The
-adic Eigencurve is Proper.
Kevin Buzzard
Frank Calegari
*
*
Supported in part by the American Institute of Mathematics
November 27, 2006
1 Introduction
In [7] , Coleman and Mazur construct a rigid analytic space
that parameterizes overconvergent and therefore classical modular eigenforms of finite slope. The geometry of
is at present poorly understood, and seems quite complicated, especially over the centre of weight space.
Recently, some progress has been made in understanding the geometry of
in certain examples (see for example [3] ,[4] ). Many questions remain. In this paper, we address the following question raised on p5 of [7] :
-
Do there exist
-adic analytic families of overconvergent eigenforms of finite slope parameterized by a punctured disc, and converging, at the puncture, to an overconvergent eigenform of infinite slope?
We answer this question in the negative for the 2-adic eigencurve of tame level 1. Another way of phrasing our result is that the map from the eigencurve to weight space satisfies the valuative criterion of properness, and it is in this sense that the phrase “proper” is used in the title, since the projection to weight space has infinite degree and so is not technically proper in the sense of rigid analytic geometry. One might perhaps say that this map is “functorially proper”. Our approach is based on the following simple idea. One knows (for instance, from [1] ) that finite slope eigenforms of integer weight may be analytically continued far into the supersingular regions of the moduli space. On the other hand, it turns out that eigenforms in the kernel of
do not extend as far. Now one can check that a limit of highly overconvergent eigenforms is also highly overconvergent, and this shows that the given a punctured disc as above, the limiting eigenform cannot lie in the kernel of
.
The problem with this approach is that perhaps the most natural definition of “highly convergent” is not so easy to work with at non-integral weight. The problem stems from the fact that such forms of non-integral weight are not defined as sections of a line bundle. In fact Coleman's definition of an overconvergent form of weight
is a formal
-expansion
for which
is overconvergent of weight
, where
is the weight
-deprived Eisenstein series. One might then hope that the overconvergence of
would be a good measure of the overconvergence of
. One difficulty is that if
is an eigenform for the Hecke operators, the form
is unlikely to be an eigenform. This does not cause too much trouble when proving that finite slope eigenforms overconverge a long way, as one can twist the
-operator as explained in [5] and apply the usual techniques. We outline the argument in sections 2 and 3 of this paper. On the other hand we do not know how to prove general results about (the lack of ) overconvergence of forms in the kernel of
in this generality. Things would be easier if we used
to twist from weight
to weight 0, but unfortunately the results we achieve using this twist are not strong enough for us to get the strict inequalities that we need.
The approach that we take in our “test case” of
and
is to control the kernel of
in weight
by explicitly writing down the matrix of
(and of
) with respect to a carefully-chosen basis. To enable us to push the argument through, however, we were forced to diverge from Coleman's choice of twist. We define the overconvergence of
, not in terms of
, but rather in terms of
for some explicit modular form
. The benefit of our choice of
is that it is nicely compatible with the explicit formulae developed in [3] , and hence we may prove all our convergence results by hand in this case. Our proof that eigenforms of finite slope overconverge “as far as possible” is essentially standard. The main contribution of this paper is to analyse the overconvergence (or lack thereof ) of eigenforms in the kernel of the
operator in this case. One disadvantage of our approach is that the power series defining
only converges for
sufficiently small and hence our arguments only deal with forms whose weights lie in a certain disc at the centre of weight space. However, recently in [4] , the 2-adic level 1 eigencurve was shown to be a disjoint union of copies of weight space near the boundary of weight space, and hence is automatically proper here.
2 Definitions
Let
denote the classical level 1 weight 12 modular form (where
). Set
a uniformizer for
, and
| |
a modular form of level 2 and weight 12. Note that the divisor of
is
, where
denotes the zero cusp on
, and hence that
is a classical modular form of weight
and level 2.
We briefly review the theory of overconvergent
-adic modular forms, and make it completely explicit in the setting we are interested in, namely
and tame level 1. Let
denote the completion of an algebraic closure of
. Normalise the norm on
such that
, and normalise the valuation
so that
. Choose a group-theoretic splitting of
sending
to
, and let the resulting homomorphism
be denoted
. Define
. Let
denote the elements of
with non-negative valuation.
If
with
(note that
if
) then there is a rigid space
over
such that functions on this space are
-overconvergent 2-adic modular functions. Let
denote the rigid space
. By Proposition 1 of the appendix to [3] , we see that
is simply the closed subdisc of the
-line defined by
. We will also need to use (in Lemma 6.13 ) the rigid space
, which we define as the closed subdisc of the
-line defined by
. The parameter
can be viewed as a rigid function defined in a neighbourhood of
on
, and hence any rigid function on
can be written as a power series in
; this is the
-expansion of the form in this rigid analytic setting. Moreover, it is well-known that the classical level 2 form
descends to a function on
(for any
), with the same
-expansion as that given above.
For
define
to be the space of rigid functions on
, equipped with its supremum norm. Then
is a Banach space over
— it is the space of
-overconvergent modular forms of weight 0. An easy calculation using the remarks after Proposition 1 of the appendix to [3] shows that the set
is an orthonormal Banach basis for
, and we endow
once and for all with this basis.
We define
to be the open disc of centre 1 and radius 1 in the rigid affine line over
.
If
then there is a unique continuous group homomorphism
such that
and
; moreover this establishes a bijection between
and the set of even 2-adic weights, that is, continuous group homomorphisms
such that
. Note that if
is an even integer then the map
is such a homomorphism, and we refer to this weight as weight
. Let
denote the character with kernel equal to
, and let
denote the character
; this character corresponds to
. If
with
then we may define
and we let
denote the homomorphism
corresponding to this point of weight space.
