Tag: Riemann

noncommutative curves and their maniflds

Published March 17, 2007 by lieven

Last time we have
seen that the noncommutative manifold of a Riemann surface can be viewed
as that Riemann surface together with a loop in each point. The extra
loop-structure tells us that all finite dimensional representations of
the coordinate ring can be found by separating over points and those
living at just one point are classified by the isoclasses of nilpotent
matrices, that is are parametrized by the partitions (corresponding
to the sizes of the Jordan blocks). In addition, these loops tell us
that the Riemann surface locally looks like a Riemann sphere, so an
equivalent mental picture of the local structure of this
noncommutative manifold is given by the picture on teh left, where the surface is part of the Riemann surface
and a sphere is placed at every point. Today we will consider
genuine noncommutative curves and describe their corresponding
noncommutative manifolds.

Here, a mental picture of such a
_noncommutative sphere_ to keep in mind would be something
like the picture on the right. That is, in most points of the sphere we place as before again
a Riemann sphere but in a finite number of points a different phenomen
occurs : we get a cluster of infinitesimally nearby points. We
will explain this picture with an easy example. Consider the
complex plane $C$ , the points of which are just the
one-dimensional representations of the polynomial algebra in one
variable $C [z]$ (any algebra map $C [z] \to C$ is fully determined by the image of z). On this plane we
have an automorphism of order two sending a complex number z to its
negative -z (so this automorphism can be seen as a point-reflexion
with center the zero element 0). This automorphism extends to
the polynomial algebra, again induced by sending z to -z. That
is, the image of a polynomial $f (z) \in C [z]$ under this
automorphism is f(-z).

With this data we can form a noncommutative
algebra, the _skew-group algebra_ $C [z] * C_{2}$ the
elements of which are either of the form $f (z) * e$ or $g (z) * g$ where
$C_{2} = ⟨ g : g^{2} = e ⟩$ is the cyclic group of order two
generated by the automorphism g and f(z),g(z) are arbitrary
polynomials in z.

The multiplication on this algebra is determined by
the following rules

$(g (z) * g) (f (z) * e) = g (z) f (- z) \astg$ whereas $(f (z) * e) (g (z) * g) = f (z) g (z) * g$

$(f (z) * e) (g (z) * e) = f (z) g (z) * e$ whereas $(f (z) * g) (g (z) * g) = f (z) g (- z) * e$

That is, multiplication in the
$C [z]$ factor is the usual multiplication, multiplication in
the $C_{2}$ factor is the usual group-multiplication but when we want
to get a polynomial from right to left over a group-element we have to
apply the corresponding automorphism to the polynomial (thats why we
call it a _skew_ group-algebra).

Alternatively, remark that as
a $C$ -algebra the skew-group algebra $C [z] * C_{2}$ is
an algebra with unit element 1 = 1\aste and is generated by
the elements $X = z * e$ and $Y = 1 * g$ and that the defining
relations of the multiplication are

$Y^{2} = 1$ and $Y . X = - X . Y$

hence another description would
be

$C [z] * C_{2} = \frac{C ⟨ X, Y ⟩}{(Y^{2} - 1, X Y + Y X)}$

It can be shown that skew-group
algebras over the coordinate ring of smooth curves are _noncommutative
smooth algebras_ whence there is a noncommutative manifold associated
to them. Recall from last time the noncommutative manifold of a
smooth algebra A is a device to classify all finite dimensional
representations of A upto isomorphism Let us therefore try to
determine some of these representations, starting with the
one-dimensional ones, that is, algebra maps from

$C [z] * C_{2} = \frac{C ⟨ X, Y ⟩}{(Y^{2} - 1, X Y + Y X)} \to C$

Such a map is determined by the image of X and that of
Y. Now, as $Y^{2} = 1$ we have just two choices for the image of Y
namely +1 or -1. But then, as the image is a commutative algebra
and as XY+YX=0 we must have that the image of 2XY is zero whence the
image of X must be zero. That is, we have only
two one-dimensional representations, namely $S_{+} : X \to 0, Y \to 1$
and $S_{-} : X \to 0, Y \to - 1$

This is odd! Can
it be that our noncommutative manifold has just 2 points? Of course not.
In fact, these two points are the exceptional ones giving us a cluster
of nearby points (see below) whereas most points of our
noncommutative manifold will correspond to 2-dimensional
representations!

So, let’s hunt them down. The
center of $C [z] * C_{2}$ (that is, the elements commuting with
all others) consists of all elements of the form $f (z) * e$ with f an
_even_ polynomial, that is, f(z)=f(-z) (because it has to commute
with 1\ast g), so is equal to the subalgebra $C [z^{2}] * e$ .

The
manifold corresponding to this subring is again the complex plane
$C$ of which the points correspond to all one-dimensional
representations of $C [z^{2}] * e$ (determined by the image of
$z^{2} * e$ ).

We will now show that to each point of $C - 0$
corresponds a simple 2-dimensional representation of
$C [z] * C_{2}$ .

If a is not zero, we will consider the
quotient of the skew-group algebra modulo the twosided ideal generated
by $z^{2} * e - a$ . It turns out
that

$\frac{C [z] * C_{2}}{(z^{2} \aste - a)} = \frac{C [z]}{(z^{2} - a)} * C_{2} = (\frac{C [z]}{(z - \sqrt{a})} \oplus \frac{C [z]}{(z + \sqrt{a})}) * C_{2} = (C \oplus C) * C_{2}$

where the skew-group algebra on the
right is given by the automorphism g on $C \oplus C$ interchanging the two factors. If you want to
become more familiar with working in skew-group algebras work out the
details of the fact that there is an algebra-isomorphism between
$(C \oplus C) * C_{2}$ and the algebra of $2 \times 2$ matrices $M_{2} (C)$ . Here is the
identification

$(1, 0) \aste \to [\begin{matrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{matrix}]$

$(0, 1) \aste \to [\begin{matrix} 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{matrix}]$

$(1, 0) \astg \to [\begin{matrix} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \end{matrix}]$

$(0, 1) \astg \to [\begin{matrix} 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 0 \end{matrix}]$

so you have to verify that multiplication
on the left hand side (that is in $(C \oplus C) * C_{2}$ ) coincides with matrix-multiplication of the associated
matrices.

Okay, this begins to look like what we are after. To
every point of the complex plane minus zero (or to every point of the
Riemann sphere minus the two points $0, \infty$ ) we have
associated a two-dimensional simple representation of the skew-group
algebra (btw. simple means that the matrices determined by the images
of X and Y generate the whole matrix-algebra).

In fact, we
now have already classified ‘most’ of the finite dimensional
representations of $C [z] * C_{2}$ , namely those n-dimensional
representations

$C [z] * C_{2} = \frac{C ⟨ X, Y ⟩}{(Y^{2} - 1, X Y + Y X)} \to M_{n} (C)$

for which the image of X is an invertible $n \times n$ matrix. We can show that such representations only exist when
n is an even number, say n=2m and that any such representation is
again determined by the geometric/combinatorial data we found last time
for a Riemann surface.

That is, It is determined by a finite
number $P_{1}, \dots, P_{k}$ of points from $C - 0$ where
k is at most m. For each index i we have a positive
number $a_{i}$ such that $a_{1} + \dots + a_{k} = m$ and finally for each i we
also have a partition of $a_{i}$ .

That is our noncommutative
manifold looks like all points of $C - 0$ with one loop in each
point. However, we have to remember that each point now determines a
simple 2-dimensional representation and that in order to get all
finite dimensional representations with det(X) non-zero we have to
scale up representations of $C [z^{2}]$ by a factor two.
The technical term here is that of a Morita equivalence (or that the
noncommutative algebra is an Azumaya algebra over
$C - 0$ ).

What about the remaining representations, that
is, those for which Det(X)=0? We have already seen that there are two
1-dimensional representations $S_{+}$ and $S_{-}$ lying over 0, so how
do they fit in our noncommutative manifold? Should we consider them as
two points and draw also a loop in each of them or do we have to do
something different? Rememer that drawing a loop means in our
geometry -> representation dictionary that the representations
living at that point are classified in the same way as nilpotent
matrices.

Hence, drawing a loop in $S_{+}$ would mean that we have a
2-dimensional representation of $C [z] * C_{2}$ (different from
$S_{+} \oplus S_{+}$ ) and any such representation must correspond to
matrices

$X \to [\begin{matrix} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \end{matrix}]$ and $Y \to [\begin{matrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{matrix}]$

But this is not possible as these matrices do
_not_ satisfy the relation XY+YX=0. Hence, there is no loop in $S_{+}$
and similarly also no loop in $S_{-}$ .

However, there are non
semi-simple two dimensional representations build out of the simples
$S_{+}$ and $S_{-}$ . For, consider the matrices

$X \to [\begin{matrix} 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 \end{matrix}]$ and $Y \to [\begin{matrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & - 1 \end{matrix}]$

then these
matrices _do_ satisfy XY+YX=0! (and there is another matrix-pair
interchanging $\pm 1$ in the Y-matrix). In erudite terminology this
says that there is a _nontrivial extension_ between $S_{+}$ and $S_{-}$
and one between $S_{-}$ and $S_{+}$ .

In our dictionary we will encode this
information by the picture

$Misplaced &$

where the two
vertices correspond to the points $S_{+}$ and $S_{-}$ and the arrows
represent the observed extensions. In fact, this data suffices to finish
our classification project of finite dimensional representations of
the noncommutative curve $C [z] * C_{2}$ .

Those with Det(X)=0
are of the form : $R \oplus T$ where R is a representation with
invertible X-matrix (which we classified before) and T is a direct
sum of representations involving only the simple factors $S_{+}$ and
$S_{-}$ and obtained by iterating the 2-dimensional idea. That is, for
each factor the Y-matrix has alternating $\pm 1$ along the diagonal
and the X-matrix is the full nilpotent Jordan-matrix.

So
here is our picture of the noncommutative manifold of the
noncommutative curve $C [z] * C_{2}$ : the points are all points
of $C - 0$ together with one loop in each of them together
with two points lying over 0 where we draw the above picture of arrows
between them. One should view these two points as lying
infinetesimally close to each other and the gluing
data

$Misplaced &$

contains enough information to determine
that all other points of the noncommutative manifold in the vicinity of
this cluster should be two dimensional simples! The methods used
in this simple minded example are strong enough to determine the
structure of the noncommutative manifold of _any_ noncommutative curve.

So, let us look at a real-life example. Once again, take the
Kleinian quartic In a previous
course-post we recalled that
there is an action by automorphisms on the Klein quartic K by the
finite simple group $P S L_{2} (F_{7})$ of order 168. Hence, we
can form the noncommutative Klein-quartic $K * P S L_{2} (F_{7})$
(take affine pieces consisting of complements of orbits and do the
skew-group algebra construction on them and then glue these pieces
together again).

We have also seen that the orbits are classified
under a Belyi-map $K \to P_{C}^{1}$ and that this map
had the property that over any point of $P_{C}^{1} - 0, 1, \infty$ there is an orbit consisting of 168 points
whereas over 0 (resp. 1 and $\infty$ ) there is an orbit
consisting of 56 (resp. 84 and 24 points).

So what is
the noncommutative manifold associated to the noncommutative Kleinian?
Well, it looks like the picture we had at the start of this
post For all but three points of the Riemann sphere
$P^{1} - 0, 1, \infty$ we have one point and one loop
(corresponding to a simple 168-dimensional representation of $K * P S L_{2} (F_{7})$ ) together with clusters of infinitesimally nearby
points lying over 0,1 and $\infty$ (the cluster over 0
is depicted, the two others only indicated).

