Arxiv:1604.08551V6 [Math.NT] 23 Feb 2019 field Conductor 1.1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BURGESS-LIKE SUBCONVEXITY FOR GL1 HAN WU Abstract. We generalize our previous method on subconvexity problem for GL2 × GL1 with cuspidal representations to Eisenstein series, and deduce a Burgess-like subconvex bound for Hecke characters, 1/4−(1−2θ)/16+ǫ i.e., the bound |L(1/2,χ)|≪F,ǫ C(χ) for varying Hecke characters χ over a number field F with analytic conductor C(χ). As a main tool, we apply the extended theory of regularized integral due to Zagier developed in a previous paper to obtain the relevant triple product formulas of Eisenstein series. Contents 1. Introduction 1 1.1. Statement of Main Result 1 1.2. Discussion on Method 3 1.3. Notations and Conventions 4 2. Miscellaneous Preliminaries 5 2.1. Extension of Zagier’s Regularized Integral 5 2.2. Regularized Triple Product Formula 7 2.3. Extension of Global Zeta Integral 12 2.4. Classical Vectors in Spherical Series 15 3. Local Estimations 18 3.1. Non Archimedean Places for Exceptional Part 18 3.2. Non Archimedean Places for L4-Norms 19 4. Proof of Main Result 20 4.1. Reduction to Global Period Bound 20 4.2. Reduction to Bound of Truncated Integral 21 4.3. Interlude: Failure of Truncation on Eisenstein series 22 4.4. Regroupment of Generalized Fourier Inversion 23 4.5. Bounds for Each Part 24 5. Complements of Global Estimations 25 5.1. Estimation for Exceptional Part 25 5.2. Estimation for Regularized L4-Norms 28 arXiv:1604.08551v6 [math.NT] 23 Feb 2019 6. Appendix: Dis-adelization in a Special Case 32 Acknowledgement 37 References 37 1. Introduction 1.1. Statement of Main Result. If π is a (cuspidal) automorphic representation of GLd over a number field F with (usual) conductor C(πfin) resp. archimedean analytic conductor C(π∞) resp. analytic conductor C(π) = C(π∞)C(πfin), the absolute convergence for ℜs > 1 of the associated L-function Research partially supported by SNF-grant 200021-125291 and DFG-SNF-grant 00021L 153647 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification [MSC] codes: 11R42 Keywords: subconvexity, L-function over number field, Burgess-type hybrid bound. 1 2 HAN WU L(s, π) and the functional equation implies for any ǫ > 0, via the Phragm´en-Lindel¨of principle together with Iwaniec’s method [7, (19.16)] 1 to establish the necessary bound on the vertical line with ℜs =1+ ǫ with small ǫ> 0, the estimation at the central point 1/4+ǫ |L(1/2, π)| ≪F,ǫ C(π) , called the convex bound or the convexity. If the Riemann Hypothesis holds for L(s, π), then we have the optimal bound ǫ |L(1/2, π)| ≪F,ǫ C(π) , called the Lindel¨of Hypothesis. Reducing the exponent of C(π) from 1/4+ ǫ to 1/4 − δ + ǫ for some positive constant 0 <δ< 1/4 is called the subconvexity problem. More generally, for Q = C(π) resp. C(πfin) resp. C(π∞), an estimation 1/4−δ+ǫ |L(1/2, π)| ≪F,ǫ,C(π)/Q Q is called a (hybrid) subconvex bound resp. subconvex bound in the level aspect resp. subconvex bound in the archimedean aspect. In the simplest case, the first and most famous subconvex bound was obtained for the Riemann zeta- function by Weyl [21] (see for example [16, §6.6]) 1/4−1/12+ǫ ζ(1/2+ it) ≪ǫ |t| , t ∈ R, which can be considered as (a special case of) a subconvex bound in the archimedean aspect for the Dirichlet L-functions. If χ is a Dirichlet character of modulus q = C(χfin) ∈ N, Burgess [4] established his famous subconvex bound it 1 − 1 +ǫ |L(1/2,χ|·|A )| = |L(1/2+ it,χ)| ≪t,ǫ q 4 16 . Later, Heath-Brown [9, 10] generalized Burgess’ result to include the t-aspect as the following hybrid bound 1 − 1 +ǫ |L(1/2+ it,χ)| ≪ǫ (q(|t| + 2)) 4 16 . Ever since, the subconvexity problem has become a venerable problem in analytic number theory, in which both the optimal subconvex saving δ and the largest class of L-function mark the limit of techniques of analytic number theory. The saving δ =1/12 resp. 1/16 seem to be two natural barriers in the literature. They are called Weyl-type resp. Burgess-type subconvex bound for this historic reason. Moreover, it was discovered that for d > 1 the subconvexity problem of L(s, π) is intimately related with various equidistribution problems [6, 19]. More such relations can be found in [13, Lecture 5], as well