One checks easily that the points of weight space corresponding to characters of this form are
.
We now explain the definitions of overconvergent modular forms of general weight that we shall use in this paper. Recall
. Define
to be the formal
-expansion
. Now
and hence
. Write
with
. If
is a formal variable then we define
to be the formal binomial expansion of
. If
with
then we define
to be the specialisation in
of
at
.
In fact for the main part of this paper we shall only be concerned with
when
.
If
with
, then define
, so
. Define
to be the pairs
(where
and
) such that there exists
with
satisfying
-
∙
, and
-
∙
.
Note that the second inequality implies
, and conversely if
and
then
.
For
, and only for these
, we define the space
of
-overconvergent forms of weight
thus. Write
and define
to be the vector space of formal
-expansions
such that
is the
-expansion of an element of
. We give
the Banach space structure such that multiplication by
induces an isomorphism of Banach spaces
, and we endow
once and for all with the orthonormal basis
.
Remark 2.1.
We do not consider the question here as to whether, for all
, the space
is equal to the space of
-overconvergent modular forms of weight
as defined by Coleman (who uses the weight
Eisenstein series
to pass from weight
to weight 0). One could use the methods of proof of §5 of [
4]
to verify this; the issue is verifying whether
is
-overconvergent and has no zeroes on
. However, we do not need this result — we shall prove all the compactness results for the
operator that we need by explicit matrix computations, rather than invoking Coleman's results. Note however that our spaces clearly coincide with Coleman's if
, as the two definitions coincide in this case. Note also that for
sufficiently small (depending on
with
), the definitions do coincide, because if
denotes the weight 1 level 4 Eisenstein series, then
is overconvergent of weight 0, has no zeroes on
for
, and has
-expansion congruent to 1 mod 32. Hence for
sufficiently small, the supremum norm of
on
is
with
and
, and this is enough to ensure that the power series
is the
-expansion of a function on
with supremum norm at most 1. Hence instead of using powers of
to pass between weight
and weight 0, we could use powers of
. Finally, Corollary B4.5.2 of [
5]
shows that if
then there exists
such that
is
-overconvergent, which suffices.
Recall that if
and
are Banach spaces over a complete field
with orthonormal bases
and
, then by the matrix of a continuous linear map
we mean the collection
of elements of
such that
. One checks that
-
∙
, and
-
∙
for all
we have
,
and conversely that given any collection
of elements of
having these two properties, there is a unique continuous linear map
having matrix
(see Proposition 3 of [10] and the remarks following it for a proof ). When we speak of “the matrix” associated to a continuous linear map between two spaces of overconvergent modular forms, we will mean the matrix associated to the map using the bases that we fixed earlier.
If
is a ring then we may define maps
,
and
on the ring
by
| |
| |
| |
Recall that
for
formal power series in
, and that
is a ring homomorphism. The operator
is not standard (or at least, our notation for it is not standard), but is also a ring homomorphism (it sends
to
) and one also checks easily that
. We shall show later on that there are continuous linear maps between various spaces of overconvergent modular forms which correspond to
and
, and will write down explicit formulae for the matrices associated to these linear maps.
3 The
operator on overconvergent modular forms
Our goal in this section is to make precise the statement in the introduction that finite slope
-eigenforms overconverge a long way. Fix
with
. We will show that if
then the
-operator (defined on
-expansions) induces a continuous linear map
, and we will compute the matrix of this linear map (with respect to our chosen basis of
). We will deduce that if
and
is
-overconvergent with
then
is
-overconvergent. These results are essentially standard but we shall re-prove them, for two reasons: firstly to show that the arguments still go through with our choice of twist, and secondly to introduce a technique for computing matrices of Hecke operators in arbitrary weight that we shall use when analysing the
operator later.
It is well-known that the
-operator induces a continuous linear map
, and its associated matrix was computed in [3] . Now choose
, and set
. One checks that
. If
then
A simple analysis of the
-expansion of
shows that it has no pole at the cusp of
and hence
. We deduce that
induces a continuous map
, and moreover that the matrix of this map (with respect to the basis fixed earlier) equals the matrix of the operator
acting on
. We now compute this matrix.
Lemma 3.1.
For
and
as above, and
, we have
where
is defined as follows: we have
,
if
or
, and
if
,
, and
,
,
are not all zero.
-
Proof.
The case
of the lemma is Lemma 2 of [3] , and the general case follows easily from the fact that
. Note that in fact all the sums in question are finite, as
for
.
Now for
define a polynomial
by
if
,
if
, and
if
. One checks easily that evaluating
at
for
gives
, so there is no ambiguity in notation. Our goal now is to prove that for all
such that
and
, the matrix
is the matrix of the
-operator acting on
for
(with respect to the basis of
that we fixed earlier).
Say
with
, define
, set
, and say
. Then
. Note that
for any
, and
.
Lemma 3.2.
(a) One has
.
(b) There is a continuous linear map
with matrix
.
Equivalently, there is a continuous linear map
such that
-
Proof.
(a) This is a trivial consequence of our explicit formula for
, the remark about
above, and the fact that
if
(see Lemma 6.2 ).
(b) Recall that
if
. Hence by (a) we see that
for all
.
It remains to check that for all
we have
which is also clear from (a).
Note that
if
.
In fact the same argument gives slightly more. Choose
with
. Then
.
Theorem 3.3.
The endomorphism
of
is the composite of a continuous map
and the restriction
.
-
Proof.
Define
. By the previous lemma we have
and
if
. In particular
for all
, and moreover for all
we have
. The continuous linear map
with matrix
will hence do the job.
As usual say
,
and
.