Over 0 we have
three points connected by the diagram

$Misplaced &$

where each of the vertices corresponds to a
simple 56-dimensional representation. Over 1 we have a cluster of
two points corresponding to 84-dimensional simples and connected by
the picture we had in the $C [z] * C_{2}$ example).

Finally,
over $\infty$ we have the most interesting cluster, consisting of the
seven dwarfs (each corresponding to a simple representation of dimension
24) and connected to each other via the
picture

$Misplaced &$

Again, this noncommutative manifold gives us
all information needed to give a complete classification of all finite
dimensional $K * P S L_{2} (F_{7})$ -representations. One
can prove that all exceptional clusters of points for a noncommutative
curve are connected by a cyclic quiver as the ones above. However, these
examples are still pretty tame (in more than one sense) as these
noncommutative algebras are finite over their centers, are Noetherian
etc. The situation will become a lot wilder when we come to exotic
situations such as the noncommutative manifold of
$S L_{2} (Z)$ …

the noncommutative manifold of a Riemann surface

Published March 16, 2007 by lieven

The
natural habitat of this lesson is a bit further down the course, but it
was called into existence by a comment/question by
Kea

I don’t yet quite see where the nc
manifolds are, but I guess that’s coming.

As
I’m enjoying telling about all sorts of sources of finite dimensional
representations of $S L_{2} (Z)$ (and will carry on doing so for
some time), more people may begin to wonder where I’m heading. For this
reason I’ll do a couple of very elementary posts on simple examples of
noncommutative manifolds.

I realize it is ‘bon ton’ these days
to say that noncommutative manifolds are virtual objects associated to
noncommutative algebras and that the calculation of certain invariants
of these algebras gives insight into the topology and/or geometry of
these non-existent spaces. My own attitude to noncommutative geometry is
different : to me, noncommutative manifolds are genuine sets of points
equipped with a topology and other structures which I can use as a
mnemotechnic device to solve the problem of interest to me which is the
classification of all finite dimensional representations of a smooth
noncommutative algebra.

Hence, when I speak of the
‘noncommutative manifold of $S L_{2} (Z)$ ’ Im after an object
containing enough information to allow me (at least in principle) to
classify the isomorphism classes of all finite dimensional
$S L_{2} (Z)$ -representations. The whole point of this course is
to show that such an object exists and that we can make explicit
calculations with it. But I’m running far ahead. Let us start with
an elementary question :

Riemann surfaces are examples of
noncommutative manifolds, so what is the noncommutative picture of
them?

I’ve browsed the Google-pictures a bit and a picture
coming close to my mental image of the noncommutative manifold of a
Riemann surface locally looks like the picture on the left. Here, the checkerboard-surface is part of the Riemann surface
and the extra structure consists in putting in each point of the Riemann
surface a sphere, reflecting the local structure of the Riemann surface
near the point. In fact, my picture is slightly different : I want to
draw a loop in each point of the Riemann surface, but Ill explain why
the two pictures are equivalent and why they present a solution to the
problem of classifying all finite dimensional representations of the
Riemann surface. After all why do we draw and study Riemann
surfaces? Because we are interested in the solutions to equations. For
example, the points of the _Kleinian quartic Riemann
surface_ give us all solutions tex \in
\mathbb{C}^3 $t o t h e e q u a t i o n$ X^3Y+Y^3Z+Z^3X=0 $. I f (a, b, c) i s s u c h a s o l u t i o n, t h e n s o a r e a l l s c a l a r m u l t i p l e s$ (\lambda a,\lambda
b,\lambda c) $s o w e m a y a s w e l l a s s u m e t h a t t h e Z$ coordinate is equal
to 1 and are then interested in finding the solutions tex \in
\mathbb{C}^2 $t o t h e e q u a t i o n$ X^3Y+Y^3+X=0 $ which gives us an affine
patch of the Kleinian quartic (in fact, these solutions give us all
points except for two, corresponding to the _points at infinity_ needed
to make the picture compact so that we can hold it in our hand and look
at it from all sides. These points at infinity correspond to the trivial
solutions (1,0,0) and (0,1,0)).

