WHAT IS A PERIOD ? Stefan M¨uller-Stach Mathematical constants like π, e and γ arise for integers si ≥ 1 with s1 ≥ 2 are very interesting frequently in number theory and other areas of periods. Even for the odd zeta-values ζ(3), ζ(5), mathematics and physics. Mathematicians have ... only a few results about their irrationality are long wondered whether such numbers are irra- known. By work of Ap´ery, ζ(3) is irrational. Like tional or perhaps even transcendental, that is, all multiple zeta values, it can be represented as not algebraic. Because they are solutions of an iterated integral polynomial equations with rational coefficients, dxdydz algebraic numbers form a countable subset of ζ(3) = . ZZZ (1 − x)yz the complex numbers. Therefore, most complex 0<x<y<z<1 numbers are transcendental, although, for any Using notions from algebraic geometry, one given number, it is usually difficult to figure out can also define periods in a different form as fol- whether it is transcendental. lows. Let X be a smooth algebraic variety over Q This essay is about the arithmetic notion of of dimension d. Take a regular algebraic d-form periods, a countable subalgebra P of the complex ω on X and a normal crossing divisor D in X; numbers defined around 1999 by Maxim Kontse- both ω and D are also defined over Q. Then let vich and Don Zagier [4]. Periods contain all alge- γ be a singular chain on the underlying topologi- braic numbers but also many other transcenden- cal manifold X(C) with boundary in D(C). The tal numbers important for number theory. This integral notion of periods generalizes in algebraic geome- p = ω try and yields the theory of periods and period Zγ domains for algebraic varieties, see [2]. is the period of the quadruple (X,D,ω,γ). Kontsevich and Zagier define periods as those From an even higher viewpoint, periods are complex numbers whose real and imaginary parts matrix coefficients of the period isomorphism are values of absolutely convergent integrals ∗ ∼= ∗ arXiv:1407.2388v1 [math.NT] 9 Jul 2014 HdR(X,D) ⊗Q C−→Hsing(X,D) ⊗Q C f(x1,...,xn) p = dx1 ··· dxn. Z∆ g(x1,...,xn) between algebraic de Rham cohomology and sin- gular cohomology after choosing Q-bases in both Here f and g are polynomials with coefficients in groups. In this case, X need not be smooth and Q, and the integration domain ∆ ⊂ Rn is given forms need not be of top degree. Sophisticated by polynomial inequalities with rational coeffi- arguments show that all three given definitions cients. of periods agree. Some initial examples of periods are In this setting, we find 2πi as the period of n dx H1(X) with X = P1 \{0, ∞}, D = ∅, ω = dx and log(n)= and π = dxdy. x Z1 x Zx2+y2≤1 γ the unit circle. In a similar way, log(n) is one of the periods of H1(X,D), where X = P1 \{0, ∞}, The representation of a period by an integral is D = {1,n}, ω = dx and γ = [1,n]. Certain not unique, in the sense that there are many dif- x special Γ-values occur in the Chowla-Selberg for- ferent integrals representing that period. mula for periods of abelian varieties with com- The values ζ(s) = n−s of the Riemann n plex multiplication. The Beilinson conjectures, zeta function at positiveP integers s ≥ 2, and their which extend Dirchlet’s class number formula in natural generalizations, the multiple zeta values algebraic number theory, would imply that lead- −s1 −s2 −sk ing terms in the Taylor series of L-functions of ζ(s1, ..., sk)= n1 n2 ··· nk , n1>···X>nk>0 motives are periods in the extended period ring 1 2 1 ⊗ P = P[ π ], where π is inverted. A completely dif- pro-algebraic fundamental group G = Aut (T ) ferent example comes from quantum field theory, of MM(Q) in the Tannaka sense. We call G a b where periods arise as values of regularized Feyn- Galois group, as the viewpoint gives a far-ranging man amplitudes. Periods of homotopy groups are extension of the Galois theory of zero-dimensional another source of examples. varieties. In MM(Q) cohomology groups of al- In addition to the additivity in the integrand gebraic pairs (X,D) are immediately mixed mo- and the integration domain, periods inherit from tives, i.e., finite-dimensional Q-representations of calculus