On the Hasse invariants of the Tate normal forms $E_5$ and $E_7$
Patrick Morton

TL;DR
This paper derives formulas for the factorization of Hasse invariants of Tate normal forms $E_5$ and $E_7$, linking their factors to class numbers of quadratic fields, and confirms related conjectures about supersingular polynomials.
Contribution
It provides explicit formulas for the number of linear and quadratic factors of Hasse invariants in terms of class numbers, and determines the roots of supersingular polynomials for specific modular groups.
Findings
Formulas for linear factors of Hasse invariants in terms of class numbers.
Determination of irreducible factors of the Hasse invariant for $E_7$.
Roots of supersingular polynomials lie in quadratic extensions for certain groups.
Abstract
A formula is proved for the number of linear factors over of the Hasse invariant of the Tate normal form for a point of order , as a polynomial in the parameter , in terms of the class number of the imaginary quadratic field , proving a conjecture of the author from 2005. A similar theorem is proved for quadratic factors with constant term , and a theorem is stated for the number of quartic factors of a specific form in terms of the class number of . These results are shown to imply a recent conjecture of Nakaya on the number of linear factors over of the supersingular polynomial corresponding to the Fricke group . The degrees and forms of the irreducible factors of the Hasse invariant of the Tate normal form for a point of order are determined,…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
On the Hasse invariants of the Tate normal forms and 1112020 Mathematics Subject Classification. 14H52, 11G15, 11G20, 11R29, 11R37 222Key words and phrases. Tate normal form, Hasse invariant, class number, class fields, Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction, Fricke group
Patrick Morton
Abstract
A formula is proved for the number of linear factors over of the Hasse invariant of the Tate normal form for a point of order , as a polynomial in the parameter , in terms of the class number of the imaginary quadratic field , proving a conjecture of the author from 2005. A similar theorem is proved for quadratic factors with constant term , and a theorem is stated for the number of quartic factors of a specific form in terms of the class number of . These results are shown to imply a recent conjecture of Nakaya on the number of linear factors over of the supersingular polynomial corresponding to the Fricke group . The degrees and forms of the irreducible factors of the Hasse invariant of the Tate normal form for a point of order are determined, which is used to show that the polynomial for the group has roots in , for any prime , when .
1 Introduction.
The Tate normal form of an elliptic curve with a point of order is the curve
[TABLE]
In [13] I proved several properties of the Hasse invariant of this curve, which for a given prime is the polynomial
[TABLE]
where ; and is the polynomial
[TABLE]
The factors of the Hasse invariant over the field are linear, quadratic, or quartic in (see [13], Theorem 6.2). Linear factors occur only for primes (mod ), and in [13] I made a conjecture about the number of distinct linear factors in this case. In this paper I will prove this conjecture, which can be stated as follows.
Theorem 1.1. If (mod ) is a prime and denotes the class number of the field , then the number of distinct linear factors of the Hasse invariant is
[TABLE]
It is a consequence of a theorem of Deuring that, for a given prime , the number in Theorem 1.1 is exactly times the number of supersingular invariants which lie in , which number is given by the formula
[TABLE]
(See [3, p. 97].) To prove the theorem, I will show the following. Set
[TABLE]
where runs over the supersingular invariants different from which lie in . These latter values are exactly the roots of the polynomial in . Excepting the factor (when mod ), the polynomials make up the individual factors of which correspond to -invariants in . Hence, Theorem 1.1 follows from:
Theorem 1.2. If , or is a supersingular -invariant for the prime (mod ), then the corresponding polynomial , or has exactly distinct linear factors over .
The polynomials (including or ) have no repeated factors in , as was noted in [13, p. 268]. Also, (mod ) can only have a root in if also lies in this field.
The key to proving Theorem 1.2 lies in considering the factorization of the prime in certain class fields over the imaginary quadratic field . Since (mod ), the prime splits in the field . Denoting the conjugate prime divisors of in the ring of integers of by , the relevant class fields are and (when mod ), where is the ray class field of conductor or over and is the ring class field of conductor over . (The latter field coincides with the Hilbert class field when (mod ).)
The field is useful in the proof of Theorem 1.2 because of the following considerations. Using Deuring’s theorem that injects into the endomorphism ring of any supersingular elliptic curve with , it follows that every supersingular -invariant lying in is a root of one of the class equations or (mod ), where the polynomial occurs only when (mod ). In fact, the following congruences hold. If then
[TABLE]
where and are products of distinct linear factors which are relatively prime to each other. Moreover,
[TABLE]
(In particular, this shows that is never a zero of (mod ), since is not a zero of .) On the other hand, if (mod ), then
[TABLE]
Note also that is the supersingular polynomial in characteristic . See Elkies [7], Kaneko [12], and Brillhart and Morton [3, Propositions 9, 11].
As is shown in [16], the class fields and are generated over the field by certain values of the Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction
[TABLE]
(See [1], [2], [6].) Namely, if , then and , for a unique primitive -th root of unity and an algebraic integer in with and . The numbers and are conjugate units in these fields and roots of a polynomial of degree , where is the class number of the order of discriminant in . Using the above factorizations modulo , the proof of Theorem 1.2 shows that four roots of the polynomial in (for ) are provided by rational expressions of roots of in , for or ; and the latter choice of versus depends only on . The fact that these are the only four roots of in follows from calculations using the normal form of the icosahedral group over , where is a -th root of unity. (See [8, Vol. II].)
As a corollary of the proof of Theorem 1.2, I show in Section 4 that factors (mod ) as a product of the squares of distinct linear factors, when (mod ) and or , echoing the factorizations of the class equations above. This implies that the powers of form an -integral basis of the field over , where in and ( or ). The latter result is also true when (mod ).
