Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Justin Scarfy
The University of British Columbia
1 / 29
Introduction
Background
In the past few lectures we learned the definition of elliptic curves, absorbed the
Nagell-Lutz Theorem, were being introduced to the L-functions of elliptic curves,
and got spoiled by a few mouth-watering conjectures.
2 / 29
Introduction
Background
In the past few lectures we learned the definition of elliptic curves, absorbed the
Nagell-Lutz Theorem, were being introduced to the L-functions of elliptic curves,
and got spoiled by a few mouth-watering conjectures.
Lecture Plan
Today we shall start discussing a theorem that L. Mordell proved in 1922:
The group of rational points on a non-singular cubic elliptic curve is finitely
generated.
2 / 29
Introduction
Background
In the past few lectures we learned the definition of elliptic curves, absorbed the
Nagell-Lutz Theorem, were being introduced to the L-functions of elliptic curves,
and got spoiled by a few mouth-watering conjectures.
Lecture Plan
Today we shall start discussing a theorem that L. Mordell proved in 1922:
The group of rational points on a non-singular cubic elliptic curve is finitely
generated.
The main source I follow is that of Silverman-Tate, in which they employ a
technique called heights, and cheerfully partition the so I can serve them to you
by slices.
2 / 29
Introduction
Background
In the past few lectures we learned the definition of elliptic curves, absorbed the
Nagell-Lutz Theorem, were being introduced to the L-functions of elliptic curves,
and got spoiled by a few mouth-watering conjectures.
Lecture Plan
Today we shall start discussing a theorem that L. Mordell proved in 1922:
The group of rational points on a non-singular cubic elliptic curve is finitely
generated.
The main source I follow is that of Silverman-Tate, in which they employ a
technique called heights, and cheerfully partition the so I can serve them to you
by slices.
Disclaimer
I only have time to serve you a finite portion of the today.
Justin Scarfy (UBC)
2 / 29
Review
Definition (Non-Singular Cubic Elliptic Curve)
Recall the precise definition of a non-singular cubic elliptic curve E is an equation
of the form
y 2 = f (x) = x3 + ax2 + bx + c
(1)
with non-zero discrimant:
:= 16(4a3 + 27b2 ) 6= 0
3 / 29
Review
Definition (Non-Singular Cubic Elliptic Curve)
Recall the precise definition of a non-singular cubic elliptic curve E is an equation
of the form
y 2 = f (x) = x3 + ax2 + bx + c
(1)
with non-zero discrimant:
:= 16(4a3 + 27b2 ) 6= 0
Nagell-Lutz Theorem
Let E be a non-singular cubic elliptic curve with the form y 2 = x3 + ax + b,
a, b Z
If P E(Q) is a torsion point of order m 2, then,
1) x(P ), y(P ) Z
2) Either 2P = 0 or y 2 | := 4a2 + 27b2
Justin Scarfy (UBC)
3 / 29
Heights
Definition (Heights)
For all x Q with x =
m
n
4 / 29
Heights
Definition (Heights)
For all x Q with x =
m
n
4 / 29
Heights
Definition (Heights)
For all x Q with x =
m
n
4 / 29
Partitioning the
Theorem (Modrell 1922)
The group of rational points E(Q) is finitely generated.
5 / 29
Partitioning the
Theorem (Modrell 1922)
The group of rational points E(Q) is finitely generated.
Slice 1
For every M R, the set {P E(Q) : h(P ) M } is finite.
5 / 29
Partitioning the
Theorem (Modrell 1922)
The group of rational points E(Q) is finitely generated.
Slice 1
For every M R, the set {P E(Q) : h(P ) M } is finite.
Slice 2
Let P0 Q on E be fixed, then there exists a constant 0 depending on P0 and
a, b, c such that h(P + P0 ) < 2h(P ) + 0 for all P E(Q).
5 / 29
Partitioning the
Theorem (Modrell 1922)
The group of rational points E(Q) is finitely generated.
Slice 1
For every M R, the set {P E(Q) : h(P ) M } is finite.
Slice 2
Let P0 Q on E be fixed, then there exists a constant 0 depending on P0 and
a, b, c such that h(P + P0 ) < 2h(P ) + 0 for all P E(Q).