Corollary 3.4.
The map
is compact and its characteristic power series is independent of
with
. Furthermore if
then any non-zero
-eigenform with non-zero eigenvalue on
extends to an element of
.
-
Proof.
This follows via standard arguments from the theorem; see for example Proposition 4.3.2 of [7] , although the argument dates back much further.
Keep the notation:
,
,
and
, so
. We now twist
back to weight
and show that the resulting compact operator is the
-operator (defined in the usual way on power series).
Proposition 3.5.
The compact endomorphism of
defined by
is the
-operator, i.e., sends
to
.
-
Proof.
It suffices to check the proposition for
for all
, as the result then follows by linearity. If
is a formal variable then recall that we may think of
as an element of
and in particular as an invertible element of
. Write
for its inverse. We may think of
as an element of
(though not yet as an element of
). Write
with
(this is clearly possible as
). The proposition is just the statement that the power series
equals the polynomial
. Now there exists some integer
such that both
and
lie in
(as
is a polynomial). Furthermore, Lemma 3.1 shows that
for all
and hence
is an element of
with infinitely many zeroes in the disc
, so it is identically zero by the Weierstrass approximation theorem.
Corollary 3.6.
If
and
then
is a compact operator on
and its characteristic power series coincides with the characteristic power series of
on
. Furthermore
is an eigenvector for
iff
is an eigenvector for
.
The utility of these results is that they allow us to measure the overconvergence of a finite slope form
of transcendental weight by instead considering the associated form
in weight
. This will be particularly useful to us later on in the case when
is in the kernel of
. We record explicitly what we have proved. By an overconvergent modular form of weight
we mean an element of
, where
runs through the
for which
.
Corollary 3.7.
If
and
is an overconvergent modular form of weight
which is an eigenform for
with non-zero eigenvalue, then
extends to an element of
.
-
Proof.
This follows from 3.4 and 3.5 .
In fact we will need a similar result for families of modular forms, but our methods generalise to this case. We explicitly state what we need.
Corollary 3.8.
Let
be an affinoid subdomain, say
, and assume that for all
we have
. Let
be an analytic family of
-overconvergent modular forms, such that
for some
. Then
is
-overconvergent.
4 The
operator on overconvergent modular forms
We need to perform a similar analysis to the previous section with the operator
. Because
we know that
induces a continuous linear map
for
(for
in this range,
doubles and then
halves the radius of convergence). Our goal in this section is to show that, at least for
with
, there is an operator on weight
overconvergent modular forms which also acts on
-expansions in this manner, and to compute its matrix.
We proceed as in the previous section by firstly introducing a twist of
. If
, if
and if
then the fact that
implies
and so we define the operator
on
,
, by
.
Set
, so
. Because
, we see that the
can be regarded as a meromorphic function on
of degree at most 4. Similarly
may be regarded as a function on
of degree 2.
Now the meromorphic function
on
has degree at most 16 but the first 1000 terms of its
-expansion can be checked to be zero on a computer, and hence this function is identically zero. We deduce the identity
where the square root is the one of the form
, and one verifies using the binomial theorem that
with
| |
| |
The other ingredient we need to compute the matrix of
is a combinatorial lemma.
Lemma 4.1.
If
and
are integers then
-
Proof.
Set
and
and then eliminate the variables
and
; the lemma then takes the form
and, for fixed
and
, both
and
are rational functions of
. The lemma is now easily proved using Zeilberger's algorithm (regarding
as a free variable), which proves that the left hand side of the equation satisfies an explicit (rather cumbersome) recurrence relation of degree 1; however it is easily checked that the right hand side is a solution to this recurrence relation, and this argument reduces the proof of the lemma to the case
, where it is easily checked by hand.
We now compute the matrix of
on
for
and
,
.
Lemma 4.2.
For
we have
where
is defined as follows: we have
if
,
, and for
we define
-
Proof.
We firstly deal with the case
, by induction on
. The case
is easily checked as
for
, and the case
follows from the fact that
for
, as is easily verified. For
we have
and so to finish the
case it suffices to verify that for
and
we have
which quickly reduces to the combinatorial lemma above.
Finally we note that because
, the general case follows easily from the case
and the fact that
.
As before, we now define polynomials
by
if
,
, and
for
. We observe that
specialises to
when
.
Now if
and
, and we set
, then we check easily that
, so for
we see that
is the matrix of a continuous endomorphism
of
. Moreover, arguments analogous to those of the previous section show that if furthermore
(so
is defined), then the endomorphism of
defined by sending
to
equals the
operator as defined on
-expansions. Note that if
then
implies
.
5 Strategy of the proof.
We have proved in Corollary 3.7 that overconvergent modular forms
such that
with
overconverge “a long way”. Using the
-operator introduced in the previous section we will now prove that overconvergent modular forms
such that
cannot overconverge as far. We introduce a definition and then record the precise statement.
Definition 5.1.
If
then set
, allowing
if
, and define
as follows:
if
,
if
, and in general
if
. Finally define
if
.
The meaning of the following purely elementary lemma will become apparent after the statement of Theorem 5.3 .
Lemma 5.2.
Say
with
and furthermore assume
. Then for all
with
, we have
-
Proof.
We have
and so certainly
. The other inequality can be verified on a case-by-case basis. We sketch the argument.
If
then
and
; the inequality now follows easily from the fact that
.
If
but
then
and
; now
and hence
, thus
.
Finally if
then we are assuming
and hence
so
and hence
. Hence
and we have
.
Again say
and
. Write
, and
. Let
be an overconvergent form of weight
(by which we mean an element of
for some
sufficiently small). The theorem we prove in the next section (which is really the main contribution of this paper) is
Theorem 5.3.
