completely determined by its values on x1,…,xh.
Consequently Mk(O)≃⨁VkΓi.
Note that viewing φ as a function of B^× (which we do from now on
except where explicated), φ is invariant under F^×=Z(B^×),
right O^×-invariant and transforms on the left by ρk under B×
since
[TABLE]
If k=0:=(0,0,…,0), then ρk is the trivial representation
so Mk(O) is simply the set of functions φ:Cl(O)→C.
Here we define the Eisenstein subspace E0(O) to be the space of
φ∈M0(O) which factors through the reduced norm NB/F.
By the assumption that hF+=1, E0(O)=C\mathbbm1, where
\mathbbm1 denotes the constant function on Cl(O). (For general F,
E0(O) is hF+-dimensional.)
In this case, we can define a normalized inner product on M0(O) to be
[TABLE]
Then we define the cuspidal subspace
S0(O) of M0(O) to be the orthogonal complement of the
Eisenstein subspace: M0(O)=E0(O)⊕S0(O).
If k=0, then nothing nonzero in Mk(O) can factor through
AF×, so we put Ek(O)=0 and
Sk(O)=Mk(O).
3.1. Hecke operators
In this section, g∈B^× and we view elements of Mk(O) as
functions on B^× by (3.1).
Fix a Haar measure dg on B^× which gives O^×
volume 1.
For α∈B^×, we
associate the Hecke operator Tα:Mk(O)→Mk(O) given by
[TABLE]
Writing O^×αO^×=⨆βjO^×
for some finite collection of βj∈O^×, we can rewrite
(3.4) as the finite sum
[TABLE]
For p a prime of F, let ϖp denote a uniformizer in Fp.
Then for p∤N, identify Bp× with GL2(Fp) and set
αp=(ϖp001)∈Bp×.
For p∣N, let Ep be the unramified quadratic extension of Fp,
write Bp={(xxˉϖpyyˉ):x,y∈Ep} and
set αp=ϖBp=(01ϖp0)∈Bp×. Here we used
the notation ϖBp to indicate that this element is a uniformizer for Bp.
For any prime p, let Tp=Tαp, where we view
αp∈Bp× as the
element β=(βv)v∈B^× satisfying
βv=αp when v=p and βv=1 otherwise.
When p∤N, this definition agrees with the (suitably normalized)
definition of unramified Hecke operators for holomorphic Hilbert modular forms.
Suppose p∣N. Since Op is the unique maximal order of Bp,
it is fixed under conjugation by αp=ϖBp. (In fact explicit calculation shows
that conjugation by αp in Bp acts as the canonical involution of Bp.)
Consequently O^×αpO^×=ϖBpO^×, and the definition of the Hecke operator means
[TABLE]
Hence, for ramified primes, since ϖBp2=ϖp∈Z(B^×), we have (Tp2φ)(x)=φ(xϖp)=φ(x), i.e.,
Tp acts on Mk(O) with order 2.
In this paper, we say φ∈Mk(O) is an eigenform if it is an eigenfunction of
all Tp’s. Then Mk(O) has a basis of eigenforms as (Tp)p
is a commuting family of diagonalizable operators. Recall that this is not quite true for Hilbert (or
elliptic) modular forms—rather, one either needs to restrict the definition of eigenforms to be
eigenfunctions of the unramified Hecke operators or restrict to a subspace of newforms.
In our quaternionic
situation, all eigenforms are “new” because we are working with a maximal order. The
diagonalizability of the ramified Hecke operators Tp, p∣N,
follows from the fact that they are involutions.
Any eigenform φ∈Mk(O) lies in an irreducible cuspidal automorphic
representation π of B×(A) with trivial central character. (Our definition of
cusp forms does not exactly match up with the usual notion of cuspidal automorphic
representations—the eigenform \mathbbm1∈M0(O) is not a cusp form, and it
generates the trivial automorphic representation, which is a cuspidal representation of
B×(A) using the standard definition. However, it will not correspond to a cuspidal
representation of GL2(A), which is why we do not call the form \mathbbm1 a cusp form.)
At a ramified prime
p, the local representation πp is 1-dimensional and factors through the
reduced norm map NBp/Fp.
Because we are working with trivial central character, either
πp is the trivial representation \mathbbm1p or the reduced norm map composed with the unramified quadratic character ηp of Fp×.
Since Tpφ=π(ϖBp)φ,
we see that Tp acts on φ by +1 (resp. −1) if πp=\mathbbm1p
(resp. ηp∘NBp/Fp).
3.2. The Jacquet–Langlands correspondence
The Jacquet–Langlands correspondence, proved in the setting of automorphic
representations, gives an isomorphism:
[TABLE]
where 2:=(2,…,2)∈Nd.
This isomorphism respects the action of Tp for p∤N, i.e.,
it is an isomorphism of modules for the unramified Hecke algebra.
(To get the right normalization of Hecke operators,
we take the convention of viewing the space of Hilbert modular forms Mk(N)
adelically and defining the Hecke operators analogously to (3.4).)
Let Stp denote the Steinberg representation of GL2(Fp).
