Weierstrass $wp$-function defines a map from the torus to an elliptic curve. Why is it injective?












2












$begingroup$


For $L$ a lattice in $mathbb C$, the Weierstrass $wp$-function is the meromorphic function



$$wp(z) = frac{1}{z^2} + sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L}frac{1}{(z-lambda)^2} - frac{1}{lambda^2}$$
It can be shown to satisfy the differential equation $wp'(z) = 4wp(z)^3 - g_2wp(z) - g_3$, where



$$g_2 = 60 sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L} frac{1}{lambda^4}$$



$$g_3 = 120 sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L} frac{1}{lambda^6}$$
If $E$ is the elliptic curve in $mathbb P^2$ defined by the homogeneous polynomial $y^2z = 4x^3 - g_2xz^2-g_3z^3$, then



$$F(z) = begin{cases} (wp(z);wp'(z);1) & textrm{if }znotin L \ (0;1;0) & textrm{if } z in L end{cases}$$



can be shown to define a holomorphic function $mathbb C rightarrow E$. Since $mathscr P$ and $mathscr P'$ are well defined on $mathbb C/L$, so is $F$, and $F$ induces a holomorphic function



$$bar{F}: mathbb C /L rightarrow E$$
which is automatically surjective, because $F$ is an open map (being holomorphic and nonconstant), and $mathbb C/L$ and $E$ are compact. I want to say that $bar{F}$ is a biholomorphism, which is equivalent to saying $bar{F}$ is injective.



How do we know that $bar{F}$ is injective?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    2












    $begingroup$


    For $L$ a lattice in $mathbb C$, the Weierstrass $wp$-function is the meromorphic function



    $$wp(z) = frac{1}{z^2} + sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L}frac{1}{(z-lambda)^2} - frac{1}{lambda^2}$$
    It can be shown to satisfy the differential equation $wp'(z) = 4wp(z)^3 - g_2wp(z) - g_3$, where



    $$g_2 = 60 sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L} frac{1}{lambda^4}$$



    $$g_3 = 120 sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L} frac{1}{lambda^6}$$
    If $E$ is the elliptic curve in $mathbb P^2$ defined by the homogeneous polynomial $y^2z = 4x^3 - g_2xz^2-g_3z^3$, then



    $$F(z) = begin{cases} (wp(z);wp'(z);1) & textrm{if }znotin L \ (0;1;0) & textrm{if } z in L end{cases}$$



    can be shown to define a holomorphic function $mathbb C rightarrow E$. Since $mathscr P$ and $mathscr P'$ are well defined on $mathbb C/L$, so is $F$, and $F$ induces a holomorphic function



    $$bar{F}: mathbb C /L rightarrow E$$
    which is automatically surjective, because $F$ is an open map (being holomorphic and nonconstant), and $mathbb C/L$ and $E$ are compact. I want to say that $bar{F}$ is a biholomorphism, which is equivalent to saying $bar{F}$ is injective.



    How do we know that $bar{F}$ is injective?










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      2












      2








      2





      $begingroup$


      For $L$ a lattice in $mathbb C$, the Weierstrass $wp$-function is the meromorphic function



      $$wp(z) = frac{1}{z^2} + sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L}frac{1}{(z-lambda)^2} - frac{1}{lambda^2}$$
      It can be shown to satisfy the differential equation $wp'(z) = 4wp(z)^3 - g_2wp(z) - g_3$, where



      $$g_2 = 60 sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L} frac{1}{lambda^4}$$



      $$g_3 = 120 sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L} frac{1}{lambda^6}$$
      If $E$ is the elliptic curve in $mathbb P^2$ defined by the homogeneous polynomial $y^2z = 4x^3 - g_2xz^2-g_3z^3$, then



      $$F(z) = begin{cases} (wp(z);wp'(z);1) & textrm{if }znotin L \ (0;1;0) & textrm{if } z in L end{cases}$$



      can be shown to define a holomorphic function $mathbb C rightarrow E$. Since $mathscr P$ and $mathscr P'$ are well defined on $mathbb C/L$, so is $F$, and $F$ induces a holomorphic function



      $$bar{F}: mathbb C /L rightarrow E$$
      which is automatically surjective, because $F$ is an open map (being holomorphic and nonconstant), and $mathbb C/L$ and $E$ are compact. I want to say that $bar{F}$ is a biholomorphism, which is equivalent to saying $bar{F}$ is injective.



