11
$\begingroup$

I'm currently learning about the Kubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function and I'm noticing that many people view the Kubota–Leopoldt $p$-adic $L$-function as a measure as opposed to a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series.

My question is: What is the motivation behind viewing a $p$-adic $L$-function as a measures? It seems a bit unnatural, at least from a beginner's perspective. Why is it natural to view $p$-adic $L$-functions as measures (as opposed to, say, as a $p$-adic analytic function or as a power series), and what is the advantage of viewing them as measures?

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If $E$ is a supersingular elliptic curve at $p$ then the roots of the Frobenius characteristic polynomial at $p$ are not necessarily units, so you can construct two different p-adic L-functions (see Pollack's paper). Bernadette Perrin Riou finds a way to define a p-adic L-function module, which is contained (up to details) in the p-adic distributions module. So some interpollation only gives you distributions. Hence my understanding is that the nicest generalization of the simplest interpolation cases is the generalization from the point of view of measure. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 25, 2022 at 9:13
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Since it is fairly easy to go from one way of writing $p$-adic $L$-functions to the other, I am not sure there are any direct advantages, but conceptually it is important. I think it is analogous to the view point in Tate's thesis for complex $L$-functions. There we see a zeta-function as a function of a quasi-character like $\vert\cdot\vert^s$, which is obtained by integration. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 25, 2022 at 13:33

1 Answer 1

9
$\begingroup$

This is extremely late, but hopefully it's still of some use/interest to you.

p-adic L-functions are usually described as 'p-adic interpolations of special values of L-functions'. For Kubota--Leopoldt's p-adic interpolation of the Riemann zeta function, the relevant special values are all the values $\zeta(1-k)$, where $k$ is a positive integer.

Riemann zeta is a complex meromorphic function $\zeta : \mathbb{C} \to \mathbb{C}$. Probably the most naive hope is that you can construct a p-adic L-function as an $p$-adic meromorphic function $\zeta_p : \mathbb{Z}_p \to \mathbb{C}_p$ with the appropriate interpolation property, namely that $\zeta_p(1-k) = (*) \zeta(1-k)$ for all $k > 0$ and some correction factor $(*)$. Unfortunately this doesn't quite work: there is no single such function that captures all the special values. In particular, $\mathbb{Z}_p$ is the 'wrong' domain for the p-adic L-function.

From complex analytic functions to complex-valued measures: To fix this, as Chris mentioned in his comment, we use Tate's measure-theoretic interpretation of L-functions. You can identify $\mathbb{C}$ with the space of characters $\mathbb{R}_{>0} \to \mathbb{C}$, where $s$ corresponds to the character $x \mapsto x^s$. Then we view an $L$-function as a function on $\mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{cts}}(\mathbb{R}_{>0},\mathbb{C})$, which looks like a $\mathbb{C}$-valued measure on $\mathbb{R}_{>0}$. You can expand this by adding in the finite places to obtain a measure-theoretic description on the ideles $\mathbb{A}^\times$, capturing not only the original $L$-function but all of its twists by Dirichlet characters.

p-adic measures: In the p-adic world, we might instead consider $\mathbb{C}_p$-valued measures on the ideles. For topological reasons this essentially reduces (up to finite-order twist) to considering measures on $\mathbb{Z}_p^\times$, and - hey presto! - you get the measure-theoretic language in which you see statements about p-adic L-functions. Now, there is a single (pseudo-)measure $\mu$ on $\mathbb{Z}_p^\times$ that does interpolate all the special values $\zeta(1-k)$. (Here pseudo-measure = 'measure with simple poles'). In particular, we have $$\int_{\mathbb{Z}_p^\times} x^k \cdot \mu = (1-p^{k-1})\zeta(1-k)$$ for all $k > 0$, a very clean interpolation.

p-adic measures to p-adic analytic functions: From this, one can indeed recover a description as an analytic function. There is a correspondence (Fourier or Amice transform) between $\mathbb{C}_p$-valued measures on $\mathbb{Z}_p^\times$ and bounded rigid analytic functions on $\mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{cts}}(\mathbb{Z}_p^\times,\mathbb{C}_p)$. The latter is the $\mathbb{C}_p$-points of the weight space $\mathcal{W}$, that shows up in the theory of p-adic families of modular forms/Hida theory/the eigencurve. The p-adic L-function, then, is naturally a p-adic meromorphic function on $\mathcal{W}(\mathbb{C}_p)$, with at worst simple poles.

