text:
# Quantum algebras in phenomenological description of particle properties

## 1 Introduction

Quantum groups and quantum or $`q`$-deformed algebras , whose basic mathematical aspects and diverse quantum physical applications are intensively studied for about a decade and half, will belong to most important and perspective tools of research in the 3rd millenium, too.

In this talk, meant as a mini-review, we concentrate on two examples of applying $`q`$-algebras to phenomenology of hadrons. Within the first one initiated in  and developed in subsequent papers, the $`q`$-analogs $`U_q(su_n)`$ of the Lie algebras of groups $`SU_n`$ are adopted for hadronic flavor symmetries in order to derive new results concerning hadron masses and mass sum rules. Basic tool of this aproach is the representation theory of the $`q`$-algebras $`U_q(su_n)`$ , and in sections 2-8 we discuss a number of results, including unexpected implications: a possibility (gained due to use of $`q`$-algebras) to label different flavors topologically - by knot invariants; a direct link of deformation parameter to the Cabibbo angle , etc. In the second part of the talk (section 9) we consider a usage of the algebras of $`q`$-deformed oscillators, within a model of $`q`$-Bose gas, for effective description of unusual (non-Bose type) behavior of two-particle correlations of hadrons (pions or kaons) produced and registered in heavy ion collisions.

## 2 Vector mesons: $`q`$-deformation vs mixing

We use (see ) Gelfand-Tsetlin basis vectors for meson states from $`(n^21)`$-plet of ’$`n`$-flavor’ $`U_q(u_n)`$ embedded into $`\{(n+1)^21\}`$-plet of ’dynamical’ $`U_q(u_{n+1});`$ construct mass operator $`\widehat{M_n}`$, invariant under the ’isospin+hypercharge’ $`q`$-algebra $`U_q(u_2)`$, from the generators of dynamical algebra $`U_q(u_{n+1})`$ (e.g., $`\widehat{M_3}=M_0\mathrm{𝟏}+\gamma _3A_{34}A_{43}+\delta _3A_{43}A_{34}`$); calculate expressions for masses $`m_{V_i}V_i|\widehat{M_3}|V_i`$ \- these involve $`M_0`$, the parameters $`\gamma _3,\delta _3`$, and the $`q`$-parameter. In particular, for $`n=3`$ one obtains

$`m_\rho =M_0,m_K^{}=M_0\gamma _3,`$
$`m_{\omega _8}=M_02[2]_q/[3]_q\gamma _3,`$ (1)
where $`[x]_q[x]=\frac{q^xq^x}{qq^1}`$ is the $`q`$-number ’deforming’ a number $`x`$ and, to have equal masses for particles/antiparticles, $`\delta _3=\gamma _3`$ was set. $`q`$-Dependence appears only in the mass of $`\omega _8`$ (isosinglet in $`U_q(su_3)`$-octet). Excluding $`M_0,\gamma _3`$, the $`q`$-analog of Gell–Mann - Okubo (GMO) relation is  :

$$[3]_qm_{\omega _8}+(2[2]_q[3]_q)m_\rho =2[2]_qm_K^{}.$$
(2)
In the limit $`q=1`$ (then, $`\frac{[3]_q}{[2]_q}=\frac{3}{2}`$), this reduces to usual GMO formula $`3m_{\omega _8}+m_\rho =4m_K^{}`$ which needs singlet mixing . However, it also yields

$$m_{\omega _8}+m_\rho =2m_K^{}\mathrm{if}q=e^{i\pi /5}$$
(3)
(then, $`[3]_q=[2]_q`$). With $`m_{\omega _8}m_\varphi `$, and no mixing, eq.(3) coincides with nonet mass formula of Okubo  agreeing ideally with data . The deformation angle $`\frac{\pi }{5}`$, see (3), coincides remarkably with $`\omega `$-$`\varphi `$ mixing angle (known  to be $`\theta _{\omega \varphi }=36^{}`$) of traditional $`SU(3)`$-based scheme. In other words, the $`q`$-deformation of flavor symmetries supersedes the issue of singlet mixing.

For $`3<n6`$ the scheme works as well. Again, only masses of singlets $`\omega _{15}`$, $`\omega _{24}`$, $`\omega _{35}`$ from $`(n^21)`$-plets of $`U_q(u_n)`$ involve $`q`$-dependence. As result, we get the $`q`$-analog (with isodoublet $`D^{}`$)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{[4]}{[3]}}m_{\omega _{15}}+\left(2{\displaystyle \frac{[4]^2}{[3]^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{8}{[2]}}{\displaystyle \frac{[4]}{[3]}}{\displaystyle \frac{[4]}{[3]}}+4\right)m_\rho =`$
$`=2m_D^{}+\left(2{\displaystyle \frac{[4]^2}{[3]^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{8}{[2]}}{\displaystyle \frac{[4]}{[3]}}+2\right)m_K^{},`$ (4)
and $`q`$-analogs for $`n=5,6`$ (see ). Fixing $`q`$ by setting $`[4]_q=[3]_q`$ (and $`[n]_q=[n1]_q`$, $`n=5,6`$) oversimplifies the relations and yields higher analogs of Okubo’s nonet sum rule (isodoublets in r.h.s):

$`m_{\omega _{15}}+(58/[2]_{q_4})m_\rho =`$
$`=2m_D^{}+(48/[2]_{q_4})m_K^{},`$ (5)
$`m_{\omega _{24}}+(916/[2]_{q_5})m_\rho =`$
$`=2m_{D_{b}^{}{}_{}{}^{}}+(48/[2]_{q_5})(m_D^{}+m_K^{}),`$ (6)
$`m_{\omega _{35}}+(1324/[2]_{q_6})m_\rho =`$
$`=2m_{D_{t}^{}{}_{}{}^{}}+(48/[2]_{q_6})(m_{D_{b}^{}{}_{}{}^{}}+m_D^{}+m_K^{}).`$ (7)
Here the values $`q_n=e^{i\pi /(2n1)}`$ (for which $`[2]_{q_n}=2\mathrm{cos}\frac{\pi }{2n1}`$) solve eqs. $`[n]_q[n1]_q=0`$. Like in the case with $`m_{\omega _8}m_\varphi ,`$ it is meant in (5)-(7) that $`J/\psi `$ is put in place of $`\omega _{15},`$ $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ in place of $`\omega _{24},`$ toponium in place of $`\omega _{35}`$ (i.e., no mixing!). With experimental masses, eq.(5) holds to within $`2.6\%`$ and eq.(6) holds with precision $`0.7\%`$ .