      How do we know that $bar{F}$ is injective?










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      For $L$ a lattice in $mathbb C$, the Weierstrass $wp$-function is the meromorphic function



      $$wp(z) = frac{1}{z^2} + sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L}frac{1}{(z-lambda)^2} - frac{1}{lambda^2}$$
      It can be shown to satisfy the differential equation $wp'(z) = 4wp(z)^3 - g_2wp(z) - g_3$, where



      $$g_2 = 60 sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L} frac{1}{lambda^4}$$



      $$g_3 = 120 sumlimits_{0 neq lambda in L} frac{1}{lambda^6}$$
      If $E$ is the elliptic curve in $mathbb P^2$ defined by the homogeneous polynomial $y^2z = 4x^3 - g_2xz^2-g_3z^3$, then



      $$F(z) = begin{cases} (wp(z);wp'(z);1) & textrm{if }znotin L \ (0;1;0) & textrm{if } z in L end{cases}$$



      can be shown to define a holomorphic function $mathbb C rightarrow E$. Since $mathscr P$ and $mathscr P'$ are well defined on $mathbb C/L$, so is $F$, and $F$ induces a holomorphic function



      $$bar{F}: mathbb C /L rightarrow E$$
      which is automatically surjective, because $F$ is an open map (being holomorphic and nonconstant), and $mathbb C/L$ and $E$ are compact. I want to say that $bar{F}$ is a biholomorphism, which is equivalent to saying $bar{F}$ is injective.



      How do we know that $bar{F}$ is injective?







      complex-analysis elliptic-curves riemann-surfaces complex-manifolds






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 17 '18 at 1:45









      D_SD_S

      13.9k61553




      13.9k61553






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          [I will treat $wp$ and related functions always as functions with domain $mathbb{C}/L$, rather than $mathbb{C}$.]



          First, note that $wp$ has degree $2$: its only pole is a double pole at $0$, so it takes every value in $mathbb{C}cup{infty}$ twice, with multiplicity. Also, $wp$ is even. So, if $zneq -z$, then $z$ and $-z$ are two preimages of $wp(z)$ and thus must be the only such preimages (and both must have multiplicity $1$). If $z=-z$, we now see that $wp$ is a $2$-to-$1$ mapping in a deleted neighborhood of $z$, so $z$ is a preimage of $wp(z)$ of multiplicity $2$ and is the only such preimage. In particular, we see that for any $z,winmathbb{C}/L$, $wp(z)=wp(w)$ iff $z=pm w$



          So, it suffices to show that $wp'(z)neq wp'(-z)$ for any $z$ such that $zneq -z$. Now $wp'$ is odd, so $wp'(z)=wp'(-z)$ implies $wp'(z)=0$. But $wp'(z)=0$ means that $z$ is a preimage of $wp(z)$ of multiplicity $2$. By the previous paragraph, this implies $z=-z$, as desired.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3043451%2fweierstrass-wp-function-defines-a-map-from-the-torus-to-an-elliptic-curve-wh%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            2












            $begingroup$

            [I will treat $wp$ and related functions always as functions with domain $mathbb{C}/L$, rather than $mathbb{C}$.]



            First, note that $wp$ has degree $2$: its only pole is a double pole at $0$, so it takes every value in $mathbb{C}cup{infty}$ twice, with multiplicity. Also, $wp$ is even. So, if $zneq -z$, then $z$ and $-z$ are two preimages of $wp(z)$ and thus must be the only such preimages (and both must have multiplicity $1$). If $z=-z$, we now see that $wp$ is a $2$-to-$1$ mapping in a deleted neighborhood of $z$, so $z$ is a preimage of $wp(z)$ of multiplicity $2$ and is the only such preimage. In particular, we see that for any $z,winmathbb{C}/L$, $wp(z)=wp(w)$ iff $z=pm w$



            So, it suffices to show that $wp'(z)neq wp'(-z)$ for any $z$ such that $zneq -z$. Now $wp'$ is odd, so $wp'(z)=wp'(-z)$ implies $wp'(z)=0$. But $wp'(z)=0$ means that $z$ is a preimage of $wp(z)$ of multiplicity $2$. By the previous paragraph, this implies $z=-z$, as desired.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$


















              2












              $begingroup$

              [I will treat $wp$ and related functions always as functions with domain $mathbb{C}/L$, rather than $mathbb{C}$.]



