\documentclass[landscape]{slides}
\usepackage{fancybox}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{pstricks}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[all]{xy}

\newcommand{\mtwo}[4]{\left(
        \begin{matrix}\hfill #1&\hfill #2\\\hfill #3&\hfill #4
        \end{matrix}\right)}
\DeclareMathOperator{\moddeg}{moddeg}
\DeclareMathOperator{\HH}{H}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Ann}{Ann} 
\DeclareMathOperator{\SL}{SL}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Res}{Res}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Jac}{Jac}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Disc}{Disc}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Det}{Det}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Tr}{Tr}
\DeclareMathOperator{\res}{res}
\renewcommand{\H}{\HH}
\newcommand{\ds}{\displaystyle}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Vis}{Vis}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Coker}{Coker}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Ker}{Ker}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Reg}{Reg}
\DeclareMathOperator{\End}{End}
\DeclareMathOperator{\rank}{rank}
\DeclareMathOperator{\op}{odd}
\DeclareMathOperator{\tor}{tor}
\DeclareFontEncoding{OT2}{}{} % to enable usage of cyrillic fonts
  \newcommand{\textcyr}[1]{%
    {\fontencoding{OT2}\fontfamily{wncyr}\fontseries{m}\fontshape{n}%
     \selectfont #1}}
\newcommand{\Sha}{{\mbox{\textcyr{Sh}}}}
\newcommand{\first}[1]{\hline#1}
\newcommand{\add}[1]{&#1\\}
\newcommand{\sha}[3]{{\bf #1}, dim #2, $\ell=#3$}
\newcommand{\higher}[3]{$\mathbf{p=#1}$: dim #2, rank #3}
\newrgbcolor{dblue}{0 0 0.8}
\newcommand{\h}[1]{\begin{center}\LARGE\bf\dblue #1\end{center}}
\newcommand{\htwo}[1]{\begin{center}\Large\bf\dblue #1\end{center}}
\newrgbcolor{dred}{0.7 0 0}
\newrgbcolor{dgreen}{0 0.3 0}
\newcommand{\rd}[1]{{\bf \dred #1}}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Gal}{Gal}
\DeclareMathOperator{\ord}{ord}
\DeclareMathOperator{\charpoly}{charpoly}
\newcommand{\Q}{\mathbf{Q}}
\newcommand{\F}{\mathbf{F}}
\newcommand{\C}{\mathbf{C}}
\newcommand{\T}{\mathbf{T}}
\newcommand{\Z}{\mathbf{Z}}
\newcommand{\Qbar}{\mathbf{\overline{Q}}}
\newcommand{\con}{\equiv}
\newcommand{\hra}{\hookrightarrow}
\newcommand{\isom}{\cong}
\newcommand{\ce}{\stackrel{\mbox{\tiny conj.}}{=}}
\newcommand{\nT}{\tilde{\T}}
%\newcommand{\photo}[2]{{\small [Photo: #1 #2]}}
\newcommand{\photo}[2]{\includegraphics[width=#1in]{graphics/#2.eps}}

%opening
\title{\Large\bf\dblue Modular Degrees of Elliptic Curves\\and\\ Discriminants
of Hecke Algebras}
\author{\rd{\Large William Stein\footnote{This is joint work 
with F.~Calegari.\hspace{2ex}\photo{1}{frank}}}\\
{\tt http://modular.fas.harvard.edu}}
\date{ANTS VI, June 18, 2004\vspace{1ex}
}

\begin{document}

\maketitle


\begin{slide}
\h{\rd{Goal}\hspace{2in}}

Let $p$ be a prime.
My goal is to explain and justify
the following \underline{Calegari-Stein conjectures}
(note: 3 implies 2 implies 1):
\vspace{-1.5ex}

{\Large{\dblue\bf Conjecture 1:} }{\large If $E/\Q$ is an elliptic
  curve of conductor $p$, then the modular degree $m_E$ of $E$ is not
  divisible by $p$.}  
\vspace{-1.5ex}

{\Large{\dblue\bf Conjecture 2:} } {\large If
$\T_2(p)$ is the Hecke algebra associated to 
$S_2(p)$, then $p$ does not divide the
index of $\T_2(p)$ in its normalization.}
\vspace{-1.5ex}

{\Large{\dblue\bf Conjecture 3:} } {\large 
If $p\geq k-1$, then there is an explicit 
formula for the $p$-part of the index of $\T_k(p)$
in its normalization.}
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\end{slide}


\begin{slide}
%\h{Conjecture 1}
\htwo{Conj 1: If $E$ 
of conductor $p_E$,
then $p_E\nmid m_E$.}  