as an application of the subconvexity problem in the level aspect for d = 1 and F imaginary quadratic. In this paper, we restrict to the case d = 1, i.e., when π = χ is a Hecke character. In the case F = Q, many strong results are known besides the above bounds by Weyl, Burgess and Heath-Brown (for example [11]), especially in some special cases. For example, in [11] the case of q prime and of hybrid type is considered; in [15] with very strong result of sub-Weyl type, the case of q = pn a prime power and for the q-aspect is treated. Another interesting special case is when we restrict to χ = χq the quadratic character (and for q special, say square-free). Bounds of better quality than Burgess’ are known to hold for Weyl-type. For example, among many other good results Conrey and Iwaniec [5, Corollary 1.5] obtained 1 − 1 +ǫ |L(1/2+ it,χq)| ≪t,ǫ q 4 12 , which was recently generalized by Young [26, (1.5)] as 1 − 1 +ǫ |L(1/2+ it,χq)| ≪ǫ (q(|t| + 2)) 4 12 . 1The cited argument only treats the case for F = Q but it works for general number fields by replacing the relevant divisor function by the one for ideals of the ring of algebraic integers. BURGESS-LIKE SUBCONVEXITY FOR GL1 3 The above bound was further generalized for cube-free q by Petrow and Young [17]. Over a general number field, the best known result is the main theorem of Soehne [20, p.227], which follows the method 3 of Heath-Brown [9, 10] (it attains the Weyl-type bound if the usual conductor f = f0 is a cube): it 1/6+ǫ 1/2+ǫ 1/4+ǫ L(1/2+ it,χ) ≪ǫ,F C∞(χ|·|A )Nr(f) + Nr(f0) + Nr(f/f0) , where f0 is any ideal dividing f, the usual conductor of χ. In the work of Michel & Venkatesh [14, Theorem 5.1 & Section 5.1.7], a subconvex bound for Hecke characters χ was obtained with the subconvex exponent unspecified. We shall modify their approach and obtain a hybrid subconvex bound of Burgess-type for L-functions associated with Hecke characters over general number fields. Theorem 1.1. Let χ be a Hecke character of F with analytic conductor C(χ). We have 1 1 − 1−2θ +ǫ L( ,χ) ≪F C(χ) 4 16 , 2 ,ǫ where θ is any constant towards the Ramanujan-Petersson conjecture. Combining with Soehne’s bound, we deduce the following result. Corollary 1.2. Let χ be a Hecke character of F and t ∈ R. Denote by it T := C∞(χ · |·|A ), q := Cfin(χ). Then we have for any ǫ> 0 (T q)1/6 if T ≥ q1/2 1 ǫ 1/4 (1−2θ)/(3+2θ) 1/2 L( + it,χ) ≪ F (T q) · q if q ≤ T < q , 2 ǫ, (T q)(3+2θ)/16 if T ≤ q(1−2θ)/(3+2θ) where θ is any constant towards the Ramanujan-Petersson conjecture. Proof. We apply Soehne’s bound with f0 = o the ring of integers of F, compare it with Theorem 1.1 and distinguish cases according to the relative size of T and q. 1.2. Discussion on Method. The proof is inspired by the method of our earlier work [22] where we established a Burgess-type subconvext bound for GL1 twists of a GL2 cuspidal representation π. 1 − 1−2θ +ǫ (1.1) |L(1/2, π × χ)| ≪π,F,ǫ C(χ) 2 8 . In this paper we show that it is possible to replace the cuspidal representation π by the Eisenstein series representation π(1, 1) and obtain the same bound. Theorem 1.1 then follows from the identity (1.2) L(s, π(1, 1) × χ)= L(s,χ)2. The main hurdle is to address the non square-integrability of Eisenstein series. For this we use a regular- ization process which we show does not harm the quality of the final out-come. By contrast, the original approach with truncation on Eisenstein series [14, §5.1.7] does destroy the Burgess-like quality (see §4.3 below for more details). It is worthwhile to give some comments on our method, which is quite different from the methods applied in the case F = Q by Burgess or Conrey-Iwaniec. Burgess’ method is based on the study of character sums of the shape χ(n), m1≤Xn≤m2 which makes use of Weil’s bound hence makes extensive use of the periodicity of the summand function n 7→ χ(n). Its direct generalization (1.3) χ(A), m1≤Nr(XA)≤m2 where A runs over integral ideals, loses the periodicity for the summand function. Our method can be viewed as a variant of Conrey-Iwaniec’s method (see [23, §1.1]). The main common feature is to bring 4 HAN WU a problem for GL1 into the setting for GL2, and to use the available knowledge on the spectral theory of automorphic representations for GL2.