If
satisfies
, then
does not extend to an element of
for
. Equivalently,
.
Note that by Lemma 5.2 we have
so the theorem makes sense. Furthermore, by Corollary 3.7 , overconvergent eigenforms of the form
in the kernel of
overconverge less than finite slope overconvergent eigenforms. Note also that if
then
and for
as above we have
. We deal with this minor annoyance in the last section of this paper.
6 The Kernel of
In this section we prove Theorem 5.3 . We divide the argument up into several cases depending on the value of
. We suppose that
and
, and we set
.
Define
as in the previous section, and set
. For simplicity we drop the
notation from
and write
| |
| |
Say
as in Theorem 5.3 is
-overconvergent for some
, so
. If we expand
as
then it follows that
. Recall also that
as
. On the other hand,
, and so
where
denotes the matrix of
on
(so
). We deduce from this that if we define
then
and
Note in particular that the sum converges even if
does not extend to a continuous endomorphism of
or if
does not extend to an element of
. In fact our goal is to show that the
do not tend to zero, and in particular that
does not extend to an element of
.
Lemma 6.1.
Suppose
is as above. Suppose also that there exist constants
and
, an infinite set
of positive integers, and for each
constants
and
tending to infinity as
and such that
-
(i)
, for all
.
-
(ii)
for all
and
.
-
(iii)
for all
and
.
Then the
do not tend to zero as
, and hence
does not extend to a function on
.
-
Proof.
Assume
. Recall that we assume
. By throwing away the first few terms of
if necessary, we may then assume that for all
we have
-
(1)
, and
-
(2)
.
We now claim that for all
we have
for all
. The reason is that if
the inequality follows from equation (1) above, and if
it follows from (2).
Now from the equality
we deduce that
is bounded for all
, contradicting the fact that
.
The rest of this section is devoted to establishing these inequalities for suitable
and
.
We start with some preliminary lemmas.
Lemma 6.2.
-
1.
If
then
, with equality if and only if
is a power of 2.
-
2.
If
then
, with equality if and only if
.
-
3.
If
and
then setting
we have
.
-
Proof.
1 and 2 follow easily from
For 3, we have
and for
we have
, so
by 2. Finally
by 1. Hence
and so
.
Lemma 6.3.
Let
be arbitrary and set
and
as in Definition 5.1 .
-
1.
If
then
for all
, hence the valuation of
is
.
-
2.
If
and if
is a power of 2 with
then the valuation of
is exactly
.
-
3.
If
and if
is an arbitrary integer then the valuation of
is
, where
.
-
4.
If
and if
is an arbitrary integer then the valuation of
is at least
.
-
Proof.
(1) is obvious and (2) is easy to check (note that
is periodic with period
). For part (3), say
. Now about half of the terms in this product are divisible by
, about a quarter are divisible by
, and so on. More precisely, this means that the largest possible power of
that can divide this product is
| |
| |
A similar argument shows that the lowest possible power of 2 dividing this product is strictly greater than
.
For part (4), if
then
and by a continuity argument it suffices to prove the result for
a large positive integer, where it is immediate because the binomial coefficient
is an integer.
Now set
and let
. Note that if
then
, and if
then
.
Recall
if
,
, and if
we have
In particular, for
we have
We shall continually refer to
in what follows.
Proposition 6.4.
Say
(and hence
).
-
1.
If
then
, and if
then
.
-
2.
If
then
and if
then
.
-
Proof.
1 is immediate from
and Lemma 6.3 (1). Now 2 can be deduced from 1, using part 1 of Lemma 6.2 for the first part and part 3 of Lemma 6.2 for the second.
We now prove:
Lemma 6.5.
Theorem 5.3 is true if
(i.e., if
).
Equivalently, if
and
, and if
is a non-zero weight
overconvergent form in
, then
does not converge as far as
, where
as above.
-
Proof.
This will be a direct application of lemma 6.1 . We set
, and if
we define
and
. We set
and
. Now assumptions (i) and (ii) of Lemma 6.1 follow from Proposition 6.4 (2), and (iii) follows from Proposition 6.4 (1).
Let us now consider the case when
.
Proposition 6.6.
Let
.
-
1.
If
then
.
-
2.
If
then
If
then
and if
then
-
Proof.
From the definition of
, the valuation of
lies in
. The result then follows from
and lemma 6.3 , part 3. Part 2 follows from part 1 and Lemma 6.2 , parts (1) and (3), applied to
.
Lemma 6.7.
Theorem 5.3 is true if
, that is, if
and
.
-
Proof.
Again this is an application of lemma 6.1 . Set
,
,
, and if
then set
and
.
Conditions (i)–(iii) of Lemma 6.1 hold by Proposition 6.6 (2).
The only cases of Theorem 5.3 left to deal with are those with
, that is,
.
Because the theorem does not deal with the case
we may assume from now on that
, so
. We next deal with the case
and
, where
is the positive integers. In this case, we shall again use Lemma 6.1 with
of the form
.
However, it will turn out that only certain (although infinitely many)
will be suitable.
Since we assume
we have
, so
and hence
Let
. Define functions
as follows:
Lemma 6.8.
For any
there exist infinitely many values of
for which
-
Proof.
For each
, define an integer
by setting
. If
and
, then
Since
takes on every equivalence class modulo
, It follows from the definition of
that
If
then
and
. There are infinitely many
satisfying this condition unless
for all sufficiently large
.
Yet this implies
for all sufficiently large
, and subsequently that
. In this case we have
, and
.
Corollary 6.9.
There are infinitely many
such that if
then
.
-
Proof.