The $`q`$-polynomials $`[n]_q[n1]_q`$ have a topological meaning.

Labelling flavors by knots invariants

Polynomials $`[n]_q[n1]_qP_n(q),`$ by their roots, reduce $`q`$-analogs (2), (4) and those for $`n=5,6`$ to realistic mass sum rules (MSR) (3), (5)-(7). And, due to the property $`(i)P_n(q)=P_n(q^1),(ii)P_n(1)=1,`$ they coincide  with such knot invariants as Alexander polynomials $`\mathrm{\Delta }_q\{(2n1)_1\}`$ of $`(2n1)_1`$-torus knots. E.g., $`[3]_q[2]_q=q^2+q^2qq^1+1\mathrm{\Delta }_q\{5_1\},`$ $`[4]_q[3]_q=q^3+q^3q^2q^2+q+q^11\mathrm{\Delta }_q\{7_1\}`$ correspond to the $`5_1`$\- and $`7_1`$-knots. Since the extra $`q`$-deuce in (4) can be linked to the trefoil (or $`3_1`$-) knot: $`[2]_q1=q+q^11\mathrm{\Delta }_q\{3_1\}`$, all the $`q`$-dependence in masses of $`\omega _{n^21}`$, in coefficients of (2),(4) and of higher $`q`$-analogs, is expressible through Alexander polynomials. Namely, $`\frac{[3]_q}{[2]_q}=1+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\{5_1\}}{[2]_q}=1+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\{5_1\}}{\mathrm{\Delta }\{3_1\}+1},`$ $`\frac{[4]_q}{[3]_q}=1+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\{7_1\}}{[3]_q}=1+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\{7_1\}}{\mathrm{\Delta }\{5_1\}+\mathrm{\Delta }\{3_1\}+1},`$ etc. The values $`q_n`$ are thus roots of respective Alexander polynomials. For each $`n`$, just the ’senior’ (numerator) polynomial in $`\frac{[3]_q}{[2]_q}`$, $`\frac{[4]_q}{[3]_q}`$ and $`\frac{[n]_q}{[n1]_q}`$, $`n=5,6`$, serves to ’single out’, by its root, the corresponding MSR from $`q`$-deformed analog.

Thus, the $`q`$-parameter for each $`n`$ is fixed rigidly as a root $`q_n`$ of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\{(2n1)_1\},`$ contrary to choice of $`q`$ by fitting in other phenomenological applications . Here, using flavor $`q`$-algebras along with ’dynamical’ $`q`$-algebras according to $`U_q(u_n)U_q(u_{n+1})`$, we gain: the torus knots $`5_1,7_1,9_1,11_1`$ are put into correspondence  with vector quarkonia $`s\overline{s}`$, $`c\overline{c}`$, $`b\overline{b}`$, and $`t\overline{t}`$ respectively. The polynomial $`P_n(q)[n]_q[n1]_q`$ by its root $`q_n=q(n)`$ determines the value of $`q`$-parameter for each $`n`$ and thus serves as defining polynomial for the MSR/quarkonium/flavor corresponding to $`n`$. Hence, the use of $`q`$-algebras suggests a possibility of topological labeling of flavors: fixed number $`n`$ corresponds to $`2n1`$ overcrossings of 2-strand braids whose closure gives these $`(2n1)_1`$-torus knots. With the form $`(2n1,2)`$ of same torus knots this means the correspondence $`nw2n1,`$ $`w`$ being the winding number around one of the two basic cycles on torus.

## 3 Octet baryon mass sum rules: best candidates from $`q`$-deformation

Using $`U_q(su_n)`$, the $`q`$-deformed mass relation

$`[2]M_N+{\displaystyle \frac{[2]M_\mathrm{\Xi }}{[2]1}}=[3]M_\mathrm{\Lambda }+\left({\displaystyle \frac{[2]^2}{[2]1}}[3]\right)M_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{A_q}{B_q}}\left(M_\mathrm{\Xi }+[2]M_N[2]M_\mathrm{\Sigma }M_\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)`$ (8)
was obtained  where $`A_q`$, $`B_q`$ are certain polynomials of $`[2]_q`$ with non-overlapping sets of zeros. This $`q`$-analog yields, as three particular cases, the familiar Gell-Mann - Okubo mass relation (in the ’classical’ case of $`q=1`$) and two new MSRs of improved accuracy :

$`M_N+M_\mathrm{\Xi }={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}M_\mathrm{\Lambda }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}M_\mathrm{\Sigma },(0.58\%)`$ (9)
$`M_N+{\displaystyle \frac{1+\sqrt{3}}{2}}M_\mathrm{\Xi }={\displaystyle \frac{2M_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\sqrt{3}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{9\sqrt{3}}{6}}M_\mathrm{\Sigma },(0.22\%)`$ (10)
$`M_N+{\displaystyle \frac{M_\mathrm{\Xi }}{[2]_{q_7}1}}={\displaystyle \frac{M_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{[2]_{q_7}1}}+M_\mathrm{\Sigma }.(0.07\%)`$ (11)
Different dynamical representations, after calculation, produce in (8) differing pairs $`A_q`$, $`B_q`$. Each $`A_q`$ contains the factor $`([2]_q2)`$ i.e., the ’classical’ zero $`q=1`$, and some other nontrivial zeros. Eqs. (10), (11) result from two different dynamical representations $`D^{(1)}`$ resp. $`D^{(2)}`$ producing $`A_q^{(1)}`$ resp. $`A_q^{(2)}`$ which possess zeros $`q_6=e^{\mathrm{i}\pi /6}`$ resp. $`q_7=e^{\mathrm{i}\pi /7}`$. The choise (11), i.e. $`q_7=e^{\mathrm{i}\pi /7}`$, provides the best mass sum rule.111 The value $`q_7`$ is linked  to the Cabibbo angle: $`\frac{1}{i}\mathrm{ln}q_7\theta _\mathrm{𝟖}=\frac{\pi }{7}=2\theta _\mathrm{C}`$ (see also sec. 7 below).

