This paper provides a constructive proof demonstrating the infinite existence of certain elliptic curves, called good Frey curves, related to the Modified Szpiro Conjecture and the abc Conjecture.
Contribution
It offers a constructive proof that there are infinitely many good Frey elliptic curves, advancing understanding of the Modified Szpiro Conjecture.
Findings
01
Constructive proof of infinite good Frey curves
02
Supports the Modified Szpiro Conjecture
03
Links to the abc Conjecture
Abstract
The Modified Szpiro Conjecture, equivalent to the abc Conjecture, states that for each ϵ>0, there are finitely many rational elliptic curves satisfying NE6+ϵ<max{c43,c62} where c4 and c6 are the invariants associated to a minimal model of E and NE is the conductor of E. We say E is a good elliptic curve if NE6<max{c43,c62}. Masser showed that there are infinitely many good Frey curves. Here we give a constructive proof of this assertion.
Tables6
Table 1. Table 1. Universal Elliptic Curve 𝒳 t ( T ) subscript 𝒳 𝑡 𝑇 \mathcal{X}_{t}\!\left(T\right)
Table 2. Table 2. Table for Example 5.2
Table 3. Table 3. The Invariant c 4 subscript 𝑐 4 c_{4} of F T subscript 𝐹 𝑇 F_{T}
Table 4. Table 4. Example of Good Frey Curves
Table 5. Table 5. Admissible Change of Variables for Lemma 4.3
Table 6. Table 6. Polynomials and Rational Functions
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.
Full text
A Constructive Proof of Masser’s Theorem
Alexander J. Barrios
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Carleton College, Northfield, Minnesota 55057
The Modified Szpiro Conjecture, equivalent to the abc Conjecture, states
that for each ϵ>0, there are finitely many rational elliptic curves
satisfying NE6+ϵ<max{c43,c62} where c4 and c6 are the invariants associated
to a minimal model of E and NE is the conductor of E. We say E is a
good elliptic curve if NE6<max{c43,c62}. Masser showed that there are infinitely many good Frey
curves. Here we give a constructive proof of this assertion.
Key words and phrases:
Number Theory, Elliptic Curves, Arithmetic Geometry
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 11G05
1. Introduction
By an ABC triple, we mean a triple of positive integers (a,b,c) such that a,b, and c are relatively prime positive
integers with a+b=c. The ABC Conjecture [CR01, 5.1] states that
for any ϵ>0, there are only finitely many ABC triples that satisfy
rad(abc)1+ϵ<c where
rad(n) denotes the product of the distinct
primes dividing n. We say that an ABC triple is good if
rad(abc)<c. For instance, the triple
(1,8,9) is a good ABC triple and more generally the triple
(1,9k−1,9k) is a good ABC triple for each positive
integer k [CR01]. In 1988, Oesterlé [Oes88] proved
that the ABC Conjecture is equivalent to the modified Szpiro conjecture
which states that for ϵ>0, there are only finitely many elliptic
curves E such that NE6+ϵ<max{c43,c62} where NE denotes the conductor of
the elliptic curve and c4 and c6 are the invariants associated to a
minimal model of E. As with ABC triples, we define a good elliptic curve
to be an elliptic curve E that satisfies the inequality NE6<max{c43,c62}. In the
special case of Frey curves, that is, a rational elliptic curve that has a
Weierstrass model of the form y2=x(x−a)(x+b) where a and b are relatively prime integers, Masser [Mas90]
showed that there are infinitely many good Frey curves. In this article, we
provide a constructive proof of Masser’s Theorem. Moreover, the torsion
subgroup of a Frey curve can only take on four possibilities due to Mazur’s
Torsion Theorem [Maz77], namely E(Q)tors≅C2×C2N where Cm denotes the
cyclic group of order m and N=1,2,3, or 4. With this we state our main theorem:
Theorem 1
For each of the four possible torsion subgroups T=C2×C2N where N=1,2,3, or 4, there are infinitely many good elliptic
curves such that E(Q)tors≅T.
This is equivalent to Theorem 6.3, where the main theorem is
given in its constructive form. As a consequence we get examples akin to the
infinitely many good ABC triples (1,9k−1,9k) for each
positive integer k. For each of the four possible T, we use rational maps
of modular curves to construct a recursive sequence of ABC triples
PjT=(aj,bj,cj) such that if PjT is a
good ABC triple satisfying certain congruences, then PjT is a good
ABC triple for each nonnegative integer j. Once this is proven, we prove
our main Theorem by showing that the associated Frey curve
[TABLE]
is a good elliptic curve for each positive integer j with FPjT(Q)tors≅T.