Slice 3
There is a constant , depending on a, b, c so that h(2P ) 4h(P ) for all
P E(Q).
5 / 29
Partitioning the
Theorem (Modrell 1922)
The group of rational points E(Q) is finitely generated.
Slice 1
For every M R, the set {P E(Q) : h(P ) M } is finite.
Slice 2
Let P0 Q on E be fixed, then there exists a constant 0 depending on P0 and
a, b, c such that h(P + P0 ) < 2h(P ) + 0 for all P E(Q).
Slice 3
There is a constant , depending on a, b, c so that h(2P ) 4h(P ) for all
P E(Q).
Slice 4
Not ready yet will be ready and served next week!
Justin Scarfy (UBC)
5 / 29
6 / 29
6 / 29
6 / 29
6 / 29
7 / 29
7 / 29
7 / 29
8 / 29
8 / 29
8 / 29
8 / 29
9 / 29
9 / 29
1
0 +
3
1
h(Pj1 ) +
= h(Pj1 ) h(Pj1 ) (0 + )
2
4
4
4
9 / 29
3
h(Pj1 )
4
10 / 29
3
h(Pj1 )
4
10 / 29
3
h(Pj1 )
4
10 / 29
3
h(Pj1 )
4
10 / 29
11 / 29
11 / 29
Remark
This Theorem is called a Descent Theorem as the proof imitates the style of
Fermats method of infinite descent: One starts with an arbitrary point P E(Q),
and by manipulation descents to a smaller point [in terms of height, of course].
11 / 29
12 / 29
m
and
M
in lowest terms with M > 0 and N > 0.
x=
y=
n
N
12 / 29
m
and
M
in lowest terms with M > 0 and N > 0.
x=
y=
n
N
12 / 29
m
and
M
in lowest terms with M > 0 and N > 0.
x=
y=
n
N
(2)
January 31, 2012
12 / 29
13 / 29
13 / 29
13 / 29
13 / 29
13 / 29
13 / 29
N
M ,we
e2 =
Therefore x =
find that
N2
M3
= 2 = M,
2
M
M
and
e3 =
N2
N3
= 2 = N.
3
M
N
m
n
and y = 3 have the desired form.
e2
e
13 / 29
14 / 29
To prove this we just use the fact that the point satisfies the equation:
substituting into equation (1) and multiplying by e6 to clear denominator:
n2 = m3 + ae2 m2 + be4 m + ce6
14 / 29
To prove this we just use the fact that the point satisfies the equation:
substituting into equation (1) and multiplying by e6 to clear denominator:
n2 = m3 + ae2 m2 + be4 m + ce6
Taking the absolute value and using the triangle inequality yields:
|n2 | |m3 | + |ae2 m2 | + |be4 m| + |ce6 |
H(P )3 + |a|H(P )3 + |b|H(P )3 + |c|H(P )3
So we can take K =
14 / 29
To prove this we just use the fact that the point satisfies the equation:
substituting into equation (1) and multiplying by e6 to clear denominator:
n2 = m3 + ae2 m2 + be4 m + ce6
Taking the absolute value and using the triangle inequality yields:
|n2 | |m3 | + |ae2 m2 | + |be4 m| + |ce6 |
H(P )3 + |a|H(P )3 + |b|H(P )3 + |c|H(P )3
So we can take K =
14 / 29
15 / 29
15 / 29
15 / 29
15 / 29
y y0
.
x x0
y y0
.
x x0
16 / 29
y y0
.
x x0
16 / 29
17 / 29
17 / 29
n KH(P )3/2 ,
m H(P )
17 / 29
18 / 29
18 / 29
18 / 29
19 / 29
19 / 29
where =
f 0 (x)
2y
19 / 29
20 / 29
20 / 29
20 / 29
21 / 29
m
n
and
21 / 29
22 / 29
m
= a0 md + a1 md1 + + ad nd ,
n
m
= b0 me nde + b1 me1 ndn+1 + + be nd
(m, n) := nd
n
So we need to find an estimate for gcd((m, n), (m, n)) which does NOT
depend on m OR n.
22 / 29
m
= a0 md + a1 md1 + + ad nd ,
n
m
= b0 me nde + b1 me1 ndn+1 + + be nd
(m, n) := nd
n
So we need to find an estimate for gcd((m, n), (m, n)) which does NOT
depend on m OR n.