\rd{\bf A Motivation:} \photo{1.3}{flach} Conjecture 1 looks like
Vandiver's conjecture, which asserts that $p\nmid h_p^-$.  Flach
proved the modular degree annihilates $\Sha({\rm Sym}^2(E))$,
which is an analogue of a class group.
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\htwo{Conj 1: If $E$ 
of conductor $p_E$,
then $p_E\nmid m_E$.}  

\rd{\bf Watkins Data:} \photo{1.2}{watkins}  For $p_E<10^7$ there 
are 52878 curves of
prime conductor whose modular degree Watkins computed.  
No counterexamples to Conjecture 1 in the data. 
There are $23$ curves
such that $m_E$ is divisible by a prime $\ell> p_E$.  For example the
curve $y^2 + xy = x^3 - x^2 -391648x -94241311$ of prime conductor
$p_E=4\,847\,093$ has modular degree $2\cdot 21\,695\,761$.  
Smallest $p_E$ with some $\ell>p_E$ is $p_E=1\,194\,923$.
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\h{More Data}
\begin{itemize}
\item The \rd{maximum} known ratio $\ds\frac{m_E}{p_E}$ is $\sim 23.2$, attained for
$p_E=7\,944\,197$.  
\item 
\rd{First} curve with $\ds \frac{m_E}{p_E}>1$ has $p_E=13723$ and
$m_E=16176=2^4\cdot 3\cdot 337$.  
\item \rd{Smallest} known $\ds\frac{m_E}{p_E}>1$ is 
$1.0004067\ldots$ for $p_E=1\,757\,963$ where $m_E=p_E+715$.
\end{itemize}
%Conjecture is consistent with $m_E\gg p_E^{7/6-\varepsilon}$.
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\htwo{Modular Forms\hspace{1in}\photo{1.3}{hecke}}
\vspace{-2ex}

\rd{Congruence Subgroup:}
$$
\Gamma_0(N) = \left\lbrace 
\mtwo{a}{b}{c}{d} \in \SL_2(\Z) \text{ such that } N \mid c
\right\rbrace.
$$
\vspace{-2ex}

\rd{Cusp Forms:}
$\displaystyle
 S_k(N) = \Bigl\{f : \mathfrak{h}\to\C \text{ such that }
$
\vspace{-2ex}
$$
      \qquad\qquad\qquad   f(\gamma(z)) = (cz+d)^{-k}f(z) \text{ all }
                        \gamma\in\Gamma_0(N), 
\vspace{-1ex}$$
$$\qquad \qquad \qquad \text{ and $f$ is holomorphic at the cusps}\Bigr\}
$$
\vspace{-1ex}
\rd{Fourier Expansion:}
$$
  f = \sum_{n\geq 1} a_n e^{2\pi i z n} = \sum_{n\geq 1} a_n q^n \in \C[[q]].
$$
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\htwo{\photo{1}{merel} Computing Modular Forms \photo{1}{cremona}}
$S_k(N)=0$ if $k$ is odd, so we will not consider odd $k$ further.

For $k\geq 2$, a basis of $S_k(N)$ can be computed to any given
precision using \rd{modular symbols}.  Appears
that no formal analysis of complexity has been done.  
Certainly polynomial time in $N$ and required precision.
Is polynomial factorization over $\Z$ the theoretical
bottleneck?


%GUESS: Maybe $O(N^6)$ to
%compute setup data, and computing $q$-expansions to precision $n$ is
%maybe $O(N\cdot n^3)$?  (TODO)

