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

The TT-adic Galois representation is surjective for a positive density of Drinfeld modules

Anwesh Ray Chennai Mathematical Institute, H1, SIPCOT IT Park, Kelambakkam, Siruseri, Tamil Nadu 603103, India [email protected]
Abstract.

Let 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q} be the finite field with q5q\geq 5 elements, A:=𝔽q[T]A\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\mathbb{F}_{q}[T] and F:=𝔽q(T)F\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\mathbb{F}_{q}(T). Assume that qq is odd and take |||\cdot| to be the absolute value at \infty that is normalized by |T|=q|T|=q. Given a pair w=(g1,g2)A2w=(g_{1},g_{2})\in A^{2} with g20g_{2}\neq 0, consider the associated Drinfeld module ϕw:AA{τ}\phi^{w}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\rightarrow A\{\tau\} of rank 22 defined by ϕTw=T+g1τ+g2τ2\phi_{T}^{w}=T+g_{1}\tau+g_{2}\tau^{2}. Fix integers c1,c21c_{1},c_{2}\geq 1 and define |w|:=max{|g1|1c1,|g2|1c2}|w|\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{max}\{|g_{1}|^{\frac{1}{c_{1}}},|g_{2}|^{\frac{1}{c_{2}}}\}. I show that when ordered by height, there is a positive density of pairs w=(g1,g2)w=(g_{1},g_{2}), such that the TT-adic Galois representation attached to ϕw\phi^{w} is surjective.

Key words and phrases:
Galois representations, Drinfeld modules, function fields in postive characteristic, density results
2020 Mathematics Subject Classification:
11F80, 11G09, 11R45

1. Introduction

1.1. Background and motivation

Given an elliptic curve EE over \mathbb{Q}, and a prime natural number n>1n>1, there is a Galois representation

ρE,n:Gal(¯/)GL2(/n)\rho_{E,n}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{Gal}(\bar{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q})\rightarrow\operatorname{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z})

on the nn-torsion of E(¯)E(\bar{\mathbb{Q}}). Moreover, given a prime pp, the pp-adic Tate-module Tp(E):=limnE[pn]T_{p}(E)\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\varprojlim_{n}E[p^{n}] admits a natural Galois action, which is encoded by the representation

ρ^E,p:Gal(¯/)GL2(p).\hat{\rho}_{E,p}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{Gal}(\bar{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q})\rightarrow\operatorname{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}_{p}).

Passing to the inverse limit of ρE,n\rho_{E,n}, one obtains the adelic Galois representation

ρ^E:Gal(¯/)GL2(^)pGL2(p),\hat{\rho}_{E}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{Gal}(\bar{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q})\rightarrow\operatorname{GL}_{2}(\widehat{\mathbb{Z}})\xrightarrow{\sim}\prod_{p}\operatorname{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}_{p}),

which can also be identified with the product pρ^E,p\prod_{p}\hat{\rho}_{E,p}. The celebrated open image theorem of Serre [Ser72] asserts that if EE does not have complex multiplication, then the image of ρ^E\hat{\rho}_{E} has finite index in GL2(^)\operatorname{GL}_{2}(\widehat{\mathbb{Z}}). In particular, this means that for all but finitely many primes pp, the ρE,p:Gal(¯/)GL2(/p)\rho_{E,p}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{Gal}(\bar{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q})\rightarrow\operatorname{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z}) is surjective. A prime pp is said to be exceptional if ρE,p\rho_{E,p} is not surjective. Duke [Duk97] showed that almost all elliptic curves have no exceptional primes (when ordered according to height). An elliptic curve E/E_{/\mathbb{Q}} is said to be a Serre curve if the index of ρ^E\hat{\rho}_{E} in GL2(^)\operatorname{GL}_{2}(\widehat{\mathbb{Z}}) is equal to 22. This is the minimal possible index, and Jones [Jon10] showed that almost all elliptic curves are Serre curves. Generalized results have been obtained for principally polarized abelian varieties over a rational base, cf. [LSTX19].

In this article I explore natural analogues of such questions for Drinfeld modules of rank 22. These arithmetic objects are natural function field analogues of elliptic curves, and they give rise to compatible families of Galois representations. Drinfeld modules (and their generalizations) have come to prominence for their central role in the Langlands program over function fields. Let qq be a power of a prime number and FF be the rational function field 𝔽q(T)\mathbb{F}_{q}(T). Let FsepF^{\operatorname{sep}} be a choice of separable closure of FF. Take AA to be the polynomial ring 𝔽q[T]\mathbb{F}_{q}[T]. Take A^:=lim𝔞A/𝔞\widehat{A}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\varprojlim_{\mathfrak{a}}A/\mathfrak{a}, where 𝔞\mathfrak{a} runs over all non-zero ideals in AA. Pink and Rütsche [PR09] proved an analogue of Serre’s open image theorem for Drinfeld modules ϕ\phi over FF without complex multiplication. In greater detail, suppose that ϕ:AF{τ}\phi\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\rightarrow F\{\tau\} is a Drinfeld module of rank rr for which EndF¯(ϕ)=A\operatorname{End}_{\bar{F}}(\phi)=A, then the image of the adelic Galois representation

ρ^ϕ:Gal(Fsep/F)GLr(A^)\hat{\rho}_{\phi}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{Gal}(F^{\operatorname{sep}}/F)\rightarrow\operatorname{GL}_{r}(\widehat{A})

has finite index in GLr(A^)\operatorname{GL}_{r}(\widehat{A}). For odd prime powers q5q\geq 5, Zywina [Zyw11] was in fact able to construct an explicit Drinfeld module of rank 22 for which the adelic Galois representation is surjective. These results have been generalized to certain higher ranks by Chen [Che22, Che21]. There has also been recent interest in the study of the mod-TT representation for certain infinite families of Drinfeld modules [GM23], as well as its application to the inverse Galois problem over the rational function field.

1.2. Main result

The strategy taken by Duke to prove that almost all elliptic curves have no expectional primes makes use of the large sieve. This involves local estimates that rely on bounds for certain sums of Hurwitz class numbers (in congruence classes). These sums are related to the fourier coefficients of certain modular forms, and the estimates rely on the Ramanujan bound (cf. [Duk97, Lemma 3]). The approach taken for Drinfeld modules in this article is indeed different, since Duke’s method does not readily generalize to this context. I consider only the Galois representation at the rational prime 𝔭=(T)\mathfrak{p}=(T). I then study the density of rank 22 Drinfeld modules ϕ\phi for which the TT-adic Galois representation

(1.1) ρ^ϕ,𝔭:Gal(Fsep/F)GL2(A𝔭)\hat{\rho}_{\phi,\mathfrak{p}}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{Gal}(F^{\operatorname{sep}}/F)\rightarrow\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}})

is surjective.

Theorem 1.1.

Assume that q5q\geq 5 is odd. Then there is a positive density of Drinfeld modules of rank 22 over A:=𝔽q[T]A\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\mathbb{F}_{q}[T] for which the TT-adic Galois representation (1.1) is surjective.

One may refer to section 2.3, where a precise notion of density is given for Drinfeld modules over AA.