Sum rule (10) was first derived  from a dynamical representation (irrep) $`D^{(1)}`$ of $`U_q(u_{4,1})`$. However, the ’compact’ dynamical $`U_q(u_5)`$ is equally well suited. Among the admissible dynamical irreps there exist an entire series of irreps (numbered by integer $`m`$, $`6m<\mathrm{}`$) which produce infinite set of MSRs, each given by the first line in (8) with $`q_m`$ put for $`q`$, where $`q_m=e^{\mathrm{i}\pi /m}`$ guarantees vanishing of $`\frac{A_q}{B_q}`$. Each of these MSRs shows better agreement with data than the classical GMO one. To illustrate, few cases from the infinite set are shown in the table, the 1st row of which being the classical GMO with $`q_{\mathrm{}}=1`$.

| $`\theta =\frac{\pi }{m}`$ | (RHS$``$LHS), $`MeV`$ | $`\frac{\left|\mathrm{RHS}\mathrm{LHS}\right|}{\mathrm{RHS}},\%`$ |
| --- | --- | --- |
| $`\pi /\mathrm{}`$ | 26.2 | 0.58 |
| $`\pi /30`$ | 25.42 | 0.56 |
| $`\pi /12`$ | 20.2 | 0.44 |
| $`\pi /8`$ | 10.39 | 0.23 |
| $`\pi /7`$ | 3.26 | 0.07 |
| $`\pi /6`$ | -10.47 | 0.22 |

We thus gain that a ’discrete choice’ becomes possible instead of usual fitting; the $`q`$-polynomials $`A_q`$ due to zeros $`q_m`$ serve as defining polynomials for the corresponding MSRs.

Quark mass ratio in terms of baryon masses

Since $`[2]_{q_7}=2\mathrm{cos}\frac{\pi }{7}`$, the MSR (11) takes the equivalent form of “modified average”

$$\frac{M_\mathrm{\Xi }M_N+M_\mathrm{\Sigma }M_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{2\mathrm{cos}(\pi /7)}=M_\mathrm{\Sigma }M_N.$$
(12)
From (12) with $`\frac{\pi }{7}=2\theta _\mathrm{C}`$ (see footnote 2), using the famous relation  $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta _\mathrm{C}=m_d/m_s`$ we infer a new formula giving quark mass ratio in terms of (very precisely known) octet baryon masses:

$$\frac{m_s}{m_d}=\frac{3M_\mathrm{\Sigma }M_\mathrm{\Lambda }3M_N+M_\mathrm{\Xi }}{M_\mathrm{\Sigma }+M_\mathrm{\Lambda }M_NM_\mathrm{\Xi }}=18.63\pm 0.16.$$

Numerically, the obtained ratio is in nice agreement with the value $`\frac{m_s}{m_d}=18.9\pm 0.8`$ given in .

## 4 Mass sum rules for decuplet baryons: the $`q`$-analog matches empirical masses

In the case of $`SU(3)`$-decuplet baryons $`\frac{3}{2}^+`$, 1st order symmetry breaking yields  equal spacing rule (ESR) for isoplet members in $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}`$-plet. Empirically, $`M_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}M_\mathrm{\Delta },`$ $`M_\mathrm{\Xi }^{}M_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ and $`M_\mathrm{\Omega }M_\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ show sensible deviation from ESR: $`152.6MeV148.8MeV139.0MeV`$. The other mass relation known long ago ,

$$(M_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}M_\mathrm{\Delta }+M_\mathrm{\Omega }M_\mathrm{\Xi }^{})/2=M_\mathrm{\Xi }^{}M_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{},$$
(13)
accounts 1st and 2nd order of $`SU(3)`$-breaking and holds only slightly better than the ESR.

On the contrary, use of the $`q`$-algebras $`U_q(su_n)`$ instead of $`SU(n)`$ leads to sizable improvement. From evaluations of decuplet masses in two particular irreps of the dynamical algebra $`U_q(u_{4,1})`$, the $`q`$-deformed mass relation

$$\frac{M_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}M_\mathrm{\Delta }+M_\mathrm{\Omega }M_\mathrm{\Xi }^{}}{2\mathrm{cos}\theta _{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}}=M_\mathrm{\Xi }^{}M_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}$$
(14)
was derived . As proven there, this mass relation is universal \- it results from any admissible irrep (which contains $`U_q(su_3)`$-decuplet embedded in 20-plet of $`U_q(su_4)`$) of the dynamical $`U_q(u_{4,1})`$. With empirical masses , the formula (14) holds remarkably for $`\theta _{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}\frac{\pi }{14}`$ (in fact, $`\theta _{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}=\theta _\mathrm{C}`$, see footnote 2 and sec. 7 below).

The universality of $`q`$-analog (14) extends also to all admissible irreps of the ’compact’ dynamical $`U_q(su_5)`$. Say, within a dynamical irrep $`\{4000\}`$ of $`U_q(su_5)`$ calculation yields: $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }=M_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}+\beta ,`$ $`M_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}=M_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}+[2]\beta +\alpha ,`$ $`M_\mathrm{\Xi }^{}=M_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}+[3]\beta +[2]\alpha ,`$ $`M_\mathrm{\Omega }=M_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}+[4]\beta +[3]\alpha ,`$ from which (14) stems. With hypercharge $`Y`$, all four masses are comprised by single formula for $`M_{D_i}M\left(Y(D_i)\right)`$:

$$M_{D_i}=M_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}+\alpha [1Y(D_i)]_q+\beta [2Y(D_i)]_q,$$
(15)
with explicit dependence on $`Y`$. If $`q=1`$, this reduces to $`M_{D_i}=\stackrel{~}{M}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}+aY(D_i)`$, i.e. linear dependence on hypercharge (or strangeness) where $`a=\alpha \beta ,`$ $`\stackrel{~}{M}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}=M_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}+\alpha +2\beta .`$

## 5 Highly nonlinear $`SU(3)`$-breaking effects in baryon masses

Formula (15) involves highly nonlinear dependence of mass on hypercharge (for decuplet, $`Y`$ alone causes $`SU(3)`$-breaking). Since for the $`q`$-number $`[N]_q`$ we have $`[N]_q=q^{N1}+q^{N3}+\mathrm{}+q^{N+3}+q^{N+1}`$ ($`N`$ terms), this shows exponential $`Y`$-dependence of masses. Such high nonlinearity makes (14) and (15) radically different from the result (13) of traditional treatment accounting linear and quadratic effects in $`Y`$.

