Rigidity of Euler Products
arXiv:2103.06464v3 [math.NT] 23 Mar 2021
Shin-ya Koyama∗ & Nobushige Kurokawa†
March 24, 2021
Abstract
We report a simple rigidity theorem for certain Euler products.
Key Words: Euler products; Zeta functions
AMS Subject Classifications: 11M06, 11M41
Introduction
For purely imaginary numbers a, b, c ∈ iR we study the meromorphy of the
associated Euler product
Y
Z abc (s) = (1 − (pa + pb )p−s + pc−2s )−1
p: prime
in the family of Euler products
Zab = {Z abc (s) | c ∈ iR}.
This family Zab contains
ζ(s − a)ζ(s − b) = Z ab(a+b) (s),
which is a meromorphic function in all s ∈ C (with a functional equation under
s ←→ 1 + a + b − s). We prove the converse:
Theorem A. If Z abc (s) is meromorphic in all s ∈ C, we have a + b = c and
Z abc (s) = ζ(s − a)ζ(s − b).
∗ Department of Biomedical Engineering, Toyo University, 2100 Kujirai, Kawagoe, Saitama,
350-8585, Japan.
† Department of Mathematics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Oh-okayama, Meguro-ku,
Tokyo, 152-8551, Japan.
1
This shows rigidity of the Euler product ζ(s − a)ζ(s − b) in the family Zab
concerning the meromorphy on the entire C.
The next result gives a detailed meromorphy for a + b 6= c.
Theorem B. If a + b 6= c, then Z abc (s) has an analytic continuation to
Re(s) > 0 as a meromorphic function with the natural boundary Re(s) = 0.
More precisely, each point on Re(s) = 0 is a limit point of poles of Z abc (s) in
Re(s) > 0.
We notice generalizations in §4 in the text. Our theorems follow from results of
Kurokawa [4, 5, 6] extending results of Estermann [1].
We remark that our result characterizes ζ(s−a)ζ(s−b) by the meromorphy in all
s ∈ C only in contrast to usual “converse theorems” originated by Hamburger [2]
and Hecke [3] where the functional equation and the attached automorphic form
are important; ζ(s − a)ζ(s − b) corresponds to a Maass wave form studied by
Maass [7].
1 Euler datum
We use the triple E = (P, R, α), where P is the set of all prime numbers, R
denotes the real numbers, and α is the map α : P → R given by α(p) = log p.
Such a triple is a simple example of Euler datum studied in [4, 5, 6]; generalized
Euler data are treated there with general “primes” P and general topological
groups G instead of R.
Let R(R) be the virtual character ring of R defined as
( )
X
R(R) = m(a)χa m(a) ∈ Z, m(a) = 0 except for finitely many a ,
a∈iR
where χa is a (continuous) unitary character χa : R → U (1) given by χa (x) =
eax for x ∈ R.
For a polynomial
n
X
H(T ) = hm T m ∈ 1 + T R(R)[T ]
m=0
we denote by L(s, E, H) the Euler product
Y
L(s, E, H) = Hα(p) (p−s )−1 ,
p∈P
2
where
n
X
Hx (T ) = hm (x)T m ∈ 1 + T C[T ].
m=0
For example, let a, b, c ∈ iR, then the polynomial
H abc (T ) = 1 − (χa + χb )T + χc T 2
in 1 + T R(R)[T ] gives the Euler product
Y −1
L(s, E, H abc ) = 1 − (pa + pb )p−s + pc−2s
p∈P
since
abc
Hα(p) = 1 − (χa (log p) + χb (log p))p−s + χc (log p)p−2s
= 1 − (pa + pb )p−s + pc−2s .
2 Unitariness and meromorphy
Let E = (P, R, α) as in §1 and take a polynomial H(T ) in 1 + T R(R)[T ] of
degree n. We say that H(T ) is unitary when there exist functions θj ; R → R
satisfying
Hx (T ) = (1 − eiθ1 (x) T ) · · · (1 − eiθn (x) T )
for all x.
The main theorem proved in [5] gives in this particular situation the following
result.
Theorem 1.
(1) If H(T ) is unitary, then L(s, E, H) is meromorphic in all s ∈ C.
(2) If H(T ) is not unitary, then L(s, E, H) is meromorphic in Re(s) > 0 with
the natural boundary. Moreover, each point on Re(s) = 0 is a limit point of
poles of L(s, E, H) in Re(s) > 0.
This theorem was proved in [5] (p.45, §8, Theorem1) since our E = (P, R, α)
is nothing but E0 (Q/Q) there.
3 Proof of rigidity
After looking Theorem 1 recalled in §2 we see that Theorems A and B in Intro-
duction are both derived from the following result:
3
Theorem 2. Let a, b, c ∈ iR and
H abc (T ) = 1 − (χa + χb )T + χc T 2 ∈ 1 + T R(R)[T ].