1.3. Organization

Including the introduction, this article consists of three sections. In section 2, I discuss the basic properties of Drinfeld modules and their associated Galois representations. In the final section, I prove that the surjectivity of the TT-adic representation can indeed be detected from certain very explicit congruence conditions on the coefficients of a Drinfeld module with coefficients in AA (cf. Theorem 3.1). These conditions are very explicit, and they are leveraged to prove that the density of Drinfeld modules satisfying these conditions is positive. In fact, a lower bound for this density can be given, and I refer to the Remark 3.6 for a discussion on the issues in obtaining a satisfactory lower bound.

1.4. Outlook

One of the key methods used is the algorithm of Gekeler for computing characteristic polynomials of rank 22 Drinfeld modules. I would expect that they can be generalized to prove similar results for the Galois representations on 𝔭\mathfrak{p}-adic Tate modules, when 𝔭\mathfrak{p} is a prime with small degree. However, this has not been pursued since one does not have a general statement that applied to all 𝔭\mathfrak{p}, and one only considers 𝔭=(T)\mathfrak{p}=(T) in this article. I am hopeful that Theorem 1.1 shall pave the way for interesting developments in the future.

2. Drinfeld modules and associated Galois representations

2.1. Preliminary notions

I discuss the theory of Drinfeld modules; my notation is consistent with that in [Pap23]. Let pp be an odd prime number and q=pnq=p^{n}. Set 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q} to be the field with qq elements and assume that q5q\geq 5. Let AA be the polynomial ring 𝔽q[T]\mathbb{F}_{q}[T] and FF its fraction field 𝔽q(T)\mathbb{F}_{q}(T). Given a non-zero ideal 𝔞\mathfrak{a} with generator aa, set deg𝔞:=degT(a)\operatorname{deg}\mathfrak{a}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{deg}_{T}(a). Let KK be a field extension of 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q}, KK is called an AA-field if it is equipped with an 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q}-algebra homomorphism γ:AK\gamma\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\rightarrow K. Given an AA-field KK, the AA-characteristic of KK is defined as follows

charA(K):={0 if γ if injective,kerγ otherwise.\operatorname{char}_{A}(K)\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\begin{cases}0&\text{ if }\gamma\text{ if injective,}\\ \operatorname{ker}\gamma&\text{ otherwise.}\end{cases}

Then KK is of generic characteristic if charA(K)=0\operatorname{char}_{A}(K)=0. Take KsepK^{\operatorname{sep}} to be a choice of separable closure of KK, and set GK:=Gal(Ksep/K)\operatorname{G}_{K}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{Gal}(K^{\operatorname{sep}}/K). The rational function field FF is an AA-field of generic characteristic where the map γ:AF\gamma\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\hookrightarrow F is the natural inclusion map. Given a non-zero prime λ\lambda of AA, take kλk_{\lambda} to denote the residue field of AA at λ\lambda. Then, kλk_{\lambda} is an AA-field of characteristic λ\lambda, where γλ:Akλ\gamma_{\lambda}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\rightarrow k_{\lambda} is the mod-λ\lambda reduction map.

Given an 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q}-algebra KK, set K{τ}K\{\tau\} to denote the noncommutative ring of twisted polynomials over KK, the elements of which are polynomials f(τ)=i=0daiτif(\tau)=\sum_{i=0}^{d}a_{i}\tau^{i}, with coefficients aiKa_{i}\in K. Addition is defined term-wise as follows

iaiτi+ibiτi:=i(ai+bi)τi,(aτi)(bτj):=abqiτi+j.\begin{split}&\sum_{i}a_{i}\tau^{i}+\sum_{i}b_{i}\tau^{i}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\sum_{i}(a_{i}+b_{i})\tau^{i},\\ &(a\tau^{i})(b\tau^{j})\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=ab^{q^{i}}\tau^{i+j}.\end{split}

Given f=i=0daiτif=\sum_{i=0}^{d}a_{i}\tau^{i}, set

f(x):=i=0daixqi.f(x)\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\sum_{i=0}^{d}a_{i}x^{q^{i}}.

The polynomial f(x)f(x) is an 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q}-linear polynomial, i.e., given c1,c2𝔽qc_{1},c_{2}\in\mathbb{F}_{q}, the following algebraic relation holds

f(c1x+c2y)=c1f(x)+c2f(y)f(c_{1}x+c_{2}y)=c_{1}f(x)+c_{2}f(y)

in K[x,y]K[x,y]. I take KxK\langle x\rangle to denote non-commutative ring of 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q}-linear polynomials defined by the relations

(f+g)(x):=f(x)+g(x) and (fg)(x):=f(g(x)).(f+g)(x)\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=f(x)+g(x)\text{ and }(f\cdot g)(x)\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=f(g(x)).

The map f(τ)f(x)f(\tau)\mapsto f(x) is an isomorphism of 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q}-algebras from K{τ}K\{\tau\} to KxK\langle x\rangle.

Next, I define the notion of height htτ(f)\operatorname{ht}_{\tau}(f) and degree degτ(f)\operatorname{deg}_{\tau}(f) of a twisted polynomial f(τ)K{τ}f(\tau)\in K\{\tau\}. Write

f(τ)=ahτh+ah+1τh+1++adτd,f(\tau)=a_{h}\tau^{h}+a_{h+1}\tau^{h+1}+\dots+a_{d}\tau^{d},

where ah,ad0a_{h},a_{d}\neq 0, and set

htτ(f):=h and degτ(f):=d.\operatorname{ht}_{\tau}(f)\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=h\text{ and }\operatorname{deg}_{\tau}(f)\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=d.

Thus, one finds that the degree of f(x)f(x) as a polynomial in xx is qdegτ(f)q^{\operatorname{deg}_{\tau}(f)}. When referring to the degree of the polynomial in xx, I write

degxf(x):=qdegτ(f).\operatorname{deg}_{x}f(x)\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=q^{\operatorname{deg}_{\tau}(f)}.

Let :K{τ}K\partial\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}K\{\tau\}\rightarrow K be the derivative map sending

nanτna0.\sum_{n}a_{n}\tau^{n}\mapsto a_{0}.

Thus, ht(f)=0\operatorname{ht}(f)=0 if and only if (f)0\partial(f)\neq 0. Note that f(x)f(x) is separable if and only if its derivative in xx does not vanish. Since f=ddx(f(x))\partial f=\frac{d}{dx}(f(x)), one finds that f(x)f(x) is separable if and only if ht(f)=0\operatorname{ht}(f)=0. With these conventions at hand, I recall the definition of a Drinfeld module of rank r1r\geq 1. In this article, I shall only be concerned with the case in which r=2r=2.

Definition 2.1.

Let r1r\geq 1 be an integer and KK be an AA-field. A Drinfeld module of rank rr over KK is a homomorphism of 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q}-algebras

ϕ:AK{τ},\phi\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\rightarrow K\{\tau\},

sending aAa\in A to ϕaK{τ}\phi_{a}\in K\{\tau\}, such that

  • (ϕa)=γ(a)\partial(\phi_{a})=\gamma(a) for all aAa\in A;

  • degτ(ϕa)=rdegT(a)\operatorname{deg}_{\tau}(\phi_{a})=r\operatorname{deg}_{T}(a).

The second condition is equivalent to requiring that degτ(ϕT)=r\operatorname{deg}_{\tau}(\phi_{T})=r. I shall write

ϕT=T+g1τ+g2τ2++grτr,\phi_{T}=T+g_{1}\tau+g_{2}\tau^{2}+\dots+g_{r}\tau^{r},

and observe that since degτϕT=r\operatorname{deg}_{\tau}\phi_{T}=r, grrg_{r}\neq r. The coefficients (g1,,gr)(g_{1},\dots,g_{r}) completely describe the module ϕ\phi.

Let ϕ\phi and ψ\psi be Drinfeld modules, a morphism u:ϕψu\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\phi\rightarrow\psi is a function u(τ)K{τ}u(\tau)\in K\{\tau\} such that uϕa=ψauu\phi_{a}=\psi_{a}u for all aAa\in A. An isogeny is a non-zero morphism. It is easy to see that if there exists an isogeny, then, the rank of ϕ\phi equals the rank of ψ\psi. The group of all morphisms from ϕ\phi to ψ\psi is denoted HomK(ϕ,ψ)\operatorname{Hom}_{K}(\phi,\psi). An isomorphism between Drinfeld module is an isogeny with an inverse. It is easy to see that the only invertible elements in K{τ}K\{\tau\} are the non-zero constant elements cKc\in K. Write ϕT=T+g1τ++grτr\phi_{T}=T+g_{1}\tau+\dots+g_{r}\tau^{r} and ψT=T+g1τ++grτr\psi_{T}=T+g_{1}^{\prime}\tau+\dots+g_{r}^{\prime}\tau^{r}, one finds that ϕ\phi is isomorphic to ψ\psi if and only if there is a non-zero constant cc such that

gi=cqi1gi,g_{i}^{\prime}=c^{q^{i}-1}g_{i},

for i[1,r]i\in[1,r]. When r=2r=2, the jj-invariant of ϕ\phi is defined as

j(ϕ):=g1q+1g2.j(\phi)\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\frac{g_{1}^{q+1}}{g_{2}}.

Two rank 22 Drinfeld modules ϕ\phi and ϕ\phi^{\prime} are isomorphic if and only if j(ϕ)=j(ϕ)j(\phi)=j(\phi^{\prime}) (cf. [Pap23, Ch. 3]).

Let ΩF\Omega_{F}^{\ast} denote the set of discrete valuations of FF, and ΩF\Omega_{F} be the valuations corresponding to non-zero prime ideals of AA. For λΩF\lambda\in\Omega_{F}, set AλA_{\lambda} denote the completion of AA at λ\lambda, and FλF_{\lambda} be its field of fractions. Taking 𝔪λ\mathfrak{m}_{\lambda} to be the maximal ideal of AλA_{\lambda}, set kλ:=Aλ/𝔪λk_{\lambda}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=A_{\lambda}/\mathfrak{m}_{\lambda}. Let ϕ\phi be a Drinfeld module over FF and λΩF\lambda\in\Omega_{F}. I denote by ϕλ\phi_{\lambda} the localized Drinfeld module over FλF_{\lambda}, defined to be the composite

ϕλ:AϕF{τ}Fλ{τ},\phi_{\lambda}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\xrightarrow{\phi}F\{\tau\}\rightarrow F_{\lambda}\{\tau\},

where the second map is induced by the natural inclusion of FF into FλF_{\lambda}. Say that ϕ\phi has stable reduction at λ\lambda if there is a Drinfeld module ψ\psi over FλF_{\lambda} that is isomorphic to ϕλ\phi_{\lambda} with coefficients in AλA_{\lambda}, for which the reduction

ψ¯:Akλ{τ}\bar{\psi}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\rightarrow k_{\lambda}\{\tau\}

is a Drinfeld module. The rank of ψ¯\bar{\psi} is referred to as the reduction rank of ϕ\phi at λ\lambda. If the reduction rank is rr, then ϕ\phi has good reduction at λ\lambda. Let λΩF\lambda\in\Omega_{F} be a prime of good reduction, and consider the reduced Drinfeld module

ψ¯:Akλ{τ}.\bar{\psi}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\rightarrow k_{\lambda}\{\tau\}.

Let aa be the monic generator of λ\lambda. The element aa is in the kernel of the reduction map γ:Akλ\gamma\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\rightarrow k_{\lambda}. The constant term of ϕa\phi_{a} is γ(a)=0\gamma(a)=0, and thus, htτ(ϕa)>0\operatorname{ht}_{\tau}(\phi_{a})>0. In fact, degT(a)\operatorname{deg}_{T}(a) divides htτ(ϕa)\operatorname{ht}_{\tau}(\phi_{a}) and the height of ψ¯\bar{\psi} is defined to be the integer

H(ψ¯):=htτ(ϕa)degT(a),H(\bar{\psi})\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\frac{\operatorname{ht}_{\tau}(\phi_{a})}{\operatorname{deg}_{T}(a)},

which one refers to as the height of the reduction of ϕ\phi at vv. It is easy to see that H(ψ¯)[1,r]H(\bar{\psi})\in[1,r], I refer to [Pap23, section 3.2] for further details. The quantity H(ψ¯)H(\bar{\psi}) is called the height of the reduction of ϕ\phi at λ\lambda.

Given a Drinfeld module ϕ\phi of rank rr over FF, there is an isomorphic Drinfeld module ψ\psi for which

ψT=T+g1τ+g2τ2+grτr\psi_{T}=T+g_{1}\tau+g_{2}\tau^{2}+\dots g_{r}\tau^{r}

with coefficients giAg_{i}\in A. A tuple (g1,,gr)Ar(g_{1},\dots,g_{r})\in A^{r} is said to be minimal if there is no non-constant polynomial fAf\in A such that gig_{i} is divisible by cqi1c^{q^{i}-1} for all i[1,r]i\in[1,r]. It is easy to see that ψ\psi can be uniquely chosen so that (g1,,gr)(g_{1},\dots,g_{r}) is minimal in the above sense. Moreover, the primes of bad reduction are precisely those that divide the leading coefficient grg_{r}. It is thus clear that there are only finitely many primes of bad reduction. The primes of unstable reduction are those that divide every single coefficient gig_{i} for i[1,r]i\in[1,r].

2.2. Galois representations

I discuss Galois representations associated to Drinfeld modules over FF or rank rr. Let ϕ\phi be a Drinfeld module over FF and aa be a non-zero polynomial in AA. Since the constant coefficient of ϕa\phi_{a} is γ(a)=a\gamma(a)=a, it follows that ϕa(x)\phi_{a}(x) is a separable polynomial. Let ϕ[a]Fsep\phi[a]\subset F^{\operatorname{sep}} denote the set of roots of ϕa(x)\phi_{a}(x). I note that if bAb\in A, then,

ϕa(ϕb(x))=ϕab(x)=ϕb(ϕa(x))=0.\phi_{a}(\phi_{b}(x))=\phi_{ab}(x)=\phi_{b}(\phi_{a}(x))=0.

One defines a twisted AA-module structure on FsepF^{\operatorname{sep}} by bα:=ϕb(α)b\ast\alpha\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\phi_{b}(\alpha). Then, the above computation shows that ϕ[a]\phi[a] is an AA-submodule of FsepF^{\operatorname{sep}}. Given a non-zero ideal 𝔞\mathfrak{a} in AA, set ϕ[𝔞]:=ϕ[a]\phi[\mathfrak{a}]\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\phi[a], where aa is the monic generator of 𝔞\mathfrak{a}. Then, one finds that ϕ[𝔞](A/𝔞)r\phi[\mathfrak{a}]\simeq(A/\mathfrak{a})^{r}. The Galois group GF:=Gal(Fsep/F)\operatorname{G}_{F}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{Gal}(F^{\operatorname{sep}}/F) naturally acts on ϕ[𝔞]\phi[\mathfrak{a}] by AA-module automorphisms. I denote by

ρϕ,𝔞:GFAutA(ϕ[𝔞])GLr(A/𝔞)\rho_{\phi,\mathfrak{a}}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{G}_{F}\rightarrow\operatorname{Aut}_{A}(\phi[\mathfrak{a}])\xrightarrow{\sim}\operatorname{GL}_{r}(A/\mathfrak{a})

the associated Galois representation. Let 𝔭\mathfrak{p} be a non-zero prime ideal of AA and take T𝔭(ϕ)T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi) to denote the 𝔭\mathfrak{p}-adic Tate-module, defined to be the inverse limit

T𝔭(ϕ):=limnϕ[𝔭n].T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi)\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\varprojlim_{n}\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}].

Choosing a A𝔭A_{\mathfrak{p}}-basis of T𝔭(ϕ)T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi) the associated Galois representation is denoted

ρ^ϕ,𝔭:GFAutA𝔭(T𝔭(ϕ))GLr(A𝔭).\hat{\rho}_{\phi,\mathfrak{p}}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{G}_{F}\rightarrow\operatorname{Aut}_{A_{\mathfrak{p}}}(T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi))\xrightarrow{\sim}\operatorname{GL}_{r}(A_{\mathfrak{p}}).

The mod-𝔭\mathfrak{p} reduction of ρ^ϕ,𝔭\hat{\rho}_{\phi,\mathfrak{p}} is identified with ρϕ,𝔭\rho_{\phi,\mathfrak{p}}. The Galois representation ρϕ,𝔞\rho_{\phi,\mathfrak{a}} is unramified at all primes 𝔩𝔞\mathfrak{l}\nmid\mathfrak{a} of AA at which ϕ\phi has good reduction. Moreover, given a non-zero prime 𝔩𝔭\mathfrak{l}\neq\mathfrak{p} of AA, the representation ρ^ϕ,𝔭\hat{\rho}_{\phi,\mathfrak{p}} is unramified at 𝔩\mathfrak{l} if and only if 𝔩\mathfrak{l} is a prime of good reduction for ϕ\phi.

Assume that ϕ\phi has good reduction at 𝔭\mathfrak{p}. Let me briefly discuss the structure of T𝔭(ϕ)T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi) as a module over G𝔭:=GF𝔭\operatorname{G}_{\mathfrak{p}}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{G}_{F_{\mathfrak{p}}}. Let HH denote the height of the reduction of ϕ\phi at 𝔭\mathfrak{p}. Let nn be a positive integer and v=v𝔭v=v_{\mathfrak{p}} be the valuation on F𝔭F_{\mathfrak{p}} normalized by v(πv)=1v(\pi_{v})=1, where πv\pi_{v} is a uniformizer of F𝔭F_{\mathfrak{p}}.

ϕ[𝔭n]0:={αϕ[𝔭n]v(α)>0}.\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]^{0}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\{\alpha\in\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]\mid v(\alpha)>0\}.

For ease of notation, denote by ϕ¯\bar{\phi} the reduction of ϕ\phi at 𝔭\mathfrak{p}, and ϕ¯[𝔭n]\bar{\phi}[\mathfrak{p}^{n}] be its 𝔭n\mathfrak{p}^{n}-torsion module. Then, ϕ¯[𝔭n]\bar{\phi}[\mathfrak{p}^{n}] is an unramified G𝔭\operatorname{G}_{\mathfrak{p}}-module and can be identified with the quotient ϕ[𝔭n]/ϕ[𝔭n]0\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]/\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]^{0}. One has a short exact sequence of G𝔭\operatorname{G}_{\mathfrak{p}}-modules

0ϕ[𝔭n]0ϕ[𝔭n]ϕ¯[𝔭n]0,0\rightarrow\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]^{0}\rightarrow\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]\rightarrow\bar{\phi}[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]\rightarrow 0,

cf. [Pap23, (6.3.1) on p. 371]. Taking

T𝔭(ϕ)0:=limnϕ[𝔭n]0 and T𝔭(ϕ¯):=limnϕ¯[𝔭n],T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi)^{0}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\varprojlim_{n}\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]^{0}\text{ and }T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\bar{\phi})\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\varprojlim_{n}\bar{\phi}[\mathfrak{p}^{n}],

and obtain a short exact sequence

0T𝔭(ϕ)0T𝔭(ϕ)T𝔭(ϕ¯)0,0\rightarrow T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi)^{0}\rightarrow T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi)\rightarrow T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\bar{\phi})\rightarrow 0,

cf. [Pap23, Proposition 6.3.9]. As an A𝔭A_{\mathfrak{p}}-module,

ϕ[𝔭n]0(A/𝔭n)H, and ϕ¯[𝔭n](A/𝔭n)rH.\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]^{0}\simeq(A/\mathfrak{p}^{n})^{H}\text{, and }\bar{\phi}[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]\simeq(A/\mathfrak{p}^{n})^{r-H}.

Thus, one finds that

T𝔭(ϕ)0A𝔭H and T𝔭(ϕ¯)A𝔭rH.T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi)^{0}\simeq A_{\mathfrak{p}}^{H}\text{ and }T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\bar{\phi})\simeq A_{\mathfrak{p}}^{r-H}.

Let F𝔭(ϕ[𝔭n]0)F_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]^{0}) be the field extension of F𝔭F_{\mathfrak{p}} generated by ϕ[𝔭n]0\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]^{0}. In other words, it is the fixed field of the kernel of the action map

ϱ:G𝔭Aut(ϕ[𝔭n]0)GLH(A/𝔭n).\varrho\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{G}_{\mathfrak{p}}\rightarrow\operatorname{Aut}(\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]^{0})\xrightarrow{\sim}\operatorname{GL}_{H}(A/\mathfrak{p}^{n}).
Lemma 2.2.

With respect to notation above, the ramification index of F𝔭(ϕ[𝔭n]0)/F𝔭F_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi[\mathfrak{p}^{n}]^{0})/F_{\mathfrak{p}} is divisible by qN(n1)(qN1)q^{N(n-1)}(q^{N}-1), where N:=Hdeg(𝔭)N\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=H\operatorname{deg}(\mathfrak{p}).

Proof.

The result is [Pap23, Lemma 6.3.10]. ∎

Proposition 2.3.

With respect to the above notation, assume that H=1H=1. Then, the determinant map

detρ^ϕ,𝔭:GFA𝔭×\operatorname{det}\hat{\rho}_{\phi,\mathfrak{p}}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{G}_{F}\rightarrow A_{\mathfrak{p}}^{\times}

is surjective.

Proof.

It suffices to show that for all n>0n>0, the determinant map

detρϕ,𝔭n:GF(A/𝔭n)×\operatorname{det}\rho_{\phi,\mathfrak{p}^{n}}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{G}_{F}\rightarrow\left(A/\mathfrak{p}^{n}\right)^{\times}

is surjective. Consider the restriction of detρϕ,𝔭n\operatorname{det}\rho_{\phi,\mathfrak{p}^{n}} to the inertia group I𝔭\operatorname{I}_{\mathfrak{p}} of G𝔭\operatorname{G}_{\mathfrak{p}}. Let ψ:I𝔭A𝔭×\psi\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{I}_{\mathfrak{p}}\rightarrow A_{\mathfrak{p}}^{\times} be the character for the action of the inertia group on T𝔭(ϕ)0T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi)^{0} and ψn\psi_{n} be its mod-𝔭\mathfrak{p} reduction. It follows from Lemma 2.2 that ψn\psi_{n} is surjective for all nn. Since ϕ¯[𝔭n]\bar{\phi}[\mathfrak{p}^{n}] is unramified at 𝔭\mathfrak{p}, it follows that detρ^ϕ,𝔭\operatorname{det}\hat{\rho}_{\phi,\mathfrak{p}} coincides with ψ\psi, when restricted to I𝔭\operatorname{I}_{\mathfrak{p}}. It follows that

detρ^ϕ,𝔭(I𝔭)=ψ(I𝔭)=A𝔭×.\operatorname{det}\hat{\rho}_{\phi,\mathfrak{p}}(\operatorname{I}_{\mathfrak{p}})=\psi(\operatorname{I}_{\mathfrak{p}})=A_{\mathfrak{p}}^{\times}.

This shows that the determinant map detρ^ϕ,𝔭\operatorname{det}\hat{\rho}_{\phi,\mathfrak{p}} is surjective. ∎

2.3. Counting Drinfeld modules

In this section, I consider the data defining a Drinfeld module over AA of rank 22. I say that ϕ\phi is defined over AA if

ϕT=T+g1τ+g2τ2,\phi_{T}=T+g_{1}\tau+g_{2}\tau^{2},

where (g1,g2)A2(g_{1},g_{2})\in A^{2}. It is easy to see that any Drinfeld module over FF is isomorphic to a Drinfeld module defined over AA. Since I assume that ϕ\phi has rank 22, it follows that g20g_{2}\neq 0. The pair w=(g1,g2)A2w=(g_{1},g_{2})\in A^{2} with g20g_{2}\neq 0 shall be referred to as a Drinfeld datum. I shall take ϕw\phi^{w} to be the Drinfeld module defined by

ϕTw=T+g1τ+g2τ2.\phi^{w}_{T}=T+g_{1}\tau+g_{2}\tau^{2}.

The pair ww does not uniquely determine the Drinfeld module ϕ\phi up to isomorphism over FF. Take 𝒞\mathcal{C} to be the set of Drinfelf data w=(g1,g2)A2w=(g_{1},g_{2})\in A^{2}.

Fix a pair of positive integers c=(c1,c2)\vec{c}=(c_{1},c_{2}). Given a polynomial ff, set |f|:=qdeg(f)|f|\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=q^{\operatorname{deg}(f)}. Then, the height

|w|:=max{|g1|1c1,|g2|1c2}.|w|\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{max}\left\{|g_{1}|^{\frac{1}{c_{1}}},|g_{2}|^{\frac{1}{c_{2}}}\right\}.

Let X>0X>0 be an integer, take 𝒞(X)\mathcal{C}(X) to be the set of Drinfeld modules with |ϕ|<qX|\phi|<q^{X}. Then, this is the set of Drinfeld data w=(g1,g2)w=(g_{1},g_{2}) such that

degg1<c1X and degg2<c2X.\deg g_{1}<c_{1}X\text{ and }\deg g_{2}<c_{2}X.

Thus, one finds that

(2.1) #𝒞(X)=qc1X(qc2X1).\#\mathcal{C}(X)=q^{c_{1}X}(q^{c_{2}X}-1).

Let 𝒮\mathcal{S} be a subset of 𝒞\mathcal{C} and given a positive integer X>0X>0, take 𝒮(X):={w𝒮|w|<X}\mathcal{S}(X)\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\{w\in\mathcal{S}\mid|w|<X\}. Refer to the following limit

𝔡(𝒮)=limX#𝒮(X)#𝒞(X)=#𝒮(X)qc1X(qc2X1),\mathfrak{d}(\mathcal{S})=\lim_{X\rightarrow\infty}\frac{\#\mathcal{S}(X)}{\#\mathcal{C}(X)}=\frac{\#\mathcal{S}(X)}{q^{c_{1}X}(q^{c_{2}X}-1)},

(provided it exists) as the density of 𝒮\mathcal{S}. The upper and lower densities 𝔡¯(𝒮)\overline{\mathfrak{d}}(\mathcal{S}) and 𝔡¯(𝒮)\underline{\mathfrak{d}}(\mathcal{S}) are defined as follows

𝔡¯(𝒮):=lim supX(#𝒮(X)#𝒞(X));𝔡¯(𝒮):=lim infX(#𝒮(X)#𝒞(X)),\begin{split}&\overline{\mathfrak{d}}(\mathcal{S})\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\limsup_{X\rightarrow\infty}\left(\frac{\#\mathcal{S}(X)}{\#\mathcal{C}(X)}\right);\\ &\underline{\mathfrak{d}}(\mathcal{S})\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\liminf_{X\rightarrow\infty}\left(\frac{\#\mathcal{S}(X)}{\#\mathcal{C}(X)}\right),\end{split}

and unlike 𝔡(𝒮)\mathfrak{d}(\mathcal{S}), these densities are guaranteed to exist. One says that 𝒮\mathcal{S} has positive density if 𝔡¯(𝒮)>0\underline{\mathfrak{d}}(\mathcal{S})>0.

Remark 2.4.

Recall that a pair w=(g1,g2)A2w=(g_{1},g_{2})\in A^{2} with g20g_{2}\neq 0 is said to be minimal if there is no non-constant polynomial aa such that aq1a^{q-1} divides g1g_{1} and aq21a^{q^{2}-1} divides g2g_{2}. One may instead define 𝒞min\mathcal{C}_{\operatorname{min}} to consist of only minimal pairs ww, and define the density of a subset 𝒮\mathcal{S} of 𝒞min\mathcal{C}_{\operatorname{min}} by

𝔡(𝒮):=#𝒮(X)#𝒞min(X).\mathfrak{d}(\mathcal{S})\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\frac{\#\mathcal{S}(X)}{\#\mathcal{C}_{\operatorname{min}}(X)}.

It is possible to adopt this approach instead since it relies on point counting techniques in certain weighted projective spaces, cf. [Phi22, section 5]. I do not however pursue it in this article since it makes calculations more cumbersome.

3. Main results

In this section, the main results of the article are proven. I shall assume that q5q\geq 5 is odd. There are two distinct elements a1,a2𝔽q×a_{1},a_{2}\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{\times}. For i=1,2i=1,2, set λi:=(Tai)\lambda_{i}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=(T-a_{i}). I set viv_{i} to denote the valuation at λi\lambda_{i}, normalized by vi(Tai)=1v_{i}(T-a_{i})=1. Let w=(g1,g2)w=(g_{1},g_{2}) be a Drinfeld datum for a rank 22 Drinfeld module ϕ=ϕw:AA{τ}\phi=\phi^{w}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\rightarrow A\{\tau\}. Throughout this section, I fix an element η𝔽q×\eta\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{\times} which is not a square in 𝔽q×\mathbb{F}_{q}^{\times}. This is possible since qq is assumed to be odd, and thus, 𝔽q×\mathbb{F}_{q}^{\times} has even order (and therefore not 22-divisible). Set 𝔭:=(T)\mathfrak{p}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=(T) and for ease of notation, take ρ\rho to denote the TT-adic representation ρ^ϕw,𝔭:GFGL2(A𝔭)\hat{\rho}_{\phi^{w},\mathfrak{p}}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{G}_{F}\rightarrow\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}}). Set

ρ¯:GFGL2(A/𝔭)GL2(𝔽q)\bar{\rho}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{G}_{F}\rightarrow\operatorname{GL}_{2}\left(A/\mathfrak{p}\right)\xrightarrow{\sim}\operatorname{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{F}_{q})

to denote the mod-𝔭\mathfrak{p} reduction of ρ\rho. For i=1,2i=1,2, set Gλi:=Gal(Fλisep/Fλi)\operatorname{G}_{\lambda_{i}}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{Gal}(F_{\lambda_{i}}^{\operatorname{sep}}/F_{\lambda_{i}}) and IiGλi\operatorname{I}_{i}\subset G_{\lambda_{i}} be the inertia group. The Frobenius in Gλi/Ii\operatorname{G}_{\lambda_{i}}/\operatorname{I}_{i} is denoted σi\sigma_{i}. Likewise, G𝔭:=Gal(F𝔭sep/F𝔭)\operatorname{G}_{\mathfrak{p}}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{Gal}(F_{\mathfrak{p}}^{\operatorname{sep}}/F_{\mathfrak{p}}) and I𝔭\operatorname{I}_{\mathfrak{p}} is the inertia subgroup.

3.1. Congruence criteria for surjective TT-adic images

In this subsection, we prove the following result.

Theorem 3.1.

Let η𝔽q×\eta\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{\times} be a non-square, and let a1,a2a_{1},a_{2} be distinct non-zero elements in 𝔽q×\mathbb{F}_{q}^{\times}. Consider a pair (g1,g2)A2(g_{1},g_{2})\in A^{2} with g20g_{2}\neq 0 such that

  1. (1)

    g1g_{1} is divisible by (Ta1)(T-a_{1}),

  2. (2)

    g1g_{1} is coprime to T(Ta2)T(T-a_{2}),

  3. (3)

    g2g_{2} is divisible by (Ta2)(T-a_{2}) and not by (Ta2)2(T-a_{2})^{2},

  4. (4)

    g2a1η1mod(Ta1)g_{2}\equiv-a_{1}\eta^{-1}\mod{(T-a_{1})},

  5. (5)

    g2g_{2} is coprime to TT.

Then, the representation ρ:GFGL2(A𝔭)\rho\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{G}_{F}\rightarrow\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}}) is surjective.

I prove some preparatory results. Let π\pi be the uniformizer of A𝔭A_{\mathfrak{p}} at 𝔭\mathfrak{p}. The congruence filtration on GL2(A𝔭)\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}}) is defined by

G𝔭0:=GL2(A𝔭) for i=0;G𝔭i:=Id+πiM2(A𝔭) for i>0;\begin{split}&G_{\mathfrak{p}}^{0}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}})\text{ for }i=0;\\ &G_{\mathfrak{p}}^{i}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{Id}+\pi^{i}\operatorname{M}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}})\text{ for }i>0;\end{split}

where M2(A𝔭)\operatorname{M}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}}) denotes the 2×22\times 2 matrices with entries in A𝔭A_{\mathfrak{p}}. Let \mathcal{H} be a closed subgroup of GL2(A𝔭)\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}}), take i:=G𝔭i\mathcal{H}^{i}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\mathcal{H}\cap G_{\mathfrak{p}}^{i}, and

[i]:=i/i+1.\mathcal{H}^{[i]}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\mathcal{H}^{i}/\mathcal{H}^{i+1}.
Proposition 3.2.

Let \mathcal{H} be a closed subgroup of GL2(A𝔭)\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}}). Assume that the following conditions hold

  1. (1)

    q4q\geq 4,

  2. (2)

    det()=A𝔭×\operatorname{det}(\mathcal{H})=A_{\mathfrak{p}}^{\times},

  3. (3)

    [0]=GL2(𝔽q)\mathcal{H}^{[0]}=\operatorname{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{F}_{q}),

  4. (4)

    [1]\mathcal{H}^{[1]} contains a non-scalar matrix.

Then one has that

=GL2(A𝔭).\mathcal{H}=\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}}).
Proof.

This result is [PR09, Proposition 4.1]. ∎

Lemma 3.3.

Let ϕ:AF{τ}\phi\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}A\rightarrow F\{\tau\} be a Drinfeld module of rank 22 associated to a pair (g1,g2)A2(g_{1},g_{2})\in A^{2}, i.e.,

(3.1) ϕT=T+g1τ+g2τ2.\phi_{T}=T+g_{1}\tau+g_{2}\tau^{2}.

Let λ=(a)\lambda=(a) be a non-zero prime ideal of AA and vv be the associated valuation normalized by setting v(a)=1v(a)=1. Take Iv\operatorname{I}_{v} to be the inertia group of GFv\operatorname{G}_{F_{v}}. Assume that

v(g1)=0 and v(g2)=1.v(g_{1})=0\text{ and }v(g_{2})=1.

Let 𝔞\mathfrak{a} be a proper ideal of AA. Then there is a basis of ϕ[𝔞]\phi[\mathfrak{a}] such that ρϕ,𝔞(Iv)\rho_{\phi,\mathfrak{a}}(\operatorname{I}_{v}) contains the full group of unipotent upper triangular matrices (101)\left({\begin{array}[]{cc}1&\ast\\ 0&1\\ \end{array}}\right) in GL2(A/𝔞)\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A/\mathfrak{a}).

Proof.

It follows from the conditions (3.1) that ϕ\phi has stable reduction at vv with reduction rank equal to 11. Moreover, the valuation of the jj-invariant is 1-1. The result then follows from [Zyw11, Proposition 4.1]111I am happy to reproduce the details here if the referee insists.. ∎

Lemma 3.4.

Let 𝔽\mathbb{F} be a finite field and GG be a subgroup of GL2(𝔽)\operatorname{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{F}) such that

  1. (1)

    GG contains a subgroup of order #𝔽\#\mathbb{F},

  2. (2)

    GG acts irreducibly.

Then, GG must contain SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F}).

Proof.

This result is [Zyw11, Lemma A.1]. ∎

Proposition 3.5.

Let ϕ\phi be a Drinfeld module associated to a pair (g1,g2)A2(g_{1},g_{2})\in A^{2} such that

  1. (1)

    g1g_{1} is divisible by (Ta1)(T-a_{1}),

  2. (2)

    g1g_{1} is coprime to (Ta2)(T-a_{2}),

  3. (3)

    g2g_{2} is divisible by (Ta2)(T-a_{2}) and not by (Ta2)2(T-a_{2})^{2},

  4. (4)

    g2a1η1mod(Ta1)g_{2}\equiv-a_{1}\eta^{-1}\mod{(T-a_{1})}.

Then, the image of the representation

ρ¯:GFGL2(𝔽q)\bar{\rho}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{G}_{F}\rightarrow\operatorname{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{F}_{q})

contains SL2(𝔽q)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F}_{q}).

Proof.

Let GG be the image of ρ¯\bar{\rho} and let V¯:=ϕ[𝔭]𝔽q2\bar{V}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\phi[\mathfrak{p}]\simeq\mathbb{F}_{q}^{2} be the underlying space on which GG acts.

First, I show that GG acts irreducibly on V¯\bar{V}. In other words, there is no 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q}-basis of V¯\bar{V} with respect to which GG consists only of upper triangular matrices (0)\left({\begin{array}[]{cc}\ast&\ast\\ 0&\ast\\ \end{array}}\right). Since g2a1η1mod(Ta1)g_{2}\equiv-a_{1}\eta^{-1}\mod{(T-a_{1})}, and both a1a_{1} and η\eta are non-zero constants in 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q}, one finds that (Ta1)(T-a_{1}) does not divide g2g_{2}. As a consequence, ϕ\phi has good reduction at λ1\lambda_{1}. Recall that

ρ:GFGL2(A𝔭)\rho\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}\operatorname{G}_{F}\rightarrow\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}})

is the Galois representation on the TT-adic Tate-module T𝔭(ϕ)T_{\mathfrak{p}}(\phi). This representation is unramified at λ1\lambda_{1}, and thus there is a well defined element ρ(σ1)GL2(A𝔭)\rho(\sigma_{1})\in\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}}). Let a,bA𝔭a,b\in A_{\mathfrak{p}} be coefficients of the characteristic polynomial of ρ(σ1)\rho(\sigma_{1}), i.e.,

a:=traceρ(σ1) and b:=detρ(σ1).a\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{trace}\rho(\sigma_{1})\text{ and }b\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{det}\rho(\sigma_{1}).

The elements a,ba,b are in the image of the natural embedding AA𝔭A\hookrightarrow A_{\mathfrak{p}}, and can thus be identified with elements in AA (cf. [Pap23, Section 4.2, p.236]). These elements a,ba,b depend only on λ1\lambda_{1} and not on the prime 𝔭\mathfrak{p}. Moreover, it follows from [Pap23, Theorem 4.2.7, (2)] that

degT(a)=0 and degT(b)1.\operatorname{deg}_{T}(a)=0\text{ and }\operatorname{deg}_{T}(b)\leq 1.

I compute aa and bb using Gekeler’s algorithm for Drinfeld modules of rank 22, cf. [Pap23, p.248, l.-2]. This this context, Gekeler’s result simply states that

a=g¯21g¯1modλ1;b=g¯21(Ta1),\begin{split}&a=-\bar{g}_{2}^{-1}\bar{g}_{1}\mod{\lambda_{1}};\\ &b=-\bar{g}_{2}^{-1}(T-a_{1}),\end{split}

where g¯i:=gimodλ1\bar{g}_{i}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=g_{i}\mod{\lambda_{1}} is a constant in 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q}. Note that the first of the above equations determines aa, since aa is a constant, and λ1\lambda_{1} has degree 11. I warn the reader that aa and bb are computed only with reference to λ1\lambda_{1} and the above computation has no dependence on 𝔭=(T)\mathfrak{p}=(T). After computing aa and bb, I shall reduce them modulo (T)(T). Since g1g_{1} is divisible by (Ta1)(T-a_{1}), one finds that g¯1=0\bar{g}_{1}=0. On the other hand, g¯2=a1η1\bar{g}_{2}=-a_{1}\eta^{-1}. Hence, one finds that

a=0 and b=η(a11T1).a=0\text{ and }b=\eta(a_{1}^{-1}T-1).

Let a¯,b¯𝔽q\bar{a},\bar{b}\in\mathbb{F}_{q} denote the mod-TT reductions of aa and bb respectively. Then, one has that

a¯:=traceρ¯(σ1) and b¯:=detρ¯(σ1),\bar{a}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{trace}\bar{\rho}(\sigma_{1})\text{ and }\bar{b}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\operatorname{det}\bar{\rho}(\sigma_{1}),

where I remind the reader that ρ¯\bar{\rho} is the mod-TT reduction of ρ\rho. Note that a¯=0\bar{a}=0 and b¯=η\bar{b}=-\eta. Thus, the trace and determinant of ρ¯(σ1)\bar{\rho}(\sigma_{1}) are 0 and η-\eta respectively. Suppose that by way of contradiction that there is an 𝔽q\mathbb{F}_{q}-basis of V¯\bar{V} with respect to which ρ¯(σ1)\bar{\rho}(\sigma_{1}) is upper triangular. Then, since the trace of this matrix is 0, one has that

ρ¯(σ1)=(cd0c),\bar{\rho}(\sigma_{1})=\left({\begin{array}[]{cc}c&d\\ 0&-c\\ \end{array}}\right),

and the determinant is c2=η-c^{2}=-\eta. Thus, η\eta is a square in 𝔽q×\mathbb{F}_{q}^{\times}, which is a contradiction. Therefore, GG acts on V¯\bar{V} irreducibly.

In order to complete the proof, note that the assumptions imply that v2(g1)=0v_{2}(g_{1})=0 and v2(g2)=1v_{2}(g_{2})=1. Taking 𝔞:=𝔭\mathfrak{a}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\mathfrak{p} and λ:=λ2\lambda\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\lambda_{2} in Lemma 3.3, one finds that the full group of unipotent upper triangular matrices is in GG. Thus in particular, GG contains a subgroup with qq elements. I have shown that the hypotheses of Lemma 3.4 are satisfied, and thus, GG contains SL2(𝔽q)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F}_{q}). ∎

I now give the proof of Theorem 3.1.

Proof of Theorem 3.1.

Let ρ¯\bar{\rho} be the mod-𝔭\mathfrak{p} reduction of ρ\rho. It follows from Proposition 3.5 that the image of ρ¯\bar{\rho} contains SL2(𝔽q)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F}_{q}). It is assumed that g2g_{2} is coprime to TT, and hence, ϕ\phi has good reduction at TT. Since g1g_{1} is coprime to TT, the height of the reduction of ϕ\phi at 𝔭\mathfrak{p} is 11. It then follows from Proposition 2.3 that detρ\operatorname{det}\rho is surjective. Let ρ2\rho_{2} denote the reduction of ρ\rho modulo 𝔭2\mathfrak{p}^{2}, and let 𝒢GL2(A/𝔭2)\mathcal{G}\subseteq\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A/\mathfrak{p}^{2}) be its image. In order to complete the proof, it suffices to show that 𝒢\mathcal{G} contains a non-scalar matrix that is identity modulo 𝔭\mathfrak{p}. Applying Lemma 3.3 to λ=λ2\lambda=\lambda_{2} and 𝔞:=𝔭2\mathfrak{a}\mathrel{\mathop{\mathchar 58\relax}}=\mathfrak{p}^{2}, one finds that 𝒢\mathcal{G} contains the full upper triangular unipotent subgroup of GL2(A/𝔭2)\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A/\mathfrak{p}^{2}) (up to conjugation). Thus in particular, it contains a nontrivial unipotent matrix that reduces to the identity modulo-𝔭\mathfrak{p}. Now set \mathcal{H} to denote the image of ρ\rho. I have shown that the conditions of Proposition 3.2 are satisfied for \mathcal{H}, and thus, I conclude from it that =GL2(A𝔭)\mathcal{H}=\operatorname{GL}_{2}(A_{\mathfrak{p}}). ∎

3.2. Proof of the main result

In this short subsection, we give a proof of the main result from the Introduction.

Proof of Theorem 1.1.

Fix an element η𝔽q×\eta\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{\times} which is not contained in (𝔽q×)2(\mathbb{F}_{q}^{\times})^{2}. Let w=(g1,g2)A2w=(g_{1},g_{2})\in A^{2} be a pair satisfying the congruence conditions of Theorem 3.1, then the TT-adic Galois representation associated to ϕw\phi^{w} is surjective. In other words, one requires that g1=b1modT(Ta1)(Ta2)g_{1}=b_{1}\mod{T(T-a_{1})(T-a_{2})} where b1b_{1} is divisible by (Ta1)(T-a_{1}), but is coprime to T(Ta2)T(T-a_{2}), and that g2=b2modT(Ta1)(Ta2)g_{2}=b_{2}\mod{T(T-a_{1})(T-a_{2})} where b2b_{2} is divisible by (Ta2)(T-a_{2}) but not by (Ta2)2(T-a_{2})^{2}, is coprime to TT and b2a1η1mod(Ta1)b_{2}\equiv-a_{1}\eta^{-1}\mod{(T-a_{1})}. Fix one such pair (b1,b2)(b_{1},b_{2}) represented by bib_{i} with

degTb1<3 and degTb2<4.\operatorname{deg}_{T}b_{1}<3\text{ and }\operatorname{deg}_{T}b_{2}<4.

Let 𝒮\mathcal{S} be the set of all pairs w=(g1,g2)w=(g_{1},g_{2}) such that

g1b1modT(Ta1)(Ta2) and g2b2modT(Ta1)(Ta2)2.g_{1}\equiv b_{1}\mod{T(T-a_{1})(T-a_{2})}\text{ and }g_{2}\equiv b_{2}\mod{T(T-a_{1})(T-a_{2})^{2}}.

Let X>0X>0 be an integer such that c1X,c2X4c_{1}X,c_{2}X\geq 4. Then, the polynomials g1g_{1} for which degg1<c1X\operatorname{deg}g_{1}<c_{1}X and such that g1b1modT(Ta1)(Ta2)g_{1}\equiv b_{1}\mod{T(T-a_{1})(T-a_{2})} can be written uniquely as g1=b1+a1T(Ta1)(Ta2)g_{1}=b_{1}+a_{1}T(T-a_{1})(T-a_{2}), where dega1<c1X3\operatorname{deg}a_{1}<c_{1}X-3. Thus, the number of such polynomials g1g_{1} is exactly equal to qc1X3q^{c_{1}X-3}. Likewise, the number of polynomials g2=b2+a2T(Ta1)(Ta2)2g_{2}=b_{2}+a_{2}T(T-a_{1})(T-a_{2})^{2} is exactly equal to qc2X4q^{c_{2}X-4}. Therefore, one finds that for X4max{c11,c21}X\geq 4\operatorname{max}\{c_{1}^{-1},c_{2}^{-1}\},

#𝒮(X)=q(c1+c2)X7.\#\mathcal{S}(X)=q^{(c_{1}+c_{2})X-7}.

Thus, I have that limX#𝒮(X)#𝒞(X)=q7\lim_{X\rightarrow\infty}\frac{\#\mathcal{S}(X)}{\#\mathcal{C}(X)}=q^{-7}. Thus in particular, 𝒮\mathcal{S} has positive density. Let 𝒯\mathcal{T} be the set of all pairs w𝒞w\in\mathcal{C} such that the TT-adic representation attached to ϕw\phi^{w} is surjective. Then, 𝒯\mathcal{T} contains 𝒮\mathcal{S} and

𝔡¯(𝒯)𝔡¯(𝒮)=𝔡(𝒮)>0.\underline{\mathfrak{d}}(\mathcal{T})\geq\underline{\mathfrak{d}}(\mathcal{S})=\mathfrak{d}(\mathcal{S})>0.

This completes the proof of the main result. ∎

Remark 3.6.

The density is calculated to be q7q^{-7} for a choice of 55-tuple (b1,b2,λ1,λ2,η)(b_{1},b_{2},\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2},\eta). Two choices (b1,b2,λ1,λ2,η)(b_{1},b_{2},\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2},\eta) and (b1,b2,λ1,λ2,η)(b_{1}^{\prime},b_{2}^{\prime},\lambda_{1}^{\prime},\lambda_{2}^{\prime},\eta^{\prime}) could have a non-empty intersection. I have not made an effort to obtain a closed formula for the density of pairs (g1,g2)(g_{1},g_{2}) that satisfy the union of conditions imposed for all such 55-tuples.

References

  • [Che21] Chien-Hua Chen. Surjectivity of the adelic galois representation associated to a drinfeld module of prime rank. arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.04234, 2021.
  • [Che22] Chien-Hua Chen. Surjectivity of the adelic Galois representation associated to a Drinfeld module of rank 3. J. Number Theory, 237:99–123, 2022.
  • [Duk97] William Duke. Elliptic curves with no exceptional primes. Comptes rendus de l’Académie des sciences. Série 1, Mathématique, 325(8):813–818, 1997.
  • [GM23] Rod Gow and Gary McGuire. On Galois groups of linearized polynomials related to the general linear group of prime degree. J. Number Theory, 253:368–377, 2023.
  • [Jon10] Nathan Jones. Almost all elliptic curves are Serre curves. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 362(3):1547–1570, 2010.
  • [LSTX19] Aaron Landesman, Ashvin Swaminathan, James Tao, and Yujie Xu. Surjectivity of Galois representations in rational families of abelian varieties. Algebra Number Theory, 13(5):995–1038, 2019. With an appendix by Davide Lombardo.
  • [Pap23] Mihran Papikian. Drinfeld modules, volume 296 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, Cham, [2023] ©2023.
  • [Phi22] Tristan Phillips. Counting drinfeld modules with prescribed local conditions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.05576, 2022.
  • [PR09] Richard Pink and Egon Rütsche. Adelic openness for Drinfeld modules in generic characteristic. J. Number Theory, 129(4):882–907, 2009.
  • [Ser72] Jean-Pierre Serre. Propriétés galoisiennes des points d’ordre fini des courbes elliptiques. Invent. Math., 15(4):259–331, 1972.
  • [Zyw11] David Zywina. Drinfeld modules with maximal galois action on their torsion points. arXiv preprint arXiv:1110.4365, 2011.