For p∣N, the Atkin–Lehner operator Wp acts on an eigenform
f∈Sk+2new(N) with eigenvalue −1 (resp. +1)
if the associated local representation πf,p is Stp (resp. Stp⊗ηp). In fact, we can take this to be the
definition of the Atkin–Lehner operator on the space of Hilbert modular newforms of
squarefree level. (See [shemanske-walling] for a more classical approach to Atkin–Lehner
operators for Hilbert modular forms.) A standard computation shows that
the (normalized) ramified Hecke eigenvalue ap(f)=−wp(f), i.e.,
Tp=−Wp for p∣N.
Since the local Jacquet–Langlands correspondence
associates \mathbbm1p with
Stp and ηp∘NBp/Fp with
Stp⊗ηp, we see that the action of the ramified
Hecke operators Tp on Sk(O) corresponds to the
action of Tp=−Wp on Sk+2new(N) under the
Jacquet–Langlands correspondence. This can be viewed as a
representation-theoretic generalization of the relationship between the Fricke
involution on the space of weight 2 elliptic cusp forms and quaternionic theta
series given by Pizer [pizer].
While the Jacquet–Langlands correspondence is technically only a correspondence of cusp forms
(or rather, cuspidal representations which are not 1-dimensional), we can extend the above
Hecke module isomorphism to include all of Mk(O).
Namely, it suffices to assume k=0, so Mk(O)
is just the space of C-valued functions on Cl(O).
Then E0(O)=C\mathbbm1, and
the p-th eigenvalue of \mathbbm1∈E0(O)
is simply the degree of Tp, i.e., 1+N(p) if p∤N
or 1 if p∣N. There is an Eisenstein series E2,N∈M2(N)
with these same Hecke eigenvalues for all p. When F=Q, we may take
E2,N:=∑d∣Nμ(d)dE2(dz) where E2 is the quasimodular weight 2
Eisenstein series for SL2(Z) and μ is the Möbius function.
Thus when k=0, we can extend
the above Hecke module isomorphism of cuspidal spaces to a Hecke module isomorphism:
[TABLE]
We take wp(E2,N)=−ap(E2,N)=−1 for all p∣N.
We remark that for general hF+, the reduced norm map from
B to F induces a surjective map NB/F:Cl(O)→Cl+(oF),
and a basis of eigenforms for E0(O) is just the collection of maps
λ∘NB/F where λ ranges over characters of Cl+(oF).
We can still extend the Jacquet–Langlands correspondence to all of
M0(O) by associating λ∘NB/F to
E2,N⊗λ.
3.3. Relation with quaternionic S-ideal classes
Let M be an integral ideal dividing N, which we just
write as M when F=Q.
By a sign pattern χ=χM for M, we mean a collection of
signs χp∈{±1} for all prime ideals p∣M.
If χp=+1 (resp. −1) for all p∣M, we denote the sign pattern by
+M (resp. −M). Also, if χ is a sign pattern for M,
denote by −χ the sign pattern given by signs −χp for all
p∣M.
Consider the subspace of Mk(O) with this
collection of Hecke signs:
[TABLE]
Similarly we define Skχ(O)=Mkχ(O)∩Sk(O).
Note that
Mkχ(O)=Skχ(O)⊕C\mathbbm1 if k=0 and
χ=+M; otherwise Mkχ(O)=Skχ(O).
To keep notation consistent with [me:dim] when F=Q, we denote
the space of Hilbert newforms with fixed Atkin–Lehner (rather than Hecke)
signs by
[TABLE]
for a sign pattern ε for M. The description of the Jacquet–Langlands
correspondence above tells us we have Hecke module isomorphisms:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
If φ∈Mkχ(O), then it is
right Bp×-invariant (i.e., φ(xαp)=φ(x) for all
αp∈Bp×) if and only if χp=+1. This implies
we can view forms in Mk+M(O) as certain functions on ClS(O). In particular, for weight zero we see that
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
We remark that when F=Q and N=p, we
have hB,p=tB so (3.9) yields
tB=1+S2new,−p(p), which was already known to Deuring.
More generally, but still with F=Q, a relation between
type numbers and the full (not new) space of cusp forms with given Atkin–Lehner eigenvalues
was given by Hasegawa and Hashimoto [hasegawa-hashimoto], which is similar to, but slightly
different than, (3.9). Note they do not restrict to squarefree level, and
their approach is essentially to use
explicit formulas for type numbers and dimensions, rather than looking through
the lens of the Jacquet–Langlands correspondence as we do here.
When F=Q, a formula for dimSknew,ε(N) was given in [me:dim],
This translates into an explicit formula for the S-ideal class numbers hB,S by
(3.9). The general case is somewhat complicated, so here we just
explain the formula in a simple case which will arise for us later: when
S={p}, we have hB,p=21hB=21(1+dimS2new(N)) if
(and only if) p satisfies condition (a), (b), or (c) of 5.5 below.
In the next section, we will generalize (3.8)
to treat spaces Mkχ(O) of higher weight and other sign patterns χ.