Then the following conditions are equivalent.
(1) a + b = c
(2) H(T ) is unitary.
Proof. (1)=⇒(2): From a + b = c we get
H abc (T ) = 1 − (χa + χb )T + χa χb T 2
= (1 − χa T )(1 − χb T ).
This gives
Hxabc (T ) = (1 − χa (x)T )(1 − χb (x)T )
= (1 − eax T )(1 − ebx T )
for x ∈ R. Hence H abc (T ) is unitary, by
|eax | = |ebx | = 1.
(2)=⇒(1): Assume that H abc (T ) is unitary, and set
Hxabc (T ) = (1 − eiθ1 (x) T )(1 − eiθ2 (x) T )
with θj : R → R. Then comparing with
Hxabc (T ) = 1 − (eax + ebx )T + ecx T 2
we obtain
eax + ebx = eiθ1 (x) + eiθ2 (x) , (2.1)
cx i(θ1 (x)+θ2 (x))
e =e . (2.2)
Note that the complex conjugation of (2.1) gives
e−ax + e−bx = e−iθ1 (x) + e−iθ2 (x) .
Since
e−ax + e−bx = e−(a+b)x (eax + ebx )
and
e−iθ1 (x) + e−iθ2 (x) = e−i(θ1 (x)+θ2 (x)) (eiθ1 (x) + eiθ2 (x) )
we obtain the equality
e−(a+b)x (eax + ebx ) = e−cx (eax + ebx )
4
by using (2.1) and (2.2).
Hence we get
(e(a+b−c)x − 1)(eax + ebx ) = 0
for all x ∈ R. Especially
e(a+b−c)x − 1 ax
(e + ebx ) = 0
x
for all x ∈ R \ {0}. Thus letting x → 0 we obtain the desired equality
a + b − c = 0.
4 Generalizations
From the proof above it would be easy to see that we have generalizations of
Theorems A and B by using results of [4, 5, 6]. Hence we notice simple results
only.
(1) Dedekind case.
Let ζF (s) be the Dedekind zeta function of a finite extension field F of the
rational number field Q. Let a, b, c ∈ iR and
Y
ZFabc (s) = (1 − (N (P )a + N (P )b )N (P )−s + N (P )c−2s )−1 ,
P ∈Specm(OF )
where P runs over the set Specm(OF ) of maximal ideals of the integer ring
OF of F . Then we have exactly the same Theorems A and B chracterizing
ζF (s − a)ζF (s − b) among ZFabc (s) by using Theorem 1 of [5, §8] for E0 (F/F ).
(2) Selberg case
Let ζM (s) be the Selberg (or Ruelle) zeta function
Y
ζM (s) = (1 − N (P )−s )−1
P ∈Prim(M)
of a compact Riemann surface M of genus g ≥ 2, where Prim(M ) denotes the
prime geodesics on M with N (P ) = exp(length(P )). Let a, b, c ∈ iR and
Y
abc
ZM (s) = (1 − (N (P )a + N (P )b )N (P )−s + N (P )c−2s )−1 .
P ∈Prim(M)
5
Then we have the same Theorems A and B characterizing ζM (s − a)ζM (s − b)
abc
among ZM (s) by using Theorem 9 of [6, p.232].
(3) More parameters
It is possible to generalize the situation with more parameters (or representa-
tions). For example, let a, b, c, d ∈ iR and
Y
Z abcd (s) = (1 − (pa + pb + pc )p−s + (pa+b + pb+c + pc+a)p−2s − pd−3s )−1 .
p: prime
Then we have the following result by a similar proof: Z abcd (s) is meromorphic
in all s ∈ C iff a + b + c = d. This result characterizes ζ(s − a)ζ(s − b)ζ(s − c)
among Z abcd (s).
References
[1] T. Estermann, On certain functions represented by Dirichlet series, Proc. London Math.
Soc. (2) 27 (1928), 435-448.
[2] H. Hamburger, Über die Riemannsche Funktionalgleichung der ζ-Funktion, Math. Z. 10
(1921), 240-254.
[3] E. Hecke, Über dir Bestimmung Dirichletscher Reihen durch ihre Funktionalgleichung,
Math. Ann. 112 (1936), 664–699.
[4] N. Kurokawa, On the meromorphy of Euler products, Proc. Japan Acad. 54A (1978),
163-166.
[5] , On the meromorphy of Euler products (I), Proc. London Math. Soc (3). 53 (1986),
1-47.
[6] , On the meromorphy of Euler products (II), Proc. London Math. Soc (3). 53
(1986), 209-236.
[7] H. Maass, Über eine neue Art von nichtanalytischen automorphen Funktionen und die
Bestimmung Dirichletscher Reihen durch Funktionalgleichungen, Math. Ann. 121 (1949),
141-183.