Using a similar approach, the following theorem is proved in Section 4, regarding irreducible quadratic factors of with constant term .
Theorem 1.3. Let be a prime.
- a)
If mod , the polynomial has no irreducible factors of the form over . 2. b)
If mod , the number of irreducible quadratic factors dividing over is , i.e. given by:
- i)
, if mod ; 2. ii)
, if mod ; 3. iii)
, if mod .
Further, in Section 7, I will use the following theorem regarding quartic factors of , which only occur when (mod ), and certain quadratic factors, which only appear when (mod ). For this theorem, set and , and let denote the class number of the field . The proof will be given in the paper [17].
Theorem 1.4. Let be a prime.
- a)
*Assume mod . The number of irreducible quartics of the form dividing over is: *
- i)
, if mod ; 2. ii)
, if mod ; 3. iii)
, if mod . 2. b)
If mod , the number of irreducible quadratic factors dividing over , with or in is:
- i)
, if mod ; 2. ii)
, if mod ; 3. iii)
, if mod . 3. c)
If mod , the number of irreducible quadratic factors dividing over , with or in is:
- i)
, if mod ; 2. ii)
, if mod ; 3. iii)
, if mod .
The above theorems are analogues of theorems that have been proven in previous papers for the Hasse invariants of other normal forms for elliptic curves. Theorems 1.1 and 1.3 are the analogues for the prime and the Tate normal form of Theorem 1 in [3], which gives the counts of linear and certain quadratic factors of the Hasse invariants of the Legendre normal form, the Jacobi normal form, and the Deuring normal form in characteristic , in terms of the class number of the field . Theorem 1.4 is the analogue of Theorem 1.1 of [14], which gives the count of binomial quadratic factors of the Legendre polynomial (mod ), where is an odd prime and , in terms of the class number of . This case is related to the Hasse invariant of the Tate normal form for a point of order . Theorem 1.4 is also the analogue for the prime of Theorem 1.1 of [15], which gives the count of binomial quadratic factors of the Legendre polynomial (mod ) (), in terms of the class number of the field ; and in this case the proof involves the Hasse invariant of the Deuring normal form .
The results in [3], [14], and [15] just referred to have recently been used by Nakaya [18] to count the number of linear factors (mod ) of the supersingular polynomial corresponding to the Fricke group , for and (see [20], [21], [18]). See Section 6 below for the precise definitions. In his paper [18] Nakaya also states many interesting conjectures regarding , including a formula for the number of linear factors of for and in his Conjecture 5, where is the set given immediately below. Using Theorems 1.1 and 1.3, I show in Section 7 that Theorem 1.4, stated above, implies Nakaya’s Conjecture 5 for . The proof of Theorem 1.4 appears in a sequel to this paper (see [17]), which establishes Nakaya’s conjecture for this case.
In addition, Nakaya [18] also asks the interesting question, whether the roots of always lie in , when is a prime in the set
[TABLE]
(See [18, Question 1].) The set consists of the primes for which all supersingular invariants of elliptic curves in characteristic lie in the prime field . In Section 6 I give a partial answer to Nakaya’s question by showing that the roots of lie in for .
For , this follows from Theorem 6.2 of [13], which concerns the form of the irreducible factors of modulo . In order to prove this for , I consider the Hasse invariant of the Tate normal form for a point of order . In Theorems 5.2 and 5.3 I determine the degrees of the irreducible factors of modulo , as well as the particular forms of cubic factors and sextic factors which can appear. The proofs of Theorems 5.2 and 5.3 make use of meromorphisms of elliptic function fields, as in [13]. Conjecture 1 in Section 5 is the analogue of Theorem 1.1 for the polynomial .
The paper is laid out as follows. In Section 2 I handle the cases of Theorem 1.2, and collect the preliminary results on the icosahedral group that will be needed for the proofs of Theorems 1.1-1.3. Section 3 contains the proof of Theorem 1.2. In Section 4 I determine the factorization of the polynomial (mod ), for or , in case (mod ), and I prove Theorem 1.3 (see Theorem 4.3). Section 5 discusses the Hasse invariant of the Tate normal form , as well as Conjecture 1 on the number of linear and cubic factors of and Conjecture 2 on the number of linear factors of over , for a general prime . Theorems 5.2 and 5.3 are used in Section 6 to give a partial affirmative answer to Nakaya’s question mentioned above. Finally, Theorem 7.1 is proved in Section 7, showing that Theorem 1.4 implies Nakaya’s Conjecture 5 for in [18].
2 Preliminaries.
2.1 The -invariants .
We start by proving the assertion of Theorem 1.2 for the two polynomials . From the representations
[TABLE]
it is not difficult to see that the splitting fields of these two polynomials over are
[TABLE]
respectively. These square-roots can be represented in terms of th and th roots of unity:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Since and are totally real, it follows that
[TABLE]
are the real subfields of and , respectively.
This gives the following proposition, in which we consider the factorization of the polynomials modulo primes which are (mod ).
Proposition 2.1.
- a)
If (mod ) is a prime for which , so that is supersingular in characteristic , then splits into distinct linear factors (mod ). 2. b)
If (mod ) is a prime for which , so that is supersingular in characteristic , then splits into distinct linear factors (mod ). 3. c)
If (mod ) is a prime for which , then splits into two irreducible quadratics of the form (mod ). 4. d)
If (mod ) is a prime for which , then splits into two irreducible quadratics of the form (mod ).
Proof. a) If (mod ) and , then (mod ), so that splits completely in the field . Note that does not divide . A similar statement holds for part b), since (mod ) and .
