View source for Selberg conjecture

{{TEX|want}}

Let $\HH$ denote the upper half-plane, $SL(2,\ZZ)$ the group of integer matrices of determinant one and

$$\Gamma_0(N)= \left\{ \left(\begin{array}{rr}
a & b \\
c & d
\end{array}\right) \in SL(2,\ZZ) : c \equiv 0 \,(\operatorname{mod} N) \right\}.$$

Following H. Maass [[#References|[a9]]], let $W_s(\Gamma_0(N))$ denote the space of bounded functions $f$ on $\Gamma_0(N) \backslash \HH$ that satisfy

$$\Delta f = \left( \frac{1-s^2}{4} \right) f,$$

where

$$\Delta = -y^2 \left( \frac{\partial^2}{\partial^2_x} + \frac{\partial^2}{\partial^2_y} \right)$$

is the Laplace–Beltrami operator (cf. also [[Laplace operator|Laplace operator]]). Such eigenfunctions $f$ are called Maass wave forms. Since $\Delta$ in this context is essentially self-adjoint and non-negative (cf. also [[Self-adjoint operator|Self-adjoint operator]]), it follows that $(1-s^2)/4$ is real and not zero.

A. Selberg conjectured [[#References|[a12]]] that there is a lower bound $\ell_1(N)$ for the smallest (non-zero) eigenvalue: For $N \not= 1$,

$$\ell_1(N) \geq 1/4.$$

This innocent looking conjecture is (cf. [[#References|[a10]]]) one of the fundamental unsolved questions in the theory of modular forms (as of 2000; cf. also [[Modular form|Modular form]]). For $SL(2,\ZZ)$ and for small values of $N$, it has been known for some time (Selberg, W. Roelcke). In general, it has many applications to classical number theory (see [[#References|[a4]]] and [[#References|[a12]]], for example). To back up his conjecture, Selberg also proved the following assertion:

$$\ell_1(N) \geq 3/16.$$

Selberg's approach was to relate this problem to a purely arithmetical question about certain sums of exponentials, called Kloosterman sums (cf. also [[Exponential sum estimates|Exponential sum estimates]]; [[Trigonometric sum|Trigonometric sum]]). This allowed him to invoke results from arithmetic geometry. The key ingredient giving the estimate is a (sharp) bound on Kloosterman sums due to A. Weil [[#References|[a13]]]. This bound, in turn, is a consequence of the Riemann hypothesis for the [[Zeta-function|zeta-function]] of a curve over a finite field, which he had proven earlier (cf. also [[Riemann hypotheses|Riemann hypotheses]]). On the other hand, to go further than the theorem by this approach one needs to detect cancellations in sums of such Kloosterman sums, and arithmetic geometry offers nothing in this direction. This is the reason that the approach through Kloosterman sums has a natural barrier at $3/16$. It is interesting that H. Iwaniec [[#References|[a5]]] has given a proof of Selberg's theorem which, while still being along the lines of Kloosterman sums, avoids appealing to Weil's bounds.

Presently (2000), Selberg's conjecture is part of the "Ramanujan–Petersson conjecture at infinity" . In other words, if interpreting the Ramanujan–Petersson conjecture as a statement about the irreducible representations of $p$-adic groups $GL(2,\QQ_p)$ inside a cuspidal representation of $GL(2,\mathcal{A})$ (see below), Selberg's conjecture will follow as a statement for $GL(2,\RR)$.

Indeed, first let <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021024.png" /> denote the completion of the rational field <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021025.png" /> with respect to the <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021026.png" />-adic absolute value <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021027.png" />, <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021028.png" />, and view <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021029.png" /> as the completion with respect to <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021030.png" />. By the adèles, denoted <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021031.png" />, one means the "restricted" direct product <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021032.png" /> (restricted so that almost every <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021033.png" /> has <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021034.png" />, i.e., <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021035.png" />; cf. also [[Adèle|Adèle]]). Secondly, let <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021036.png" /> denote the space of measurable functions <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021037.png" /> on <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021038.png" />, where <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021039.png" /> ( "restricted" means <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021040.png" />, with <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021041.png" /> for almost every <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021042.png" />), <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021043.png" /> imbedded diagonally in <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021044.png" />,

<table class="eq" style="width:100%;"> <tr><td valign="top" style="width:94%;text-align:center;"><img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021045.png" /></td> </tr></table>

is the centre of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021046.png" />,

