1) Defintion :(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

A congruence subgroup of level ##N## is one that contains the principal subgroup at level ##N## which is defined as ## (a b c d) \in SL_2(Z) : a,d\equiv 1 (mod N), b,c \equiv 0 (mod N) ## (apologies ## ( a b c d)## is a 2x2 matrix.)

The Hecke group is one such example given by ##T_{0}(N) = ( *, *) ( 0, *) ## (apologies again that's the first row and second row of the matrix respecitvely).

So is my understanding of these definitions correct: that ##T(N) \in T_0(N)## since can choose ##( *, *) = (1,0) ## and ##(0,d) = (0,1) ## to give the required ##a,d \equiv 1 (mod N), b,c \equiv 0 (mod N) ## ?or eg ##(*,*)= (cN+1, cN) ##, ##c## is a constant, and then both of these elements divide by ##N##? (that's the top row of the matrix ##\in## ##SL_2(Z)## , apologies again.

2) In my notes I have that the 'corresponding' condifiton for a function ##f(t)## to be modular for ##T_0(N)## differs to the ##SL_2(Z)## condition that must be holomorphic at ##\infty##,( from ##f(t)##can be written as an expansion as ##f(t)= \sum\limits^{\infty}_{n=0} a_{n} q^n ##, to :

##f## is 'holomporphic at all cusps of ##T_0 (N) ## , that is the limit

##lim _{q \to 0} (ct+d)^{-k} f( \alpha t) ## exists for all ##\alpha## \in ##SL_2(Z)##.

And that this only needs to be checked at finitely many ##\alpha##, for those which map the (inequivalent) cusps to ##\infty##.

So i don't really understand why this is the condition, nor why it is sufficient to only check the ##\alpha## that map the cusps to ##\infty##.

Here's what I know:

- In ##SL_2(Z) ## all cusps are ##T##-equivalent to ##\infty##, since all rational numbers are, and so this is why it suffices to only check holomorphicity at ##\infty## for ##SL_2(Z)## ?

- Whereas for ##T _0 (N) ## fewer points are ##T##-equivalent and so ##T_0 ## can have other cusps at the rational numbes, that is, the cusps can no longer be mapped to ##\infty##. So we check the expansion of ##f## mapped to ##\infty## from these inequivalent cusps - however I don't really under where the condition comes from. Why is the idea to map to ##\infty##? Why is the condition working with maps ##\in SL_2(Z)## , how is this ok?

3) This is proabably a stupid question but in my notes it says:

##T _0 (N) ## touches the real axis at the point ##0##. In fact, such a behavior will happen for any ##T_0(N)##. Any fundamental domain for## T_0(N)## will touch the the real axis in ﬁnitely many rational points, and we call these points (together with the inﬁnite cusp ##∞##), the (equivalence classes) of cusps of ##T_0(N)##.

I don't understand how the cusp at ##0## and ##\infty## are called equivalence classes, since ##0## is mapped to ##\infty## by ##S## , however, for e.g ##T_0 (p) ## ##s \notin T_0(p) ## and so the points ##0## and ##\infty## are not ##T##-equivalent...

I'm pretty confused.

Any clarification what so ever greatly appreciated, ta.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# I Congruence Subgroups and Modular Forms Concept Questions

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads for Congruence Subgroups Modular |
---|

A Why a Lie Group is closed in GL(n,C)? |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**