Let
and
, and assume
. By
we have
Let
and set
. Then
and the result follows from Lemma 6.8 and the fact that
.
Let us now turn to estimating
for general
.
Lemma 6.10.
If
then
.
-
Proof.
By continuity, it suffices to verify the result for
a large positive even integer. It is clear if
so assume
. Now because the product of
successive integers is divisible by
we see (putting one extra term into the product) that both
and
are integers. The result now follows as
.
Set
. Then
is infinite by Corollary 6.9 . We will ultimately let
be a subset of
. We must analyse
for
and
small. Note that if
and
, then
Since
,
. Thus for any
there exists
depending on
such that for all
we have
for all
. In particular, for fixed
and sufficiently large
(with
),
Lemma 6.11.
For any constants
and
, there exists
such that for all
such that
, we have
for
.
-
Proof.
Set
and choose
such that
.
We may now prove:
Lemma 6.12.
Theorem 5.3 is true if
and
.
-
Proof.
We apply lemma 6.1 as follows. Set
and
. We build
as follows. As
runs through the positive integers, set
, define
as in Lemma 6.11 , choose
such that
and such that
is not yet in
; now add
to
and define
. The conditions of lemma 6.1 are then satisfied.
The final case in our proof of Theorem 5.3 is the case
, which corresponds to weight
. We shall not use Lemma 6.1 in this case, but give a direct argument.
Because our level structure is so small it is convenient to temporarily augment it to get around representability issues. So choose some odd prime
and consider the compact modular curve
over
whose cuspidal points parametrise elliptic curves with a subgroup of order 2 and a full level
structure (note that this curve is not in general connected). There is a sheaf
on
, and classical modular forms of weight
and level 2 are, by definition,
-invariant global sections of
on
.
For
let
denote the pre-image of
via the forgetful functor. Recall that there is a compact operator
on
for
and
.
Lemma 6.13.
If
and
is in the kernel of
, then
.
Remark 6.14.
The lemma is not special to
; the proof shows that non-zero
-adic modular forms in the kernel of
are never
-overconvergent.
-
Proof.
Say
is arbitrary. If
is an elliptic curve over a finite extension of
, equipped with with a subgroup
of order
and a full level
structure
, and such that the corresponding point
is in
, then one can regard
as an element of
. Now define
by
where the sum is over the subgroups
of
of order 2,
denotes the projection
, and a bar over a level structure denotes its natural pushforward. An easy calculation using Tate curves (see for example Proposition 5.1 of [1] ) shows that
, and hence if
then
. In particular if
is an elliptic curve with no canonical subgroup and we fix a full level
structure
on
, then then
for all
, and
for all
implies that
for all
. Summing, one deduces that
and hence that
for all
of order 2. This implies that
is identically zero on the “boundary” of
and hence that
is identically zero.
We deduce
Lemma 6.15.
Theorem 5.3 is true for
.
-
Proof.
If
then
and, because
, we know that
is a classical modular form of level 2 and hence an element of
. Thus the preceding lemma applies to
and we conclude that
.
Theorem 5.3 now follows from Lemmas 6.5 , 6.7 , 6.12 and 6.15 .
7 General facts about the 2-adic eigencurve.
In this section we collect some standard results about
, including several for which we know no reference. For brevity we have restricted our attention to the 2-adic level 1 eigencurve, but much of what we say applies more generally (see Remark 7.6 for more precise comments about what works in general and what doesn't.) We remark that sometimes our proofs could be shortened slightly but we have presented proofs that would generalise easily once one has set up the required notation.
We firstly recall the definition of the eigencurve
, following Part II of [2] . If
is a map from an affinoid to
(for example a point of
or an admissible affinoid open in
) then for
we define
to be the space of
-overconvergent modular forms of weight
, that is, the
-module of formal power series
such that
is the
-expansion of an element of
, where
denotes the pullback of the Eisenstein family in
to
. This is probably not the “correct” definition if
is close to
and the image of
contains points near the boundary of weight space. On the other hand, it is shown in section 7 of [2] that for
sufficiently close to zero the space
is stable under all the Hecke operators
(this was not proved in [7] , although it was stated for
; however the missing ingredient is provided by Lemma 7.1 of [2] ). We assume henceforth that
is always sufficiently small for all the Hecke operators to be defined. Then
is a well-defined compact endomorphism of
and its characteristic power series
is independent of
. As noted in Remark 2.1 , if the image of
in weight space is contained within the characters of the form
with
, and if
is sufficiently small, then the definition of
above coincides with the one used in this paper. We henceforth assume that
is also sufficiently small to ensure that this is the case.
Now if
is a compact operator on
(for example,
could be the operator
, or
for some odd prime
) then its characteristic power series
is in
and can even be regarded as a function on
. Let
denote the closed subspace of
cut out by
. If we let
run over the elements of an admissible affinoid cover of
, the corresponding
glue together to give the spectral curve
associated to
.
Going back to
arbitrary, for every factorization
where
is a polynomial of degree
with leading term a unit, and such that
and
are relatively prime, there is a decomposition of
into two disjoint subspaces, the one corresponding to
being finite and flat of degree
. The submodule
of
corresponding to
via Coleman's Riesz theory (Theorem A4.3 of [5] ) is a free
-module of rank
, and is stable under all the Hecke operators. The Hecke operators acting on this subspace generate a finite free
-algebra which is hence an affinoid algebra, and the associated rigid space naturally lives over
. The eigencurve
is built by glueing all such spaces together, as
ranges over admissible affinoid opens in
. The key technical difficulty in this construction is verifying that the induced cover of
is admissible, and this problem was solved in Proposition A5.8 of [5] .
Lemma 7.1.
