5
$\begingroup$

The Gamma transform of a measure is defined as follows. If $\alpha$ is a $\mathbf{Z}_p$-valued measure on $\mathbf{Z}_p$, then the Gamma transform of $\alpha$ is: $$\Gamma_{\alpha}(s) = \int_{\mathbf{Z}_p^{\times}} \langle x \rangle^s \, d\alpha(x). $$ So the Gamma transform takes as input a measure $\alpha$, and returns an analytic function of the variable $s$, which we call $\Gamma_{\alpha}(s)$. But we can also think of the Gamma transform in a different way: as taking as input a power series and returning as output a power series. Namely:

  • as input, the Gamma transform takes in the power series $F_{\alpha}(T)$ corresponding to the measure $\alpha$
  • as output, the Gamma transform returns the power series $G$ such that $G((1+p)^s - 1) = \Gamma_{\alpha}(s)$.

My question is: can one explicitly describe the Gamma transform as a map from power series to power series? That is, given a power series $f(T) = \sum a_nT^n$, is there an explicit formula for the power series expansion of $\Gamma_F(T)$ in terms of the power series expansion of $F(T)$?

Here is my motivation for asking this. Washington has a very nice article, "On Sinnott's Proof of the Vanishing of the lwasawa Invariant $\mu_p$", where he gives a different proof of the Ferrero–Washington Theorem, inspired by a proof of Sinnott. On page 3, Washington does a few calculations with power series and says that "this is essentially the Gamma-transform". But I don't know what the Gamma transform looks like as a map from power series to power series, so I don't understand what that comment means. It seems to lie at the heart of the proof, so I want to ask this question to make sense of that step in the paper.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

6
$\begingroup$

This is a hard problem (and one which is easily overlooked by the unwary)! Just to be clear, I'll summarize (how I think about) the problem: as a relation between additive and multiplicative Fourier transforms. We start with a measure $\mu$, i.e. a linear map

$\mu$: (continuous functions on $\mathbf{Z}_p$) $\to \mathbf{Z}_p$.

For any $t$ with $|t| < 1$, there is a unique character $\kappa_t$ of $\mathbf{Z}_p$ as an additive group which sends 1 to $1 + t$; and we have $\mu(\kappa_T) = F_\mu(T)$ for some power series $F_\mu(T) \in \mathbf{Z}_p[[T]]$: the additive Fourier transform of $\mu$.

On the other hand, for each $u$ with $|u| < 1$, there is also a character $\chi_u$ of $\mathbf{Z}_p^\times$ as a multiplicative group, which is trivial on roots of unity and sends $1 + p$ to $1 + u$. This is given by $\mu(\chi_u) = G_\mu(u)$ for some power series $G_\mu \in \mathbf{Z}_p[[U]]$: the multiplicative Fourier transform of $\mu$. (I am deliberately using a different name for the variable here!)

Your question is, then, how $F_\mu$ and $G_\mu$ are related. The answer is: "not in any straightforward way". For a given $t$, the functions $\chi_u$ and $\kappa_u$ are totally different as functions on $\mathbf{Z}_p$, so the values of $F_\mu$ and $G_\mu$ at a specific $u$ do not determine each other. On the other hand, if $\mu$ is supported in $1 + p\mathbf{Z}_p$ (so we lose nothing by restricting), then the two series $F_\mu$ and $G_\mu$ do determine each other: we get a bijection (the "Mellin transform") $$\mathfrak{M}: (1 + T) \cdot \mathbf{Z}_p[[(1+T)^p - 1]] \longleftrightarrow \mathbf{Z}_p[[U]]$$ which is a bijection of additive groups mapping $F_\mu(T)$ to $G_\mu(U)$ (but not respecting multiplication on either side). As an example, if $\mu$ is the Dirac measure sending a function to its value at $a$, for some $a \in 1 + p\mathbf{Z}_p$, then $F_\mu(T) = (1 + T)^a$, and $G_\mu(U) = (1 + U)^{log_p(a) / log_p(1 + p)}$. (This formula actually determines $\mathfrak{M}$ uniquely, since the Dirac measures are dense.)

One can pull various information about the power series through this isomorphism -- for instance, the Iwasawa $\lambda$ and $\mu$-invariants of the two series are the same, and the Newton polygons coincide beyond a certain point (Sarah Zerbes and I proved this in an old paper of ours). But there is no simple formula that would allow you to read off the coefficients of $F_\mu$ from those of $G_\mu$ or vice versa.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ thank you! this is immensely helpful. as a clarification: is the Gamma transform of the measure $\mu$ referring to the power series $G_{\mu}(T)$ or $F_{\mu}(T)$? $\endgroup$ May 7, 2022 at 4:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ That depends on the source, but I would guess that "Gamma transform" means either the power series $G_\mu$ or the analytic function $s \mapsto G_\mu( (1 + p)^s - 1)$. $\endgroup$ May 7, 2022 at 6:46

Your Answer

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.