Welcome to MathOverflow

Question

4

2

We know that principal congruence subgroups are characteristic in $SL(n,\mathbb Z)$. Suppose $\Gamma$ is a finite index subgroup of $SL(n,\mathbb Z)$ and $\Gamma_m$ is a principal congruence subgroup of level m contained in $\Gamma$. Will it be characteristic in $\Gamma$?

edited Sep 16 2011 at 19:17

asked Sep 6 2011 at 7:00

Poove
195●5

Agol · Accepted Answer · 2011-09-06 20:57:15Z UTC

This is false. Consider the case $n=2$, and let $p$ be a prime. Let $A=\left[\begin{array}{cc}0 & -1 \\ p & 0\end{array}\right] $ be an Atkin-Lehner involution (considered as an element of $PGL_2(\mathbb{Q})$), and consider the subgroup $\Gamma_0(p) = \{ \left[\begin{array}{cc}a & b \\ c & d\end{array}\right]\in SL_2(\mathbb{Z}) | c\equiv 0(\mod p) \}$. Then one may check that for $B\in \Gamma_0(p)$, $A^{-1} B A = \left[\begin{array}{cc}d & -c/p \\ -pb & a\end{array}\right] \in \Gamma_0(p)$, so $A\in Aut(\Gamma_0(p))$. Also, the principal congruence subgroup $\Gamma(p) \leq \Gamma_0(p)$. However, consider the matrix $C=\left[\begin{array}{cc}1 & 0 \\ p & 1\end{array}\right] \in \Gamma(p)$. Then one has $A^{-1} C A = \left[\begin{array}{cc}1 & -1 \\ 0 & 1\end{array}\right] \notin \Gamma(p)$. Thus, the subgroup $\Gamma(p)\leq \Gamma_0(p)$ is not characteristic. This extends to all $n$, taking the appropriate congruence subgroup by extending trivially $\mod p$.

Igor Rivin · Answer 2 · 2011-09-06 14:03:54Z UTC

-1

As noted by in the answer to this question:

http://mathoverflow.net/questions/57235/automorphisms-of-sl-n-mathbbz

by @Guntram, Margulis super rigidity implies that an authomorphism of a lattice (which a finite index subgroup of $SL(n, \mathbb{Z})$ is) extends to an automorphism of $SL(n, \mathbb{Q}).$ So, the answer to your previous question

http://mathoverflow.net/questions/62446/principal-congruence-subgroups-of-sln-mathbbz

works just as well here.

answered Sep 6 2011 at 14:03

Igor Rivin
31.1k●3●37●71

That is for $n\ge 3$. For $n=1$ the result is also true, but for $n=2$ a finite index subgroup may not contain a congruence subgroup at all. – Mark Sapir Sep 6 2011 at 14:15

@Mark: yes, I was assuming higher rank (since, as you say, for $n=2$ the situation is completely different...) – Igor Rivin Sep 6 2011 at 14:27

1

$\Gamma_m$ isn't characteristic in $SL_n(Q)$. It isn't even normal. Also, superrigidity only says that an automorphism of a lattice virtually extends to an automorphism of the ambient group. – Ben Wieland Sep 6 2011 at 18:41

1

I never said $\Gamma_m$ was characteristic in $SL_n(\mathbb{Q}).$ – Igor Rivin Sep 6 2011 at 19:58

@Igor Rivin: Any automorphism of $\Gamma$ extends(super rigidity) to an automorphism of $SL(n,\mathbb R)$, for n>2. But it not necessarily restricts as an automorphism to $SL(n,\mathbb Z)$, instead it restricts to the normalizer of $\Gamma$ in $SL(n,\mathbb R)$, Which is again a proper finite index subgroup of $SL(n,\mathbb Z)$. So mathoverflow.net/questions/62446/… doesn't say $\Gamma_m$ is characteristic in $\Gamma$. – Poove Sep 8 2011 at 21:09

Suppose $\Gamma_m$ is a principal congruence subgroup of level m contained in a finite index subgroup $\Gamma$ of $SL(n,\mathbb Z)$. Is $\Gamma_m$ characteristic in $\Gamma$?

Remember to vote up questions/answers you find interesting or helpful (requires 15 reputation points)

2 Answers

You can accept an answer to one of your own questions by clicking the check mark next to it. This awards 15 reputation points to the person who answered and 2 reputation points to you.