4. Action of local involutions
Keep the notation of the previous section. Here, for a prime p at which
B is ramified, we will study the action of ϖBp on Cl(O).
This will give a “local involution” σp on the global space Cl(O),
which by (3.5) will tell us about the action of ramified Hecke operators on
Mk(O). This will result in an algebro-combinatorial description of the
spaces Mkχ(O) for prescribed sign patterns χ.
4.1. Action on ideal classes
Let p be a prime at which B ramifies.
For S={p}, we also write ClS(O) as Clp(O).
Now we have a surjective map
[TABLE]
given by quotienting out on the right by Bp×. Since
Bp×=Fp×(Op×⊔ϖBpOp×),
given any
x∈B^× the associated {p}-ideal class
[x]p:=B×xO^×Bp×
is either [x] or [x]⊔[xϖBp], where [x]:=B×xO^×.
Thus the map (4.1) has fibers of size 1 or 2.
Put another way, right multiplication by ϖBp induces an involution, i.e. a
permutation of order 2, on Cl(O), and the orbits of this involution are precisely the
fibers of (4.1). Denote this involution by σp, so
σp([x])=[xϖBp] for any x∈B^×.
It will be useful to know certain objects associated to ideal classes are
invariant under σp.
For a right ideal I of O, let
Ol(I)={α∈B:αI⊂I} denote the left order of I.
If I corresponds to x, we also write the left order as
Ol(x). Note xO^x−1∩B is a maximal order of B since it
locally is. Since it preserves xO^ by left multiplication, we have
Ol(x)=xO^x−1∩B. From this it is easy to see that
Ol(x)=Ol(x′) for x′∈[x], so we may unambiguously call this
the left order Ol([x]) of the ideal class [x].
Similarly, since Γ(x)=Ol(x)×, this group only depends on
[x] and we may also write it as Γ([x]).
Lemma 4.1**.**
For x∈B^×, Ol([x])=Ol(σp([x]))
and Γ([x])=Γ(σp([x])).
Proof.
It suffices to prove the statement about left orders.
By the above adelic description of left orders,
it suffices to show O^×=ϖBpO^×ϖBp−1. Clearly these groups are the same away
from p, and they are the same at p since Bp has a unique maximal
order.
∎
In this subsection, we needed to distinguish between x, [x] and [x]p for x∈B^×, but below this is less crucial so we will use xi for
an both element of Cl(O) and a representative in B^× as in Section 3.
4.2. Action on quaternionic modular forms
Fix a set of representatives x1,…,xh for Cl(O) and let
p∣N. Then we may view σp as a permutation on
{x1,…,xh}.
Writing σp(xi)=γxiϖBpu for some
γ∈B×, u∈O^×, then by (3.2) we see
[TABLE]
Note that γ−1∈Γσp(xi):=xiϖBpO^×σp(xi)−1∩B×.
Thus the ramified Hecke action in (3.5) can be rewritten as
[TABLE]
We remark that for any fixed γ0∈Γσp(xi), we
can write any γ∈Γσp(xi) as γ=γ0γ′ where γ′∈Γ(σp(xi)). Hence
if the equation in (4.2) holds for a fixed i and some γ∈Γσp(xi), it holds for all such γ for that i by
(3.1).
Now let χ be a sign pattern for some M∣N, and let
γi,p∈Γσp(xi) for each 1≤i≤h,
p∣M. Then for φ∈Mk(O), we see that φ∈Mkχ(O) if and only if
[TABLE]
In the case k=0 so ρk is trivial, (4.3) simply
becomes
[TABLE]
If σp(xi)=xi, put VkΓi,χp={v∈VkΓi:ρk(γi,p)v=χpv}.
Note that in this case γi,p2∈Z(B×), so γi,p
acts as an involution and we have VkΓi≃VkΓi,+p⊕VkΓi,−p.
If xi is not fixed by σp, put VkΓi,χp=VkΓi.
Lemma 4.2**.**
Fix χp a sign for some p∣N.
Order x1,…,xh so that x1,…,xt is a set of representatives for
Clp(O), where t=hB,p.
Then we have an
isomorphism
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let φ be an element of the set on the right, which we
temporarily denote by A(χp). Then we extend φ to
Cl(O) as follows: for t<j≤h, write xj=σp(xi) for some
1≤i≤t, and put φ(xj)=χpρk(γj,p)φ(xi).
Note that φ(xj)∈VkΓj by 4.1.
This defines an embedding of A(χp) into Mkχp(O).
We will show surjectivity by a dimension argument.
For 1≤i≤t, let Ai(χp) be the subspace of A(χp) consisting of elements
φ such that φ(xj)=0 if i=j, 1≤j≤t. If σp fixes
xi, then VkΓi≃VkΓi,+p⊕VkΓi,−p implies dimAi(+p)+dimAi(−p)=dimVkΓi. Otherwise σp(xi)=xj for some j>t,
and dimAi(+p)=dimAi(−p)=dimVkΓi=dimVkΓj. Hence
[TABLE]
and thus our embedding of A(χp) into Mkχp(O)
must be surjective.