<table class="eq" style="width:100%;"> <tr><td valign="top" style="width:94%;text-align:center;"><img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021047.png" /></td> </tr></table>

and

<table class="eq" style="width:100%;"> <tr><td valign="top" style="width:94%;text-align:center;"><img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021048.png" /></td> </tr></table>

for almost every <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021049.png" />. Now, assuming <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021050.png" /> is an eigenfunction of all Hecke operators <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021051.png" />, one can define, in a one-to-one way, a function <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021052.png" /> such that the <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021053.png" />-module <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021054.png" /> generated by the right <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021055.png" />-translates of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021056.png" /> is an irreducible subrepresentation of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021057.png" />. Then Selberg's conjecture states that the representation <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021058.png" /> of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021059.png" /> is a principal series <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021060.png" /> with trivial central character and

<table class="eq" style="width:100%;"> <tr><td valign="top" style="width:94%;text-align:center;"><img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021061.png" /></td> </tr></table>

In other words, complementary series <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021062.png" /> with <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021063.png" /> between <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021064.png" /> and <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021065.png" /> (and <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021066.png" /> between <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021067.png" /> and <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021068.png" />) should not occur (cf. [[#References|[a2]]]; see also [[Irreducible representation|Irreducible representation]]; [[Principal series|Principal series]]). In this context the Ramanujan–Petersson conjecture says that for (almost every) <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021069.png" /> the same conclusion holds, i.e., for <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021070.png" /> a class-one representation, that is, <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021071.png" />, <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021072.png" /> satisfies (cf. [[#References|[a11]]])

<table class="eq" style="width:100%;"> <tr><td valign="top" style="width:94%;text-align:center;"><img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021073.png" /></td> <td valign="top" style="width:5%;text-align:right;">(a1)</td></tr></table>

P. Deligne proved the original Ramanujan conjecture [[#References|[a1]]] when <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021074.png" /> is a holomorphic discrete series of weight <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021075.png" />. For example, when <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021076.png" /> equals Ramanujan's <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021077.png" />, the condition (a1) implies

<table class="eq" style="width:100%;"> <tr><td valign="top" style="width:94%;text-align:center;"><img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021078.png" /></td> </tr></table>

the famous Ramanujan inequality. In general, Deligne was able to exploit algebraic-geometric interpretations of the classical Ramanujan–Petersson identities. Note that for Selberg's conjecture one again assumes that <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021079.png" /> is of class-one and <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021080.png" /> with

<table class="eq" style="width:100%;"> <tr><td valign="top" style="width:94%;text-align:center;"><img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021081.png" /></td> </tr></table>

It was with this modern representation-theoretic point of view that progress was made on Selberg's theorem.

First, consider the mapping

$$ \operatorname{Sym}^m : GL(2,\CC) \longrightarrow GL(m+1,\CC)$$

defined by action of $GL(2,\CC)$ on symmetric tensors of rank $m$. It was conjectured by R.P. Langlands [[#References|[a8]]] that there should be a corresponding mapping $\operatorname{Sym}^m_\star$ that (roughly) maps cuspidal automorphic representations of $GL(2)$ to those of $GL(m+1)$ ; moreover, whenever $\pi$ corresponds to class-one representations indexed by

$$
\left(\begin{array}{rr}
\alpha_p & 0 \\
0 & \beta_p
\end{array}\right)
$$

(including possibly $p=\infty$), $\operatorname{Sym}^m_\star(\pi)$ should correspond to <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021091.png" />. This conjecture, for all $m$, implies both the Selberg and the Ramanujan–Petersson conjecture. In 1978, S. Gelbart and H. Jacquet [[#References|[a3]]] proved Langlands' conjecture for $m=2$; for Selberg's conjecture, this simply replaced the equality in his theorem by an inequality. Then, in 1994 [[#References|[a7]]], W. Luo, Z. Rudnick and P. Sarnak used <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021094.png" /> and analytic properties of [[L-function]]s to go well beyond Selberg's conjecture:

<table class="eq" style="width:100%;"> <tr><td valign="top" style="width:94%;text-align:center;"><img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021096.png" /></td> </tr></table>

And in 2000, H. Kim and F. Shahidi [[#References|[a6]]] proved Langlands' conjecture for $m=3$ and established <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021098.png" />, i.e.,

<table class="eq" style="width:100%;"> <tr><td valign="top" style="width:94%;text-align:center;"><img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s13021099.png" /></td> </tr></table>

Either Selberg's conjecture will continue to be proved along the lines of Langlands' conjecture, or by entirely new ideas.

