Timeline for j-invariant fixed point?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 24, 2016 at 15:31 | comment | added | Adam Epstein | @Igor Yes, see my answer below. | |
| Feb 24, 2016 at 15:17 | answer | added | Adam Epstein | timeline score: 3 | |
| Sep 13, 2012 at 22:20 | vote | accept | Jon Cohen | ||
| Aug 31, 2012 at 8:42 | answer | added | user26102 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Aug 11, 2012 at 13:52 | answer | added | Alexandre Eremenko | timeline score: 2 | |
| Apr 13, 2012 at 8:40 | answer | added | S. Carnahan♦ | timeline score: 9 | |
| Apr 12, 2012 at 17:46 | comment | added | Igor Rivin | @Kevin: is it not possible for the $j$-invariant to have a fixed point ALWAYS (that is, independently of the choice of constant term)? | |
| Apr 12, 2012 at 17:34 | comment | added | Kevin Buzzard | Isn't the $j$-invariant really only "natural" up to the constant term? In other words can't one envisage a mathematical world where we defined the $j'$-invariant, by $j'(x)=j(x)-744$ or $j(x)+53$ or whatever, and this function $j'$ was our "canonical" isomorphism of $Y_0(1)$ with the affine line. This makes your question sound very weird. What I'm saying is that perhaps the $j$-function is not sufficiently natural to make the question "interesting"... | |
| Apr 12, 2012 at 12:50 | history | asked | Jon Cohen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |