Documentation

TauCeti.NumberTheory.ModularForms.AtkinLehner.Normalized

The normalized Atkin–Lehner operators 𝒲_Q #

The raw Atkin–Lehner slash W_Q of TauCeti/NumberTheory/ModularForms/AtkinLehner/Operator.lean squares to Q ^ (k - 2), so it is not an involution. Multiplying it by atkinLehnerNormalizer Q k = (√Q) ^ (2 - k) removes that scalar exactly, and the resulting normalized operator

𝒲_Q f = (√Q) ^ (2 - k) • (f ∣[k] W)

is an involution of M_k(Γ₀(N)) and of S_k(Γ₀(N)) — at every weight, with no parity hypothesis, because -I lies in Γ₀(N) and absorbs the sign that the Fricke operator on the Γ₁(N) carrier is left with.

Every later Atkin–Lehner statement — the signs 𝒲_Q f = ε_Q f on a newform, and the sign i ^ k · ε_N of the functional equation of L(s, f) — is a statement about 𝒲_Q, not about the raw slash, with which they would all acquire a stray power of Q.

The composition law #

The exact divisors of N form a Boolean group under symmetric difference of the corresponding subsets of N.primeFactors, and the normalized operators act through it: for exact divisors Q and R,

𝒲_Q ∘ 𝒲_R = 𝒲_{Q R / gcd (Q, R) ²},

the divisor on the right being the symmetric difference of Q and R (TauCeti.Nat.IsExactDivisor.mul_div_gcd_sq). It is proved from two special cases: at coprime Q and R the product of an Atkin–Lehner matrix for Q and one for R is one for Q * R (TauCeti.IsAtkinLehnerMatrix.mul) and the normalizers multiply (TauCeti.atkinLehnerNormalizer_mul), so 𝒲_Q ∘ 𝒲_R = 𝒲_{Q R}; and at Q = R the operator is an involution. Writing g = gcd (Q, R), Q = g · q and R = g · r with g, q, r pairwise coprime exact divisors, the two cases give

𝒲_Q 𝒲_R = 𝒲_g 𝒲_q 𝒲_g 𝒲_r = 𝒲_g 𝒲_g 𝒲_q 𝒲_r = 𝒲_q 𝒲_r = 𝒲_{q r}.

In particular all of them commute. Bundling an exact divisor as TauCeti.Nat.ExactDivisor N gives this Boolean group explicitly, and normalizedAtkinLehnerRepresentation and its cusp-form counterpart are its representations on the two form spaces. The group is abstractly (ℤ/2) ^ ω(N): TauCeti.Nat.ExactDivisor.primeFactorsEquiv identifies it with the subsets of N.primeFactors, on which multiplication is symmetric difference and every element is its own inverse, and TauCeti.Nat.IsExactDivisor.prodPrimePow_primeFactors recovers an exact divisor as the product of the maximal prime powers p ^ v_p(N) it contains — the prime-power generators. The action may have a kernel: nothing here claims it is injective.

Main definitions #

Main results #

References #

The operator #

The normalized Atkin–Lehner operator 𝒲_Q on M_k(Γ₀(N)), for an exact divisor Q of N: the raw slash W_Q scaled by atkinLehnerNormalizer Q k. Unlike W_Q it is an involution.

Equations
Instances For

    Defining equation for normalizedAtkinLehnerOperator: it is the raw operator W_Q scaled by atkinLehnerNormalizer Q k.

    @[simp]

    On underlying functions 𝒲_Q is (√Q) ^ (2 - k) • (⇑f ∣[k] W).

    Defining equation for normalizedAtkinLehnerOperatorCusp: it is the raw cusp-form operator W_Q scaled by atkinLehnerNormalizer Q k.

    @[simp]

    On underlying functions the cusp-form 𝒲_Q is (√Q) ^ (2 - k) • (⇑f ∣[k] W).

    @[simp]

    The two normalized operators agree under the coercion S_k(Γ₀(N)) → M_k(Γ₀(N)), since the raw ones do and the scalar is the same.

    The operator depends on the divisor only through its value. Two proofs that the same natural number is an exact divisor give the same operator, so an identity between divisors transports the operators along it.

    The cusp-form operator depends on the divisor only through its value.

    The involution #

    @[simp]

    𝒲_Q (𝒲_Q f) = f on M_k(Γ₀(N)). The raw operator squares to Q ^ (k - 2) and the square of the normalizer is Q ^ (2 - k); no parity hypothesis on the weight is needed, since on the Γ₀(N) carrier the matrix -I acts trivially.

    𝒲_Q is an involution of M_k(Γ₀(N)) — the property the raw slash lacks and the whole normalization exists to supply.

    The bundled automorphism #

    The endpoints Q = 1 and Q = N #

    @[simp]

    𝒲_1 is the identity on M_k(Γ₀(N)): the raw operator is, and the normalizer at Q = 1 is 1.

    𝒲_N is the normalized Fricke slash on M_k(Γ₀(N)): on underlying functions it is (√N) ^ (2 - k) • (⇑f ∣[k] W) for the Fricke matrix W, which is what TauCeti.normalizedFrickeOperator performs on the Γ₁(N) carrier. The two operators have different carriers, so this function-level identity is the comparison between them.

    The composition law #

    𝒲_R ∘ 𝒲_Q = 𝒲_{Q R} at coprime exact divisors, on M_k(Γ₀(N)). The raw operators compose this way because the matrices multiply, and the normalizers multiply as well.

    @[simp]

    The composition law 𝒲_Q ∘ 𝒲_R = 𝒲_{Q R / gcd (Q, R) ²} on M_k(Γ₀(N)), for arbitrary exact divisors Q and R of N. The divisor on the right is the symmetric difference of Q and R under the identification of exact divisors with subsets of N.primeFactors.

    The exact-divisor group action #

    The representation of the exact-divisor group on M_k(Γ₀(N)). An exact divisor acts by its normalized Atkin–Lehner automorphism. Multiplicativity is precisely the symmetric-difference composition law.

    Equations
    Instances For
      @[simp]

      The exact-divisor representation acts by the normalized Atkin–Lehner operator.

      The representation of the exact-divisor group on S_k(Γ₀(N)). An exact divisor acts by its normalized Atkin–Lehner automorphism on cusp forms.

      Equations
      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
      Instances For
        @[simp]

        The cusp-form exact-divisor representation acts by the normalized Atkin–Lehner operator.

        The normalized Atkin–Lehner operators commute on M_k(Γ₀(N)): the divisor Q R / gcd (Q, R) ² they compose to is symmetric in Q and R.

        The eigenspace splitting #

        The ±1 eigenspaces of 𝒲_Q are complementary in M_k(Γ₀(N)). This is the Atkin–Lehner sign decomposition of the space: on the +1 eigenspace 𝒲_Q f = f, on the -1 eigenspace 𝒲_Q f = -f, and every modular form for Γ₀(N) is uniquely a sum of one of each. The label of a newform under this splitting is its Atkin–Lehner sign ε_Q, and for a general exact divisor that is all it is; only at the Fricke member Q = N is it the sign appearing in the functional equation of L(s, f) (as i ^ k · ε_N). Unlike the Fricke statement on the Γ₁(N) carrier, no parity hypothesis on the weight is needed.