There is a far-reaching generalization of Selberg's conjecture to $GL(n)$: If <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/s/s130/s130210/s130210101.png" /> is an irreducible cuspidal automorphic representation of $GL(n,\mathcal{A})$, then every class-one local representation of $GL(n,\QQ_p)$ is "tempered" .

====References====
<table>
<TR><TD valign="top">[a1]</TD> <TD valign="top"> P. Deligne, "La conjecture de Weil I" ''Publ. Math. IHES'' , '''43''' (1974) pp. 273–307 {{MR|0340258}} {{ZBL|0314.14007}} {{ZBL|0287.14001}} </TD></TR>
<TR><TD valign="top">[a2]</TD> <TD valign="top"> I. Gel'fand, M. Graev, I. Piatetski-Shapiro, "Representation theory and automorphic functions" , W.B. Saunders (1969) {{MR|233772}} {{ZBL|0718.11022}} {{ZBL|0138.07201}} {{ZBL|0136.07301}} {{ZBL|0121.30601}} </TD></TR>
<TR><TD valign="top">[a3]</TD> <TD valign="top"> S. Gelbart, H. Jacquet, "A relation between automorphic representations of $GL(2)$ and $GL(3)$" ''Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup.'' , '''11''' (1978) pp. 471–552 {{MR|0533066}} {{ZBL|0406.10022}} </TD></TR>
<TR><TD valign="top">[a4]</TD> <TD valign="top"> D. Hejhal, "The Selberg trace formula II" , ''Lecture Notes in Mathematics'' , '''1001''' , Springer (1983) {{MR|}} {{ZBL|}} </TD></TR>
<TR><TD valign="top">[a5]</TD> <TD valign="top"> H. Iwaniec, "Selberg's lower bound for the first eigenvalue of congruence groups" , ''Number Theory, Trace Formula, Discrete Groups'' , Acad. Press (1989) pp. 371–375 {{MR|993327}} {{ZBL|}} </TD></TR>
<TR><TD valign="top">[a6]</TD> <TD valign="top"> H. Kim, F. Shahidi, "Functorial products for $GL(2) \times GL(3)$ and functorial symmetric cube for $GL(2)$" ''C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris'' , '''331''' : 8 (2000) pp. 599–604 {{MR|1799096}} {{ZBL|1002.11044}} </TD></TR>
<TR><TD valign="top">[a7]</TD> <TD valign="top"> W. Luo, Z. Rudnick, P. Sarnak, "On Selberg's eigenvalue conjecture" ''Geom. Funct. Anal.'' , '''5''' (1995) pp. 387–401 {{MR|1334872}} {{ZBL|}} </TD></TR>
<TR><TD valign="top">[a8]</TD> <TD valign="top"> R.P. Langlands, "Problems in the theory of automorphic forms" , ''Lectures in Modern Analysis and Applications'' , ''Lecture Notes in Mathematics'' , '''170''' , Springer (1970) pp. 18–86 {{MR|0302614}} {{ZBL|0225.14022}} </TD></TR>
<TR><TD valign="top">[a9]</TD> <TD valign="top"> H. Maass, "Nichtanalytishe Automorphe Funktionen" ''Math. Ann.'' , '''121''' (1949) pp. 141–183 {{MR|}} {{ZBL|}} </TD></TR>
<TR><TD valign="top">[a10]</TD> <TD valign="top"> P. Sarnak, "Selberg's eigenvalue conjecture" ''Notices Amer. Math. Soc.'' , '''42''' : 4 (1995) pp. 1272–1277 {{MR|}} {{ZBL|}} </TD></TR>
<TR><TD valign="top">[a11]</TD> <TD valign="top"> I. Satake, "Spherical functions and Ramanujan's conjecture" , ''Algebraic Groups and Discontinuous Subgroups'' , ''Proc. Symp. Pure Math.'' , '''IX''' , Amer. Math. Soc. (1966) pp. 258–264 {{MR|211955}} {{ZBL|}} </TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a12]</TD> <TD valign="top"> A. Selberg, "On the estimation of Fourier coefficients of modular forms" , ''Proc. Symp. Pure Math.'' , '''VIII''' , Amer. Math. Soc. (1965) pp. 1–15 {{MR|0182610}} {{ZBL|0142.33903}} </TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a13]</TD> <TD valign="top"> A. Weil, "On some exponential sums" ''Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.'' , '''34''' (1948) pp. 204–207 {{MR|0027006}} {{ZBL|0032.26102}} </TD></TR>
</table>