For octet baryon masses, nonpolynomiality in $`SU(3)`$-breaking effectively accounted by the model was explicitly shown in . For this, one analyses the expressions for isoplet masses with explicit dependence on hypercharge $`Y`$ and isospin $`I`$, through $`I(I+1)`$. Typical matrix element contributing to octet baryon masses contains terms such as $`\left([Y/2]_q[Y/2+1]_q[I]_q[I+1]_q\right)`$ or $`\left([Y/21]_q[Y/22]_q[I]_q[I+1]_q\right)`$ (with multipliers depending on irrep labels $`m_{15},m_{55}`$), which show explicitly the dependence on hypercharge and the factor $`[I]_q[I+1]_q`$ $`q`$-deforming the $`SU(2)`$ Casimir. From definition of $`q`$-bracket $`[n]=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(nh)}{\mathrm{sin}(h)}`$, $`q=\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}h)`$, it is clearly seen that baryon masses depend on hypercharge $`Y`$ and isospin $`I`$ (hence, on $`SU(3)`$-breaking effects) in highly nonlinear - nonpolynomial \- fashion.

The ability to account highly nonlinear $`SU(3)`$-breaking effects by applying quantum analogs $`U_q(su_n)`$ of usual flavor symmetries is much alike the fact shown in  that, by exploiting appropriate free $`q`$-deformed structure one is able to efficiently study the properties of (undeformed) quantum-mechanical systems with complicated interactions.

## 6 Using the Hopf-algebra structure

As demonstrated, our approach supplies a plenty of $`q`$-analogs (with different pairs $`A_q,B_q`$) of the form (8). A completely different, as regards (8), version of $`q`$-deformed analog can be derived  using for the symmetry breaking term in mass operator a component of $`q`$-tensor operator. This implies usage of the Hopf algebra structure (comultiplication, antipode) of the quantum algebras $`U_q(su_n)`$, through the $`q`$-tensor operators $`(V_1,V_2,V_3)`$ resp. $`(V_{\overline{1}},V_{\overline{2}},V_{\overline{3}})`$ formed from elements of $`U_q(su_4)`$ and transforming as $`\mathrm{𝟑}`$ resp. $`\mathrm{𝟑}^{}`$ under the adjoint action of $`U_q(su_3)`$. With the Cartan elements $`H_1,H_2`$, denoting $`[X,Y]_qXYqYX`$, the components $`(V_1,V_2,V_3)`$ and $`(V_{\overline{1}},V_{\overline{2}},V_{\overline{3}})`$ can be found explicitly , e.g., $`V_2=[E_2^+,E_3^+]_qq^{H_1/6H_2/6}`$, $`V_3=E_3^+q^{H_1/6+H_2/3},`$ and $`V_{\overline{3}}=q^{H_1/6+H_2/3}E_3^{}`$. The mass operator is given as

$$\begin{array}{cc}& \widehat{M}=\widehat{M}_0+\widehat{M}_8=M_0\mathrm{𝟏}+\alpha V_8^{(1)}+\beta V_8^{(2)}\hfill \\ & =M_0\mathrm{𝟏}+\alpha V_3V_{\overline{3}}+\beta V_{\overline{3}}V_3\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`\widehat{M}_0`$ is $`U_q(su_3)`$-invariant and $`\widehat{M}_8`$ transforms as $`I=0,Y=0`$ component of tensor operator of $`\mathrm{𝟖}`$-irrep of $`U_q(su_3)`$, and it is taken into account that the irrep $`\mathrm{𝟖}`$ occurs twice in the decomposition of $`\mathrm{𝟖}\mathrm{𝟖}`$. Besides, the isosinglet operators $`V_3V_{\overline{3}}`$ and $`V_{\overline{3}}V_3`$ arise in accordance with $`\mathrm{𝟑}\mathrm{𝟑}^{}=\mathrm{𝟏}\mathrm{𝟖},`$ $`\mathrm{𝟑}^{}\mathrm{𝟑}=\mathrm{𝟏}\mathrm{𝟖}`$.

The final form of mass operator, with redefined $`M_0,\alpha ,\beta `$, is

$$\widehat{M}=M_0\mathrm{𝟏}+\alpha E_3^+E_3^{}q^Y+\beta E_3^{}E_3^+q^Y$$
(16)
where the hypercharge $`Y=(H_1+2H_2)/3`$. Matrix elements with $`\widehat{M}`$ from (16) are evaluated by embedding $`\mathrm{𝟖}`$ in a particular irrep of $`U_q(su_4).`$ Evaluation of baryon masses, say, within the irrep $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟓}`$ of $`U_q(su_4)`$ yields: $`M_N=M_0+\beta q,M_\mathrm{\Sigma }=M_0,M_\mathrm{\Lambda }=M_0+\frac{[2]}{[3]}(\alpha +\beta ),M_\mathrm{\Xi }=M_0+\alpha q^1`$. Excluding $`M_0,\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, one finds:

$$[3]M_\mathrm{\Lambda }+M_\mathrm{\Sigma }=[2](q^1M_N+qM_\mathrm{\Xi }).$$
(17)
The $`q`$-parameter now can be fixed by a fitting only and, for each of values $`q_{1,2}=\pm 1.035`$, $`q_{3,4}=\pm 0.903\sqrt{1}`$, the $`q`$-MR (17) indeed holds within experimental uncertainty.

## 7 The link: $`q`$-parameter $``$ Cabibbo angle

For pseudoscalar (PS) mesons, the generalization  of GMO-formula

$$f_\pi ^2m_\pi ^2+3f_\eta ^2m_\eta ^2=4f_K^2m_K^2$$
(18)
involves decay constants as coefficients. On imposing the constraint222 It leads to the single dimensionless quantity $`\frac{f_K}{f_\pi }`$ involved in the multipliers of masses. $`f_\pi ^2+3f_\eta ^2=4f_K^2`$ it becomes

$$m_\pi ^2+\left(4\frac{f_K^2}{f_\pi ^2}1\right)m_\eta ^2=4\frac{f_K^2}{f_\pi ^2}m_K^2,$$
(19)
to be compared with our $`q`$-analog (2) rewritten for PS mesons (with masses squared):

$$m_\pi ^2+\frac{[3]}{2[2][3]}m_{\eta _8}^2=\frac{2[2]}{2[2][3]}m_K^2.$$
(20)
This holds for (the mass of) physical $`\eta `$-meson put for $`\eta _8`$ (i.e., no mixing), at properly fixed $`q=q_{\mathrm{PS}}`$.