What is the connection
between points on this Riemann surface and representations? Well, if
(a,b) is a solution to the equation $X^{3} Y + Y^{3} + X = 0$ , then we have a
_one-dimensional representation_ of the affine _coordinate ring_
$C [X, Y] / (X^{3} Y + Y^{3} + X)$ , that is, an algebra
morphism

$C [X, Y] / (X^{3} Y + Y^{3} + X) \to C$

defined by sending X to a and Y to b.
Conversely, any such one-dimensonal representation gives us a solution
(look at the images of X and Y and these will be the coordinates of
a solution). Thus, commutative algebraic geometry of smooth
curves (that is Riemann surfaces if you look at the ‘real’ picture)
can be seen as the study of one-dimensional representations of their
smooth coordinate algebras. In other words, the classical Riemann
surface gives us already the classifcation of all one-dimensional
representations, so now we are after the ‘other ones’.

In
noncommtative algebra it is not natural to restrict attention to algebra
maps to $C$ , at least we would also like to include algebra
maps to $n \times n$ matrices $M_{n} (C)$ . An n-dimensional
representation of the coordinate algebra of the Klein quartic is an
algebra map

$C [X, Y] / (X^{3} Y + Y^{3} + X) \to M_{n} (C)$

That is, we want to find all pairs of $n \times n$ matrices A and B satisfying the following
matrix-identities

$A . B = B . A$ and $A^{3} . B + B^{3} + A = 0_{n}$

The
first equation tells us that the two matrices must commute (because we
took commuting variables X and Y) and the second equation really is
a set of $n^{2}$ -equations in the matrix-entries of A and
B.

There is a sneaky way to get lots of such matrix-couples
from a given solution (A,B), namely by _simultaneous conjugation_.
That is, if $C \in G L_{n} (C)$ is any invertible $n \times n$
matrix, then also the matrix-couple $(C^{- 1} . A . C, C^{- 1} . B . C)$
satisfies all the required equations (write the equations out and notice
that middle terms of the form $C . C^{- 1}$ cancel out and check that one
then obtains the matrix-identities

$C^{- 1} A B C = C^{- 1} B A C$ and $C^{- 1} (A^{3} B + B^{3} + A) C = 0_{n}$

which are satisfied because
(A,B) was supposed to be a solution). We then say that these two
n-dimensional representations are _isomorphic_ and naturally we are
only interested in classifying the isomorphism classes of all
representations.

Using classical commutative algebra theory of
Dedekind domains (such as the coordinate ring $C [X, Y] / (X^{3} Y + Y^{3} + X)$ )
allows us to give a complete solution to this problem. It says that any
n-dimensional representation is determined up to isomorphism by the
following geometric/combinatorial data

a finite set of points $P_{1}, P_{2}, \dots, P_{k}$ on the Riemann surface with $k \leq n$ .
a set of positive integers $a_{1}, a_{2}, \dots, a_{k}$ associated to these pointssatisfying $Double subscripts: use braces to clarify$ .
for each $a_{i}$ a partition of $a_{i}$ (that is, a decreasing sequence of numbers with total sum
$a_{i}$ ).

To encode this classification I’ll use the mental
picture of associating to every point of the Klein quartic a small
loop. $\xymatrix \vtx \ar @ (u l, u r)$ Don\’t get over-exited about this
noncommutative manifold picture of the Klein quartic, I do not mean to
represent something like closed strings emanating from all points of the
Riemann surface or any other fanshi-wanshi interpretation. Just as
Feynman-diagrams allow the initiated to calculate probabilities of
certain interactions, the noncommutative manifold allows the
initiated to classify finite dimensional representations.