\end{slide}
\begin{slide}
\h{Implemented in MAGMA \photo{2}{magma}}
\begin{verbatim}
> S := CuspForms(37,2);
> Basis(S);
    q + q^3 - 2*q^4 - q^7 + O(q^8),
    q^2 + 2*q^3 - 2*q^4 + q^5 - 3*q^6 + O(q^8)
\end{verbatim}
See also {\tt http://modular.fas.harvard.edu/mfd}
\begin{center}
\photo{3}{mfd}
\end{center}
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\rd{Basis for $S_{14}(11)$:}
\begin{verbatim}
> S := CuspForms(11,14); SetPrecision(S,17);
> Basis(S);
    q   - 74*q^13 - 38*q^14 + 441*q^15 + 140*q^16 + O(q^17),
    q^2 - 2*q^13 + 78*q^14 + 24*q^15 - 338*q^16 + O(q^17),
    q^3 + 18*q^13 - 72*q^14 + 89*q^15 + 492*q^16 + O(q^17),
    q^4 + 12*q^13 + 31*q^14 - 18*q^15 - 193*q^16 + O(q^17),
    q^5 - 10*q^13 + 46*q^14 - 63*q^15 - 52*q^16 + O(q^17),
    q^6 + 11*q^13 - 18*q^14 - 74*q^15 - 4*q^16 + O(q^17),
    q^7 - 7*q^13 - 16*q^14 + 42*q^15 - 84*q^16 + O(q^17),
    q^8 - q^13 - 16*q^14 - 18*q^15 - 34*q^16 + O(q^17),
    q^9 - 8*q^13 - 2*q^14 - 3*q^15 + 16*q^16 + O(q^17),
    q^10 - 5*q^13 - 2*q^14 - 6*q^15 + 14*q^16 + O(q^17),
    q^11 + 12*q^13 + 12*q^14 + 12*q^15 + 12*q^16 + O(q^17),
    q^12 - 2*q^13 - q^14 + 2*q^15 + q^16 + O(q^17)
\end{verbatim}
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\h{Hecke Algebras \photo{1}{hecke}}

\rd{Hecke Operators:}
Let $p$ be a prime.
$$T_p\left(\sum_{n\geq 1} a_n\cdot q^n\right) 
 = \sum_{n\geq 1} a_{np}\cdot q^n + p^{k-1} \sum_{n\geq 1} a_n \cdot q^{np}$$
(If $p\mid N$, drop the second summand.)
This preserves $S_k(N)$, so defines a linear map
$$
T_p : S_k(N) \to S_k(N).
$$
  Similar definition of $T_n$ for any
integer~$n$.  

\rd{Hecke Algebra:}  A {\em commutative ring}:
$$\T_k(N) = \Z[T_1, T_2,T_3,T_4,T_5,\ldots] \subset \End_\C(S_k(N))$$


\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\h{Computing Hecke Algebras}

\rd{Fact:} $\T_k(N) = \Z[T_1, T_2,T_3,T_4,T_5,\ldots]$ is free as a
$\Z$-\rd{module} of rank equal to $\dim S_k(N)$.

\rd{Sturm Bound:}
$\T_k(N)$ is generated as a $\Z$-module by 
$T_1, T_2, \ldots, T_b$, where 
$$b = \Bigl\lceil \frac{k}{12}\cdot N \cdot \prod_{p\mid N} \left(1+\frac{1}{p}\right)\Bigr\rceil.$$

\rd{Example:} For $N=37$ and $k=2$, the bound is $7$.  In fact, $\T_2(37)$
has $\Z$-basis $T_1=\mtwo{1}{0}{0}{1}$ and $T_2=\mtwo{-2}{0}{1}{0}$.

There are several other $\T_k(N)$-modules isomorphic to $S_2(N)$, and
I use these instead to compute $\T_k(N)$ as a ring.
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
  \h{Discriminants} 
  
  The discriminant of $\T_k(N)$ is an integer.  It measures
  ramification, or what's the same, congruences between simultaneous
  eigenvectors for $\T_k(N)$, hence is related to the modular degree.

\rd{Discriminant:}
$$
  \Disc(\T_k(N)) = \Det(\Tr(t_i \cdot t_j)),
$$
where $t_1,\ldots, t_n$ are a basis for $\T_k(N)$
as a free $\Z$-module.

\rd{Examples:}\\
$\quad\Disc(\T_2(37)) = \Det\mtwo{ 2}{-2}{-2}{ 4}=4$\\
$\quad\Disc(\T_{14}(11)) = $ {\small $2^{46}\cdot 3^{14}\cdot 5^2\cdot 11^{42}
\cdot 79 \cdot 241\cdot 1163 \cdot 40163 \cdot 901181111 \cdot 
\quad{}\qquad{} \qquad{} \qquad{} \qquad{} \qquad{} 47552569849 \cdot 124180041087631 \cdot 205629726345973.$
}
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\h{Ribet's Question \hspace{2ex}\photo{1.6}{ribet}}

I became interested in computing with modular forms when I was
a grad student and Ken Ribet started asking:

\vspace{-1ex}
\rd{Question:} (Ribet, 1997) Is there a prime $p$ so that
$p\mid \Disc(\T_2(p))$?
\vspace{-2ex}

Ribet proved a theorem about $X_0(p) \cap J_0(p)_{\tor}$ under the
hypothesis that $p\nmid \Disc(\T_2(p))$, and wanted to know how restrictive his
hypothesis was.   Note: When $k>2$, usually $p\mid \Disc(\T_k(p))$.
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\h{Computations\hspace{2ex}\photo{1.5}{mestre}}
Using a \photo{0.9}{pari} script of Joe Wetherell, I set up a computation on my
laptop and found exactly one example in which 
$p\mid \Disc(\T_2(p))$.  It was $p=389$, now my favorite number.