              First, note that $wp$ has degree $2$: its only pole is a double pole at $0$, so it takes every value in $mathbb{C}cup{infty}$ twice, with multiplicity. Also, $wp$ is even. So, if $zneq -z$, then $z$ and $-z$ are two preimages of $wp(z)$ and thus must be the only such preimages (and both must have multiplicity $1$). If $z=-z$, we now see that $wp$ is a $2$-to-$1$ mapping in a deleted neighborhood of $z$, so $z$ is a preimage of $wp(z)$ of multiplicity $2$ and is the only such preimage. In particular, we see that for any $z,winmathbb{C}/L$, $wp(z)=wp(w)$ iff $z=pm w$



              So, it suffices to show that $wp'(z)neq wp'(-z)$ for any $z$ such that $zneq -z$. Now $wp'$ is odd, so $wp'(z)=wp'(-z)$ implies $wp'(z)=0$. But $wp'(z)=0$ means that $z$ is a preimage of $wp(z)$ of multiplicity $2$. By the previous paragraph, this implies $z=-z$, as desired.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$
















                2












                2








                2





                $begingroup$

                [I will treat $wp$ and related functions always as functions with domain $mathbb{C}/L$, rather than $mathbb{C}$.]



                First, note that $wp$ has degree $2$: its only pole is a double pole at $0$, so it takes every value in $mathbb{C}cup{infty}$ twice, with multiplicity. Also, $wp$ is even. So, if $zneq -z$, then $z$ and $-z$ are two preimages of $wp(z)$ and thus must be the only such preimages (and both must have multiplicity $1$). If $z=-z$, we now see that $wp$ is a $2$-to-$1$ mapping in a deleted neighborhood of $z$, so $z$ is a preimage of $wp(z)$ of multiplicity $2$ and is the only such preimage. In particular, we see that for any $z,winmathbb{C}/L$, $wp(z)=wp(w)$ iff $z=pm w$



                So, it suffices to show that $wp'(z)neq wp'(-z)$ for any $z$ such that $zneq -z$. Now $wp'$ is odd, so $wp'(z)=wp'(-z)$ implies $wp'(z)=0$. But $wp'(z)=0$ means that $z$ is a preimage of $wp(z)$ of multiplicity $2$. By the previous paragraph, this implies $z=-z$, as desired.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                [I will treat $wp$ and related functions always as functions with domain $mathbb{C}/L$, rather than $mathbb{C}$.]



                First, note that $wp$ has degree $2$: its only pole is a double pole at $0$, so it takes every value in $mathbb{C}cup{infty}$ twice, with multiplicity. Also, $wp$ is even. So, if $zneq -z$, then $z$ and $-z$ are two preimages of $wp(z)$ and thus must be the only such preimages (and both must have multiplicity $1$). If $z=-z$, we now see that $wp$ is a $2$-to-$1$ mapping in a deleted neighborhood of $z$, so $z$ is a preimage of $wp(z)$ of multiplicity $2$ and is the only such preimage. In particular, we see that for any $z,winmathbb{C}/L$, $wp(z)=wp(w)$ iff $z=pm w$



                So, it suffices to show that $wp'(z)neq wp'(-z)$ for any $z$ such that $zneq -z$. Now $wp'$ is odd, so $wp'(z)=wp'(-z)$ implies $wp'(z)=0$. But $wp'(z)=0$ means that $z$ is a preimage of $wp(z)$ of multiplicity $2$. By the previous paragraph, this implies $z=-z$, as desired.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Dec 17 '18 at 2:14









                Eric WofseyEric Wofsey

                189k14216347




                189k14216347






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3043451%2fweierstrass-wp-function-defines-a-map-from-the-torus-to-an-elliptic-curve-wh%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Plaza Victoria

                    Puebla de Zaragoza

                    Musa