Our
mental picture of the noncommutative manifold of the Klein quartic, that
is : the points of the Klein quartic together with a loop in each point,
will tell the initiated quite a few things, such as : The fact
that there are no arrows between distict points, tells us that the
classification problem splits into local problems in a finite number of
points. Technically, this encodes the fact that there are no nontrivial
extensions between different simples in the commutative case. This will
drastically change if we enter the noncommutative world…

The fact that there is one loop in each point, tells us that
the local classification problem in that point is the same as that of
classifying nilpotent matrices upto conjugation (which, by the Jordan
normal form result, are classified by partitions) Moreover,
the fact that there is one loop in each point tells us that the local
structure of simple representations near that point (that is, the points
on the Kleinian quartic lying nearby) are classified as the simple
representations of the polynmial algebra $C [x]$ (which are the
points on the complex plane, giving the picture
of the Riemann sphere in each point reflecting the local
neighborhood of the point on the Klein quartic)

In general, the
noncommutative manifold associated to a noncommutative smooth algebra
will be of a similar geometric/combinatorial nature. Typically, it will
consist of a geometric collection of points and arrows and loops between
these points. This data will then allow us to reduce the classification
problem to that of _quiver-representations_ and will allow us to give
local descriptions of our noncommutative manifolds. Next time,
I’ll give the details in the first noncommutative example : the
skew-group algebra of a finite group of automorphisms on a Riemann
surface (such as the simple group $P S L_{2} (F_{7})$ acting on the
Klein quartic). Already in this case, some new phenomena will
appear…

ADDED : While writing this post
NetNewsWire informed me that over at Noncommutative Geometry they have a
post on a similar topic : What is a noncommutative space.

The cartographers’ groups

Published March 13, 2007 by lieven

Just as cartographers like
Mercator drew maps of
the then known world, we draw dessins
d ‘enfants to depict the
associated algebraic curve defined over
$\overset{―}{Q}$ .

In order to see that such a dessin
d’enfant determines a permutation representation of one of
Grothendieck’s cartographic groups, $S L_{2} (Z), Γ_{0} (2)$ or $Γ (2)$ we need to have realizations of these
groups (as well as their close relatives
$P S L_{2} (Z), G L_{2} (Z)$ and $P G L_{2} (Z)$ ) in
terms of generators and relations.

As this lesson will be rather
technical I’d better first explain what we will prove (so that you can
skip it if you feel comfortable with the statements) and why we want to
prove it. What we will prove in detail below is that these groups
can be written as free (or amalgamated) group products. We will explain
what this means and will establish that

$P S L_{2} (Z) = C_{2} * C_{3}, Γ_{0} (2) = C_{2} * C_{\infty}, Γ (2) = C_{\infty} * C_{\infty}$

$S L_{2} (Z) = C_{4} *_{C_{2}} C_{6}, G L_{2} (Z) = D_{4} *_{D_{2}} D_{6}, P G L_{2} (Z) = D_{2} *_{C_{2}} D_{3}$

where $C_{n}$ resp.
$D_{n}$ are the cyclic (resp. dihedral) groups. The importance of these
facts it that they will allow us to view the set of (isomorphism classes
of) finite dimensional representations of these groups as
noncommutative manifolds . Looking at the statements above we
see that these arithmetical groups can be build up from the first
examples in any course on finite groups : cyclic and dihedral
groups.