∎
There are two situations where the above description of Mkχp(O) becomes simpler. First, if σp has no fixed points, then we can identify this
space of forms with the functions φ on Clp(O) such that
φ(xi)∈VkΓi for each 1≤i≤t. Second, if k=0 then
we can identify this space with functions φ:Clp(O)→C such that
φ(xi)=0 if σp(xi)=xi and χp=−1.
4.3. Actions without fixed points
Let sp denote the number of orbits of size 2 for σp, so h−2sp
is the number of fixed points of σp.
For φ∈M0(O), note the equation
Tpφ=φ imposes sp linear constraints on φ:
φ(xi)=φ(σp(xi))
for xi in any orbit of size 2. On the other hand, Tpφ=−φ forces
φ(xi)=0 for any xi fixed by σp and φ(xi)=−φ(σp(xi)) for
xi in an orbit of size 2. Hence for a sign pattern χp for p, we
have
[TABLE]
Consequently, we can compute sp from (3.7) and
a dimension formula for S2new,−χp(N).
In particular, σp acts without fixed points if and only if
[TABLE]
Now we assume F=Q, and will use a trace formula for the Atkin–Lehner operator
Wp on S2new(N) from [me:dim]
to give necessary and sufficient criteria for σp to act on Cl(O) without
fixed points, which is equivalent to sp=2h.
Lemma 4.3**.**
Let p∣N.
(a) For p>2, sp=2h if and only if −p\overwithdelims()q=1 for some odd prime
q∣N or if N is even and p≡7mod8.
(b) For p=2, sp=2h if and only if N is divisible by a prime which is 1mod4
and −2\overwithdelims()q=1 for some prime q∣N.
Proof.
By (4.5), sp=2h if and only if
dimS2new,+p=1+dimS2new,−p, i.e., if and only if
trS2new(N)Wp=1. This trace is computed in [me:dim, Prop 1.4].
Let N′=N/p. For m∈N, let modd=2−v2(m)m be the odd part of m.
We define a constant b(p,N′) by the following table:
[TABLE]
If p>3, the trace of interest is
[TABLE]
This is 1 if and only if the second term on the right is 0, which gives part (a) when p>3.
If p=3, this trace is
[TABLE]
This finishes (a).
If p=2, this trace is
[TABLE]
This gives (b).
∎
We remark that knowing the traces of the Atkin–Lehner operator Wp on S2new(N)
is the same as knowing the S-ideal class numbers hB,p together with h (see
(3.9) and [me:dim]), so one may view the above result
as an application of formulas for
S-ideal class numbers, i.e., an application of the refined dimension formulas for
S2new,ε(N).
4.4. Weight zero spaces
To study the spaces Mkχ(O) in more detail,
we need to understand how the involutions σp interact for
the various primes p∣M. It will be convenient to describe this in terms of a graph.
The general case is somewhat complicated, so here we treat weight zero before discussing
higher weights.
Fix an integral ideal M∣N and a sign pattern χ
for M. We associate to χ a (signed multi)graph Σχ as follows.
Let the vertex set of Σχ be Cl(O)={x1,…,xh}.
For p∣M,
let E(χp) denote the set of signed edges
{χp⋅(xi,σp(xi))} where xi runs over a complete set of
representatives for the orbits of σp. (By signed edges, we mean weighted
edges, where the weights are ±1 according to whether χp=±1.)
Then we let the edge set of Σχ be the disjoint union of the E(χp)’s.
In other words, to construct our graph Σχ on Cl(O),
for all 1≤i≤j≤h and p∣M, we add an (undirected) edge
between xi and xj with sign χp if and only if
xj=σp(xi). Note that Σχ may
have loops as well as multiple edges with the same or opposite signs.
Let X1,…,Xt denote the (vertex sets of the) connected components of Σχ.
We note that X1,…,Xt do not
depend upon χ—the sign pattern only affects the signs of the edges in
Σχ. Moreover, xj lies in the connected component of xi if and only
if it lies in the orbit of xi under the permutation group generated by {σp:p∣M}. By the description of σp in terms of (4.1),
this is equivalent to xj lying in the same S-ideal class as xi, where
S={p:p∣M}. Hence, viewing the S-ideal classes as subsets
of Cl(O), we may write ClS(O)={X1,…,Xt}, and we see
t=hB,S.
Let Ei be the edge set for Xi in Σχ and
partition Ei=Ei+⊔Ei−, where
Ei± denotes the subset of edges with sign ±1. We say Xi
is χ-admissible if there is a partition Xi=Xi+⊔Xi− such that the set of edges in Ei which connect a vertex in Xi+ with a vertex in Xi− is precisely Ei−. In this case, we call the partition Xi+⊔Xi− χ-admissible. Note that if χ=+M, then Xi+=Xi and Xi−=∅ is
always a χ-admissible partition of Xi.
Denote the set of χ-admissible Xi∈ClS(O) by ClS(O)χ−adm.
Proposition 4.4**.**
Let χ be a sign pattern for M∣N,
S={p:p∣M}, and write ClS(O)={X1,…,Xt}.
