This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

A journey from the octonionic 2\mathbb{P}^{2} to a fake 2\mathbb{P}^{2}

Lev Borisov Department of Mathematics
Rutgers University
Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA
[email protected]
Anders Buch Department of Mathematics
Rutgers University
Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA
[email protected]
 and  Enrico Fatighenti Department of Mathematical Sciences, Loughborough University, LE113TU, UK [email protected]
Abstract.

We discover a family of surfaces of general type with K2=3K^{2}=3 and p=q=0p=q=0 as free C13C_{13} quotients of special linear cuts of the octonionic projective plane 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2}. A special member of the family has 33 singularities of type A2A_{2}, and is a quotient of a fake projective plane. We use the techniques of [BF20] to define this fake projective plane by explicit equations in its bicanonical embedding.

1. Introduction

Fake projective planes are complex projective surfaces of general type with Hodge numbers equal to those of the usual projective plane 2\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^{2}. There are exactly 5050 complex conjugate pairs, constructed as ball quotients in [CS11] and they are fascinating gemstones in the vast mine of algebraic surfaces of general type. The first explicit equations of a pair of fake projective planes were constructed in [BK19], and additional six pairs were given explicitly in [BF20]. We refer the reader to [BK19] for more background and history.

Many fake projective planes fake2\mathbb{P}^{2}_{fake} admit an action of the cyclic group C3C_{3}. The quotient fake2/C3\mathbb{P}^{2}_{fake}/C_{3} is then a singular surface with K2=3K^{2}=3 and three singular points of type A2A_{2}. It can be deformed to construct interesting smooth surfaces with K2=3K^{2}=3, genus p=0p=0, and irregularity q=0q=0. In [BF20] the process was reversed and since the current paper is in many ways analogous, we describe [BF20] in some detail below.

The paper [BF20] first builds a family of special complete intersections of seven Plücker hyperplanes in the Grassmannian Gr(3,6)\operatorname{Gr}(3,\mathbb{C}^{6}) which admit a free action of the cyclic group C14C_{14}. This gives a family of surfaces WW which has KW2=3,p=q=0K_{W}^{2}=3,\leavevmode\nobreak\ p=q=0. Then the authors find an element of this family such that the quotient by C14C_{14} has an additional C3C_{3} symmetry and three A2A_{2} singularities. Its Galois cover (that was not at all easy to construct) is a fake projective plane with the automorphism group (C3)2(C_{3})^{2}, labeled by (C2,p=2,,d3D3)(\operatorname{C2},p=2,\emptyset,d_{3}D_{3}) in Cartwright-Steger classification [CS11+].

In the table [BCP11, Table 1] there are listed surfaces with fundamental group C13C_{13} instead of C14C_{14}. The current paper is the result of our efforts to replicate the approach of [BF20] and to construct their fundamental covers as complete intersections in some homogeneous space. We were not quite able to do it, instead we constructed them as almost complete intersections of the 1616 dimensional octonionic projective plane 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2} in 26\mathbb{P}^{26} by certain 1515 linear equations, equivariant with respect to an order 1313 element in the Cartan subgroup of the E6E_{6} group of automorphisms of 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2}.

Afterwards, the process was rather similar to that of [BF20], although there were some technical complications due to lack of unramified double covers. In particular, we had more difficulty controlling the size of the coefficients and had to work with 60K60K decimal digit numbers at some intermediate steps.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we describe our motivation for using the octonionic projective plane and the special linear cuts that achieve our goal of constructing surfaces with K2=3,p=q=0K^{2}=3,\leavevmode\nobreak\ p=q=0. We also describe how we found a special element of this family with three A2A_{2} singularities. In Section 3 we briefly explain the construction of the fake projective plane fake2\mathbb{P}^{2}_{fake}, labeled by (C18,p=3,,d3D3)(\operatorname{C18},p=3,\emptyset,d_{3}D_{3}) in [CS11+], and state some open problems.

Acknowledgements. Our computations relied heavily on Mathematica software package [Math] and to some extent on Julia [Ju], Macaulay2 [Mac] and Magma [Mag]. We thank John Cremona for helping us access the number theory server at the University of Warwick. Anders Buch was partially supported by the NSF grant DMS-1503662.

2. Special cuts of the octonionic projective plane

2.1. Motivation.

As was mentioned in the Introduction, we set out to find a family of surfaces of general type with K2=3,p=q=0K^{2}=3,\leavevmode\nobreak\ p=q=0 and fundamental group C13C_{13}. Here is how this search led us to consider cuts of the octonionic projective plane 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2}.

Let XX be the universal cover of a surface in question, with a free action of an order 1313 automorphism gg. Then KX2=39K_{X}^{2}=39 and χ(KX)=13\chi(K_{X})=13. It is reasonable to expect that h1(X,KX)=0h^{1}(X,K_{X})=0 and h0(X,KX)=12h^{0}(X,K_{X})={12}. Then the pluricanonical ring n0H0(X,nKX)\bigoplus_{n\geq 0}H^{0}(X,nK_{X}) of XX must have the graded dimension

n0dimH0(X,nKX)tn=1+12t+52t2+130t3+=1+9t+19t2+9t3+t4(1t)3.\sum_{n\geq 0}\dim H^{0}(X,nK_{X})\,t^{n}=1+12t+52t^{2}+130t^{3}+\cdots=\frac{1+9t+19t^{2}+9t^{3}+t^{4}}{(1-t)^{3}}.