Recall that the cyclic group of order n, $C_{n}$ is the group of
rotations of a regular n-gon (so is generated by a rotation r with
angle $\frac{2 π}{n}$ and has defining relation $r^{n} = 1$ , where 1
is the identity). However, regular n-gons have more symmetries :
flipping over one of its n lines of symmetry

The dihedral group $D_{n}$ is the group generated by the n
rotations and by these n flips. If, as before r is a generating
rotation and d is one of the flips, then it is easy to see that the
dihedral group is generated by r and d and satisfied the defining
relations

$r^{n} = 1$ and $d^{2} = 1 = (r d)^{2}$

Flipping twice
does nothing and to see the relation $(r d)^{2} = 1$ check that doing twice a
rotation followed by a flip brings all vertices back to their original
location. The dihedral group $D_{n}$ has 2n elements, the n-rotations
$r^{i}$ and the n flips $d r^{i}$ .

In fact, to get at the cartographic
groups we will only need the groups $D_{4}, D_{6}$ and their
subgroups. Let us start by finding generators of the largest
group $G L_{2} (Z)$ which is the group of all invertible $2 \times 2$ matrices with integer coefficients.

Consider the
elements

$U = [\begin{matrix} 0 & - 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{matrix}], V = [\begin{matrix} 0 & 1 \\ - 1 & 1 \end{matrix}] / t e x] a n d$ R =
$[\begin{matrix} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{matrix}]$ $

and form the
matrices

$X = U V = [\begin{matrix} 1 & - 1 \\ 0 & 1 \end{matrix}], Y = V U = [\begin{matrix} 1 & 0 \\ 1 & 1 \end{matrix}]$

By induction we prove the following relations in
$G L_{2} (Z)$

$X^{n} [\begin{matrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{matrix}] = [\begin{matrix} a - n c & b - n d \\ c & d \end{matrix}]$
and $[\begin{matrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{matrix}] X^{n} = [\begin{matrix} a & b - n a \\ c & d - n c \end{matrix}]$

$Y^{n} [\begin{matrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{matrix}] = [\begin{matrix} a & b \\ c + n a & d + n b \end{matrix}]$ and
$[\begin{matrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{matrix}] Y^{n} = [\begin{matrix} a + n b & b \\ c + n d & d \end{matrix}]$

The determinant ad-bc of
a matrix in $G L_{2} (Z)$ must be $\pm 1$ whence all rows and
columns of

$[\begin{matrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{matrix}] \in G L_{2} (Z)$

consist of coprime numbers and hence a and
c can be reduced modulo each other by left multiplication by a power
of X or Y until one of them is zero and the other is $\pm 1$ . We
may even assume that $a = \pm 1$ (if not, left multiply with U).

So,
by left multiplication by powers of X and Y and U we can bring any
element of $G L_{2} (Z)$ into the form

$[\begin{matrix} \pm 1 & β \\ 0 & \pm 1 \end{matrix}]$

and again by left
multiplication by a power of X we can bring it in one of the four
forms

$[\begin{matrix} \pm 1 & 0 \\ 0 & \pm 1 \end{matrix}] = 1, U R, R U, U^{2}$

This proves that $G L_{2} (Z)$ is
generated by the elements U,V and R.

Similarly, the group
$S L_{2} (Z)$ of all $2 \times 2$ integer matrices with
determinant 1 is generated by the elements U and V as using the
above method and the restriction on the determinant we will end up with
one of the two matrices

$[\begin{matrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{matrix}], [\begin{matrix} - 1 & 0 \\ 0 & - 1 \end{matrix}] = 1, U^{2}$

so we never need the matrix R. As for
relations, there are some obvious relations among the matrices U,V and
R, namely

$U^{2} = V^{3}$ and $1 = U^{4} = R^{2} = (R U)^{2} = (R V)^{2}$ $

The
real problem is to prove that all remaining relations are consequences
of these basic ones. As R clearly has order two and its commutation
relations with U and V are just $R U = U^{- 1} R$ and $R V = V^{- 1} R$ we can
pull R in any relation to the far right and (possibly after
multiplying on the right with R) are left to prove that the only
relations among U and V are consequences of $U^{2} = V^{3}$ and
$U^{4} = 1 = V^{6}$ .