Let
be an affinoid subdomain of
and choose
sufficiently small so that the Hecke operator
is a well-defined endomorphism of
.
Then, possibly after shrinking
again, we have
.
-
Proof.
This comes from an explicit analysis of the formula used to describe
. Note that, unlike the classical case,
is not defined as a correspondence in general weight
, because of the slightly unnatural definition of an overconvergent eigenform of weight
. On the other hand, the definition as a correspondence does work well in weight 0, and one can deduce from this that
is a well-defined map from
-overconvergent functions of weight 0 and level 1 to level
-overconvergent functions of weight 0 and level
, and furthermore that this map has norm at most 1. Now the lemma follows from the explicit definition of
at weight
given on p463 of [5] , with the proviso that this definition only works near the centre of weight space, so every occurrence of
should be replaced by the Eisenstein family
, and every occurrence of
should replaced by
, a function which is proved to be overconvergent in Proposition 2.2.7 of [7] , and which has
-expansion congruent to 1 modulo the maximal ideal of
. The reason one might have to shrink
again is that we need to guarantee that the supremum norm of
is at most 1 on
.
Lemma 7.2.
If
then
is not the
-expansion of a function on
.
Equivalently,
is not the
-expansion of a 2-adic modular form of weight
for any non-zero
.
-
Proof.
For
a positive even integer this follows from Corollary 4.5.2 of [9] . We reduce to this case. Assume
is a function on
. Then theorem 2.2.2 of [7] implies that
is as well, and hence we may assume that
with
and furthermore we may assume that
is sufficiently close to zero to ensure that
has
-expansion divisible by, say, 16 in
. Now choose
with
and
, and consider the function
on
. By Corollary B4.5.2 of [5] we see that
is an overconvergent function on
, and this reduces us to the case we have dealt with already.
Fix a weight
, and for a Hecke operator
define
to be the eigenvalue of
acting on
(so
and
.)
Corollary 7.3.
If
is a non-zero cuspidal eigenform of weight
, then there is a Hecke operator
such that
.
-
Proof.
By standard results on how Hecke operators act on
-expansions, we see that any counterexample to the lemma must be of the form
with
.
If
then this eigenform is of the form
, and hence the
-expansion 1 is in the linear span of
and
, and we deduce that 1 is an overconvergent modular form of weight
, contradicting Lemma 7.2 . It remains to deal with the case
. Yet, as noted in Lemma 4 of [6] , a result of Serre implies that the form
is not even a
-adic modular form, and thus certainly not an overconvergent eigenform.
Lemma 7.4.
The 2-adic level 1 eigencurve
can be written as a disjoint union
, with
, the Eisenstein component, mapping isomorphically down to
via the projection, and
being the eigencurve constructed from spaces of cuspidal overconvergent modular forms via the argument above.
-
Proof.
This is no doubt well-known but we write down a proof for lack of a reference. Let
denote the characteristic polynomial of
in
. Now
because it is a function on weight space that vanishes at all classical even weights
, which are Zariski-dense in
(it vanishes because the Eisenstein series is an eigenform with eigenvalue 1). Write
. Set
. Now
is not identically zero, because if it were then there would be a cuspidal overconvergent eigenform of weight 4 with
-eigenvalue 1 and such a thing would be classical. However the level 2 weight 4 Eisenstein series which vanishes at infinity does not have the right eigenvalue, and neither do any cusp forms because this would contradict the Weil bounds. So the zeroes of
form a Zariski-closed subset of weight space which is not all of
. Let
denote the complement of this set, so
is open and dense in
. Over
we know that
is coprime to
, and one deduces that the spectral curve
is the disjoint union of the component
corresponding to the
-eigenvalue 1, and its complement, corresponding to cusp forms. Moreover the construction of the eigencurve over the spectral curve gives, over
, a component of the eigencurve isomorphic to
, since the associated Hecke algebra is of rank 1. Hence over
the eigencurve is a disjoint union of a component
isomorphic to
and its complement,
.
We must extend this construction now to
. We remark that in the case we are interested in it is almost certainly the case that
, and this would follow from the well-known fact that Hida theory and Coleman theory are compatible; unfortunately we have been unable to find an explicit reference for this that applies for small primes or for weights that are not in
, so we give a self-contained proof. The trick is to change our choice of compact operator. If
then there is a cuspidal eigenform of weight
with
-eigenvalue 1, but we shall construct another compact operator
such that the eigencurves constructed via
and
are isomorphic,
is an eigenvector for
with eigenvalue
, and furthermore
divides the characteristic power series of
on
precisely once. The existence of such a
implies that
splits up as the disjoint union of an Eisenstein component and a cuspidal component over a neighbourood of
, and hence
also splits up as a disjoint union of
and
over this neighbourhood, which is what we need to finish the proof.
It remains to construct such a
. Chose
in
and consider the space
of overconvergent cusp forms of weight
annihiliated by
. This space is finite-dimensional and non-zero. Furthermore, by Corollary 7.3 , for any
there exists an odd prime
such that
. Choose a basis
of
such that all the
are in upper triangular form, and for each
choose a Hecke operator
such that
. It is easy now to find a linear combination
of these Hecke operators such that if
then
is not an eigenvalue of
on
. For
sufficiently large we have
and hence
is invertible on
. We claim that for some such
the Hecke operator
suffices. The eigencurves constructed using
and
are isomorphic above a small neighbourhood of
in
, by the arguments of Corollary 7.3.7 of [7] (applied to the neighbourhood of
rather than all of weight space, and noting that the argument does not rely on any of the deformation theory of Galois representations presented earlier in [7] and hence does not need the assumptions
and
.) It remains to check that we can choose
such that if
then the generalised
-eigenspace for
on
is precisely 1-dimensional (and hence spanned by
). It suffices to verify this on the
-ordinary subspace of
(which is equal to the
-ordinary subspace of
), as
is a unit. The ordinary subspace splits as a direct sum of the Eisenstein subspace and the cuspidal part, which in turns splits into the sum of the generalised
-eigenspace
where the
-eigenvalue is 1, and the direct sum
of the other generalised
-eigenspaces. On
we have to verify that no eigenvalue of
is
, which follows without too much trouble from our construction of
, whatever the value of
. Finally the space
is finite-dimensional and 1 is not an eigenvalue of
on this space. On the other hand, as
tends to infinity we see that
tends to 1 and
tends to
, so for
large enough there will also be no eigenvalues equal to
on
. This completes the proof.