It is also reasonable to assume that the pluricanonical ring is generated in degree one, so XX is embedded into 11\mathbb{P}^{11}. It is also plausible that its image is cut out by 12(12+1)/252=2612(12+1)/2-52=26 quadrics. By the Holomorphic Lefschetz formula, as in [H11, Theorem 2.1], the trace of the action of gg on H0(X,KX)H^{0}(X,K_{X}) is (1)(-1), which means that H0(X,KX)H^{0}(X,K_{X}) has a basis of eigenvectors of gg with eigenvalues ζ13i\zeta_{13}^{i} for i=1,,12i=1,\ldots,12. Similarly, the action of gg on the space of quadrics splits it into 1313 two-dimensional eigenspaces.

Inspired by [BF20], we undertook a rather exhaustive computer search for homogeneous varieties of degree 3939 and other relevant invariants, but were not successful. However, the octonionic projective plane 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2} has degree 7878, and we observed the following remarkable coincidence: the homogeneous coordinate ring of 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2} has graded dimension

(1+9t+19t2+9t3+t4)(1+t)(1t)17.\frac{(1+9t+19t^{2}+9t^{3}+t^{4})(1+t)}{(1-t)^{17}}.

More specifically, 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2} is the dim 1616 singular locus of the E6E_{6}-invariant cubic in 26\mathbb{P}^{26} cut out by the 2727 quadratic equations which are the partial derivatives of the cubic. So our idea was to take a linear cut of 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2} by 1515 equations (so that we are in 11\mathbb{P}^{11}) which only drop the dimension by 1414. We also want one of the quadratic equations to reduce to zero on the linear cut. The best analogy would be cutting a quadric xy=zwxy=zw with Hilbert series 1+t(1t)3\frac{1+t}{(1-t)^{3}} by two linear equations x=0x=0 and z=0z=0 to get a line with the Hilbert series 1(1t)2\frac{1}{(1-t)^{2}} but, ultimately, it was a lucky guess.

2.2. Octonionic projective plane.

There are several incarnations of the E6E_{6}-invariant cubic found in the literature. We used the one in Jacob Lurie’s undergraduate thesis [L11], namely

P10P13P16P11P14P17P12P15P18P16P17P18+P1P10P19P1P18P2+P11P2P20P1P14P21P16P20P21P18P22P23P17P19P24P13P2P24P14P15P25P19P22P25P12P13P26P20P23P26P10P11P27P21P24P27P25P26P27+P12P21P3P10P23P3P2P25P3P15P20P4+P13P22P4P17P3P4P12P19P5+P14P23P5P27P4P5P11P22P6+P15P24P6P1P26P6P16P5P6P11P12P7P23P24P7+P16P25P7P1P4P7P10P15P8P21P22P8+P17P26P8P2P5P8P13P14P9P19P20P9+P18P27P9P3P6P9P7P8P9\begin{array}[]{l}-P_{10}P_{13}P_{16}-P_{11}P_{14}P_{17}-P_{12}P_{15}P_{18}-P_{16}P_{17}P_{18}+P_{1}P_{10}P_{19}-P_{1}P_{18}P_{2}+P_{11}P_{2}P_{20}-P_{1}P_{14}P_{21}\\ -P_{16}P_{20}P_{21}-P_{18}P_{22}P_{23}-P_{17}P_{19}P_{24}-P_{13}P_{2}P_{24}-P_{14}P_{15}P_{25}-P_{19}P_{22}P_{25}-P_{12}P_{13}P_{26}-P_{20}P_{23}P_{26}\\ -P_{10}P_{11}P_{27}-P_{21}P_{24}P_{27}-P_{25}P_{26}P_{27}+P_{12}P_{21}P_{3}-P_{10}P_{23}P_{3}-P_{2}P_{25}P_{3}-P_{15}P_{20}P_{4}+P_{13}P_{22}P_{4}\\ -P_{17}P_{3}P_{4}-P_{12}P_{19}P_{5}+P_{14}P_{23}P_{5}-P_{27}P_{4}P_{5}-P_{11}P_{22}P_{6}+P_{15}P_{24}P_{6}-P_{1}P_{26}P_{6}-P_{16}P_{5}P_{6}\\ -P_{11}P_{12}P_{7}-P_{23}P_{24}P_{7}+P_{16}P_{25}P_{7}-P_{1}P_{4}P_{7}-P_{10}P_{15}P_{8}-P_{21}P_{22}P_{8}+P_{17}P_{26}P_{8}-P_{2}P_{5}P_{8}\\ -P_{13}P_{14}P_{9}-P_{19}P_{20}P_{9}+P_{18}P_{27}P_{9}-P_{3}P_{6}P_{9}-P_{7}P_{8}P_{9}\end{array}

The 2727 variables P1,,P27P_{1},\ldots,P_{27} are indexed by the lines on the Fermat cubic surface in 3\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^{3} and the terms correspond to triples of coplanar lines. The sign prescription is more intricate, given in terms of the C3C_{3} action on the cubic, see [L11]. The octonionic projective plane 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2} is cut out by the 2727 partial derivatives of the above cubic.