Last year I checked that for $p<50000$ there are no other
examples in which $p\mid \Disc(\T_2(p))$.  For this
I used the Mestre method of graphs, which involves
computing with the free abelian group on the supersingular
$j$-invariants in $\F_{p^2}$ of elliptic curves.
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
  \h{Index in the Normalization} 

Let $\nT_k(p)$ be the \rd{normalization} of $\T_k(p)$.  Since
$\T_k(p)$ is an order in a product of number fields, $\nT_k(p)$ is the
product of the rings of integers of those number fields. 

It turned out that Ribet could prove his theorem under
the weaker hypothesis that $p\nmid [\nT_2(p):\T_2(p)]$.
I was unable to find a counterexample to this divisibility.  
(Note: Matt Baker's Ph.D. was a complete proof of the result Ribet
was trying to prove, but used different methods.)

[[Picture on blackboard of ${\rm Spec}(\T_k(p))$]]
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\h{\photo{0.5}{questions} \hspace{1in} Conjecture 2   \hspace{1in}\photo{0.5}{questions}}

{\Large{\bf Conjecture 2. (--).} } {\large If
$\T_2(p)$ is the Hecke algebra associated to 
$S_2(\Gamma_0(p))$, then $p$ does not divide the
index of $\T_2(p)$ in its normalization.}

The primes that divide $[\nT_2(p):\T_2(p)]$ are called \rd{congruence
  primes}.  They are the primes of congruence between
non-$\Gal(\Qbar/\Q)$-conjugate eigenvectors for $\T_2(p)$.  Using this
observation and another theorem of Ribet (and Wiles's theorem), we
see that Conjecture 2 implies that $p$ does not divide the modular
degree of any elliptic curve of conductor~$p$.  This is why Conjecture
2 implies Conjecture 1.

But is there any reason to believe Conjecture 2, beyond knowing that
it is true for $p<50000$?
\end{slide}

\comment{\begin{slide}
\h{Example of Weight $k=14$}
Totally stuck on Conjecture 2, so look at weight $k>2$.
We have

$\quad\Disc(\T_{14}(11)) = $ {\small $2^{46}\cdot 3^{14}\cdot 5^2\cdot  \mathbf{11}^{42}
\cdot 79 \cdot 241\cdot 1163 \cdot 40163 \cdot 901181111 \cdot 
\quad{}\qquad{} \qquad{} \qquad{} \qquad{} \qquad{} 47552569849 \cdot 124180041087631 \cdot 205629726345973.$}

Notice the large power of $11$.  Upon computing the $p$-maximal order
in $\T_{14}(11)\otimes_\Z\Q$, we find that $11\nmid \Disc(\nT_{14}(11))$,
so all the $11$ is in the index of $\T_{14}(11)$ in $\nT_{14}(11)$. Thus
$$
\ord_{11}([\nT_{14}(11) : \T_{14}(11)]) = 21.
$$
\end{slide}}

\begin{slide}
\h{Data for $k=4$}
For inspiration, consider weight $>2$.

Each row contains pairs $p$ and $\ord_p(\Disc(\T_{4}(p)))$.  

