Timeline for Explicit expressions for "weakly holomorphic" modular forms of weight 1
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 1, 2022 at 14:34 | vote | accept | Monsieur Periné | ||
| May 31, 2022 at 6:15 | comment | added | David Loeffler | For the construction of Tate I referred to, see $\S9$ of these seminar notes: math.stanford.edu/~conrad/vigregroup/vigre03/moduli.pdf | |
| May 31, 2022 at 6:03 | comment | added | David Loeffler | Oops, that was wrong, sorry. Here is a fix. There is a construction of Tate giving a moduli space for pairs $(E, P)$, over an arbitrary base scheme, such that $P$ does not have order 1, 2 or 3. Over this space the universal elliptic curve has a Weierstrass equation. So we can pull back this universal Weierstrass equation to any modular curve. | |
| May 30, 2022 at 23:47 | comment | added | Monsieur Periné | @DavidLoeffler Is this a particular property of the Hodge bundle? I don't think it's true in general that every line bundle over an affine curve is trivial (algebraically). | |
| May 30, 2022 at 22:26 | answer | added | Henri Cohen | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 30, 2022 at 21:09 | answer | added | David Loeffler | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 30, 2022 at 19:12 | comment | added | David Loeffler | Y(N) is affine, so the Hodge bundle is trivial automatically (modulo stackiness issues for N = 1 or 2 which mean the bundle doesn't exist) | |
| May 30, 2022 at 16:28 | history | edited | Monsieur Periné | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 34 characters in body
|
| S May 30, 2022 at 11:47 | review | First questions | |||
| May 30, 2022 at 13:56 | |||||
| S May 30, 2022 at 11:47 | history | asked | Monsieur Periné | CC BY-SA 4.0 |