There is a Cartan subgroup ()6(\mathbb{C}^{*})^{6} of E6E_{6} that acts diagonally on the variables PiP_{i}. We picked an element gg of order 1313 of it which acts by Piζ13aiPiP_{i}\mapsto\zeta_{13}^{a_{i}}P_{i} with the weights aia_{i} given by

(6,7,7,10,3,6,10,3,0,5,8,8,4,9,5,4,9,0,2,11,11,12,1,2,12,1,0).(6,7,7,10,3,6,10,3,0,5,8,8,4,9,5,4,9,0,2,11,11,12,1,2,12,1,0).

As the reader can see, the action of gg on the variables has a three-dimensional eigenspace of weight zero and 1212 two-dimensional eigenspace of other weights. For the three invariant variables P9,P18,P27P_{9},P_{18},P_{27}, the corresponding partial derivatives of the cubic

(1) P13P14P19P20+P18P27P3P6P7P8,P12P15P16P17P1P2P22P23+P27P9,P10P11P21P24P25P26P4P5+P18P9\begin{array}[]{l}-P_{13}P_{14}-P_{19}P_{20}+P_{18}P_{27}-P_{3}P_{6}-P_{7}P_{8},\\ -P_{12}P_{15}-P_{16}P_{17}-P_{1}P_{2}-P_{22}P_{23}+P_{27}P_{9},\\ -P_{10}P_{11}-P_{21}P_{24}-P_{25}P_{26}-P_{4}P_{5}+P_{18}P_{9}\end{array}

involve all of the variables PiP_{i}.

At this point, our expectations of the gg-action on H0(X,KX)H^{0}(X,K_{X}) indicate that we need to take a linear cut by

(P9,P18,P27,P23+d1P26,P19+d2P24,P5+d3P8,P13+d4P16,P10+d5P15,P1+d6P6,\displaystyle(P_{9},P_{18},P_{27},P_{23}+d_{1}P_{26},P_{19}+d_{2}P_{24},P_{5}+d_{3}P_{8},P_{13}+d_{4}P_{16},P_{10}+d_{5}P_{15},P_{1}+d_{6}P_{6},
P2+d7P3,P11+d8P12,P14+d9P17,P4+d10P7,P20+d11P21,P22+d12P25)\displaystyle P_{2}+d_{7}P_{3},P_{11}+d_{8}P_{12},P_{14}+d_{9}P_{17},P_{4}+d_{10}P_{7},P_{20}+d_{11}P_{21},P_{22}+d_{12}P_{25})

for some constants d1,,d12d_{1},\ldots,d_{12}. Moreover, we want a linear combination of the gg-invariant quadrics (1) to vanish on the linear subspace of the cut. In view of the Cartan subgroup symmetry, it is reasonable to pick this linear combination to be the sum of the above quadrics. This gives 66 simple equations on did_{i}, namely did13i=1d_{i}d_{13-i}=-1. We have been able to verify by computer at a specific point that the resulting scheme is a smooth surface of degree 1313 and is thus a good candidate for our XX.