To prove c), note that (mod ) and (mod ) implies (mod ). Since the order of with respect to the subgroup modulo is , splits into two irreducible quadratics (mod ), corresponding to the two prime divisors of of degree in . That these quadratics have the given form follows from the factorization of over the subfield :
[TABLE]
The proof of d) is similar, using that (mod ) and
[TABLE]
From [13] we have the following alternate representation of the Hasse invariant for :
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Proposition 2.1 also holds with in place of and in place of . To see this, consider the equations
[TABLE]
These formulas imply that the splitting fields of these two polynomials are and , respectively. Since
[TABLE]
it follows from Kummer theory that these splitting fields coincide with the fields and above. Because and , the polynomials factor over in the same way that do. In particular, we have the factorizations
[TABLE]
2.2 The group .
The above representation of the Hasse invariant will be useful, because the rational function
[TABLE]
is invariant under a group of linear fractional substitutions:
[TABLE]
which is isomorphic to the icosahedral group . The coefficients of the maps in are in the field and and have orders 5 and 2, respectively (see [11]). The transformation , together with the transformation , given in terms of and by (see [8, II, pp. 42-43]), generates the subgroup
[TABLE]
of , where , and
[TABLE]
Thus, . The normalizer of in is , where is the map
[TABLE]
of order , and . Also, is the conjugate map
[TABLE]
obtained by applying the automorphism to the coefficients. Thus,
[TABLE]
Let be the polynomial in characteristic [math] given by
[TABLE]
Then is a factor of
[TABLE]
whenever is a root of the class equation corresponding to the discriminant or . From [13] we recall that the polynomials
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
have the property that
[TABLE]
where and . It follows that
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
The latter polynomial is a factor of the polynomial defined by
[TABLE]
for the same values of . It follows (when mod ) that there is a 1-1 correspondence between linear factors of over and linear factors of over , since and the determinant of the linear fractional map is
[TABLE]
The polynomial satisfies the transformation formulas
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Thus, for a given value of , the roots of are invariant (as a set) under the group , and this is also true over , since . Moreover, the number of linear factors of (counted with multiplicity) is the same as the number of linear factors of (counted with multiplicity), and therefore of , since is a bijection on (for mod ) and . Also note that the factor is not [math] in , for any root of the congruence (mod ), because is a factor of ; and this is not [math] (mod ), since is a supersingular invariant of in characteristic .
To complete the proof of Theorem 1.2, we just need to show that has exactly four distinct linear factors (mod ), when is a supersingular -invariant different from [math] and . Finally, note that has no multiple factors (mod ) for these values of , since
[TABLE]
3 Proof of Theorem 1.2.
We shall make use of the polynomial from [16], where or and (mod ) is a prime. From that paper we know that is a factor of both polynomials and (see [16, p. 19]) and is stabilized by the group , meaning that its roots are invariant under the mappings in :
[TABLE]
Here the action of on a polynomial is defined by
[TABLE]
It can be checked that
[TABLE]
(See [16, p. 30].)
Let and let be its ring of integers, so the ideal splits into a product of the prime ideals in . Let , as in [16], where
[TABLE]
and is the Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction. (See [1], [2], [6]. As in [16], we also need in case and mod .) Then is a root of the irreducible polynomial and is an abelian extension of the quadratic field . Let be the order of discriminant or in (the former only for (mod )). It is shown in [16] that
[TABLE]
where is the ray class field of conductor over . On the other hand,
[TABLE]
where is the ring class field of conductor over .
The value , for some (mod ), also generates a class field over , namely the conjugate field
[TABLE]
of in the two cases described above. It is shown in [16] that are disjoint quadratic extensions of the Hilbert class field in the first case; and of in the second. Moreover, the unit is also a root of , and is given by the formula
[TABLE]
Finally, if , with or , the Galois group of the quadratic extension is generated by the automorphism .
With these facts in hand we prove the following.
Theorem 3.1. If is a prime with (mod ) and or , then the polynomial factors (mod ) as a product of squares of linear factors.
Proof. This follows as in [3] (see Propositions 9 and 10). This is because ramifies in , so it is the square of a product of prime ideals in . Also, the prime divisor of in is unramified in and is congruent to 1 (mod ), so is in the ray mod and in the principal ring class mod if and (mod ). Therefore, splits into a product of primes of degree 1 in (and ramification index over ). Since a root of generates over , factors over the -adic field as a product of irreducible quadratics, each of which belongs to a ramified extension of and therefore has discriminant divisible by . Thus, (mod ), where is the class number of the order .
We will see below that the roots of (mod ) in the proof of Theorem 3.1 are distinct. At any rate, is divisible by at most distinct linear factors (mod ).
Proposition 3.2. If is a supersingular -invariant (mod ), then the congruence (mod ) has at least distinct solutions in , which are also solutions of (mod ), for a unique value of or , depending on .
Proof. Let be a supersingular -invariant (mod ). Choose a root of in characteristic [math], with or , such that reduces to modulo some prime divisor of in the field . This is possible because of the congruences (1.1) and (1.2) for given in the introduction and Deuring’s lifting theorem. Let , so this field is either the Hilbert class field of , for , or and (mod ); or is the ring class field over with conductor , when and (mod ). Then also modulo , where is the prime divisor of which divides.