Finally we need a result that says that
represents a functor on rigid spaces over weight space. Again this result seems to be known but we know of no reference. If
is an affinoid subdomain of
then we let
denote the
-overconvergent cusp forms of weight
. Now let
denote any rigid space over
. We say that
is a normalised overconvergent finite slope cuspidal eigenform of weight
if
, if
, and furthermore if we can write
as an admissible union of affinoids
such that for each
there exists
and an affinoid subdomain
of
with
, such that
is the
-expansion of an element in
. Let
denote the functor on rigid spaces over
, sending
to the set of normalised overconvergent finite slope cuspidal eigenforms of weight
.
Lemma 7.5.
This functor is represented by
.
-
Proof.
We need to exhibit functorial bijections
for all
, which we do by writing down canonical maps in both directions. Let us first start with a map
and concoct a finite slope cuspidal overconvergent eigenform. Recall that
is equipped with functions
,
,
and given
we define
and set
. We claim that this is indeed a normalised overconvergent finite slope cuspidal eigenform. It suffices to verify this on an admissible affinoid cover of
, and hence we may assume that
is affinoid and the map
has image in
, where
is one of the Hecke algebras used to define the eigencurve via the spectral curve
. Now
is the Hecke algebra corresponding to a finite rank space of overconvergent cuspidal modular forms
over an affinoid
, and Coleman proves on p465 of [7] that the usual
-linear pairing
defined by
is perfect. Because
and
are free
-modules of finite rank, this pairing remains perfect when one tensors up to
, and we deduce that the map
of
-modules corresponds canonically to an element of
with
-expansion
, and in particular to a normalised cuspidal overconvergent eigenform.
It suffices to prove that this eigenform has finite slope, but this is clear because, by definition, the characteristic polynomial of
on
has constant coefficient equal to a unit in
, and hence
is invertible, thus
is also invertible.
The construction the other way is just a case of ensuring that the argument above can be reversed. If
is a rigid space and
is a normalised cuspidal finite slope overconvergent eigenform over
then we must show that there is a unique map
such that
is the pullback of
for all
. Again it suffices to do this on an admissible affinoid cover of
so again we may assume
is affinoid, that the map
has image in an affinoid
, and that
is an element of a space
of
-overconvergent cusp forms of weight
. Let
denote the characteristic power series of
on
.
The factor
of
, corresponding to our finite slope eigenform, cuts out a closed subspace
of
, which maps down isomorphically onto
under the canonical projection
, as
. Note that
may not be disconnected from the closure of its complement in
. The admissible cover of
in Proposition A5.8 of [5] pulls back to an admissible cover of
and hence to an admissible cover of
and thus of
. Replacing
by an element of this admissible cover, we may assume that there exists a factorization
with
,
a polynomial with leading term a unit, and
. This factorization induces a
-invariant decomposition
with
free of finite rank over
. We may write
via this decomposition, and both
and
will be eigenvectors for
with eigenvalue
. But
, the characteristic power series of
on
, is coprime to
and hence to
, so
.
We deduce that
. Now if
denotes the Hecke algebra associated to
then
induces an
-algebra homomorphism
, and it is a standard calculation, using the fact that
is an eigenform, that this map is in fact a ring homomorphism. This ring homomorphism induces a map
and hence
.
Finally, it is elementary to verify that both constructions are inverse to one another.
Remark 7.6.
Lemmas 7.1 and 7.2 are true for general Coleman-Mazur eigencurves (with the same proofs!). Corollary 7.3 is true for regular primes but will not be true at weights corresponding to zeros of the
-adic
-function, because the corresponding Eisenstein series is cuspidal. Similarly for Lemma 7.4 — the proof works for regular primes but the cuspidal and Eisenstein components of the eigencurve will meet for irregular primes, as can be seen from the main theorem of [
8]
and the well-known compatibility of Hida theory and Coleman theory. On the other hand Lemma 7.5 is true for general Coleman-Mazur eigencurves — one can define
using families of cuspidal overconvergent modular forms, rather than as a component of
.
8 There are not too many holes in the eigencurve.
We begin with a simple rigid-analytic lemma that forms the basis to our approach. Let
be a connected affinoid variety, and let
be a non-empty admissible open affinoid subdomain of
. Let
denote the closed unit disc, and let
denote its “boundary”, the closed annulus with inner and outer radii both 1.
Lemma 8.1.
If
is a function on
and the restriction of
to
extends to a function on
, then
extends to a function on
.
-
Proof.
We have an inclusion
, as
is connected, and we know
and
. But the intersection of these two rings is
.
Let
denote the 2-adic eigencurve of tame level 1, and let
denote 2-adic weight space.
Let
denote the closed unit disc and let
denote
with the origin removed. Suppose we have a map
such that the induced map
extends (necessarily uniquely) to a map
. Let
denote the image
under this map. The theorem we prove in this section is
Theorem 8.2.