The two extensions (19) resp. (20) both reduce to standard GMO in the corresponding limits $`\frac{f_K}{f_\pi }1`$ resp. $`q1`$. From the identification

$$f_K^2/f_\pi ^2\frac{1}{2}[2]/(2[2][3]),$$
(21)
using $`[3]_q=[2]_q^21`$ and the notation $`\xi _{\pi ,K}(4f_K^2/f_\pi ^2)^1`$, we get

$$[2]_\pm =1\xi _{\pi ,K}\pm \sqrt{\left(1\xi _{\pi ,K}\right)^2+1}.$$
(22)
The ratio $`f_K/f_\pi `$ is expressible through the Cabibbo angle, e.g., by the formula $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta _\mathrm{C}=\frac{m_\pi ^2}{m_K^2}\left[\frac{f_K}{f_\pi }\frac{m_\pi ^2}{m_K^2}\right]^1`$ (see ). With (21), (22) this implies: the deformation parameter $`q_{\mathrm{PS}}`$ is directly connected with the Cabibbo angle.

One can arrive at similar conclusion in another way. In , the $`q`$-deformed lagrangian for gauge fields of the Weinberg - Salam (WS) model, invariant against quantum-group valued gauge transformations, was constructed. The formula $`F_{\mu \nu }^0=\mathrm{Tr}_q(F_{\mu \nu })[2(q^2+q^2)]^{1/2}=B_{\mu \nu }\mathrm{cos}\theta +F_{\mu \nu }^3\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ obtained therein, along with expression for $`F_{\mu \nu }^3`$ and the relation

$$\mathrm{tan}\theta =(1q^2)/(1+q^2),$$
(23)
exhibits mixing of the $`U(1)`$-component $`B_\mu `$ with third (nonabelian) component $`A_\mu ^3`$. Forming new potentials $`\stackrel{~}{A}_\mu =B_\mu \mathrm{cos}\theta +A_\mu ^3\mathrm{sin}\theta ,`$ $`Z_\mu =B_\mu \mathrm{sin}\theta +A_\mu ^3\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ yields physical photon $`\stackrel{~}{A}_\mu `$ and $`Z`$-boson of WS model, where $`\theta =\theta _\mathrm{W}`$, i.e., the Weinberg angle (at $`\theta =0`$ the potentials $`B_\mu `$ and $`A_\mu ^3`$ get completely unmixed whereas nonzero $`\theta `$, i.e., nontrivial $`q`$-deformation provides proper mixing inherent for the WS model). To summarize: weak mixing is adequately modelled by the $`q`$-deformation. That is, the $`q`$-deformation is able to realize proper weak mixing of gauge fields and provides explicit connection of the weak angle and the deformation parameter $`q`$, see eq.(23).

On the other hand, the relation found in

$$\theta _\mathrm{W}=2(\theta _{12}+\theta _{23}+\theta _{13})$$
(24)
connects $`\theta _\mathrm{W}`$ with the Cabibbo angle $`\theta _{12}\theta _\mathrm{C}`$ (and the angles $`\theta _{13},\theta _{23}`$ of mixing with 3rd family, that will be neglected). The eqn. (24) is important as it links apparently different mixings: in the bosonic (interaction) versus fermionic (matter) sectors of the electroweak model.

Combining (23) and (24) we conclude: the Cabibbo angle can be linked with $`q`$-parameter of a quantum-group (or quantum-algebra) based structure applied in the fermion sector. Hence, there must exist a direct connection of the $`q`$-parameter in (12), (14) with the fermion mixing angle. Setting $`\theta _{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}=g(\theta _\mathrm{C})`$ and $`\theta _\mathrm{𝟖}=h(\theta _\mathrm{C})`$ we find for $`g(\theta _\mathrm{C})`$ and $`h(\theta _\mathrm{C})`$ the following:

$$\theta _{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}=\theta _\mathrm{C},\theta _\mathrm{𝟖}=2\theta _\mathrm{C}.$$
(25)
With $`\theta _\mathrm{𝟖}=\frac{\pi }{7}`$, see (12), this suggests for Cabibbo angle the exact value $`\frac{\pi }{14}`$.

Cabibbo mixing from noncommutative extra dimensions?

Quantum groups and the related quantum algebras provide necessary tools in constructing covariant differential calculi and particular noncommutative geometry on quantum spaces , e.g, quantum vector spaces, quantum homogeneous spaces.

The direct link found between the Cabibbo angle $`\theta _\mathrm{C}=\frac{\pi }{14}`$ and the $`q`$-parameter which measures strength of $`q`$-deformation for the $`q`$-algebras $`U_q(su_n)`$ used for flavor symmetry, can be viewed  as indicating towards noncommutative-geometric origin of fermion mixing. The exact value $`\theta _\mathrm{C}=\frac{\pi }{14}`$ of the Cabibbo angle would then serve as the noncommutativity measure of relevant quantum space, responsible for the mixing and explicitly as yet unknown, in extra dimensions whose number should be not less than 2.

## 8  Mass relations from anyonic realization of $`U_q(su_N)`$

Necessary setting adopted from  includes lattice angle functions $`\theta _\gamma (𝐱,𝐲)`$ and $`\theta _\delta (𝐱,𝐲)`$ for the two opposite ($`\gamma `$\- and $`\delta `$\- ) types of cuts and the related definition of ordering of sites on the lattice ($`𝐱>𝐲`$ or $`𝐲>𝐱`$). Accordingly, the two types of statistical operator, $`K_i(𝐱_\gamma )`$ and $`K_i(𝐱_\delta )`$, are formed using $`N`$ sorts of lattice fermions $`c_i(𝐱)`$, $`c_i^{}(𝐱)`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},N,`$ obeying usual (lattice) anticommutation relations (ARs), as

$$K_j(𝐱_\gamma )=\mathrm{exp}\left(\mathrm{i}\nu \underset{𝐲𝐱}{}\theta _\gamma (𝐱,𝐲)c_j^{}(𝐲)c_j(𝐲)\right)$$
(26)
and similarly for $`K_i(𝐱_\delta )`$. In terms of them, the two types of anyonic oscillators are given as

$$a_i(𝐱_\gamma )=K_i(𝐱_\gamma )c_i(𝐱),a_i(𝐱_\delta )=K_i(𝐱_\delta )c_i(𝐱).$$

The relations of permutation (PRs) obtained for anyonic oscillators include simple ARs, and also nontrivial PRs involving the deformation parameter $`q`$ (the latter is connected with the statistics parameter $`\nu `$ in eq. (26) as: $`q=\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}\pi \nu )`$). For instance, the braiding properties are described by the following nontrivial PRs ($`𝐱𝐲`$):

$$\begin{array}{cc}a_i(𝐱_\gamma )a_i(𝐲_\gamma )+q^{\mathrm{sgn}(𝐱𝐲)}a_i(𝐲_\gamma )a_i(𝐱_\gamma )=0,\hfill & \\ a_i(𝐱_\gamma )a_i^{}(𝐲_\gamma )+q^{\mathrm{sgn}(𝐱𝐲)}a_i^{}(𝐲_\gamma )a_i(𝐱_\gamma )=0.\hfill & \end{array}$$