Specifically, the 2626 quadrics that cut out XX are given by

(2) t102+d2t2t5t1t6d2t11t9,t32+t2t4d1t12t7+t11t8,d1t1t5d1t12t7+d2t11t8t10t9,t12t4t11t5+t10t6t7t9,t4t6t3t7+d2t2t8d1t1t9,t3t4+t2t5+t1t6t12t8,d1t1t2+d1t12t4+t10t6t82,d2t11t12+t52+t3t7+t1t9,d2t11t2t10t3t6t7+t4t9,t42t3t5+d2t2t6+d1t1t7,t12t6+t11t7t10t8t92,d2t2t3+t1t4+d2t11t7t10t8,t10t12+t4t5t2t7t1t8,d1t1t3d1t12t5+d2t11t6t8t9,t10t11+t3t5+t2t6d1t12t9,d2t112+d1t10t12t4t5+t3t6,d2t22+t1t3t10t7t8t9,d1t1t12+t6t7t5t8t4t9,d1t122+t5t6+t3t8t2t9,d1t12d2t11t4t10t5+t7t8,t12t3t11t4+t7t8+t6t9,d1d2t12t2d2t11t3t10t4t6t8,t1t11t10t2+t5t7t3t9,d1t1t10+t5t6+t4t7+d2t2t9,d2t12t2+t10t4t72t5t9,d1t1t11+t62+t4t8+t3t9\begin{array}[]{l}-t_{10}^{2}+d_{2}t_{2}t_{5}-t_{1}t_{6}-d_{2}t_{11}t_{9},\ t_{3}^{2}+t_{2}t_{4}-d_{1}t_{12}t_{7}+t_{11}t_{8},\ -d_{1}t_{1}t_{5}-d_{1}t_{12}t_{7}+d_{2}t_{11}t_{8}-t_{10}t_{9},\\ -t_{12}t_{4}-t_{11}t_{5}+t_{10}t_{6}-t_{7}t_{9},\ -t_{4}t_{6}-t_{3}t_{7}+d_{2}t_{2}t_{8}-d_{1}t_{1}t_{9},\ t_{3}t_{4}+t_{2}t_{5}+t_{1}t_{6}-t_{12}t_{8},\\ d_{1}t_{1}t_{2}+d_{1}t_{12}t_{4}+t_{10}t_{6}-t_{8}^{2},\ -d_{2}t_{11}t_{12}+t_{5}^{2}+t_{3}t_{7}+t_{1}t_{9},\ d_{2}t_{11}t_{2}-t_{10}t_{3}-t_{6}t_{7}+t_{4}t_{9},\\ t_{4}^{2}-t_{3}t_{5}+d_{2}t_{2}t_{6}+d_{1}t_{1}t_{7},\ -t_{12}t_{6}+t_{11}t_{7}-t_{10}t_{8}-t_{9}^{2},\ -d_{2}t_{2}t_{3}+t_{1}t_{4}+d_{2}t_{11}t_{7}-t_{10}t_{8},\\ t_{10}t_{12}+t_{4}t_{5}-t_{2}t_{7}-t_{1}t_{8},\ d_{1}t_{1}t_{3}-d_{1}t_{12}t_{5}+d_{2}t_{11}t_{6}-t_{8}t_{9},\ -t_{10}t_{11}+t_{3}t_{5}+t_{2}t_{6}-d_{1}t_{12}t_{9},\\ -d_{2}t_{11}^{2}+d_{1}t_{10}t_{12}-t_{4}t_{5}+t_{3}t_{6},\ d_{2}t_{2}^{2}+t_{1}t_{3}-t_{10}t_{7}-t_{8}t_{9},\ d_{1}t_{1}t_{12}+t_{6}t_{7}-t_{5}t_{8}-t_{4}t_{9},\\ -d_{1}t_{12}^{2}+t_{5}t_{6}+t_{3}t_{8}-t_{2}t_{9},\ d_{1}t_{1}^{2}-d_{2}t_{11}t_{4}-t_{10}t_{5}+t_{7}t_{8},\ -t_{12}t_{3}-t_{11}t_{4}+t_{7}t_{8}+t_{6}t_{9},\\ d_{1}d_{2}t_{12}t_{2}-d_{2}t_{11}t_{3}-t_{10}t_{4}-t_{6}t_{8},\ -t_{1}t_{11}-t_{10}t_{2}+t_{5}t_{7}-t_{3}t_{9},\ d_{1}t_{1}t_{10}+t_{5}t_{6}+t_{4}t_{7}+d_{2}t_{2}t_{9},\\ d_{2}t_{12}t_{2}+t_{10}t_{4}-t_{7}^{2}-t_{5}t_{9},\ d_{1}t_{1}t_{11}+t_{6}^{2}+t_{4}t_{8}+t_{3}t_{9}\end{array}

in the homogeneous coordinates (t1::t12)(t_{1}:\ldots:t_{12}) of 11\mathbb{P}^{11}. The action of gg is tiζ13itit_{i}\mapsto\zeta_{13}^{i}t_{i}.

Remark 2.1.

The action of the Cartan subgroup of E6E_{6} reduces the dimension of the space of parameters dd from six to two (taking into account the need to preserve the invariant quadric that has to vanish on the cut reduces E6E_{6} to F4F_{4}). We expect the total family to have dimension four, but it is not clear how one can build it. What makes the elements above special is that these surfaces XX admit an additional C3C_{3} symmetry that extends the C13C_{13} action to the semidirect product of these two groups. Namely, by scaling the variables (but still calling them tit_{i}) we could rewrite the equations (2) as