2. Certain Polynomials
In this section we establish a series of technical results which will ease the
proofs in the sections that are to follow. Let T=C2×C2N where
N=1,2,3,4. For each T let AT=AT(a,b),BT=BT(a,b),CT=CT(a,b),DT=DT(a,b),ATr=ATr(a,b),BTr=BTr(a,b),CTr=CTr(a,b),UT=UT(a,b,r,s),VT=VT(a,b,r,s), and WT=WT(a,b,r,s) be the polynomials in R=Z[a,b,r,s] defined in Table 6.
For a fixed T, the polynomials AT,BT,CT, and DT are homogenous polynomials in
a and b of the same degree mT. In particular, we have the equalities
[TABLE]
The first result can be verified via a computer algebra system and we note
that we are considering AT(1,t),BT(1,t),CT(1,t),DT(1,t) as functions from R to R.
Lemma 2.1**.**
For T=C2×C2N
with N=1,2,3,4, let fT,gT:R→R be the function in the variable t defined in Table
6. Let θT be the greatest real root of
fT(t). The (approximate) value of θT is found
in Table 6. Then for each T,
(1)
AT∈4R;
2. (2)
AT+BT=CT;
3. (3)
UTBT+VTCT=WT;
4. (4)
fT(ab)=AT(a,b)BT(a,b)−ab;
5. (5)
gT(t)=CT(1,t)−DT(1,t);
6. (6)
fT(t),gT(t),AT(1,t),BT(1,t),CT(1,t),DT(1,t)>0* for t>θT;*
7. (7)
For T=C2×C2N for N=1,2, fT(t),gT(t),AT(1,t),BT(1,t),CT(1,t), DT(1,t)>0 for t in (0,1).
3. Good ABC Triples
Definition 3.1**.**
By an ABC triple, we mean a triple P=(a,b,c) such that
a,b, and c are relatively prime positive integers with a+b=c. We say
P=(a,b,c) is good if rad(abc)<c.
Lemma 3.2**.**
For each T=C2×C2N, let P=(a,b,a+b) be an ABC triple with a even and ab>θT where
θT is as defined in Lemma 2.1. Suppose further that
a≡0mod3 if N=3. Then (AT,BT,CT) is an ABC triple with
AT≡0mod16,BT≡1mod4, andATBT>θT. Moreover, if N=3, then AT≡0mod3.
Proof.
Since a and b are relatively prime, there exist integers r and s such
that ran+sbn=1, for any positive integer n. Therefore, by Lemma
2.1, gcd(BT,CT)
divides 32 if N=3 and gcd(BT,CT) divides 48 if N=3. Since a is even and a≡0mod3 when N=3, we conclude that gcd(BT,CT)=1. Next, observe that
[TABLE]
Since ab>θT, we have by Lemma 2.1 that
fT(ab) is positive and therefore ATBT>ab>θT. By Lemma
2.1 we also have that AT+BT=CT for each T and therefore (AT,BT,CT) is an ABC triple. Since a
is even it is easily verified that AT≡0mod16. Similarly, when N=3, AT≡0mod3 since a≡0mod3. It easily
checked that for each T, BT≡b2kmod4 for some integer k. Since b is odd, it follows that BT≡1mod4.
∎
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let P=(a,b,a+b) be a good ABC triple and
assume the statement of Lemma 3.2. Then (AT,BT,CT) is a good ABC triple.
Proof.
Since a is assumed to be even, we have that rad(2nax)=rad(ax) for some integer
x. Therefore
[TABLE]
Since (a,b,a+b) is a good ABC triple, we have that
rad(ab(a+b))<a+b. From this
and the fact that rad(xyk)=rad(xy)≤xy for positive integers
k,x,y, we have that for each T, we attain
[TABLE]
Since ab>θT, DT(1,ab) is positive by Lemma 2.1. In particular, DT is positive since amTDT(1,ab)=DT where mT is the homogenous degree of
DT. Now observe that
[TABLE]
where the positivity follows from Lemma 2.1. Hence (AT,BT,CT) is a good ABC
triple since rad(ATBTCT)<CT.
∎
Proposition 3.4**.**
Let (a0,b0,c0) be a good ABC
triple with a0 even. For each T define the triple PjT
recursively by
[TABLE]
Assume further that a0b0>θT and that b0≡0mod3 if T=C2×C6. Then for each j≥1, PjT is a good ABC triple with aj≡0mod16,bj≡1mod4, and ajbj>θT.