From [16, eq. (25)] we know that if is chosen as in (3.1), then
[TABLE]
(Also see [6, eq. (2.5)].) Since the root of is a conjugate of , some conjugate of over is a root of . Thus, the minimal polynomial of some over (with ) divides . Since (mod ), then
[TABLE]
and the fact that means that (mod ) has at least two distinct solutions (mod ) in (recalling that roots of are invariant under the mapping ). From [16, p. 1193] we also have the equation
[TABLE]
Thus, the minimal polynomial over of some conjugate of over also divides . Now, and are certainly relatively prime to each other, since their respective roots generate distinct extensions over . Thus, in . Since the congruence does not have any multiple roots (mod ), this shows that has at least four distinct linear factors modulo and therefore also modulo . We know that , so these linear factors are also factors of (mod ).
Remark. The same arguments as in the above proof show that (mod ) has at least one solution in corresponding to each of the values and .
By the discussion in Section 2, the roots of are invariant under the group , so splits into linear factors in the field . If is a prime divisor of in the field , all the roots of the congruence (mod ) are images of the root , say, by elements of (mod ). Note that is a simple group, so the kernel of the map taking to its reduction modulo in is trivial. Four of the images lie in , since the elements of the group have coefficients in . We now prove the following.
Proposition 3.3. If is a root of the congruence (mod ), with (mod ), then , for .
Before proceeding with the proof, we recall (2.1) and record the factorizations
[TABLE]
where the are irreducible polynomials of degree (for ) and
[TABLE]
Also note the resultant
[TABLE]
this shows that is never [math] modulo for a root of (mod ).
Proof of Proposition 3.3. To prove the proposition, it suffices to show for any root of (mod ), for a system of left coset representatives of in . It is not hard to see that such a system is given by
[TABLE]
where are the linear fractional maps from Section 2.2. First, if and , cannot lie in if does, since is quadratic over (this because mod ).
If , then if and only if
[TABLE]
For this, note that (mod ), since . However, , and
[TABLE]
which cannot be [math], since the second of the above factorizations would imply that satisfies and therefore , contradicting (mod ). Hence, (mod ), giving that .
The arguments for the other coset representatives are similar: modulo we have the congruences
[TABLE]
The norms of the constant multipliers in the numerators are, respectively, ; and the -factors in the numerators divide the respective polynomials
[TABLE]
Since and , none of them can be [math] for a root of . Hence for .
Taking , we also have the following congruences modulo :
[TABLE]
As before, the norms of the constant multipliers are nonzero (mod ) (the fourth norm in the sequence is ), and the -factors divide the respective polynomials
[TABLE]
This gives that for .
It follows that for any .
Propositions 3.2 and 3.3 now yield that (mod ) has exactly distinct roots in . Together with Proposition 2.1, this completes the proof of Theorem 1.2.
4 A discriminant theorem for .
Next, we derive the following theorem from the considerations in Section 3.
Theorem 4.1. If or , where (mod ) is prime, the polynomial factors modulo as
[TABLE]
where the are distinct elements of and is the class number of the order of discriminant in .
Proof. From the results of Section 3, we know that has at most distinct roots (mod ), and that these roots lie in . We also know that for every supersingular -invariant in , different from or , which is a root of the congruence (mod ), there are distinct roots of (mod ) in . We now prove the same thing for and . (Note that is never a root of the class equation modulo . See the proof of Proposition 11 in [3].) By the remark following the proof of Proposition 3.2, we know that has at least one root corresponding to , and this is a zero (mod ) of
[TABLE]
Using the fact that is stabilized by the group , we show that has exactly distinct roots in corresponding to . Certainly there are no more than such roots, since . To prove this, consider the fixed points of the mappings in the group . We compute modulo that:
[TABLE]
However, these factors all divide the numerator of , so that any fixed point of or satisfies (mod ). It follows that there are four distinct images of which are roots of , and since stabilizes the roots of , our claim is proved.
By the congruences for in Section 1, there are either or distinct supersingular -invariants, different from , which are roots of (mod ), depending on whether (with mod ) or and modulo . Thus, has at least
[TABLE]
distinct roots corresponding to supersingular -invariants (mod ). As above, there are at least two roots of in corresponding to , when (mod ) (since (mod )). On the other hand, there cannot be more than two roots each for the polynomials and , by the last displayed equations, because has no more than distinct roots (mod ), by Theorem 3.1. Thus, both polynomials have exactly roots corresponding to , and this proves that has distinct roots in in all cases.
This fact allows us to prove
Theorem 4.2. If (mod ) and, with the previous notation, the minimal polynomial of over is , where or , then the prime divisor of does not divide , so that the powers of form an -integral basis of .
Proof We have over , where the bar denotes complex conjugation. Clearly, (mod ), so that (mod ). Thus, has no multiple roots (mod ), by Theorem 4.1, and this proves the theorem.
We now prove the following theorem, which will be useful in Section 7.
Theorem 4.3. As in Theorem 1.1, let denote the class number of the field .
- a)
If mod , the polynomial has no irreducible factors of the form over . 2. b)
If mod , the number of irreducible quadratic factors dividing over is:
- i)
, if mod ; 2. ii)
, if mod ; 3. iii)
, if mod .
Proof. Assume is an irreducible quadratic dividing . Let be a root of this polynomial over . Then the curve with the parameter is supersingular, and , which implies that the -invariant
[TABLE]
This is the -invariant of a curve isogenous to , which is denoted in [13], [16]. (Recall the alternate formula for in Section 2.1.) Moreover, both roots of lead to the same supersingular -invariant, since the roots of are and . Hence, must divide in .
First assume that (mod ). As we proved in Propositions 3.2 and 3.3, the roots of have the form , where is one of four (or two) roots of (with or ), and are left coset representatives of the subgroup in . Since the only fifth root of in is itself, it suffices to show that
[TABLE]
Letting , we have that , so that agrees with the automorphism of fixing . Hence,
[TABLE]
It follows that for , and ,
[TABLE]
This expression can equal if and only if , which holds if and only if in . But this condition is equivalent to , and as we have already seen, this never holds for a root of in . This proves part a).
