Timeline for Antiholomorphic cusp forms of negative weight
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
|
|
| Jul 13, 2016 at 4:51 | answer | added | Jack Buttcane | timeline score: 0 | |
| Feb 20, 2016 at 11:48 | history | edited | Rex | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 137 characters in body
|
| Feb 19, 2016 at 12:27 | answer | added | David Loeffler | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 19, 2016 at 7:40 | comment | added | Rex | @David: From the article of Clozel, I got the impression that he is considering a non vacuous case, hence, the question. I think I now understand what is going on. For a modular form $f$ of weight $k$, one can construct the function $\varphi_f$ on $G(\mathbb{A})$ which satisfies the property that $\varphi_f(xr(\theta))=e^{-ik\theta}\varphi_f(x)$ where $r(\theta)$ is the $2 \times 2$ matrix given by (Cos $\theta\,$ -Sin $\theta$; Sin $\theta\,$ Cos $\theta$). Now corresponding to $f$ one has $g$ as above, and the point seems to be that $\varphi_g(xr(\theta))=e^{ik\theta}\varphi_g(x)$. | |
| Feb 19, 2016 at 1:54 | comment | added | David Loeffler | Haven't you just proven that it can't? You clearly know that $S_k = 0$ for $k \le -2$ and that $S_k$ is non-zero if and only if $\overline{S_k}$ is; so what is left to say here? | |
| Feb 18, 2016 at 14:35 | history | asked | Rex | CC BY-SA 3.0 |