Additionally, if T=C2×C6, then aj≡0mod3.
Proof.
This follows automatically from Lemmas 3.2 and 3.3.
∎
4. Frey Curves
As before, we suppose T=C2×C2N and define for t∈P1, the mapping Xt as the mapping which takes T
to the elliptic curve Xt(T) where the
Weierstrass model of Xt(T) is given in Table
1. Our parameterizations for T=C2×C2N where
N=3,4 are those found in [HLP00, Table 3] which expands the
implicit expressions for the parameters b and c in [Kub76, Table
3] to express the universal elliptic curves for the modular curves
X1(2,2N) in terms of a single parameter t. Similarly,
our model for T=C2×C4 differs by a linear change of variables
from the model given for W4 in [Sil97, §4] which
parameterizes elliptic curves E with C4×C4↪E(Q(i))tors. In particular, Xt(T) is a one-parameter family of elliptic curves with
the property that if t∈K for some field K, then Xt(T) is an elliptic curve over K and T↪Xt(T)(K)tors.
For T=C2×C2, define
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.1**.**
If t∈Q such that Xt(T) is an elliptic curve, then
T↪Xt(T)(Q)tors.
Proof.
Recall that the modular curve X1(2,2N) (with cusps
removed) for N=2,3,4 parameterizes isomorphism classes of pairs (E,P,Q) where E is an elliptic curve having full 2-torsion, P
and Q are torsion points of order 2 and 2N, respectively, and
⟨P,N⋅Q⟩=E[2].
For T=C2×C2N where N=3,4, we note that our parameterizations
are those of the universal elliptic curve for the modular curve X1(2,2N) [HLP00, Table 3]. Thus T↪Xt(T)(Q)tors.
For T=C2×C4, let
[TABLE]
so that Xt(T) is equal to the Weierstrass
model given for the universal elliptic curve over X1(2,4) given in [HLP00, Table 3] with parameter t′. Hence
T↪Xt(T)(Q)tors.
For T=C2×C2, let t=ab and consider the admissible
change of variables x⟼a41x and y⟼a61y. This gives a Q-isomorphism between Xt(T) and the elliptic
curve
[TABLE]
which has ⟨(8ab(a2+b2),0),(0,0)⟩≅C2×C2. Thus
T↪Xt(T)(Q)tors.
∎
Definition 4.2**.**
For an ABC triple P=(a,b,c), let FP=FP(a,b) be the Frey curve given by the Weierstrass model
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.3**.**
Let (a,b,c) be an ABC triple which
satisfies the assumptions of Lemma 3.2. Then for each T, the Frey
curve FP with P=(AT,BT,CT) has torsion subgroup FP(Q)tors≅T.
Proof.
Let Xt(T) be as defined in Table
1 for T=C2×C2N for N=2,3,4 and as defined
in (4.1) for N=1. In addition, let uT,rT,sT,wT, and
tT be as defined in Table 5. We now proceed by cases.
Case I. Suppose T=C2×C2N for N=2,3,4. Then the admissible
change of variables x⟼uT2x+rT and y⟼uT3y+uT2sTx+wT gives a Q-isomorphism from FP onto XtT(T). In
particular, T↪FP(Q)tors by Lemma 4.1. By Mazur’s Torsion
Theorem [Maz77] we conclude that FP(Q)tors≅C2×C2N for N=3,4 and that
FP(Q)tors is isomorphic to either C2×C4 or
C2×C8 if T=C2×C4. For the latter, we observe that
our model for Xt(T) parametrizes elliptic
curves E over Q(i) with C4×C4↪E(Q(i))tors [Sil97, §4]. By
Kamienny’s Torsion Theorem [Kam92] we conclude that E(Q(i))tors≅C4×C4. Thus
Xt(T)(Q(i))tors≅C4×C4 and
therefore C2×C8↪Xt(T)(Q(i))tors. Hence Xt(T)(Q)tors≅C2×C4.
Case II. Suppose T=C2×C2 and T4=C2×C4. Then
there is a 2-isogeny ϕ:Xt(T4)→Xt(T) obtained by applying
Vélu’s formulas [V7́1] to the elliptic curve Xt(T4) and its torsion point 2P where P=(0,0) is the torsion point of order 4 of Xt(T4).
Next, observe that via the First Isomorphism Theorem:
[TABLE]
By Case I above we have that ∣Xt(T4)(Q)tors∣=8 which implies that the only prime
dividing ∣Xt(T)(Q)tors∣ is 2 since ϕ is a 2-isogeny.