Now assume mod . With in , consider the factorization of in , where is the minimal polynomial of over , as in Theorem 4.2. I claim that factors (mod ) as a product of distinct quadratic factors of the form . The argument is a modification of the argument we gave in the proof of Proposition 3.2. Recall that or , as in Section 3. In either case, , where and is as in the proof of Proposition 3.2. For any singular -invariant , which is a root of , there is a conjugate of over , say , which is a root of . It follows that the minimal polynomial of over the field divides both polynomials and . On the other hand, the nontrivial automorphism of is , so that the roots of each factor are invariant under . However, implies that , where . If is a fixed prime divisor of in , then has degree since is principal, and (mod ) in case . It follows that has, for each distinct (mod ), a factor (mod ) in . Using the same argument with in place of yields a second factor dividing and (the minimal polynomial of over ). As in Proposition 3.2, (mod ), if the -invariant corresponding to is not [math] or ; and (mod ) since (mod ). Furthermore, divides , so the -invariants (mod ) are all supersingular, where is given by the rational function in in the first paragraph of the proof. Using [13, Theorem 6.2], we see that cannot have any linear factors (mod ), and therefore the polynomials remain irreducible (mod ).
If , then by the above argument, (for , see the remarks in the Introduction after equation (1.1)) has at least one factor corresponding to . Since (mod ) is invariant under the mapping , then is also fixed by (up to a constant factor). By the factorization of in Section 2.1, would have to be congruent to one of the quadratic factors of (see below), say
[TABLE]
in which case
[TABLE]
This shows that if is divisible (mod ) by one factor corresponding to , then it is also divisible by the conjugate factor . Using (1.1) and (1.2) now shows that has least
[TABLE]
distinct quadratic factors of the form (mod ), if (mod ); and at least distinct quadratic factors of this form (mod ), if (mod ). Hence, is a product of distinct quadratics of the form , in all cases, as claimed.
In the case under consideration, for each irreducible polynomial of the form dividing , there is exactly one factor of the same form which divides the polynomial . For if (with ) are the roots of , then the roots of quadratic factors of have the form , where is a -th root of unity. Then implies that there is a unique for which . Hence, the factors of the form of modulo are in correspondence with factors of of the same form.
Thus, has at least factors of the form when (mod ), and such factors when (mod ). This yields the formulas in part b). It remains to show that these are all the factors of the form which occur in .
To do this we use an argument similar to the proof of Proposition 3.3. We show that the the expression , if , , and is a root of (mod ). (The factors corresponding to are included in the factors which we enumerated above.) In this case the -th roots of unity lie in , and (mod ); so we must show
[TABLE]
First note that we may assume (mod ), since
[TABLE]
unless . Now the claim for follows as in the proof of Proposition 3, on noting the following factorizations:
[TABLE]
This proves what we need, since and
[TABLE]
and these factors correspond to and . For we use the fact that from Section 2.2. Then
[TABLE]
where is the result of replacing by and leaving unchanged. This is an automorphism (over the rational function field ) and simply replaces by in the relevant factors above. Hence, the same argument applies.
This proves that, for , the only factors of of the form over are the factors of , for (when mod ) and . Moreover, we know that and , where and are the polynomials in Section 2.1, and for these polynomials there are no factors (mod ) other than the ones guaranteed by Proposition 2.1c) and d). This completes the proof. .
Corollary 4.4. If is a prime with (mod ), the polynomial ( or ) is the product of the squares of distinct, irreducible, quadratic factors modulo . In particular, Theorem 4.2 also holds for primes (mod ).
Proof. This is immediate from the above proof and (mod ).
5 The Hasse invariant for .
The Tate normal form for a point of order is the curve
[TABLE]
whose -invariant is
[TABLE]
(see [6]); and whose Hasse invariant is the value at of the polynomial
[TABLE]
From [13, Theorem 6.1] we have the following statements about the supersingular parameters for the curve over .
Proposition 5.1. Assume is supersingular over , for a given prime . Putting and , we have:
- i)
If (mod ), then . 2. ii)
If (mod ), then or . 3. iii)
If (mod ), then or . 4. iv)
If (mod ), then or .
Proof. The proof in [13, Theorem 6.1(ii), (iii)] is correct in case the -invariant of satisfies . However, if or , the proof given there is incomplete. In the first paragraph of the proof marked “Proof of (ii) and (iii)”, the meromorphism satisfies , where is a root of unity in , for the supersingular elliptic curve
[TABLE]
and is the smallest power of for which . The meromorphism must satisfy an equation of degree or less over in R. From this it is concluded that . (The same argument is given in [10, p. 263].) However, it is possible for to be a -th or -th root of unity and for still to be the root of a quadratic equation.
For example, suppose that in . Consider the possibilities and , where and is a primitive cube root of unity. In this case we have
[TABLE]
and it is possible for the polynomial to factor. If it does factor, then for some ,
[TABLE]
which implies that , or in . This implies that the plus sign holds in the first term. If , then , implying that is even, and in R. In this case it is not hard to show as in [13] that and , where is the order of in the quotient group . If we obtain the contradiction on using the proof of Theorem 6.1(i). We obtain, finally, that in the case , so and . If , then , implying that is an odd power of .
Similarly, if , then can lead to a quadratic equation for . This is because , and factors if and only if for some integer (by Capelli’s theorem, [4, p. 87]). This implies that , so is an odd power of . Hence, the proof in [13] works in this case if we exclude the prime .