Then we have an isomorphism
[TABLE]
Note that when χ=+M, every class in ClS(O) is χ-admissible
so this gives (3.8).
Proof.
Order x1,…,xh so that xi∈Xi for 1≤i≤t.
Let φ∈M0χ(O). By (4.4), if xj1 are xj2 are vertices in Xi connected by an edge with sign ±1, then φ∈M0χ(O) means φ(xj1)=±φ(xj2). Hence
the value of φ(xj)
is determined by φ(xi) (namely, is ±φ(xi)) whenever xj∈Xi.
This gives a map from
M0χ(O) into the space of functions on ClS(O)χ−adm by
restricting φ to be a function on the elements xi, 1≤i≤t,
such that Xi is χ-admissible.
To show this map is a bijection, it suffices to show that for 1≤i≤t
there exists φ∈M0χ(O) such that φ(xi)=0 if and only if
Xi is χ-admissible. If φ∈M0χ(O) with
φ(xi)=0, then the partition of
Xi into the two sets Xi+={xj∈Xi:φ(xj)=φ(xi)} and
Xi−={xj∈Xi:φ(xj)=−φ(xi)} is a χ-admissible partition of Xi.
Conversely, if Xi+⊔Xi− is a χ-admissible partition of Xi, then
we can define an element of φ∈M0χ(O) by setting
φ(xj)=±1 if xj∈Xi± and φ(xj)=0 if xj∈Xi.
∎
Thus dimM0χ(O) is the number of χ-admissible classes
in ClS(O), which generalizes (3.9). For congruences applications,
we want to know more about which Xi are admissible. Clearly we have
Corollary 4.5**.**
All Xi∈ClS(O) are χ-admissible if and only if
dimM0χ(O)=dimM0+M(O).
It does not seem easy to say exactly what Σχ looks like in general, however we can
get some information from considering how the edge sets E(χp) can interact for
various p.
Lemma 4.6**.**
If M=pM0 and X∈ClM0(O),
then there exists X′∈ClM0(O) such that xi∈X implies
σp(xi)∈X′.
Proof.
The projection ClM0(O)→ClM(O) has fibers of size 1 or 2.
If the fiber containing X has size 1, the lemma is true with X′=X. Otherwise,
let X′ be the other element in the fiber containing X. Then there exists
xi∈X such that σp(xi)∈X′, i.e., xiϖBp∈X′.
One easily sees that this implies xjϖBp∈X′ for all
xj∈X=B×xiO^×∏q∣M0Bq×.
∎
Thus if we think of building Σχ in stages by adding the edge sets E(χp)
one prime at a time, we see that at each stage each connected component comprises exactly
one or two connected components from the previous stage. Furthermore, if a connected
component is obtained by linking two connected components X and X′ from the previous stage, then involution σp linking X and X′ must be a bijection between
the set of right O-ideal classes in X and those in X′.
Consequently, each connected component Xi∈Σχ has cardinality
2m for some 0≤m≤2ω(M).
4.5. Admissibility in higher weight
Now we return to arbitrary weight k∈(2Z≥0)d.
As before, let M∣N and put S={p∣M}.
Write ClS(O)={X1,…,Xt} and Cl(O)={x1,…,xh}
with xi∈Xi for 1≤i≤t. For a sign pattern χ for M, we say
Xi is χ-admissible in weight k if for any v∈VkΓi there
exists φ∈Mkχ(O) such that φ(xi)=v. By the proof of
4.4, being χ-admissible in weight 0 is just the notion of
χ-admissible from the previous section.
If every Xi is χ-admissible in weight k, then similar to previous sections to we get
an isomorphism
[TABLE]
by simply restricting φ∈Mkχ(O) to x1,…,xt.
Without the admissibility condition, there is always an injection from the set on the
left to the set on the right, and we see that
dimMkχ(O)=∑i=1tdimVkΓi if
and only if each Xi is χ-admissible in weight k.
Lemma 4.7**.**
Suppose dimM0χ(O)=dimM0χ′(O) for any
choices of sign patterns χ,χ′ for M. Then for any k,
sign pattern χ for M and Xi∈ClS(O), we have
that Xi is χ-admissible in weight k. Moreover, for fixed
k, the spaces Mkχ(O) have the same dimension for all χ.
Proof.
We prove this by induction on M. It is vacuously true for M=oF, so
suppose M=p0M0 and assume the lemma is true for M0.
Write ClS(O)={X1,…,Xt} and order x1,…,xh so xi∈Xi
for 1≤i≤t. Put S0={p∣M0}.
The hypothesis in the lemma with χ,χ′ taken to be the two
sign patterns for M which restrict to +M0 for M0
implies ClS(O)=21ClS0(O) by (3.9).
Then for any Xi∈ClS(O), we may write Xi=Yi⊔Yi′ where
Yi,Yi′∈ClS0(O). By 4.1, the Γj’s
are the same for all xj∈Xi.
Fix a sign pattern χ for M and let χ0 be the restriction of χ to S0. Let χ′ be the extension of χ0 to S such that χp0′=−χp0.