Since (X) and (X) have NO common roots, they are relative prime in the
Euclidean ring Q[X], so they generate the unit ideal:
22 / 29
m
= a0 md + a1 md1 + + ad nd ,
n
m
= b0 me nde + b1 me1 ndn+1 + + be nd
(m, n) := nd
n
So we need to find an estimate for gcd((m, n), (m, n)) which does NOT
depend on m OR n.
Since (X) and (X) have NO common roots, they are relative prime in the
Euclidean ring Q[X], so they generate the unit ideal:
So we can find polynomials F (X) and G(X) with rational coefficients satisfying
F (X)(X) + G(X)(X) = 1
(3)
22 / 29
23 / 29
23 / 29
We have:
n
m o
n
m o
nD AF
(m, n) + nD AG
(m, n) = AnD+d
n
n
Since the quantities in braces are integers, we see that |AnD+d
23 / 29
24 / 29
24 / 29
24 / 29
24 / 29
25 / 29
25 / 29
25 / 29
26 / 29
n
+ n
2R
n
n
H()
26 / 29
n
+ n
2R
n
n
H()
26 / 29
H()
1
H(m/n)d
2R
d m d m
n n + n n
max{|m|d , |n|d }
m m
n + n
1
=
2R
d
max m
n ,1
27 / 29
H()
1
H(m/n)d
2R
d m d m
n n + n n
max{|m|d , |n|d }
m m
n + n
1
=
2R
d
max m
n ,1
27 / 29
H()
1
H(m/n)d
2R
d m d m
n n + n n
max{|m|d , |n|d }
m m
n + n
1
=
2R
d
max m
n ,1
27 / 29
C m d
H
2R
n
28 / 29
C m d
H
2R
n
28 / 29
C m d
H
2R
n
Remarks
Notice that there are two ideas in the above proof:
1) to bound the amount of cancellation;
H((x)/(x))
2) to look at
as a function on something compact.
H(x)d
Justin Scarfy (UBC)
28 / 29
Summary
Today we initiated the proof of Modrells Theorem by partitioning the into four
slices, picked up the definition of heights on the road, and proved the Descend
Theorem which connects the to Modrell.
29 / 29
Summary
Today we initiated the proof of Modrells Theorem by partitioning the into four
slices, picked up the definition of heights on the road, and proved the Descend
Theorem which connects the to Modrell.
Slice 1
For every M R, the set {P E(Q) : h(P ) M } is finite.
29 / 29
Summary
Today we initiated the proof of Modrells Theorem by partitioning the into four
slices, picked up the definition of heights on the road, and proved the Descend
Theorem which connects the to Modrell.
Slice 1
For every M R, the set {P E(Q) : h(P ) M } is finite.
Slice 2
Let P0 Q on E be fixed, then there exists a constant 0 depending on P0 and
a, b, c such that h(P + P0 ) < 2h(P ) + 0 for all P E(Q).
29 / 29
Summary
Today we initiated the proof of Modrells Theorem by partitioning the into four
slices, picked up the definition of heights on the road, and proved the Descend
Theorem which connects the to Modrell.
Slice 1
For every M R, the set {P E(Q) : h(P ) M } is finite.
Slice 2
Let P0 Q on E be fixed, then there exists a constant 0 depending on P0 and
a, b, c such that h(P + P0 ) < 2h(P ) + 0 for all P E(Q).
Slice 3
There is a constant , depending on a, b, c so that h(2P ) 4h(P ) for all
P E(Q).
29 / 29
Summary
Today we initiated the proof of Modrells Theorem by partitioning the into four
slices, picked up the definition of heights on the road, and proved the Descend
Theorem which connects the to Modrell.
Slice 1
For every M R, the set {P E(Q) : h(P ) M } is finite.
Slice 2
Let P0 Q on E be fixed, then there exists a constant 0 depending on P0 and
a, b, c such that h(P + P0 ) < 2h(P ) + 0 for all P E(Q).
Slice 3
There is a constant , depending on a, b, c so that h(2P ) 4h(P ) for all
P E(Q).
Slice 4 (SPOILER)
The index (E(Q) : 2E(Q) is finite.
Justin Scarfy (UBC)
29 / 29