These arguments show that when , , and , we have to add the possibility that to [13], Theorem 6.1 (ii), (iii). Thus, we must add the field to the list of possibilities in parts (iii), (iv) of this theorem, since in these cases.
The above considerations explain why it is possible to have a quadratic factor in parts (iii) and (iv) of the following theorem.
Theorem 5.2. If is prime, the irreducible factors of over are:
- i)
quadratic, if (mod ); 2. ii)
linear or quadratic, if (mod ); 3. iii)
* or sextic, if (mod );* 4. iv)
, cubic or sextic, if (mod ).
Proof. From the identity and it is clear that . Thus the statements of (i)-(iv) follow directly from Proposition 5.1, for the factors of coming from the -th degree factor (corresponding to ) and from . On the other hand, it is clear that divides whenever (mod ). We need to show that the factors over of the polynomial
[TABLE]
conform to the statements in (i)-(iv), when when it divides the Hasse invariant.
A root of the polynomial generates the real subfield of the -st roots of unity, since one of its roots is
[TABLE]
Its discriminant is . Its Galois group satisfies and it is the class field over corresponding to the congruence group (mod ). Note that is a factor of if and only if (mod ). Hence we have
[TABLE]
The order of the residue class of in determines the degree of the irreducible factors of modulo . Therefore, the above congruences (mod ) show that (i)-(iv) do indeed hold for the degrees of these factors.
Theorem 5.3 Let . All irreducible cubic or sextic factors of over are invariant under the mapping . In addition:
- a)
If mod , any root of satisfies . 2. b)
All irreducible cubic factors of over have the form
[TABLE] 3. c)
If mod , any root of satisfies . 4. d)
All irreducible sextic factors of over have the form , for conjugate elements .
Proof. a) We will make use of the meromorphism of the function field of the supersingular curve , as in [3, Section 2] and [13, Section 6]. (Also see [9], [5] and [19].) Let , and let be the points of order on lying in :
[TABLE]
Further, let represent the prime divisor of K corresponding to the point , and the prime at infinity, so that
[TABLE]
As in [13], we know that the endomorphism on prime divisors of K is given by , where is the norm from K to and is identified with the point (mod ) on . (Also see [5].) It follows that
[TABLE]
since is purely inseparable of degree . If (mod ), (mod ), so this implies that
[TABLE]
This gives in turn that
[TABLE]
since is the tangent to at . Applying to gives
[TABLE]
which implies that
[TABLE]
for some constant . Substituting from (5.1) and letting capital letters , etc., denote small letters raised to the power , implies that
[TABLE]
The elements are independent over , so comparing coefficients of on both sides gives . Now comparing the coefficients of and the constant terms yields
[TABLE]
Substituting for in the second equation from the first equation yields
[TABLE]
and therefore
[TABLE]
On the other hand, applying the meromorphism to gives
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Here we have , so considering the coefficients of the -terms gives
[TABLE]
this yields and therefore
[TABLE]
In particular, and . This shows that is always a conjugate of in this case, and proves that the set of roots of any irreducible factor of is invariant under the map . A similar argument works for the case (mod ).
b) The linear fractional map has order 3. It follows that any cubic factor of must have the form
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Since , this proves the assertion of b). Note that when (mod ), the roots of an irreducible sixth degree factor of also satisfy (5.2). It follows that the cubic factors of over also have the form given in Part b).
c) When and (mod ) we consider the effect of on . This time we have
[TABLE]
which implies that
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
yields the equation
[TABLE]
this gives
[TABLE]
Thus, and the coefficients of satisfy
[TABLE]
Applying a third time to gives
[TABLE]
hence
[TABLE]
Now this gives
[TABLE]
Combining this with (5.4), we find that
[TABLE]
or
[TABLE]
Hence,
[TABLE]
The first case gives , with , as above. The linear fractional map has order and , so the second case gives . If is a root of an irreducible factor of degree , this gives that in either case. Note that must have as a fixed point, since , and the fixed points of are just the sixth roots of unity.
Now factoring an irreducible sextic factor over and using the argument in part b) implies part d). This completes the proof.
Remark. Note that the roots of the polynomials
[TABLE]
are invariant under the map , as is the -invariant of .
Conjecture 1. Let be a prime.
- a)
If (mod ), the number of distinct irreducible cubics which divide is
[TABLE]
This is twice the number of supersingular -invariants which lie in . 2. b)
If (mod ), the number of distinct linear factors which divide is
[TABLE]
This is six times the number of supersingular -invariants which lie in .
Theorem 1.1 and Conjecture 1b) suggest the following regarding the Hasse invariant of the Tate normal form for a point of order .
Conjecture 2. If is prime and (mod ), the number of linear factors of the Hasse invariant of the Tate normal form over is times the number of supersingular -invariants which lie in .
Theorem 1.1 shows that this conjecture is true for the prime . It is also true for , if is the Deuring normal form, by [3], Theorems 1(d) and 5.
6 Supersingular invariants for the Fricke groups.
In this section, we will apply the results of Sections 3 and 5 to give a partial answer to a question and conjecture of Nakaya [18].
As in [18], let denote the supersingular polynomial for the Fricke group introduced by Koike and Sakai [20], [21]. Here we focus on the cases . As in [18], there is, for each such , a Hauptmodul for the group , given by:
[TABLE]
where is the Dedekind -function. The modular functions and satisfy, in each case, a quadratic relation
[TABLE]
with coefficients in , where:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
See [21], [18]. Then, for each , Sakai [21] defined the polynomial as follows:
[TABLE]
where runs over the distinct roots of in for those values of which are supersingular in characteristic , i.e. the roots of .