On one hand, we have
[TABLE]
On the other hand, we have
[TABLE]
But each of the dimensions on the right is at most
∑i=1tdimVkΓi, so our previous equation means in fact
dimMkχ(O)=dimMkχ′(O)=∑i=1tdimVkΓi. This implies both the admissibility and
dimension assertions.
∎
Corollary 4.8**.**
Suppose F=Q and M∣N such that, for each divisor d∣M with d=1,
there exists an odd p∣MN such that −d\overwithdelims()p=1. If M is even, we further assume MN is divisible by a prime p≡1mod4. Then each Xi∈ClM(O) is χ-admissible in weight k for all weights k and sign patterns
χ for M.
Proof.
By the lemma, we want to know that the sign patterns for M are perfectly equidistributed
in the space M0(O), i.e., that dimS2new,ε(N)=dimS2new,−M(N)+1 for all sign patterns ε for M with ε=−M.
This is immediate from [me:dim, Thm 3.3] (which also immediately implies
the sign patterns for M are perfectly equidistributed in higher weight).
∎
Remark 4.1*.*
If M is prime which is 7mod8 and N is even, then the conclusion of the
corollary also holds by 4.3.
5. Congruences
Now we prove a congruence result under admissibility hypotheses. In particular,
we will find that
equidistribution of sign patterns in weight 0 implies sign patterns are
in some sense equidistributed in congruence classes in all weights.
Let F,B,O,N be as above. Fix a set of representatives x1,…,xh
for Cl(O).
5.1. Integrality
First we describe some notions and properties of integrality.
Recall τ1,…,τd are the embeddings of F into C. Let
E/F be a totally imaginary quadratic extension which splits B.
Then we may fix an embedding of B into M2(E) so that O maps into
M2(oE).
If vi is the place of F associated to τi, the embedding of B into M2(E)
induces an embedding τiB:Bvi→M2(C) such that O maps into
M2(oEi), where Ei the image of E under an extension of τi.
We take these embeddings in our definition of (ρk,Vk). In particular,
ρki(γ)∈Mki+1(oEi) for γ∈O.
Let R⊂C be a ring such that τiB(O)⊂M2(R)
for all 1≤i≤d. Realizing Vk=Cn,
let Vk(R)=Rn be the subspace of “R-integral vectors.”
We say φ∈Mk(O) is R-integral (with respect
to x1,…,xh) if φ(xi)∈Vk(R) for 1≤i≤h.
Let Mk(O;R) be the R-submodule of R-integral forms in
Mk(O) (with respect to x1,…,xh).
Recall for any Hecke operator T=Tα, there exists a finite collection of
βj∈B^× such that for any φ∈Mk(O),
[TABLE]
For any 1≤i≤h, we can write xiβj=zijγijxmijuij
for some zij∈Z(B×), γij∈B×∩O,
1≤mij≤h, and uij∈O^×.
Then
[TABLE]
By our integrality condition on γij and assumptions on R, Tφ is R-integral when φ is.
Moreover, viewing φ as a vector in Cnh formed by concatenating the vectors φ(xi)∈Cn for 1≤i≤h,
we can think of T as given by a nh×nh Brandt matrix
with entries in R (in fact in Z≥0 when k=0).
Since there exists a Hecke operator T=Tα
with distinct eigenvalues, a basis of
eigenforms of M(O) can be described as a complete set of eigenvectors
for some R-integral matrix T. Thus M(O) has a basis consiting of
R-integral eigenforms for some integer ring R.
For integral φ,φ′∈Mk(O;R) and an ideal ℓ of R,
we write φ≡φ′modℓ
if the vectors φ(xi) and φ′(xi) are coordinate-wise congruent mod ℓ
for all i.
5.2. Congruences under admissibility
Let M∣N and S={p∣M}.
Theorem 5.1**.**
Let φ∈Mk(O) be an eigenform, χ
a sign pattern for M, and ℓ∣2 a prime of Qˉ. Suppose
each X∈ClS(O) is χ-admissible in weight k. Then
there exists an eigenform φ′∈Mkχ(O) such that
ap(φ)≡ap(φ′)modℓ for all primes p of F.
Proof.
Let K be sufficiently large number field. Namely, assume K contains
the rationality fields for all eigenforms in Mk(O) and
τiB(O)⊂M2(oK) for all 1≤i≤d.
We may assume φ is oK-integral with respect to x1,…,xh.
Let I be a prime ideal of oK under ℓ, and R the localization of
oK at I.
A priori, if I is not principal, it may not be possible to scale the values of φ so that
φ is R-integral and φ≡0modI, but we can pass to a finite
extension of K (i.e., enlarge K if necessary) that principalizes I to assume this.
Let ε be the sign pattern for M such that φ∈Mkε(O).
Write ClS(O)={X1,…,Xt}
and order x1,…,xh so that xi∈Xi for 1≤i≤t.
For each p∣M and 1≤i≤h,
let γi,p∈Γσp(xi).
