Elliptic functions were discovered in the century, but their first appearance in hidden guise goes back to Fagano and Euler, who proved “addition theorems” for elliptic integrals which amount to addition theorems for elliptic functions. Elliptic functions were the bread and butter of many generations of mathematicians; their study gave birth to the theory of Riemann surfaces and, eventually, to modern complex geometry.
An elliptic function is a meromorphic function on
which has two
-linearly independent periods
and
. Thus
is invariant under the action of the lattice group
. (Of course, there are many possible choices of
and
.) This means that we can factor
through the projection
. With the complex structure inherited from
, the topological space
is a compact Riemann surface which has the shape of a torus.
We can identify with the points of a suitably chosen parallelogram. The parallelogram having
,
and
as vertices is called a fundamental parallelogram. We include only a specified half of its boundary (for example, only the edges
and
) so as to make sure that no two points are congruent
. Of course,
is simply obtained by “pasting” opposite sides of this parallelogram together. We will call any fundamental parallelogram
. (Thus, as a topological space,
is a quotient of
, obtained by pasting opposite sides together.) There are many other choice for
; as many as there are
-bases for
.
So, all that we have merely noted so far is the basic fact that there exists a natural identification of the family of all -invariant meromorphic functions on
with the family of all meromorphic functions on
.
So now we want to build elliptic functions. The way to build a function invariant under the action of some group is to average out this action. For example, suppose is a finite group acting on some set
and that we are given a function
. We can build the function
by
, which is invariant under
. Of course, if
is infinite, we may hope to replace the finite sum by an appropriately converging series.
So Weierstrass’s idea was just that. Let , and let
. The series
is easily seen to converge absolutely and uniformly on every compact set not containing a point of . Since each summand is a meromorphic function of
, so is
.
It is easy to see from the series expansion that the function has a triple pole at every lattice point with zero residue. Moreover,
is odd, since
and
is odd. Thus we have produced a non-trivial elliptic function of order
(the order, or the degree, of an elliptic function
is the number of its poles inside any period parallelogram; or, if you prefer, it is the degree of
considered as a ramified covering
).
Now for every , the function
can be integrated from
to
along a path not passing through any point of
. Since the residue of
at each pole is
, the value of the integral is independent of path. By the uniform convergence of the series defining
along the integration path, we obtain a new function of
,
which is meromorphic, and has a double pole with zero residue at every point of . The function
is the Weierstrass
-function associated to
(we may sometimes write it
to emphasize the dependence of
on
). It is given by the series
which also converges absolutely and uniformly on every compact set disjoint from . Notice that to integrate from
, we had to remove the pole at
, integrate, and then put the pole back. It is not immediately obvious that
should be elliptic. However, since
is odd and elliptic, we have, for example,
. This shows that integrating
along the side
of the fundamental period parallelogram gives
; by generalizing this observation, we can see that
is elliptic.
It would be criminal to continue without mentioning that we have only been generalizing the theory of trigonometric functions (and, as we shall see, of their associated curves, the conics). Recall that Euler gave us the product formula for :
Taking the logarithmic derivative, we obtain the “partial fraction” expansion
(Euler used this formula to give the value of , by expanding further each term in this formula, and comparing the resulting series with the Taylor series for
.) But this function is not quite yet analogous to the
function, because it’s an odd function. Applying
yields
which really is analogous to the function. So we see that the
function degenerates to
as one of its periods becomes
.
Now let’s make some general observations about any elliptic function . First, note that
must have finitely many poles in any period parallelogram, since the closure of the period parallelogram is compact, and
is meromorphic. Second, note that the sum of the residues of
at its poles in a period parallelogram is
. Indeed, integrating around the boundary and using the periodicity of
, we see that integrals along opposite sides cancel each other. (We have to avoid poles on the boundary if there are some. By the periodicity of
, the poles on the boundary come in pairs with equal residue, and by going around them in small semi-circles in such a way that the contributions of the residues cancel each other out, we save the situation. So we’re integrating on a jigsaw puzzle piece with which we can tile the plane, basically.) This observation may remind you of the theorem which states that the sum of the residues of a meromorphic differential on
is
. This fact holds on all compact Riemann surfaces.
As a consequence of the fact that the residues sum to , we see that an elliptic function cannot have a single simple pole. This is almost true also on
. For example,
has a single simple pole. The sum of its residues is not
, but the differential
, however, has two poles with residues
and
; indeed, let
; then
, so that
also has a pole at
, with residue
. Residues are really a property of differentials and not of functions.
Moreover, a non-constant elliptic function must have at least one pole inside any fundamental parallelogram. Indeed, if
is analytic (and hence continuous) on the closure
of a fundamental parallelogram
, the image
is compact, since
is compact; but since
, Liouville’s theorem implies that
is constant.
This observation, while very simple, is the basic tool in proofs of relations among elliptic functions.
Let’s expand the series for a bit further. We have
Hence
where . Notice that
for
odd, since
(or alternatively, since
is an even function). Thus we have
As functions of , the values
are very interesting in their own right (they’re the fundamental examples of modular forms); I will talk about them in a later post.
So now that we have the Laurent expansion for around
, we can hope to discover a relationship between
and
. We have
and hence the function has a pole of order
at
, since the terms in
cancel out. We can write explicitly:
where each occurence of “” represents some analytic function which vanishes at
. Hence, by adding
and
to this series, we cancel the
term and the constant term, and we see that the function
is analytic at
and vanishes there. Moreover, it is an elliptic function with respect to
, since the same is true of
and
. Also, it can only have poles at the points of
, since the same is true of
and
. But it has no pole at
; hence it has no pole at all. Hence it must be constantly equal to
. So we have proved that the
function satisfies the second-order non-linear differential equation
in terms of the constants (depending on )
We will discuss the great significance of this differential equation in a future post.