The basic fact proven in  states that generating elements $`A_{j,j+1}`$, $`A_{j+1,j}`$ and $`H_j`$ realized bilinearly in terms of anyonic oscillators $`a_i(𝐱_\gamma )`$, $`a_i^{}(𝐲_\gamma )`$ satisfy the defining relations  of the quantum algebra $`U_q(su_N)`$. Similarly, dual realization in terms of $`a_i(𝐱_\delta )`$, $`a_i^{}(𝐲_\delta )`$ does also exist. On this basis, within anyonic realization of $`U_q(su_N)`$, one can explicitly construct  both basis vectors for hadronic irreps and hadron mass operator. Starting point is the heighest weight vector (HWV) of the irrep $`\{4000\}`$ of ’dynamical’ $`U_q(su_5)`$ which is of the form $`|1111`$ in the notation $`|n_1n_2n_3n_4`$ for the state vector, that means $`a_{n_1}^{}(𝐱_{1\gamma })a_{n_2}^{}(𝐱_{2\gamma })a_{n_3}^{}(𝐱_{3\gamma })a_{n_4}^{}(𝐱_{4\gamma })|0.`$ All basis state vectors of baryons $`\frac{3}{2}^+`$ are constructed, by acting with lowering generators, in accordance with the chain of $`q`$-algebras $`U_q(su_3)U_q(su_4)U_q(su_5)`$ and respective chain of irreps $`[30][300]\{4000\}`$. For isoquartet baryon $`|\mathrm{\Delta }^{++}`$ one finds $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{[4]}}(|5111+q^1|1511+q^2|1151+q^3|1115),`$ and similarly for $`|\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$, $`|\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$, $`|\mathrm{\Omega }^{}`$. The dual basis $`\stackrel{~}{|\mathrm{\Delta }^{++}}`$, etc., obtained by acting on the HWV with lowering operators in dual anyonic realization, is also needed. Masses $`M_{D_i}`$ of baryons $`D_i`$ are calculated within the dynamical $`U_q(su_5)`$-irrep $`\{4000\}`$ as $`M_{D_i}=\stackrel{~}{D_i|}\widehat{M}|D_i`$ (with mass operator formed from anyonic operators) to yield: $`M_\mathrm{\Delta }=M_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}+\beta `$, $`M_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}=M_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}+[2]_q\alpha +[2]_q\beta `$, $`M_\mathrm{\Xi }^{}=M_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}+[2]_q^2\alpha +[3]_q\beta `$, and $`M_\mathrm{\Omega }^{}=M_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}+[2]_q[3]_q\alpha +[4]_q\beta `$. One easily checks that these masses satisfy the relation (14). This proves applicability  of quantum algebras and their irreps for treating hadron mass relations within anyonic realization.

## 9 Algebras of $`q`$-oscillators, $`q`$-Bose gas and two-pion (two-kaon) correlations

The model of ideal gas of $`q`$-bosons based on the algebra of $`q`$-deformed oscillators either of Biedenharn-Macfarlane (BM) type  or Arik-Coon (AC) type , was recently utilized within the approach aimed to describe  unusual properties of 2-particle correlations of identical pions or kaons produced in heavy ion collisions. The approach yields clear predictions based on explicit expressions for the intercept $`\lambda `$ (dependent on temperature, particle mass, pair mean momentum, and the deformation parameter $`q`$).

To obtain needed observables, one evaluates thermal averages $`A=\mathrm{Sp}(A\rho )/\mathrm{Sp}(\rho )`$, $`\rho =e^{\beta H}`$, where the Hamiltonian $`H=\omega _iN_i`$ and $`\beta =1/T`$. With $`b_i^{}b_i=[N_i]_q`$ and $`q+q^1=2\mathrm{cos}\theta `$, the $`q`$-deformed distribution function results for BM-type $`q`$-bosons as

$$b_i^{}b_i=\frac{e^{\beta \omega _i}1}{e^{2\beta \omega _i}2\mathrm{cos}\theta e^{\beta \omega _i}+1}.$$
(27)
At $`\theta =0`$ (or $`q=1`$), it yields Bose-Einstein (B-E) distribution, since $`q=1`$ recovers usual bosonic commutation relations. As seen, deviation of $`q`$-distribution (27) from the quantum B-E distribution tends towards the Maxwell-Boltzmann one. This means reducing of quantum statistical effects. For kaons, whose mass $`m_K>3m_\pi `$, analogous curve gets closer (than pion’s one) to the B-E distribution. For AC-type $`q`$-bosons, the $`q`$-distribution is especially simple: $`b_i^{}b_i=\frac{1}{e^{\beta \omega _i}q}.`$

To obtain explicitly the intercept $`\lambda `$ of two-particle correlations one starts with the defining ratio $`\lambda +1=b^{}b^{}bb/(b^{}b)^2`$, calculates the two-particle distribution $`b^{}b^{}bb`$ and takes into account the $`b^{}b`$. The result for AC-type $`q`$-bosons reads $`\lambda =q\frac{q(1q^2)}{e^{\omega /T}q^2}`$, $`1q1`$, and for BM-type $`q`$-bosons, with $`(\beta \omega )\mathrm{cosh}(\beta \omega )`$, it is

$$\lambda =1+\frac{2\mathrm{cos}\theta ((\beta \omega )\mathrm{cos}\theta )^2}{((\beta \omega )1)((\beta \omega )2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta +1)}.$$
(28)
Both (27), (28) are real owing to the sum $`q+q^1`$.

The intercept $`\lambda `$, with $`\omega =(m^2+𝐊^\mathrm{𝟐})^{1/2}`$, shows a remarkable feature: asymptotically, at large mean momentum of pion (kaon) pair and fixed temperature, $`\lambda `$ tends to a constant given by the $`q`$-parameter: $`\lambda ^{\mathrm{as}}=q`$ ($`q`$ real) for the AC-type $`q`$-bosons, and

$$\lambda ^{\mathrm{as}}=2\mathrm{cos}\theta 1,\theta =\frac{1}{i}\mathrm{ln}q,$$
(29)
for the BM-type $`q`$-bosons.