(3) t102d1d22(t2t5+t1t6t11t9),d1d22t32+t2t4+t12t7t11t8,d1d22t1t5+t12t7d2(t11t8+t10t9),t12t4+d1d2(t11t5+t10t6+d2t7t9),t4t6+d2(t3t7t2t8+d1d2t1t9),d1d2(t3t4t2t5+d2t1t6)t12t8,d1d22t1t2+t12t4+d2t10t6d2t82,t11t12+d1d2(t52t3t7+d2t1t9),t11t2t10t3+t6t7+t4t9,t42+d1d22(t3t5+t2t6t1t7),t12t6+t11t7t10t8d1d22t92,d1d22t2t3+d2t1t4+d2t11t7t10t8,t10t12d1d2(t4t5t2t7+d2t1t8),d1d22t1t3+t12t5d2(t11t6+t8t9),t10t11d1d2(d2t3t5t2t6+t12t9),d2t112+t10t12+d2t4t5+d1d22t3t6,t10t7+d1d2(t22+d2t1t3t8t9),t1t12t6t7+t5t8t4t9,t122d1d22(t5t6t3t8+t2t9),d1d22t12+t11t4+t10t5t7t8,t11t4d2(t12t3+t7t8)+d1d22t6t9,t10t4+d1d2(t12t2+d2t11t3t6t8),d2t1t11t10t2+d2t5t7d1d22t3t9,t4t7+d1d2(t1t10t5t6+d2t2t9),d2t12t2+t10t4d2t72+d1d22t5t9,t4t8+d1d2(t1t11+t62+d2t3t9)\begin{array}[]{l}-t_{10}^{2}-d_{1}d_{2}^{2}(t_{2}t_{5}+t_{1}t_{6}-t_{11}t_{9}),\ d_{1}d_{2}^{2}t_{3}^{2}+t_{2}t_{4}+t_{12}t_{7}-t_{11}t_{8},\ d_{1}d_{2}^{2}t_{1}t_{5}+t_{12}t_{7}-d_{2}(t_{11}t_{8}+t_{10}t_{9}),\\ -t_{12}t_{4}+d_{1}d_{2}(-t_{11}t_{5}+t_{10}t_{6}+d_{2}t_{7}t_{9}),\ t_{4}t_{6}+d_{2}(-t_{3}t_{7}-t_{2}t_{8}+d_{1}d_{2}t_{1}t_{9}),\ d_{1}d_{2}(t_{3}t_{4}-t_{2}t_{5}+d_{2}t_{1}t_{6})-t_{12}t_{8},\\ d_{1}d_{2}^{2}t_{1}t_{2}+t_{12}t_{4}+d_{2}t_{10}t_{6}-d_{2}t_{8}^{2},\ t_{11}t_{12}+d_{1}d_{2}(t_{5}^{2}-t_{3}t_{7}+d_{2}t_{1}t_{9}),\ -t_{11}t_{2}-t_{10}t_{3}+t_{6}t_{7}+t_{4}t_{9},\\ t_{4}^{2}+d_{1}d_{2}^{2}(t_{3}t_{5}+t_{2}t_{6}-t_{1}t_{7}),\ -t_{12}t_{6}+t_{11}t_{7}-t_{10}t_{8}-d_{1}d_{2}^{2}t_{9}^{2},\ -d_{1}d_{2}^{2}t_{2}t_{3}+d_{2}t_{1}t_{4}+d_{2}t_{11}t_{7}-t_{10}t_{8},\\ t_{10}t_{12}-d_{1}d_{2}(t_{4}t_{5}-t_{2}t_{7}+d_{2}t_{1}t_{8}),\ d_{1}d_{2}^{2}t_{1}t_{3}+t_{12}t_{5}-d_{2}(t_{11}t_{6}+t_{8}t_{9}),\ t_{10}t_{11}-d_{1}d_{2}(d_{2}t_{3}t_{5}-t_{2}t_{6}+t_{12}t_{9}),\\ -d_{2}t_{11}^{2}+t_{10}t_{12}+d_{2}t_{4}t_{5}+d_{1}d_{2}^{2}t_{3}t_{6},\ t_{10}t_{7}+d_{1}d_{2}(t_{2}^{2}+d_{2}t_{1}t_{3}-t_{8}t_{9}),\ t_{1}t_{12}-t_{6}t_{7}+t_{5}t_{8}-t_{4}t_{9},\\ -t_{12}^{2}-d_{1}d_{2}^{2}(t_{5}t_{6}-t_{3}t_{8}+t_{2}t_{9}),\ d_{1}d_{2}^{2}t_{1}^{2}+t_{11}t_{4}+t_{10}t_{5}-t_{7}t_{8},\ t_{11}t_{4}-d_{2}(t_{12}t_{3}+t_{7}t_{8})+d_{1}d_{2}^{2}t_{6}t_{9},\\ -t_{10}t_{4}+d_{1}d_{2}(t_{12}t_{2}+d_{2}t_{11}t_{3}-t_{6}t_{8}),\ d_{2}t_{1}t_{11}-t_{10}t_{2}+d_{2}t_{5}t_{7}-d_{1}d_{2}^{2}t_{3}t_{9},\ -t_{4}t_{7}+d_{1}d_{2}(t_{1}t_{10}-t_{5}t_{6}+d_{2}t_{2}t_{9}),\\ d_{2}t_{12}t_{2}+t_{10}t_{4}-d_{2}t_{7}^{2}+d_{1}d_{2}^{2}t_{5}t_{9},\ t_{4}t_{8}+d_{1}d_{2}(-t_{1}t_{11}+t_{6}^{2}+d_{2}t_{3}t_{9})\end{array}

with the additional symmetry tit3imod13t_{i}\mapsto t_{3i\hskip-4.0pt\mod 13}. The details are in [BBF20+, Section2.nb].

2.3. Constructing a cut with A2A_{2} singularities.

Our method of constructing a fake projective plane largely followed the blueprint of [BF20].

We set d3=d4=d5=d6=1d_{3}=d_{4}=d_{5}=d_{6}=1 and tried to find out which (d1,d2)(d_{1},d_{2}) give singular cuts. In order to achieve this, we worked on an affine coordinate chart of 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2} which can be obtained by solving the equations of 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2} for eleven of the variables as follows.