Next, we consider the admissible change of variables x⟼uT2x+rT and y⟼uT3y+uT2sTx+wT which gives a
Q-isomorphism from FP onto XtT(T). In
particular, C2×C2↪FP(Q)tors by Lemma 4.1. By the proof of Lemma
4.1, Xt(T) is Q-isomorphic to the elliptic curve given by the Weierstrass model
[TABLE]
This model satisfies the assumptions of [Ono96, Main Theorem 1] and
therefore we have that Xt(T)(Q)tors≅C2×C2 if 8ab(a2+b2) is not a square. If it were a square we would have a
nontrivial integer solution to the Diophantine equation x4−y4=z2
since
[TABLE]
This contradicts Fermat’s Theorem and therefore Yt(T)(Q)tors≅C2×C2.
∎
Theorem 4.4**.**
Let T=C2×C2N for N=1,2,3,4 and consider the
sequence of good ABC triples PjT defined in Proposition
3.4. Then for each j≥1, the Frey curve FPjT
determined by PjT has torsion subgroup FPjT(Q)tors≅C2×C2N.
Proof.
In Proposition 3.4, we saw that each PjT satisfies the
assumptions of Lemma 3.2. Consequently, the Theorem follows from
Lemma 4.3.
∎
The case of N=2,4 in Theorem 4.4 was proven by the author
alongside Watts and Tillman [BTW10] as part of the Mathematical Sciences
Research Institute Undergraduate Program.
5. Examples of Good ABC Triples
Definition 5.1**.**
For an ABC** **triple P=(a,b,c), define the quality
q(P) of P to be
[TABLE]
In particular, P is a good ABC triple is equivalent to q(P)>1.
Example 5.2**.**
For T=C2×C2N where N=1,2 let
P0=(25,72,34). Then P0 is a good ABC
triple since q(P)≈1.1757. By Proposition
3.4, this good ABC triple results in two distinct infinite
sequences of good ABC triples PjT.
For T=C2×C6, let P0=(2433,17361,5374). Then P0 is a good ABC triple since q(P)≈1.0261. Moreover, 243317361>θT.
By Proposition 3.4, this good ABC triple results in an infinite
sequence of good ABC triples PjT.
For T=C2×C8, let P0=(22,112,53).
Then P0 is a good ABC triple since q(P)≈1.0272. Moreover, 4121>θT. By Proposition 3.4,
this good ABC triple results in an infinite sequence of good ABC triples
PjT.
Table 2 gives a1 and b1 of PjT=(aj,bj,cj) as well as the quality q(PjT) for j=1,2,3. We note that the values of aj and bj
are not given for j≥2 due to the size of these quantities. For
T=C2×C2N for N=3,4, we only compute q(PjT) for j=1,2 due to computational limitations.
6. Infinitely Many Good Frey Curves
Recall that the ABC Conjecture is equivalent to the modified Szpiro
conjecture which states that for every ϵ>0 there are finitely many
rational elliptic curves E satisfying
[TABLE]
where NE is the conductor of E and c4 and c6 are the
invariants associated to a minimal model of E. The following definition
gives the analog of good ABC triples and the quality of an ABC triple in
the context of elliptic curves.
Definition 6.1**.**
Let E be a rational elliptic curve with minimal discriminant ΔEmin and associated invariants c4 and c6. Define the
modified Szpiro ratioσm(E) and
Szpiro ratioσ(E) of E to be the quantities
[TABLE]
where NE is the conductor of E. We say that E is good if
σm(E)>6.
Let P=(a,b,c) be an ABC triple with a even and b≡1mod4. For T=C2×C2N where N=1,2,3,4, let
AT=AT(a,b),BT=BT(a,b),CT=CT(a,b), and DT=DT(a,b)
be as defined in Table 6. Assume further that
a≡0mod3 if T=C2×C6. Then the elliptic
curve FT=FT(a,b) given by the Weierstrass model
[TABLE]
satisfies FT(Q)tors≅T by Lemma 4.3. Moreover, the
congruences on AT and BT imply that the Frey
curve FT is semistable with minimal discriminant ΔT=(16−1ATBTCT)2
[Sil09, Exercise 8.23]. Consequently, the conductor NTof FT satisfies NT=rad(ΔT)<∣DT∣ and the invariant
c4,T=c4,T(a,b) associated with a global minimal model
of FT is as given in Table LABEL:ta:c4THT.
Lemma 6.2**.**
Let P=(a,b,c) be a good ABC triple
satisfying a≡0mod2, b≡1mod4,
and ab>θT where θT is as given in Lemma
2.1. Assume further that a≡0mod3 if
T=C2×C6. Then the Frey curve FT=FT(AT,BT) is good and FT(Q)tors≅T.
Proof.
By Lemma 4.3, FT(Q)tors≅T. Since FT is a Frey curve we have that
the invariants c4 and c6 associated to a global minimal model of
FT satisfy max{c43,c62}=c43 since c4 and ΔFTmin are
always positive [Sil09, Lemma VIII.11.3]. The congruences on a and
b imply that c4=c4,T. It, therefore, suffices to show that
c4,T3−NT6>0 where NT is the conductor of FT. Since
FT is semistable,
[TABLE]
by Lemma 3.3. Note that DT is positive since
ab>θT. Thus
[TABLE]
Lastly, for each T, the polynomial c4,T(1,t)3−DT(1,t)6 is positive on the open
interval (θT,∞) from which we conclude that
FT is a good elliptic curve.
∎
Theorem 6.3**.**
For each T, let P0T=(a0,b0,c0) be a good ABC triple satisfying a0≡0mod2, b0≡1mod4, and a0b0>θT where θT is as given in Lemma
2.1. Assume further that a0≡0mod3 if
T=C2×C6. For j≥1, define PjT recursively by
[TABLE]
Then for each j, the Frey curve FT(aj,bj) is
good and FT(aj,bj)(Q)tors≅T.
Proof.
By Proposition 3.4, PjT=(aj,bj,cj)
satisfies aj≡0mod2, bj≡1mod4, and ajbj>θT for each j.
For T=C2×C6, if a0≡0mod3, then
aj≡0mod3 for each j. Hence PjT is a good
ABC triple for each j by Proposition 3.4. Therefore the result
follows by Lemma 6.2.
∎
In Example 5.2 we began with a good ABC triple
P0=(a0,b0,c0). For each T, we constructed an
infinite sequence of good ABC triples PjT=(aj,bj,cj). By Theorem 6.3, each Frey curve FT(aj,bj)(Q)tors is a good elliptic curve with torsion subgroup
isomorphic to T. Table 4 lists the modified Szpiro ratios
of the Frey curves corresponding to PjT. Due to computational
limitations, we could only compute these ratios up to j=3.
7. Table of Polynomials
Bibliography12
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[BTW 10] Alexander J. Barrios, Caleb Tillman, and Charles Watts, Exceptional a b c 𝑎 𝑏 𝑐 abc triples for frey curves with torsion subgroups z 2 × z 4 subscript 𝑧 2 subscript 𝑧 4 z_{2}\times z_{4} and z 2 × z 8 subscript 𝑧 2 subscript 𝑧 8 z_{2}\times z_{8} , MSRI Journal (2010).
2[CR 01] Brian Conrad and Karl Rubin (eds.), Arithmetic algebraic geometry , IAS/Park City Mathematics Series, vol. 9, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI; Institute for Advanced Study (IAS), Princeton, NJ, 2001, Including papers from the Graduate Summer School of the Institute for Advanced Study/Park City Mathematics Institute held in Park City, UT, June 20–July 10, 1999. MR 1860012
3[HLP 00] Everett W. Howe, Franck Leprévost, and Bjorn Poonen, Large torsion subgroups of split Jacobians of curves of genus two or three , Forum Math. 12 (2000), no. 3, 315–364. MR 1748483
4[Kam 92] S. Kamienny, Torsion points on elliptic curves and q 𝑞 q -coefficients of modular forms , Invent. Math. 109 (1992), no. 2, 221–229. MR 1172689
5[Kub 76] Daniel Sion Kubert, Universal bounds on the torsion of elliptic curves , Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 33 (1976), no. 2, 193–237. MR 0434947
6[Mas 90] D. W. Masser, Note on a conjecture of Szpiro , Astérisque (1990), no. 183, 19–23, Séminaire sur les Pinceaux de Courbes Elliptiques (Paris, 1988). MR 1065152
7[Maz 77] B. Mazur, Modular curves and the Eisenstein ideal , Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math. (1977), no. 47, 33–186 (1978). MR 488287
8[Oes 88] Joseph Oesterlé, Nouvelles approches du “théorème” de Fermat , Astérisque (1988), no. 161-162, Exp. No. 694, 4, 165–186 (1989), Séminaire Bourbaki, Vol. 1987/88. MR 992208