{\tiny \hspace{-3em}\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
\begin{tabular}{|ccccccccccccccccc|}\hline
 &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  \vspace{-1ex}\\ 
2& 3& 5& 7& 11& 13& 17& 19& 23& 29& 31& 37& 41& 43& 47& 53& 59\\ 
0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 2& 2& 2& 2& 4& 4& 6& 6& 6& 6& 8& 8\\\hline
 &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  \vspace{-1ex}\\ 
61& 67& 71& 73& 79& 83& 89& 97& 101& 103& 107& 109& 113& 127& 131&  137& 139\\
 &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  \vspace{-2ex}\\ 
10& 10& 10& 12& 12& 12& 14& 16& 16& 16& 16& 18& 18& 20& 20& 22&
{\bf 24}\\\hline
 &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  \vspace{-1ex}\\ 
 149& 151& 157& 163& 167& 173& 179& 181& 191& 193& 197& 199&
  211& 223& 227& 229& 233\\
 &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  \vspace{-1ex}\\ 
 24& 24& 26& 26& 26&28& 28& 30& 30& 32& 32& 32& 34& 36& 36& 38& 38\\ \hline
 &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  \vspace{-1ex}\\ 
 239& 241& 251& 257& 263& 269& 271& 277&
  281& 283& 293& 307& 311& 313& 317& 331& 337\\
 &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  \vspace{-1ex}\\ 
 38& 40& 40& 42& 42&44& 44& 46& 46& 46& 48& 50& 50& 52& 52& 54& 56\\\hline
 &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  \vspace{-1ex}\\ 
 347& 349& 353& 359& 367& 373& 379& 383& 389&397& 401& 409& 419& 421& 431& 433& 439 \\
 &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  \vspace{-2ex}\\ 
 56& 58& 58& 58& 60&62& 62& 62& {\bf 65}  &66& 66& 68& 68& 70& 70& 72& 72\\\hline
 &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  \vspace{-1ex}\\ 
  443& 449& 457& 461& 463& 467& 479& 487& 491& 499 &&&&&&&\\
 &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  &  \vspace{-1ex}\\ 
  72& 74& 76& 76& 76& 76& 78& 80& 80& 82 &&&&&&&\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}}
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\h{A Pattern? \hspace{1in}\photo{2.5}{frank2}}
\rd{F.~ Calegari} (during a talk I gave): 
There is \rd{almost} a pattern!!!
Frank, Romyar Sharifi and I computed $2\cdot
[\nT_4(p):\T_4(p)]$ and obtained the numbers as in the table, except for
$p=389$ (which gives $64$) and $139$ (which gives $22$).  
We also considered many other examples... and found a pattern!
\end{slide}


\begin{slide}
\h{Conjecture 3}

In all cases, we found the following \rd{amazing} pattern:

\rd{Conjecture 3.} Suppose $p\geq k-1$.  Then
  $$
  \ord_p([\nT_k(p) : \T_k(p)]) = \left\lfloor\frac{p}{12}\right\rfloor\cdot
  \binom{k/2}{2} + a(p,k),
  $$
  where
  $$
  a(p,k) =
\begin{cases}
  0 & \text{if $p\con 1\pmod{12}$,}\\
\vspace{-2ex}\\
  3\cdot\ds\binom{\lceil \frac{k}{6}\rceil}{2} & \text{if $p\con 5\pmod{12}$,}\\
\vspace{-1ex}\\
  2\cdot\ds\binom{\lceil \frac{k}{4}\rceil}{2} & \text{if $p\con 7\pmod{12}$,}\\
\vspace{-1ex}\\
  a(5,k)+a(7,k) & \text{if $p\con 11\pmod{12}$.}
\end{cases}
$$
\end{slide}
\begin{slide}
\h{Warning}

The conjecture is false without the constraint that $p\geq k-1$.

%It works for our running example $p=11$,
%$k=14$, where the formula yields $0 + 3\cdot \binom{3}{2} +
%2\cdot\binom{4}{2} = 9 + 12 = 21$, which is correct.

For example, if $p=5$ and $k=12$, then the conjecture predicts
that the index is $0 + 3\cdot 1 = 3$,
but in fact
$\ord_p([\nT_k(p) : \T_k(p)]) = 5$.

In our data when $k> p+1$, then the conjectural $\ord_p$ is
often less than the actual $\ord_p$.
\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
  \h{Summary} 
  
  For many years I had no idea whether there
  should or shouldn't be mod~$p$ congruence between nonconjugate
  eigenforms.  (I.e., whether~$p$ divides modular degrees at
  prime level.)  By considering weight $k\geq 4$, and computing examples,
  a simple conjectural formula emerged.  When specialized to weight $2$ 
  this formula is the conjecture that there are no mod $p$ congruences.
  
  \rd{Future Direction.} Explain why there are so many mod~$p$
  congruences at level $p$, when $k\geq 4$.  See paper for a strategy. 
  
%  \rd{Computational Question.} Push computation of
%  $\ord_p(\Disc(\T_2(p)))$ to $100000$ using sparse 
%  charpoly algorithm (e.g., Wiedemann).
  
  \rd{Connection with Vandiver's Conjecture?} Investigate the
  connection between Conjecture~1 and Flach's results on modular
  degrees annihilating Selmer groups.

\end{slide}

\begin{slide}
\htwo{This Concludes ANTS VI: THANKS!}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6in]{graphics/ants6.eps}
\end{center}
Many thanks to the organizers (Sands, Kelly, Buell):
\begin{center}
       \photo{1}{sands}, \photo{1}{kelly}, and Duncan Buell 
     \end{center}
\end{slide}

\end{document}