As conjectured in , correlations of pions and kaons are determined by the same value of $`q`$ (a kind of universality). Then, experimentally one should observe the tendency of merging $`\lambda (\pi )`$ and $`\lambda (K)`$ at large enough mean momenta, i.e., $`\lambda ^{\mathrm{as}}(\pi )=\lambda ^{\mathrm{as}}(K)`$. Preliminary results of recent RHIC/STAR experiment give three values  $`\lambda _1(\pi ^{})`$, $`\lambda _2(\pi ^{})`$ and $`\lambda _3(\pi ^{})`$ for the $`\pi ^{}`$-intercept, obtained by averaging over three intervals of transverse momenta (in MeV/c): $`(125÷225)`$, $`(225÷325)`$, $`(325÷450)`$, and by integrating over rapidity in the range $`0.5y0.5`$.

In Fig.1 the three values $`\lambda _j(\pi ^{})`$, $`j=1,2,3`$, with error bars, are shown along with five curves for the intercept $`\lambda `$ which correspond to fixing in (28) different values of the deformation angle $`\theta `$, all curves being at the temperature $`T=180`$ MeV. One can see remarkable agreement with data of the curve E obtained at $`\theta =28.5^{}`$. The other interesting curve D corresponds to $`\theta =\pi /725.7^{}`$ (twice the Cabibbo angle, see footnote 2 and eq.(25)). At the same temperature $`T=180`$ MeV, the curve D agrees (within error bar) with the points $`\lambda _2(\pi )`$ and $`\lambda _3(\pi )`$. However, suffice it to take slightly higher effective temperature $`T198`$ MeV, and the resulting curve marked by $`\theta =\pi /7=2\theta _\mathrm{C}`$ respects all the three error bars. Among different mixing angles known for hadrons, see , only the angle $`2\theta _\mathrm{C}`$ seems to be relevant to the discussed topic of intercept $`\lambda (\pi )`$. It is tempting to suggest that just this angle $`2\theta _\mathrm{C}`$ can be the benchmark of assumed universality (to be) seen in 2-particle correlations since, then, $`\lambda ^{\mathrm{as}}(\pi )|_{\theta =\pi /7}=\lambda ^{\mathrm{as}}(K)|_{\theta =\pi /7}=2\mathrm{cos}\frac{\pi }{7}10.80194`$. Insisting on the asymptotical coincidence $`\lambda ^{\mathrm{as}}(\pi )=\lambda ^{\mathrm{as}}(K)`$ we may predict for kaon intercepts: at any transverse momentum, the intercept $`\lambda (K)`$ of 2-kaon correlations should not exceed $`0.80194`$.

## 10 Outlook

A question naturally arises: does there exist more intimate connection between the two discussed applications - of the quantum algebras $`U_q(su_n)`$ taken as flavor symmetries, on one hand, and of the algebras of $`q`$-deformed oscillators corresponding to discretized momenta of (correlated) pairs of pions or kaons as produced in relativistic heavy ion collisions, on the other hand? The value of $`q`$-parameter (given by $`2\theta _\mathrm{C}`$) shared by the two applications in case of octet hadrons gives a guess for possible physical reason for such a connection (recall also the well-known fact that generating elements of $`U_q(su_n)`$ admit realization in terms of $`q`$-deformed oscillators ). Future research possibly involving noncomutative geometry in extra dimensions should give ultimate answer.

Acknowledgements. I express my gratitude to J. Lukierski, A. Isaev for valuable discussion of the results, to D. Anchishkin for collaboration concerning the topics in sec. 9. My sincere thanks are to D. Sorokin for the invitation to participate in this nice and useful conference.


format: text

text:
# Mordell-Weil Groups and Selmer Groups of Two Types of Elliptic Curves MR(1991) Subject Classification: 11R58; 11R27; 14H05; 11A55 Project Supported by the NNSFC (No. 19771052)

Consider elliptic curves $`E=E_\sigma :y^2=x(x+\sigma p)(x+\sigma q),`$ where$`\sigma =\pm 1,`$ $`p`$ and $`q`$ are prime numbers with $`p+2=q`$. (1) The Selmer groups $`S^{(2)}(E/𝐐),S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)`$, and $`S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E/𝐐)`$ are explicitly determined, e.g., $`S^{(2)}(E_{+1}/𝐐)=`$ $`(𝐙/2𝐙)^2;`$ $`(𝐙/2𝐙)^3;`$ or $`(𝐙/2𝐙)^4`$ when $`p5;1`$ or $`3;`$ or $`7(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ respectively. (2) When $`p5(3,5`$ for $`\sigma =1)(\mathrm{mod}8),`$ it is proved that the Mordell- Weil group $`E(𝐐)`$ $`𝐙/2𝐙𝐙/2𝐙`$ having rank $`0,`$ and Shafarevich-Tate group $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]=0.`$ (3) In any case, the sum of rank$`E(𝐐)`$ and dimension of $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]`$ is given, e.g., $`0;1;2`$ when $`p5;1`$ or $`3;7(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ for $`\sigma =1`$. (4) The Kodaira symbol, the torsion subgroup $`E(K)_{tors}`$ for any number field $`K`$ , etc. are also obtained.

key words: elliptic curve, Selmer group, Mordell-Weil group, Shafarevich group

I. Introduction and Main Results

Let $`p,q`$ be two (twin) prime numbers and $`qp=2`$ . Here we consider the elliptic curves

$$E=E_\sigma :y^2=x(x+\sigma p)(x+\sigma q)(\sigma =\pm 1)(1.1)$$

We also denote $`E=E_+`$ or $`E_{}`$ when $`\sigma =+1`$ or $`1`$. One of the interests to consider elliptic curves (1.1) is on twin primes. Whether there are infinitely many twin primes $`p,q`$ now is equivalent to whether there are infinitely many isomorphic classes of such elliptic curves $`E`$ , since these elliptic curves are not isomorphic to each other for different $`(p,q)`$ as we will see later.

Similarly to (1.1), some other special types of elliptic curves were studied by A. Bremner, J. Cassels, R. Strocker, J. Top, B. Buhler, B. Gross and D. Zagier (see \[1-6\]), $`e.g.,y^2=x(x^2+p),`$ $`y^2=(x+p)(x^2+p^2),`$ and $`y^2=4x^328x+25.`$ The first two elliptic curves have ranks $`0,1,`$ or $`2.`$ And the last elliptic curve has rank 3 and is famous in solving the Gauss conjecture.