P4=P10P16+P2P24+P12P26+P14P9,P6=P14P17+P2P20P10P27P12P7,P8=P1P14P16P20P24P27+P12P3,P11=P15P24P1P26P16P5P3P9,P13=P15P20+P17P3+P27P5+P1P7,P18=P20P26P10P3+P14P5P24P7,P19=P14P15P26P27P2P3+P16P7,P21=P10P15+P17P26P2P5P7P9,P22=1,P23=P12P15P16P17P1P2+P27P9,P25=P1P10P17P24P12P5P20P9\begin{array}[]{l}P_{4}=P_{10}P_{16}+P_{2}P_{24}+P_{12}P_{26}+P_{14}P_{9},P_{6}=-P_{14}P_{17}+P_{2}P_{20}-P_{10}P_{27}-P_{12}P_{7},\\ P_{8}=-P_{1}P_{14}-P_{16}P_{20}-P_{24}P_{27}+P_{12}P_{3},P_{11}=P_{15}P_{24}-P_{1}P_{26}-P_{16}P_{5}-P_{3}P_{9},\\ P_{13}=P_{15}P_{20}+P_{17}P_{3}+P_{27}P_{5}+P_{1}P_{7},P_{18}=-P_{20}P_{26}-P_{10}P_{3}+P_{14}P_{5}-P_{24}P_{7},\\ P_{19}=-P_{14}P_{15}-P_{26}P_{27}-P_{2}P_{3}+P_{16}P_{7},P_{21}=-P_{10}P_{15}+P_{17}P_{26}-P_{2}P_{5}-P_{7}P_{9},\\ P_{22}=1,P_{23}=-P_{12}P_{15}-P_{16}P_{17}-P_{1}P_{2}+P_{27}P_{9},P_{25}=P_{1}P_{10}-P_{17}P_{24}-P_{12}P_{5}-P_{20}P_{9}\end{array}

We obtained this chart by connecting the formulas for the Cartan cubic from [GE96] and [L11]. We then further solved for five of the variables to reduce their number while still keeping the equations relatively short. Then we looked for tangent vectors for the surfaces with d1=1d_{1}=1 that lie in a codimension three subspace, by a multivariable Newton method starting at random points. The idea is that some of these would happen at values of d2d_{2} where the surface X=X1,d2X=X_{1,d_{2}} acquires a node. After some trial and error we saw that solutions to

2734d2397d22172d23821d24+190d2583d26+16d27=0-27-34d_{2}-397d_{2}^{2}-172d_{2}^{3}-821d_{2}^{4}+190d_{2}^{5}-83d_{2}^{6}+16d_{2}^{7}=0

give singular surfaces. As in [BF20], we then perturbed d1d_{1} slightly to 1+10201+10^{-20} to find a nearby point on the locus of singular surfaces. This lead us to conjecture that generic points (d1,d2)(d_{1},d_{2}) on the curve

0=4d13+8d144d1512d12d216d13d2+28d14d239d15d2+12d16d212d1d2228d12d2254d13d22+78d14d2234d15d22+28d16d2212d17d224d2339d1d2334d12d23277d13d23+192d14d23277d15d23+54d16d2316d17d23+4d18d238d2428d1d2478d12d24192d13d24+192d15d2478d16d24+28d17d248d18d244d2516d1d2554d12d25277d13d25192d14d25277d15d25+34d16d2539d17d25+4d18d25+12d1d26+28d12d26+34d13d26+78d14d26+54d15d2628d16d26+12d17d2612d12d2739d13d2728d14d2716d15d27+12d16d27+4d13d28+8d14d28+4d15d28\begin{array}[]{l}0=-4d_{1}^{3}+8d_{1}^{4}-4d_{1}^{5}-12d_{1}^{2}d_{2}-16d_{1}^{3}d_{2}+28d_{1}^{4}d_{2}-39d_{1}^{5}d_{2}+12d_{1}^{6}d_{2}-12d_{1}d_{2}^{2}-28d_{1}^{2}d_{2}^{2}-54d_{1}^{3}d_{2}^{2}\\ +78d_{1}^{4}d_{2}^{2}-34d_{1}^{5}d_{2}^{2}+28d_{1}^{6}d_{2}^{2}-12d_{1}^{7}d_{2}^{2}-4d_{2}^{3}-39d_{1}d_{2}^{3}-34d_{1}^{2}d_{2}^{3}-277d_{1}^{3}d_{2}^{3}+192d_{1}^{4}d_{2}^{3}-277d_{1}^{5}d_{2}^{3}\\ +54d_{1}^{6}d_{2}^{3}-16d_{1}^{7}d_{2}^{3}+4d_{1}^{8}d_{2}^{3}-8d_{2}^{4}-28d_{1}d_{2}^{4}-78d_{1}^{2}d_{2}^{4}-192d_{1}^{3}d_{2}^{4}+192d_{1}^{5}d_{2}^{4}-78d_{1}^{6}d_{2}^{4}+28d_{1}^{7}d_{2}^{4}\\ -8d_{1}^{8}d_{2}^{4}-4d_{2}^{5}-16d_{1}d_{2}^{5}-54d_{1}^{2}d_{2}^{5}-277d_{1}^{3}d_{2}^{5}-192d_{1}^{4}d_{2}^{5}-277d_{1}^{5}d_{2}^{5}+34d_{1}^{6}d_{2}^{5}-39d_{1}^{7}d_{2}^{5}+4d_{1}^{8}d_{2}^{5}+12d_{1}d_{2}^{6}\\ +28d_{1}^{2}d_{2}^{6}+34d_{1}^{3}d_{2}^{6}+78d_{1}^{4}d_{2}^{6}+54d_{1}^{5}d_{2}^{6}-28d_{1}^{6}d_{2}^{6}+12d_{1}^{7}d_{2}^{6}-12d_{1}^{2}d_{2}^{7}-39d_{1}^{3}d_{2}^{7}-28d_{1}^{4}d_{2}^{7}-16d_{1}^{5}d_{2}^{7}\\ +12d_{1}^{6}d_{2}^{7}+4d_{1}^{3}d_{2}^{8}+8d_{1}^{4}d_{2}^{8}+4d_{1}^{5}d_{2}^{8}\end{array}