Because $U^{2} = V^{3}$ this element is central in the
group generated by U and V (which we have seen to be
$S L_{2} (Z)$ ) and if we quotient it out we get the modular
group

$Γ = P S L_{2} (Z)$

Hence in order to prove our claim
it suffices that

$P S L_{2} (Z) = ⟨ \overset{―}{U}, \overset{―}{V} : {\overset{―}{U}}^{2} = {\overset{―}{V}}^{3} = 1 ⟩$

Phrased differently, we have to show that
$P S L_{2} (Z)$ is the free group product of the cyclic groups of
order two and three (those generated by $u = \overset{―}{U}$ and
$v = \overset{―}{V}$ ) $C_{2} * C_{3}$

Any element of this free group
product is of the form $(u) v^{a_{1}} u v^{a_{2}} u \dots u v^{a_{k}} (u)$ where beginning and trailing u are optional and
all $a_{i}$ are either 1 or 2.

So we have to show that in
$P S L_{2} (Z)$ no such word can give the identity
element. Today, we will first sketch the classical argument based
on the theory of groups acting on trees due to Jean-Pierre
Serre and Hyman Bass. Tomorrow, we will give a short elegant proof due to
Roger Alperin and draw
consequences to the description of the carthographic groups as
amalgamated free products of cyclic and dihedral groups.

Recall
that $G L_{2} (Z)$ acts via Moebius
transformations on
the complex plane $C = R^{2}$ (actually it is an
action on the Riemann sphere $P_{C}^{1}$ ) given by the
maps

$[\begin{matrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{matrix}] . z = \frac{a z + b}{c z + d}$

Note that the action of the
center of $G L_{2} (Z)$ (that is of $\pm [\begin{matrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 \end{matrix}]$ ) acts trivially, so it is really an action of
$P G L_{2} (Z)$ .

As R interchanges the upper and lower half-plane
we might as well restrict to the action of $S L_{2} (Z)$ on the
upper-halfplane $H$ . It is quite easy to see that a
fundamental domain
for this action is given by the greyed-out area

To see that any $z \in H$ can be taken into this
region by an element of $P S L_{2} (Z)$ note the following two
Moebius transformations

$[\begin{matrix} 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 \end{matrix}] . z = z + 1$ and $[\begin{matrix} 0 & 1 \\ - 1 & 0 \end{matrix}] . z = - \frac{1}{z}$

The first
operation takes any z into a strip of length one, for example that
with Re(z) between $- \frac{1}{2}$ and $\frac{1}{2}$ and the second
interchanges points within and outside the unit-circle, so combining the
two we get any z into the greyed-out region. Actually, we could have
taken any of the regions in the above tiling as our fundamental domain
as they are all translates of the greyed-out region by an element of
$P S L_{2} (Z)$ .

Of course, points on the boundary of the
greyed-out fundamental region need to be identified (in order to get the
identification of $\overset{―}{H / P S L_{2} (Z)}$ with the
Riemann sphere $S^{2} = P_{C}^{1}$ ). For example, the two
halves of the boundary by the unit circle are interchanged by the action
of the map $z \to - \frac{1}{z}$ and if we take the translates under
$P S L_{2} (Z)$ of the indicated circle-part

we get a connected tree with fundamental domain the circle
part bounded by i and $ρ = \frac{1}{2} + \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2} i$ .
Calculating the stabilizer subgroup of i (that is, the subgroup of
elements fixing i) we get that this subgroup
is $⟨ u ⟩ = C_{2}$ whereas the stabilizer subgroup of
$ρ$ is $⟨ v ⟩ = C_{3}$ .

Using this facts and the general
results of Jean-Pierre Serres book Trees
one deduces that $P S L_{2} (Z) = C_{2} * C_{3}$
and hence that the obvious relations among U,V and R given above do
indeed generate all relations.