21
$\begingroup$

The degree 3 modular equation for the Jacobi modular invariant $$ \lambda(q)=\biggl(\frac{\sum_{n\in\mathbb Z}q^{(n+1/2)^2}}{\sum_{n\in\mathbb Z}q^{n^2}}\biggr)^4 $$ is given by $$ (\alpha^2+\beta^2+6\alpha\beta)^2-16\alpha\beta\bigl(4(1+\alpha\beta)-3(\alpha+\beta)\bigr)^2=0, $$ where $\alpha=\lambda(q)$ and $\beta=\lambda(q^3)$. This has a very simple rational parametrization $$ \alpha=\frac{p(2+p)^3}{(1+2p)^3}, \qquad \beta=\frac{p^3(2+p)}{1+2p} $$ (with $p$ ranging from 0 to 1 as as $q$ changes in the range).

By certain heuristical reasons (which are hidden behind analysis in my recent joint work), I expect that modularity can occur in some other similar parameterizations. In particular, the expansions $$ \mu(q) = 4096q - 294912q^2 + 12238848q^3 - 379846656q^4 $$ $$ + 9737920512q^5 - 217011585024q^6 + 4333573472256q^7 - 79091807551488q^8 $$ $$ + 1337378422542336q^9 - 21157503871942656q^{10} + 315428695901356032q^{11} $$ $$ - 4455786006742302720q^{12} + 59885350975571779584q^{13} + O(q^{14}) $$ and $$ p = 4q + 12q^2 - 48q^3 + 156q^4 - 12q^5 - 6576q^6 + 78144q^7 - 607812q^8 $$ $$ + 3017364q^9 + 156q^{10} - 208502832q^{11} + 2876189520q^{12} - 24837585384q^{13} + O(q^{14}) $$ (which, of course, can be further extended) satisfy $$ \mu(q)=\frac{p(4+p)^5}{(1+4p)^5} \quad\text{and}\quad \mu(q^5)=\frac{p^5(4+p)}{1+4p}. $$ (These relations define $p$ and $\mu$ in a unique way.)

Is there any way to identify $\mu(q)$ with a known modular function, or to show that $\mu(q)$ is not modular at all?

Thanks! Best wishes already from 2011.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ If $\mu$ were modular then presumably there would be an algebraic relation between $\mu(q)$ and $\mu(q^n)$ for all positive integer values of $n$, the relation being of degree something like the index of $\Gamma_0(n)$ in $SL(2,Z)$ (but perhaps this isn't precisely right---the exact degree would depend on the level of $\mu$). So you could expand $\mu$ out to $O(q^1000)$ and then it would be easy to search for these relations. If it doesn't work out, i.e. if $n=5$ is OK but the others don't seem to come out, then this is evidence to suggest that $\mu$ isn't modular. $\endgroup$ Jan 1, 2011 at 13:24
  • $\begingroup$ @Kevin, thanks for this hint. Because I have no guess about the index of the underlying group in $\Gamma(1)$, I am not sure that $O(q^{1000})$ would be enough. I didn't try to expand so far (the coefficients grow extremely fast), but what I did (up to $O(q^{50})$) was verifying a possible algebraic relation between $\mu(q)$ and the classical $j$-invariant. None was found... $\endgroup$ Jan 1, 2011 at 13:52

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.