Nakaya [18, section 4] asked if the supersingular values lie in , for any prime , when is an element of the set
[TABLE]
which is the set of primes for which all supersingular -invariants lie in . The set is also, of course, the set of prime factors of the order of the Monster group .
We give an affirmative answer to this question for .
Theorem 6.1. If , all the supersingular values in characteristic lie in for .
Proof. The proof for the case indicates the general idea, which is to find a parametrization for each of the genus zero curves . To do this, we will substitute for the -invariant of the Legendre normal form, , namely
[TABLE]
and then factor the resulting expression in . For the polynomial we find that factors as a product of three linear polynomials in , whose roots are
[TABLE]
Hence, a parametrization of is, for example,
[TABLE]
Any of the above three roots yields an equivalent parametrization. If is supersingular, then from [3, Prop. 1] we know that the corresponding value lies in . Hence, lies in when is supersingular in characteristic . This proves the assertion for .
For , we use the expression for the -invariant of the Deuring normal form :
[TABLE]
Taking the root of the linear factor of gives the parametrization
[TABLE]
Here we could also use the parametrization
[TABLE]
which arises from an isogenous curve to ([15, eq. (2.5)]); and this yields a number of equivalent parametrizations on substituting for using the linear fractional maps in the group
[TABLE]
See [15]. If is supersingular in characteristic , then , by [15, Thm. 2.3]. Hence , as well.
For the case , we substitute in for the -invariant of the Tate normal form , expressed in the following form:
[TABLE]
This expression for arises from the fact that it is invariant under the map . (See [16].) Factoring yields the parametrization
[TABLE]
Now, from [13, Thm. 6.2] we know that the factors of the Hasse invariant over are linear, quadratic, or quartic in . If is the root of a linear or quadratic factor of , then certainly . On the other hand, the quartic factors of have the form , i.e. have roots that are invariant under . If is the root of such a factor, then satisfies the quadratic equation
[TABLE]
Therefore, if is supersingular in characteristic , then , from which it follows that , as well.
Now consider the case . Putting , the -invariant of the Tate normal form , into leads to the following parametrization:
[TABLE]
Now we use Theorems 5.2 and 5.3. First assume . If is supersingular in characteristic , then is a root of . If (mod ), then by Theorem 5.2i) and ii), which implies . If (mod ), we know is the root of a cubic or sextic factor over of a special form (excluding the trivial case when is a root of ). Now form the resultant
[TABLE]
This shows that when is the root of a cubic of the given form, over , then any corresponding value in characteristic satisfies
[TABLE]
This shows that lies in in all cases, whether and is the root of a cubic factor, or and is the root of a sextic factor, which factors as a product of two cubics, by Theorem 5.3d).
The statement for and follows by direct calculation, considering
[TABLE]
since is the only supersingular invariant in characteristic or . This completes the proof of the theorem.
7 Proof of Nakaya’s conjecture for .
In the following theorem, we let denote the class number of the quadratic field . This theorem is analogous to theorems proved in [14] and [15] for quadratic factors of certain Legendre polynomials. In those theorems the class numbers and show up in counting binomial quadratic factors of and (mod ). In the following result, the class number shows up in counting certain factors of (mod ). These statements are also higher degree analogues of Theorems 1.1 and 4.3.
Theorem 1.4.
- a)
*Assume mod . The number of irreducible quartics of the form dividing over is: *
- i)
, if mod ; 2. ii)
, if mod ; 3. iii)
, if mod . 2. b)
If mod , the number of irreducible quadratic factors dividing over , with or in is:
- i)
, if mod ; 2. ii)
, if mod ; 3. iii)
, if mod . 3. c)
If mod , the number of irreducible quadratic factors dividing over , with or in is:
- i)
, if mod ; 2. ii)
, if mod ; 3. iii)
, if mod .
If the roots of are written as , then the relation becomes
[TABLE]
Hence, the roots of a quadratic satisfying this condition yield a point on the curve :
[TABLE]
Solutions to this equation in certain class fields of imaginary quadratic fields were exhibited in [16].
I will now show that Theorem 1.4 implies Nakaya’s Conjecture 5 in [18] for . In this conjecture denotes the number of supersingular -invariants in characteristic which lie in the prime field , as in [18]. Thus, is the number of linear factors of the supersingular polynomial over .
Theorem 7.1. Theorem 1.4 implies that the number of linear factors of the polynomial over is given by the formula
[TABLE]
Proof. Case 1: mod . From [13, Theorem 6.2] we know that the factors of are either (only when (mod ), since corresponds to the -invariant ) or irreducible quartic polynomials satisfying (mod ). On the other hand, the proof of Theorem 6.1 shows that linear factors of have roots of the form , where and is the parameter defining the curve . Making this substitution for shows that is a root of the polynomial
[TABLE]
Additionally, when the factor is present, has this form with . Theorem1.4a) implies that there are exactly or irreducible factors of this form which divide , depending on the residue class of (mod ), giving this many values of which are roots of ; and the factor in the case (mod ) yields the additional value . This proves the formula for in this case.
Case 2: mod . In this case, [13, Theorem 6.2] says that has only linear and quadratic factors. We count the number of distinct factors of the form above which share roots with . Note that
[TABLE]
By the Pellet-Stickelberger-Voronoi Theorem ([3, Appendix]), the number of irreducible factors of mod satisfies
[TABLE]
It follows that if , has either or irreducible factors. The polynomial satisfies the formula , so that if has one linear factor, it must have two, implying that it must split completely. (A root in cannot satisfy , since this would imply and mod ; but factors of cannot divide for such primes, since is not supersingular for . Alternatively, only has roots in common with when and .) Hence, either splits completely or is a product of two quadratics.
We first count the linear factors of coming from the linear factors of . By Theorem 1.1, the latter polynomial has linear factors, and by Theorem 1.2, four of these linear factors correspond to the same supersingular -invariant. The mapping taking
[TABLE]
is a mapping, except for the values of for which . Now only corresponds to , which never has roots in . Since in this case, the polynomial , whose discriminant is , factors. However, its roots must correspond to supersingular -invariants, where
[TABLE]
Taking the resultant
[TABLE]
shows that the corresponding -invariants are roots of the polynomial , and are therefore supersingular if and only if , i.e., if and only if (mod ). If mod , it follows that the map (7.1) is everywhere, so there are exactly linear factors of arising from linear factors of . On the other hand, if (mod ), the quadratic has two roots in , and the values of corresponding to these roots satisfy
[TABLE]
The discriminant of this quartic is , so it also has roots in whenever it has one. Furthermore, the roots of in characteristic zero are real and lie in the real subfield of . In this case, (mod ), so splits in and therefore the above congruence in has four distinct roots in . This implies that for two values of , , where each is a root of and . Hence, there are altogether linear factors of coming from linear factors of the Hasse invariant, when (mod ).
Now consider values of coming from quadratic factors of . If , then the quadratics are either invariant under or are mapped into each other by , meaning that , for some constant . If is invariant, then
[TABLE]
implies that and ; or , so . Thus, either or , with a similar expression for . However, Theorem 4.3a) implies that none of the factors of have this form, for (mod ). Hence, the must be mapped to each other by . Now we have
[TABLE]
which gives
[TABLE]
Solving for is these two equations gives
[TABLE]
These are exactly the conditions in Theorem 1.4b). If mod , there are quadratic factors satisfying one of these conditions. This yields pairs of quadratics satisfying the above conditions, and therefore this many linear factors of . If (mod ), then satisfies these condtions with and . Subtracting from the number in Theorem 1.4b) yields either or pairs of quadratics yielding values of in , and adding gives or total linear factors of arising from quadratic factors of .
Now, [13, Theorem 6.2] says that only has linear or quadratic factors when (mod ). Hence all linear factors of arise in one of the ways described above, and this yields
[TABLE]
This completes the proof of the theorem in this case.
Case 3: mod . In this case, is only divisible by quadratic factors, by the results of [13]. The analysis in Case 2 applies to this case, except that the polynomial now factors into a product of two quadratics (mod ), since (mod ) and (mod ) imply that (mod ); so that has order in . This gives two quadratic polynomials , which are factors of , for which , with . Together with , there are three quadratics which yield values of . Moreover, factoring over gives
[TABLE]
and both of these factors satisfy the condition that or . Hence, these three quadratics are included in the counts of Theorem 1.4c). The remaining quadratics yield either or values of when (mod ). Hence, there are altogether or values of arising from quadratics satisfying the conditions.
Now we must account for the ’s which arise from invariant quadratics under . Since the above two polynomials and have already been counted, and have the form , Theorem 4.3b) shows that this leaves polynomials of this form. I claim that these polynomials pair up in a unique way to give values of , when (mod ). Let be two polynomials of this form. Then over if and only if
[TABLE]
which holds if and only if
[TABLE]
It follows that is a solution of , which gives that , where (mod ). This shows that there is at most one value of corresponding to a given factor . Then the factor is determined by , since
[TABLE]
so there is at most one factor satisfying the requirement that (mod ). On the other hand, given the factor of , we know , since is a factor of the discriminant (see Section 2). By (6.1) with , there is a -invariant
[TABLE]
in for which is a corresponding root of (mod ). Furthermore, satisfies and
[TABLE]
From [16, eq. (2.2b)] is the -invariant of a curve which is -isogenous to . We just have to show that is supersingular. This is easy, because a root of is a root of over , and the form of yields , so that is certainly supersingular. It follows that is supersingular, as well. Therefore, setting gives that is a common root of and ; the latter is an irreducible factor of over , since and has no linear factors. This shows that when (mod ), the factors of the form pair up in a unique way to give values of .
When (mod ), Theorem 4.3b) yields pairs of invariant quadratics whose product yields a polynomial of the form , by the same arguments. Hence, Theorem 1.4c) and Theorem 4.3b) yield
[TABLE]
This completes the proof.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] George E. Andrews and Bruce C. Berndt, Ramanujan’s Lost Notebook, Part I , Springer, 2005.
- 2[2] Bruce C. Berndt, Number Theory in the Spirit of Ramanujan , AMS Student Mathematical Library, vol. 34, 2006.
- 3[3] J. Brillhart and P. Morton, Class numbers of quadratic fields, Hasse invariants of elliptic curves, and the supersingular polynomial, J. Number Theory 106 (2004), 79-111.
- 4[4] D. A. Cox, Galois Theory , John Wiley & Sons, 2004.
- 5[5] M. Deuring, Die Typen der Multiplikatorenringe elliptischer Funktionenkörper, Abh. Math. Sem. Hamb. 14 (1941), 197-272.
- 6[6] W. Duke, Continued fractions and modular functions, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 42, No. 2 (2005), 137-162.
- 7[7] N. Elkies, The existence of infinitely many supersingular primes for every elliptic curve over ℚ ℚ \mathbb{Q} , Invent. Math. 89 (1987), 561-567.
- 8[8] R. Fricke, Lehrbuch der Algebra , I, II, III, Vieweg, Braunschweig, 1928.
