2
$\begingroup$

I want to understand how we construct from a modular form $f$ its symmetric power function $Sym^rf.$ I read that there is a particular representation that does this but I am not familiar with this notion so can you explain to me or give me a reference that helps me to understand clearly this application ? Best wishes, Khadija

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

The standard casual usage of this terminology is itself confusing. To be a little formal, for a modular/automorphic form $f$ on $GL_2$, the $L$-function (or at least the good-prime factors) looks like $L(s,f)=\prod_p 1/\det(1_2-p^{-s}A_p)$ where $A_p$ is a two-by-two matrix (or conjugacy class thereof). This gives the quadratic-in-$p^{-s}$ denominator we expect. The symmetric $r$-th power $L$-functions is directly described as a Dirichlet series with Euler product as $$ L(s,f,{\rm Sym}^r) \;=\; \prod_p {1\over \det(1_r-p^{-s}{\rm Sym}^r A_p)} $$ That is, the symmetric power is that of the two-by-two matrices giving local-at-$p$ information.

Yes, it is conjectured (Langlands functoriality) that any such multilinear algebra operations on the local data $A_p$ produces the standard $L$-function attached to a cuspform on $GL_n$ of the right size to have the (good-prime) $L$-factors be of the proper degree in $p^{-s}$. This is not known in many cases...

That is, on one hand, the symmetric power $L$-function is set up rather trivially and definitionally, via the symmetric power of the two-dimensional repn of $GL_2$, in which the local data $A_p$ sits, for every $p$. On the other hand, while we imagine/hope that there really is an automorphic form whose standard $L$-function is that "defined" one, we do not know that this is so. That is, we do not generally know that there is an automorphic representation producing that $L$-function.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ indeed this is part of a general picture where constructing new L-functions by finite-dimensional representations is usually pretty easy, but finding the correspond automorphic representations is usually incredibly hard. $\endgroup$
    – Will Sawin
    Commented Jul 17, 2015 at 14:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @paul garett: Do we still not know that the symmetric square of an automorphic rep of $\mathrm{GL}_2$ is automorphic? Why doesn't the paper of Gelbart and Jacquet from 1978 (math.columbia.edu/~hj/Forms%20on%20GL(2)%20and%20GL(3).pdf) prove this? C.f. bottom of p.1 of discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1509367/7/… $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 1 at 9:53
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidCorwin, oh, yes. And, also, in the 1980's or soon after, Ramakrishnan proved automorphy of the tensor product on SL_2... And, by now, I think a few other special cases. I've not kept up. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 1 at 16:33

You must log in to answer this question.

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