Then φ is determined by φ(x1),…,φ(xt) and
φ(xi)=εpρk(γi,p)φ(σp(xi))
for all i,p.
We define a function φ′ on Cl(O) as follows. For 1≤i≤t, let
φ′(xi)=φ(xi). Extend φ′ to Cl(O) by requiring
φ(xi)=χpρk(γi,p)φ(σp(xi))
for all i,p. Then φ′∈Mkχ(O) by (4.9),
and φ′(xi)=±φ(xi) for 1≤i≤h.
Thus φ′≡φmod2 with respect to
x1,…,xh.
However, this φ′ need not be an eigenform.
Take a basis of Mk(O) consisting of eigenforms
φ1,…,φm∈Mk(O;K) such that φ1=λφ
for some λ∈K×. Since
φ′∈Mk(O;R) we have that φ′=∑cjφj for some
cj∈K. By rescaling our basis vectors if necessary,
we may assume
φ′ and φ are R-linear combinations of φ1,…,φm.
Let M be the R-module generated by φ1,…,φm,
and Mχ be the submodule generated by the collection of φj’s which lie
in Mkχ(O). Then φ′∈Mχ.
Then the integrality property of
Hecke operators implies each Hecke operator Tα acts on M as well
as M/IM. Now φ′≡φmodI, so the image of
φ′ in Mχ/IMχ is a (nonzero) mod I eigenvector of each Tα.
The Deligne–Serre lifting lemma [deligne-serre, Lem 6.11] now tells us there
is an eigenform φ′′∈Mχ, i.e. some φj,
which has the same mod I Hecke eigenvalues
as φ′, and thus φ. (Note the Deligne–Serre lemma does not tell us that we may
take φ′′≡φmodI—cf. [me:cong, (3.3)].)
∎
Let Sknew(N)∗ be the space Sknew(N) if k=2
and S2new(N)⊕CE2,N if k=2. Similarly,
for a sign pattern ε for M,
let Sknew,ε(N)∗ be Sknew,ε(N) unless
k=2 and ε=−M, in which case it is
S2new,−M(N)⊕CE2,N.
Corollary 5.2**.**
Let M∣N.
Suppose all sign patterns ε for M are equidistributed in the space
S2new(N)∗, i.e. dimS2new,ε(N)∗ is
independent of ε. Let k∈(2N)d,
f an eigenform in Sknew(N)∗ and
ℓ a prime of Qˉ above 2. Then for any
sign pattern ε for M, there exists an eigenform
g∈Sknew,ε(N)∗ such that
ap(f)≡ap(g)modℓ for all primes p.
In particular, there are at least 2ω(M) eigenforms in Sknew(N)∗
which are congruent to f mod ℓ.
Proof.
Use the Jacquet–Langlands correspondence, 4.7, and the above theorem.
∎
By 4.8, this gives 1.1 when F=Q excepting the assertion that
we can take g∈S2new,−M(N) when the weight k=2, ε=−M and
N is not an even product of three primes. We handle this below.
Since, in weight 0, all quaternionic S-ideal classes are +M-admissible, the
above theorem also gives the following.
Corollary 5.3**.**
Let f∈S2(N) be a newform and ℓ a prime of Qˉ
above 2. Then there exists an eigenform
g∈S2(N)⊕CE2,N such that
ap(f)≡ap(g)modℓ for all p and
ap(g)=+1 for all p∣N.
This gives 1.3 when F=Q excepting the assertion about when we may take
g cuspidal.
5.3. Eisenstein and non-Eisenstein congruences
Here we will refine the latter corollary to show that when F=Q, we can take
g∈S2new,−M(N) if N is not an even product of three primes, which will
finish the proof of both 1.1 and 1.3.
First we refine the main theorem of [me:cong] in the setting
ℓ=2 and hF+=1. (The proof is also similar.)
Proposition 5.4**.**
Suppose the numerator of 21−d∣ζF(−1)∣N(N)∏p∣N(1−N(p)−1) is even and the type number tB>1. Then there exists an newform
g∈S2(N) such that wp(g)=−1 for all p∣N
and ap(g)≡ap(E2,N)mod2 for all p.
Proof.
Consider the graph Σχ described above when
χ is the sign pattern +N for N with components
X1,…,Xt. Let nj=∣Xj∣ for 1≤j≤t. Recall
t=tB, and t>1 means S0+N(O)=0.
By 4.3, for a fixed Xj the coefficients ∣Γi∣∣oF×∣
appearing in (3.3) are identical for all i with
xi∈Xj. Let cj be this number for Xj. Then
(\mathbbm1,\mathbbm1)=∑i=1h∣Γi∣∣oF×∣=∑j=1tcj−1nj.
This number is the mass m(O) of O studied by Eichler, and
equals 21−d∣ζF(−1)∣N(N)∏p∣N(1−N(p)−1)
(see, e.g., [me:cong]).
Let us define φ′∈M0+N(O) by φ′(xi)=aj for all
xi∈Xj, where aj∈2Z+1 for 1≤j≤t. Then φ′≡\mathbbm1mod2, and the argument with the Deligne–Serre lemma above will give our
proposition if we can choose φ′∈S0+N(O). By (3.3),
this means we want to show there is a
solution to ∑j=1tcj−1ajnj=0 in the aj’s. We can scale the
quantities cjnj by some λ∈Q× so that
mj=λcjnj∈Z for 1≤j≤t and
gcd(m1,…,mt)=1.
The hypothesis that m(O) is even means ∑mj also is.
Writing aj=2bj+1 for all j, our desired (scaled) linear equation is that
∑mj2bj=−∑mj, i.e., ∑mjbj=−21∑mj,
which has a solution as gcd(m1,…,mt)=1.
∎
Hence if the hypotheses of this proposition are satisfied, we can take
g to be a newform in S2(N) in 5.3.
From now on, assume F=Q.
Then the mass m(O) is just 12φ(N), where
φ(N)=∏p∣N(p−1), so 5.4 tells us we
can take g to be a cusp form if 8∣φ(N) and tB>1. Recall
tB≥2−ω(N)hB and hB≥m(O), so tB>1 whenever
φ(N)>12⋅2ω(N). This is automatic if N has at least 5
prime divisors, in which case we also have 8∣φ(N). Hence if ω(N)>3,
we may take g to be a cusp form in 1.3.
Suppose N=p1p2p3 with 2<p1<p2<p3. Automatically
8∣φ(N). Also, if p1≥5 or p1=3, p2≥7, or
p1=3, p2=5, p3≥17 then the above reasoning shows tB>1.
The remaining possibilities are N=3⋅5⋅7, N=3⋅5⋅11 or
N=3⋅5⋅13, and in fact one checks that tB>1 in these three cases
as well. Hence if N is an odd product of 3 primes, we can take g to be a
cusp form in 1.3.
To finish the theorems in the introduction, it thus remains treat N prime.
Proposition 5.5**.**
Let f∈S2new,χ(N) be a newform. Suppose there
exists p∣N such that wp(f)=+1 but p does not satisfy any of the following conditions:
- (a)
p≡7mod8* and N is even; or*
2. (b)
p=2* and −p\overwithdelims()q=1 for some odd prime q∣N; or*
3. (c)
p=2, N is divisible by a prime which is 1mod4 as well a (not necessarily
different) prime q such that −2\overwithdelims()q=1.
Then there exists a newform g∈S2new,−N(N)
such that f≡gmod2.
Proof.
Let φ be an associated integral newform to f.
By 4.3, the hypothesis on p implies σp has at least one fixed point
xi∈Cl(O). The condition Tpφ=−φ then implies φ(xi)=0.
Now the construction of φ′∈M0+N(O) in 5.1/5.3 with
φ′≡φmod2 also means φ′(xi)=0.
Write φ′=∑ajφj as a sum of eigenforms.
Note aj=0 unless φj∈M0+N(O) since φ′∈M0+N(O).
While we used the Deligne–Serre lemma above to get an eigenform φ′′ with the
same Hecke eigenvalues as φ′ mod 2, we gave a different argument for this
type of result in the proof of Theorem 2.1 of [me:cong].
That argument tells us that (possibly upon replacing φ′ with a different form
in M0+N(O) which is congruent to φ′ mod 2) the Hecke eigenvalues of φj are congruent to the
Hecke eigenvalues of φ′ mod 2 for all j such that aj=0. Say φm=\mathbbm1
is the constant function generating E2(O). Since φ′(xi)=0=φ1(xi),
it is not possible
that aj=0 for all j=m. This gives (at least one) φj∈S0+N(O)
congruent to φ mod 2, which gives our desired g by the Jacquet–Langlands
correspondence.
∎
Let us finish by explicating additional conditions when F=Q and
k=2 where we can take g to be a cusp form in 1.3.
Assume N=2p1p2 with 2<p1<p2.
First note that 8∣φ(N) if p1 or p2 is 1mod4.
Here tB>1 if p1≥11 or p1=7, p2≥19 or p1=5, p2≥29 or p1=3, p2≥53. Thus tB>1 if N>294 by this reasoning,
and exact calculation of class numbers shows in fact tB>1 if N>258.
Hence if N>258 is an even product of 3 primes,
at least one of which is 1mod4, then we can take g to be a cusp form
in 1.3 by 5.4.
On the other hand, suppose p1≡p2≡3mod4.
Then p=2 never satisfies (a), (b) or (c) of 5.5. Now p1,p2
never satisfy (c), and satisfy (a) if and only if they are 7mod8.
By quadratic reciprocity, −p1\overwithdelims()p2=(−1)−p2\overwithdelims()p2, so (b) of 1.3 will be satisfied for exactly one of
p=p1 and p=p2. Hence 5.5 cannot be used to guarantee
g is a cusp form in the remaining cases of N=2p1p2 for f with arbitrary
signs. However, it can be used to say we can take g to be a cusp form
if wp1(f)=wp2(f)=+1 (or just wpi(f)=+1 for whichever pi
does not satisfy (b)) and p1≡p2≡3mod8.
References