7
$\begingroup$

Is there an isometric embedding of the modular surface $X(1)=PSL(2,\mathbb{Z})\backslash \,\mathbb{H}$ into the Euclidean 3-space? For all I know this may be an open problem but I am also curious if anyone studied it numerically or maybe even made a physical model of it. (Which would probably look a little scary, with two horns (conical points) and a tail (cusp).)

P.S. To make it clear, I mean a $C^\infty$ embedding outside the conical points.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sounds like an interesting question to investigate. $\endgroup$
    – Deane Yang
    Commented Jul 2, 2020 at 14:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Nitpicking : $X$'s usually denote the compact modular curves, and $Y$'s the ones with cusps, so $Y(1)$ would be the currently standard notation. $\endgroup$
    – BS.
    Commented Jul 9, 2020 at 18:25
  • $\begingroup$ Anyway, +1 for the very natural and interesting question. $\endgroup$
    – BS.
    Commented Jul 9, 2020 at 18:58

2 Answers 2

6
$\begingroup$

There is no isometric immersion, let alone embedding, of $X(1)$ into Euclidean $3$-space. Here is a sketch of an argument:

First, let $\mathbb{H}\subset\mathbb{C}$ be the upper half plane endowed with the standard metric $(\mathrm{d}x^2+\mathrm{d}y^2)/y^2$ where $z = x+ i\,y$ with $y>0$. A fundamental domain for the action of $\mathrm{PSL}(2,\mathbb{Z})$ on $\mathbb{H}$ is then defined by the inequalities $|z|\ge 1$ and $|x|\le \tfrac12$. Then one identifies $\tfrac12+i\,y$ with $-\tfrac12+i\,y$ and $\cos\theta + i\,\sin\theta$ with $-\cos\theta + i\,\sin\theta$. The 'conical points' are $z_2 \equiv i$ (of order $2$) and $z_3 \equiv \tfrac12 + i\tfrac{\sqrt3}2$ of order $3$, and the 'cusp' point is $z_1 \equiv +i\,\infty$.

Now suppose that a smooth isometric immersion $f:X(1)\setminus\{z_1,z_2,z_3\}\to\mathbb{E}^3$ exists. Fix a point $z\in X(1)$ distinct from the three $z_i$. There will be a hyperbolic disk $D_r(z)$ of some radius $r>0$ about $z$ that does not contain any of the $z_i$. Because the Gauss curvature of $X(1)$ is $K=-1$, the convex hull of the $f$-image of $D_r(z)$ will contain an Euclidean ball of some positive radius $R>0$.

Meanwhile, let $\epsilon>0$ be a very small positive number and consider the subset $M_\epsilon\subset X(1)$ that consists of the $z = x+i\,y$ that satisfy $y\le 1/\epsilon$ and $d(z,z_2)\ge \epsilon$ and $d(z,z_3)\ge \epsilon$, where $d(z,w)$ is the hyperbolic distance between $z$ and $w$. This $M_\epsilon$ is a compact smooth surface whose boundary $\partial M_\epsilon$ consists of three disjoint circles:

  1. $C_1$ (the points of the form $z = x+i/\epsilon$), which has length $\epsilon$;

  2. $C_2$ (the points where $d(z,z_2)= \epsilon$), which has length $\pi\sinh\epsilon$, and

  3. $C_3$ (the points where $d(z,z_3) = \epsilon$), which has length $\tfrac23\pi\sinh\epsilon$.

In particular, when $\epsilon>0$ is taken to be sufficiently small, each of these curves has total length less than $4\epsilon$.

Thus, each $f(C_i)$ must therefore lie in an Euclidean ball $B_i$ of radius at most $4\epsilon$. Hence the $f$-image of the boundary $\partial M_\epsilon$ must lie in an infinite 'slab' of thickness at most $4\epsilon$. (Just take a plane that passes through the centers of the three balls $B_i$ of radius $4\epsilon$ and look at the $4\epsilon$-neighborhood of that plane.)

Now, because the Gauss curvature of $M_\epsilon$ is strictly negative, the $f$-image of $M_\epsilon$ must lie within the convex hull of the image of $\partial M_\epsilon$. In particular, it must lie in the infinite slab of thickness at most $4\epsilon$.

However, if we take $\epsilon<R/4$ sufficiently small, the disk $D_r(z)$ will lie entirely within $M_\epsilon$ and hence the $f$-image of $D_r(z)$, whose convex hull contains an Euclidean ball of radius $R$, must lie in an infinite slab of thickness at most $4\epsilon<R$, which is obviously impossible.

Thus, such an $f$ cannot exist.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ About the convex hull, could you give a reference? $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 3, 2020 at 12:25
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexGavrilov: Are you asking about "For an isometric immersion of a compact surface with negative Gauss curvature into $\mathbb{E}^3$, the image lies in the convex hull of the image of the boundary"? This is a common exercise: If $f:M\to\mathbb{E}^3$ is an isometric immersion and $h:\mathbb{E}^3\to\mathbb{R}$ is a linear function such that $h\circ f$ is not positive on $\partial M$, then $h\circ f$ is not positive on $M$ since, otherwise, if $h\circ f$ has a positive maximum at $p\in M$, then $f(M)$ will lie on one side of the image tangent plane at $f(p)$, which is impossible since $K<0$. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 3, 2020 at 14:22
  • $\begingroup$ What about $Y(3)$ ? Conformally, it is a regular tetrahedron without its vertices, quotient of the upper half plane by the torsion-free group $\Gamma(3)$, kernel of the surjective morphism $PSL_2(\mathbb{Z})\to PSL_2(\mathbb{Z}/3)\simeq A_4$. $\endgroup$
    – BS.
    Commented Jul 9, 2020 at 18:31
  • $\begingroup$ That would be a great example ! $\endgroup$
    – BS.
    Commented Jul 9, 2020 at 21:20
  • $\begingroup$ @BS.: Actually, I just realized (silly me) that an isometric immersion of $Y(3)$ is ruled out by Hilbert's Theorem. The point is that the simply-connected cover of $Y(3)$ is the entire Poincaré disk, and Hilbert's Theorem (1901) is that there is no isometric immersion of the entire Poincaré disk into $\mathbb{E}^3$. (Hilbert's Theorem didn't apply to $X(1)$ because of the two conical points. In particular, the composition $\mathbb{H}\to X(1)\to \mathbb{E}^3$ is not an immersion.) $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 10, 2020 at 12:26
1
$\begingroup$

Correction: The following idea doesn't work as stated, because (as Robert points out) the cusp and cones allow points where mean curvature is not defined.

If you could isometrically and smoothly embed the modular surface, you would smoothly and locally isometrically immerse the hyperbolic plane, which is impossible by a theorem of Hilbert.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Actually, Hilbert's theorem only applies to immersions of the entire hyperbolic plane. I don't see how Hilbert's proof would generalize to cover the case of "immersions" that have conical points or 'spikes' (i.e., cusps). For example, the mean curvature need not be smooth or even continuous at the conical points. For comparison, consider that the flat plane modulo the involution $v\mapsto -v$ can be isometrically embedded as a cone in $\mathbb{R}^3$, but the mean curvature blows up at the vertex of the cone even though $K\equiv0$. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 2, 2020 at 14:34
  • $\begingroup$ @RobertBryant Ok, I will leave this up, but it is wrong for the reasons you point out. I think that Hilbert's result can be strengthened to prevent isometric immersions of sufficiently wide strips of the hyperbolic plane, but I am not sure if that is relevant. $\endgroup$
    – Ben McKay
    Commented Jul 2, 2020 at 14:47

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .