At a seminar at the College de France in 1975, Tits wrote down the order of the monster group
Andrew Ogg, who attended the talk, noticed that the prime divisors are precisely the primes
Here’s Ogg’s paper on this: Automorphismes de courbes modulaires, Séminaire Delange-Pisot-Poitou. Théorie des nombres, tome 16, no 1 (1974-1975).
Ogg offered a bottle of Jack Daniels for an explanation of this coincidence.
Even Richard Borcherds didn’t claim the bottle of Jack Daniels, though his proof of the monstrous moonshine conjecture is believed to be the best explanation, at present.
A few years ago, John Duncan and Ken Ono posted a paper “The Jack Daniels Problem”, in which they prove that monstrous moonshine implies that if
Duncan and Ono say:
“This discussion does not prove that every
I don’t know whether they claimed the bottle, anyway.
But then, what is the non-commutative Jack Daniels Problem?
A footnote on the first page of Conway and Norton’s ‘Monstrous Moonshine’ paper says:
“Very recently, A. Pizer has shown these primes are the only ones that satisfy a certain conjecture of Hecke from 1936 relating modular forms of weight
Pizer’s paper is “A note on a conjecture of Hecke”.
Maybe there’s a connection between monstrous moonshine and the arithmetic of integral quaternion algebras. Some hints:
The commutation relations in the Big Picture are reminiscent of the meta-commutation relations for Hurwitz quaternions, originally due to Conway in his booklet on Quaternions and Octonions.
The fact that the
Then, there’s Jorge Plazas claiming that Connes-Marcolli’s
One of the first things I’ll do when I return is to run to the library and get our copy of Shimura’s ‘Introduction to the arithmetic theory of automorphic functions’.
Btw. the bottle in the title image is not a Jack Daniels but the remains of a bottle of Ricard, because I’m still in the French mountains.