give nodal Xd1,d2X_{d_{1},d_{2}}.

We then looked for singular points of this curve. There were several such points, one of which was a cusp of the curve. We focused our attention on it and discovered a surface Xd1,d2X_{d_{1},d_{2}} with 3939 A2A_{2} singularities. Specifically, both d1d_{1} and d2d_{2} can be given given as roots of

0=2187+7290d+23433d2+21640d3+66393d421640d5+23433d67290d7+2187d80=2187+7290d+23433d^{2}+21640d^{3}+66393d^{4}-21640d^{5}+23433d^{6}-7290d^{7}+2187d^{8}

approximately given by (d1,d2)(1.93+2.30i,0.01250.515i)(d_{1},d_{2})\approx(1.93+2.30\,\rm i,0.0125-0.515\,\rm i). Of course, the same is true for all of the Galois conjugates of this pair. From now on we will call this surface X0X_{0}.

We observed that four of the Galois conjugate pairs of (d1,d2)(d_{1},d_{2}) give isomorphic surfaces. To see that, we noticed that scheme Xd1,d2X_{d_{1},d_{2}} cut out by (3) is isomorphic to X1/d2,d1X_{-1/d_{2},d_{1}} under the coordinate change

(4) (t1,,t12)(d2t5,t10,d2t2,d1t7,t12,t4,d1d2t9,d1d2t1,d2t6,d1t11,d1d2t3,d1t8)(t_{1},\ldots,t_{12})\mapsto(d_{2}t_{5},t_{10},d_{2}t_{2},-d_{1}t_{7},t_{12},t_{4},-d_{1}d_{2}t_{9},-d_{1}d_{2}t_{1},d_{2}t_{6},-d_{1}t_{11},-d_{1}d_{2}t_{3},-d_{1}t_{8})

The idea behind it was to use i5imod13i\to 5i\hskip-4.0pt\mod 13, and we heavily relied on Mathematica computations, see [BBF20+, Section2.nb].

We then used the symmetry (4) to average the C13C_{13}-invariants of the coordinate ring of the surface X0X_{0} suspected to have A2A_{2} singularities, to get X0/C13X_{0}/C_{13} defined in the 1313-dimensional weighted projective space W(24,310)W\mathbb{P}(2^{4},3^{10}) by 99 equations of degree five and 2929 equations of degree six. Due to the above symmetrization, the coefficients were in the field (2)\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-2}).

2.4. Finding singular points.

It was not entirely trivial to find the singular points of X0/C13X_{0}/C_{13}. We did it by calculating a degree 1212 equation in the first four variables which gives a (non-normal) image of X0/C13X_{0}/C_{13} in 3\mathbb{P}^{3}. Then we looked for its curves of singularities by finding multiple singular points on random hyperplane cuts. Then we have looked for singular points outside of the curve of singularities, and indeed hit upon A2A_{2} singularities. We were then able to verify that these were the only singularities by computing the degree of the singular locus over a finite field. As in the case of [BF20], the A2A_{2} singularities were not defined over the quadratic extension of \mathbb{Q}, but a coordinate change gave us a model of X0/C13W13X_{0}/C_{13}\subseteq W\mathbb{P}^{13} still defined over (2)\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-2}) and with three singular points defined over \mathbb{Q}.

3. Constructing the fake projective plane

3.1. Constructing the triple cover.

By the work of Keum [Ke12], the surface X0/C13X_{0}/C_{13} admits a Galois triple cover which is a fake projective plane. In this, it is very similar to the situation in [BF20] and we employed the same general method. It was useful that in both cases there was an additional order three automorphism σ\sigma because the FPP had a C3×C3C_{3}\times C_{3} group of automorphisms. Specifically, we looked for sections ff and dd of 4KX0/C134K_{X_{0}/C_{13}} which satisfy

fσ(f)σ2(f)=d3.f\,\sigma(f)\sigma^{2}(f)=d^{3}.