If
then the map
extends to a map
.
-
Proof.
Recall from Lemma 7.4 that
. If the image of
is contained in
then the theorem is automatic, since the projection
is an isomorphism. Hence we may assume that
. If
then we are finished by the main theorem of [4] . Assume from now on that
. By Lemma 7.5 the map
gives rise to a family
of overconvergent eigenforms over
. By Lemma 7.1 the supremum norm of each
is at most 1 and, analogous to the analysis of isolated singularities of holomorphic functions, one checks easily that this is enough to ensure that each
extends to a function on
. We now have a formal power series
in
. We next claim that this formal power series is an overconvergent form of weight
— indeed, it is not too difficult to establish how overconvergent it is. We are assuming
and hence
with
. Now assume also that
. Set
. After shrinking
if necessary, we may assume that for all
we have
with
. By Lemma 5.2 we have
for all
, and by Corollary 3.8 we see that on the boundary of
our function
is
-overconvergent, it being a finite slope eigenform for
here. By Lemma 7.1 the coefficients
are all bounded by 1 on all of
. Now applying Lemma 8.1 with
and
a small disc near infinity such such that
(the
-expansion parameter) is a well-defined function on
, we deduce that
is
-overconvergent on all of
.
Next we show that
. It suffices to prove that
, as we know that
for all
. But
is an
-overconvergent form of weight
, so by Theorem 5.3 we deduce
. Hence
and
is an overconvergent cuspidal finite slope eigenform of weight
. We finish the proof by applying Lemma 7.5 once more, giving us a map
.
9 There are no holes in the eigencurve
In the previous section we showed that if there are any holes in the eigencurve, then they lie above weights of the form
. To show that in fact there are no holes in the eigencurve, we redo our entire argument with a second, even more non-standard, twist and show that using this twist we may deduce that the only holes in the eigencurve lie above the set
. Because there is no
such that
this finishes the argument. We sketch the details.
Let
denote the holomorphic Eisenstein series of weight 2 and level
. We define
. If
then set
.
If
is such that
, we define
to be the vector space of formal
-expansions
such that
is the
-expansion of an element of
. For
sufficiently small this definition is easily checked to coincide with the usual definition. We shall be using this definition with
quite large and again we neglect to verify whether the two definitions coincide in the generality in which we use them. We give
the Banach space structure such that multiplication by
is an isometric isomorphism
, and endow
once and for all with the orthonormal basis
.
Note that the reason that this definition gives us more than our original definition of
is that if
is an even integer with
then
but
, so we can “overconverge further” for such weights.
If
is the operator on formal
-expansions, then one checks that
.
Moreover, it is well-known that
and hence
for any
. Hence our formulae for the coefficients of
acting on
will give rise to formulae for the coefficients of
acting on
, which was the starting point for the arguments in section 3. We give some of the details of how the arguments should be modified. If
and
then we define a continuous operator
on
by
. One checks that this is indeed a continuous operator by verifying that it has a basis
defined by
for
or
,
, and
otherwise. One checks that for
fixed there is a polynomial
interpolating
and that for
with
we have
as before.
Hence for
,
and
such that
, the matrix
defines a compact operator
on
. Furthermore we have
, and in particular
is well-defined and compact. Moreover
increases overconvergence and any eigenvector for
on
with non-zero eigenvalue extends to
for any
such that
. Finally, these arguments also work for families of modular forms and the analogue of Corollary 3.8 remains true in this setting.
Similar arguments work in section 4. One checks that
and hence
. Hence
commutes with
and one now deduces from our explicit formulae for
in weight
that in weight
the matrix for
is given by
, where:
We remark that the only difference in this formula is that
has been replaced by
. One finds that the arguments at the end of this section apply mutatis mutandis in this case.
The analogue of Theorem 5.3 is that if
and
and
then an overconvergent infinite slope form of weight
is not
-overconvergent, for
.
The proof follows the same strategy, although some of the lemmas in section 6 need minor modifications; for example in Lemma 6.10 we set
and
, and the result follows as
. Note that
can be regarded as an element of
so that Lemma 6.13 does not need modification.
We deduce our main theorem:
Theorem 9.1.
If
and the induced map
extends to a map
, then
extends to a map
.
-
Proof.
If
then we use Theorem 8.2 , and if it is then we use the modification explained above.
References
-
K. Buzzard, Analytic continuation of overconvergent eigenforms, JAMS, 16(2003), 29–55.
-
K. Buzzard, Eigenvarieties, preprint.
-
K. Buzzard, F. Calegari, Slopes of overconvergent
-adic modular forms, to appear in Compositio Mathematica.
-
K. Buzzard, L. Kilford. The 2-adic eigencurve at the boundary of weight space, to appear in Compositio Mathematica.
-
R. Coleman,
-adic Banach spaces and families of modular forms Invent. math. 127, 417–479 (1997).
-
R. Coleman, F. Gouvêa, N. Jochnowitz.
,
, and overconvergence, Internat. Math. Res. Notices 1995, no. 1, 23–41
-
R. Coleman, B. Mazur, The eigencurve, Galois representations in algebraic geometry, (Durham, 1996), 1–113, London Math Soc. Lecture Note Ser., 254, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1998.
-
M. Emerton, The Eisenstein ideal in Hida's ordinary Hecke algebra, IMRN 1999, No. 15.
-
Katz,
-adic properties of modular schemes and modular forms., Antwerp.
-
Jean-Pierre Serre. Endomorphismes complètement continus des espaces de Banach
-adiques. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (12):69–85, 1962.
Email addresses: buzzard@imperial.ac.uk fcale@math.harvard.edu