some well-known relations: a change of G, or equivalently comodules over the associ- ∗ variables formula γ f ω = f∗γ ω, and Stokes’ ated Hopf algebra A. Both singular and de R R Rham cohomology provide fiber functors Tsing, formula γ δω = ∂γ ω. Fubini’s theorem gives P a multiplication,R R hence it becomes a Q-algebra. TdR from MM(Q) to Q-vector spaces. The ⊗ At the time Kontsevich and Zagier formulated pro-algebraic torsor Isom (TdR,Tsing) is given their idea, not a single explicit non-period num- by Spec(Pformal), where Pformal is the algebra of formal periods, i.e., generated by quadruples ber was known. In 2008, Masahiko Yoshinaga b b (arXiv:0805.0349) wrote down a computable non- (X,D,ω,γ), and subject only to the relations of period, using a variant of Cantor’s diagonal argu- linearity, change of variables and Stokes [3, 4]. ment. Moreover, he showed that all periods are In this setting, P is the set of periods of all elementary computable, i.e., they lie in a certain mixed motives over Q. Multiple zeta values form b proper subset of all computable complex num- the subset of periods of mixed Tate motives over bers, so that there are computable non-periods. Z. The motivic Galois group restricted to mixed It is still unknown whether e or 1/π are pe- Tate motives over Z gives much control over mul- riods. Presumably they are not. The notion of tiple zeta values and implies relations among mul- exponential periods was invented to extend peri- tiple zeta values ζ(s1,...,sk) of a fixed weight ods to a larger set containing e [4]. s1 + ··· + sk. The work of Francis Brown on Let us now turn to deeper properties of peri- multiple zeta values and the fundamental group ods, so that we find out more about the struc- of P1 \{0, 1, ∞} demonstrates again the value of ture of P. It turns out that the very abstract the philosophy of motives [1]. Also in other parts viewpoint of mixed motives provides insights, and of number theory, for example in the area of ra- brings into the game a big symmetry group G, the tional points, motivic arguments can be applied motivic Galois group. in finiteness proofs. Pure and mixed motives were envisioned by Grothendieck formulated the famous and dif- Alexander Grothendieck in order to formal- ficult period conjecture, stating that any relation ize properties of algebraic varieties. In the among periods is coming from algebraic geom- 1990s, Madhav Nori defined an abelian category etry, in particular through algebraic cycles on MM(Q) of mixed motives over Q. In Nori’s products of varieties. In the setting of Nori, this construction, one starts with a directed graph, is essentially equivalent to saying that the evalua- where the vertices are pairs of algebraic vari- tion map ev : Pformal → P is injective. This con- eties (X,D) defined over Q, and the edges be- jecture would have strong consequences for the b b tween them are deduced from morphisms of pairs transcendence degree of the space of all periods (X,D) → (X′,D′) (”change of variables”) and of a given algebraic variety X via the action of chains of inclusions Z ⊂ D ⊂ X (”Stokes’ for- G. mula”). The edges thus immediately resemble relations among periods, and this is what makes Further Reading: the idea so helpful. These arrows are not closed under composition. However, if one fixes a repre- [1] F. Brown: Mixed Tate motives over Z, Annals of Q Math. 175(2), 949-976 (2012). sentation T with values in vector spaces over , [2] J. Carlson and Ph. Griffiths: What is a period do- e.g. singular or de Rham cohomology, then there main ? AMS Notices Vol. 55 Nr. 11, 1418-1419 is a universal diagram category C(T ), and an ex- (2008). tension of T as a functor. After formally invert- [3] A. Huber and S. M¨uller-Stach: On the rela- ing the Tate motive Z(−1) = (P1 \{0, ∞}, {1}) tion between Nori motives and Kontsevich periods, Q arXiv:1105.0865v5 (2011). in C(T ), one obtains a -linear Tannakian, hence [4] M. Kontsevich and D. Zagier: Periods, in Engquist, abelian, category MM(Q) without any further Bj¨orn (ed.) et al., Mathematics unlimited - 2001 and assumptions [3]. The motivic Galois group is the beyond, Springer Verlag, 771-808 (2001)..