Moreover ff and dd should have certain vanishing on the exceptional lines at the blowup of A2A_{2} singularities. We refer the reader to [BF20] for details.

The nature of X0/C13X_{0}/C_{13} made the computations more challenging. In particular, at some point we had to work with random points on the surface computed with 6×1046\times 10^{4} digits of accuracy. The equations for ff and dd had coefficients in (2)\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-2}) which were about 1.5×1041.5\times 10^{4} digits long. As in [BF20], we solved it over a finite field of 1919 elements, but now we used a p-adic version of the Newton’s method to quickly gain the needed accuracy.

Once the triple cover was constructed, we used the fixed points of the automorphisms of fake2\mathbb{P}^{2}_{fake} to get a basis with nicer equations, only about 100 digits long coefficients, see [BBF20+, Section3.nb] for details. This surface is labeled by (C18,p=3,,d3D3)(\operatorname{C18},p=3,\emptyset,d_{3}D_{3}) in the classification of [CS11+], since it is the only one with an automorphism group that contains (C3)2(C_{3})^{2} and Picard group that contains C13C_{13}.

The details of the above process are in [BBF20+, Section3.nb].

3.2. Open questions.

Let us now discuss open problems related to this construction.

The first question is how to verify that the special cuts Xd1,d2X_{d_{1},d_{2}} of 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2} are simply connected. Since these are not complete intersections, the Lefschetz Hyperplane theorem can not be applied, so other methods are needed. It might perhaps follow from our construction and [CS11+], but a more direct argument is desirable.

A related question is how to construct non-C3C_{3}-invariant deformations of Xd1,d2X_{d_{1},d_{2}}. It looks like they will no longer be cuts of 𝕆2\mathbb{O}\mathbb{P}^{2} but perhaps one can get them by carefully examining the equations (2).

The quotient of the fake projective plane (C18,p=3,,d3D3)(\operatorname{C18},p=3,\emptyset,d_{3}D_{3}) by (C3)2(C_{3})^{2} is also covered by (C18,p=3,{2I})(\operatorname{C18},p=3,\{2I\}). This fake projective plane in turn covers a surface (C18,p=3,{2})(\operatorname{C18},p=3,\{2\}), which is covered by three other fake projective planes. The method of [BF20] is, unfortunately, not quite applicable here, so how do we find (the equations of) these other surfaces?

It is known from [CS11+] that (C18,p=3,,d3D3)(\operatorname{C18},p=3,\emptyset,d_{3}D_{3}) has Picard group C2×C2×C13C_{2}\times C_{2}\times C_{13}. While the C13C_{13} part can be inferred from our construction (even though it may not be entirely trivial to follow), the other two factors are mysterious. It would be interesting to see them explicitly, and they may be useful in answering both the previous and the next questions.

A perennial question is how one can reduce the size of the coefficients in the equations. There are currently only ad hoc tools that are not very successful, except in [BK19] case.

References

  • [BCP11] I. Bauer, F. Catanese, and R. Pignatelli, Surfaces of general type with geometric genus zero: a survey. Complex and differential geometry. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. 1–48.
  • [BBF20+] L. Borisov, A. Buch, and E. Fatighenti, A journey from the octonionic 2\mathbb{P}^{2} to a fake 2\mathbb{P}^{2}, supplemental materials, http://www.math.rutgers.edu/\simborisov/FPP-C13/
  • [BF20] L. Borisov and E. Fatighenti, New explicit constructions of surfaces of general type arXiv:2004.02637
  • [BK19] L. Borisov and J. Keum, Explicit equations of a fake projective plane to appear in Duke Math. J., arXiv:1802.06333
  • [CS11] D. Cartwright and T. Steger, Enumeration of the 50 fake projective planes. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 348 (2010), no. 1-2, 11–13.
  • [CS11+] http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/donaldc/fakeprojectiveplanes/registerofgps.txt
  • [GE96] N. Elkies and B. Gross, The exceptional cone and the Leech lattice. Internat. Math. Res. Notices 1996, no. 14, 665–698.
  • [H11] Z. Hua, Classification of free actions on complete intersections of four quadrics. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 15 (2011), no. 4, 973–990.
  • [Ju] J. Bezanson, A. Edelman, S. Karpinski, V. Shah, Julia: A fresh approach to numerical computing. SIAM review, 59 (2017), no. 1, 65–98.
  • [Ke12] J. Keum, Toward a geometric construction of fake projective planes, Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl. 23 (2012), no. 2, 137–155.
  • [L11] J. Lurie, On simply laced Lie algebras and their minuscule representations, Comment. Math. Helv. 76 (2001), 515–575
  • [Mac] D. Grayson and M.  Stillman, Macaulay2, a software system for research in algebraic geometry,
    http://www.math.uiuc.edu/Macaulay2.
  • [Mag] W. Bosma, J. Cannon, and C. Playoust, The Magma algebra system. I. The user language, J. Symbolic Comput., 24 (1997), 235–265; v2.23-2.
  • [Math] Mathematica 11.1, Wolfram Research, Inc., 2016.