Now, what about that original naive guess? There is a theory in this direction; it just isn't as conceptually nice. Note $\mathcal{W}(\mathbb{C}_p)$ breaks up into $p-1$ connected components (if $p$ is odd), each indexed by a character $\psi$ of $(\mathbb{Z}/p)^\times$. The possible characters are $\omega^i$, where $\omega$ is the Teichmuller character and $0 \leq i \leq k-2$. On the connected component corresponding to a fixed $\omega^i$, we are then reduced to considering characters of $1+p\mathbb{Z}_p$. This naturally contains $\mathbb{Z}_p$, where $s \in \mathbb{Z}_p$ corresponds to the character $x \mapsto x^s := \mathrm{exp}(s \ \mathrm{log}(x))$. (Note we're 'reversing' the process we adopted over $\mathbb{C}$!) Define, then, $$\zeta_{p,i} : \mathbb{Z}_p \to \mathbb{C}_p, \ \ \ s \mapsto \int_{\mathbb{Z}_p^\times} \omega^i(x) \langle x \rangle^{1-s} \cdot \mu,$$ where $\langle - \rangle : \mathbb{Z}_p^\times \to 1 + p\mathbb{Z}_p$ is the projection. We get $p-1$ p-adic meromorphic functions $\zeta_{p,0},...,\zeta_{p,k-2}$ on $\mathbb{Z}_p$. Apart from a simple pole for $i=0$, each $\zeta_{p,i}$ is a power series, as you might hope. The function $\zeta_{p,i}$ has the following interpolation: $$ \zeta_{p,i}(1-k) = (1-p^{k-1})\zeta(1-k) \ \ \ \ \forall k \equiv i \mod p-1.$$ In particular, each $\zeta_{p,i}$ only sees some of the special L-values, and you need to consider the collection of all $p-1$ of them -- or, in other words, the measure/analytic function on $\mathcal{W}(\mathbb{C}_p)$ -- to see all of them.

Twists by Dirichlet characters: Here's another benefit, that to me is an absolute clincher for the measure-theoretic language. Let $\chi$ be any Dirichlet character of $p$-power conductor. Then the measure-theoretic p-adic L-function also satisfies the following magic interpolation: $$\int_{\mathbb{Z}_p^\times} \chi(x)x^k \cdot \mu = (1- \chi(p)p^{k-1}) L(\chi,1-k),$$ for any $k > 0$. In other words, the measure-theoretic object sees so many more L-values than the corresponding analytic function on $\mathbb{Z}_p$. (You can write down twisted analytic functions on $\mathbb{Z}_p$ that each sees some of these $L$-values; but somehow the single measure-theoretic object is parcelling together an infinite number of interesting analytic functions on $\mathbb{Z}_p$ into one package!) This is very much in the spirit of Tate's original observations, in which an L-function and its twists get parceled into the same measure-theoretic object in complex analytic terms.

Everything I've written here is explained in more detail in the notes I wrote with Joaquin Rodrigues on Kubota--Leopoldt: https://da380198-735d-4021-b7f2-6247f0586806.filesusr.com/ugd/946d8a_60256058271940f7b9d2c14dc721bf91.pdf

Generalisations: If you weren't already convinced, here's one final observation. If you want to construct p-adic L-functions for motives/automorphic forms over more general base fields, then the shape of the theory changes. Here one can observe that $\mathbb{Z}_p^\times$ is either the ray class group $\mathrm{Cl}_{\mathbb{Q}}^+(p^\infty)$, or the Galois group of the maximal abelian extension of $\mathbb{Q}$ unramified outside $p\infty$. For a number field $F$, measures on $\mathbb{Z}_p^\times$ generalise to measures/distributions on $\mathrm{Cl}_F^+(p^\infty)$, or on the Galois group of the maximal abelian extension of $F$ unramified outside $p\infty$. This is a very clean generalisation; for example, if $F$ is imaginary quadratic, then you get two-variable measures, with cyclotomic and anticyclotomic variation. This admits a clean description in terms of analytic functions on the corresponding weight space. The analogous generalisation of analytic functions on $\mathbb{Z}_p$ is a mess that doesn't seem natural to me at all.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Great answer, and good to see you here! $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 1, 2023 at 0:01
  • $\begingroup$ This is a really helpful answer, thank you! The fact that the KL p-adic L-function as a measure interpolates all the special values while the analytic functions only interpolate some of them is a very persuasive argument. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 1, 2023 at 4:21

You must log in to answer this question.

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