For elliptic curves $`E`$ in (1.1), it is easy to see the discriminate of it is $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }(E)=64p^2q^2.`$ the $`j`$invariant is $`j=j(E)=64(p^2+2q)^3/p^2q^2`$ (Thus elliptic curves $`E`$ are not isomorphic to each other for different $`(p,q)`$). We will also show equation (1.1) is global minimal.

For any number field $`K`$ and any elliptic curve $`E`$ over $`K`$ , The Mordell-Weil theorem said that the set $`E(K)`$ of $`K`$rational points of $`E`$ is a finitely generated abelian group (the Mordell-Weil group), so $`E(K)E(K)_{tors}𝐙^r,`$ where $`E(K)_{tors}`$ is the torsion subgroup of $`E(K)`$ , $`r=\mathrm{rank}E(K)`$ is the rank of $`E(K)`$. We first consider $`E(K)_{tors}`$ for any number field $`K`$.

Theorem 1. Let $`K`$ be any number field. We have the following results on the torsion subgroup $`E(K)_{tors}`$ for elliptic curve $`E`$ in (1.1) with $`(p,q)(3,5),`$ here $`\mathrm{}`$ is a prime ideal of $`K`$ over 3, $`e=e(\mathrm{}|3)`$ and $`f=f(\mathrm{}|3)`$ are the ramification index and residue degree of $`\mathrm{}`$ respectively.

(1) If $`e(\mathrm{}|3)=f(\mathrm{}|3)=1,`$ then

$$E(K)_{tors}𝐙/2𝐙𝐙/2𝐙.$$

(2) If $`f(\mathrm{}|3)=1`$ and $`E`$ has an additive reduction (at any finite valuation of $`K`$ ), then

$$E(K)_{tors}𝐙/2𝐙𝐙/2𝐙\mathrm{or}𝐙/2𝐙𝐙/6𝐙.$$

(3) If $`f(\mathrm{}|3)=1`$, then

$$E(K)_{tors}/E(K)_3𝐙/2𝐙𝐙/2𝐙,$$

where $`E(K)_3`$ denotes the 3-Sylow subgroup of $`E(K)`$ , i.e. points of order a power of 3.

(4) If $`E`$ has an additive reduction (at any valuation), then $`\mathrm{\#}E(K)_{tors}=2^m`$ or $`2^m3`$ .

We now introduce the Kodaria-Neron classification of the special fibers $`𝒞_{\mathrm{}}`$ on the Neron models of elliptic curves $`E/𝐐`$ . Let $`\mathrm{}`$ be a prime number, $`𝐐_{\mathrm{}}`$ the $`\mathrm{}`$adic rationals (the completion of $`𝐐`$ at the $`\mathrm{}`$adic valuation $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ ), $`𝐅_{\mathrm{}}=𝐙/\mathrm{}𝐙`$ the finite field with $`\mathrm{}`$ elements. Let $`\rho :E(𝐐_{\mathrm{}})\stackrel{~}{E}(𝐅_{\mathrm{}}),`$ $`P\stackrel{~}{P}`$ be the reduction of $`E`$ modulo $`\mathrm{}`$ , $`\stackrel{~}{E}_{ns}(𝐅_{\mathrm{}})`$ the non-singular $`𝐅_{\mathrm{}}`$points of $`\stackrel{~}{E}(𝐅_{\mathrm{}})`$, $`E_0(𝐐_{\mathrm{}})=\rho ^1(\stackrel{~}{E}_{ns}(𝐅_{\mathrm{}})).`$ The Kodaira symbols $`I_0,I_1,I_n,II,III,IV,\mathrm{}`$ are used to describe the type of the special fiber $`𝒞_{\mathrm{}}`$ of the minimal Neron model of $`E`$ at $`\mathrm{}`$ ; $`m_{\mathrm{}}`$ denotes the number of irreducible components (ignoring multiplicities) on the special fiber $`𝒞_{\mathrm{}}`$ . The conductor of $`E/𝐐`$ is defined by $`N_E=\mathrm{}^f_{\mathrm{}}`$ , where the product takes for $`\mathrm{}`$ running over prime numbers, the local exponent $`f_{\mathrm{}}`$ is defined by $`f_{\mathrm{}}=0,1,`$ or $`2+\delta _{\mathrm{}}`$ according to $`E`$ having good, multiplicative, or additive reduction at $`\mathrm{}`$, $`\delta _{\mathrm{}}`$ is concerned the action of inertia group ( $`\delta _{\mathrm{}}=0`$ if $`\mathrm{}2,3`$ ). The index $`c_{\mathrm{}}=|E(𝐐_{\mathrm{}})/E_0(𝐐_{\mathrm{}})|`$ is said to be Tamagawa constant at $`\mathrm{}`$ . Using results of Tate, Ogg, Kodaria-Neron, and Diamond (see \[5-8\]), we could obtain the following Theorem 2 and Corollary 1(See \[5-7\] for notations).

Theorem 2. Let $`E`$ be an elliptic curve as in (1.1). Then we have the following Table.

| Prime number $`\mathrm{}`$ | $`\mathrm{}=2`$ | $`\mathrm{}=p`$ | $`\mathrm{}=q`$ | $`\mathrm{}2,p,q`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Kodaira Symbol | $`III`$ | $`I_2`$ | $`I_2`$ | $`I_0`$ |
| Number of Irreducible Component $`m_{\mathrm{}}`$ | $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}`$ | $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}`$ | $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}`$ | $`1`$ |
| Tamagawa Constant $`c_{\mathrm{}}`$ | $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}`$ | $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}`$ | $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}`$ | $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}`$ |
| $`E(𝐐_{\mathrm{}})/E_0(𝐐_{\mathrm{}})`$ | $`𝐙/2𝐙`$ | $`𝐙/2𝐙`$ | $`𝐙/2𝐙`$ | $`0`$ |
| Local exponent $`f_{\mathrm{}}`$ of conductor $`N_E`$ | $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}5}`$ | $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}`$ | $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}`$ | $`0`$ |

Corollary 1. The elliptic curves in (1.1) are modular with conductor $`N_E=2^5pq,`$ and their $`L`$function $`L(E/𝐐,s)`$ could be continually extended to the whole complex plane as an holomorphic function satisfying the following functional equation:

$$\xi (E,2s)=\pm \xi (E,s),$$

$$\xi (E,s)=(2^5pq)^{s/2}(2\pi )^s\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)L(E/𝐐,s).$$

Our main results are to determine Selmer groups, Shafarevich-Tate group and Mordell-Weil group(For definitions and notations, see ). For any abelian group $`G`$, we let $`G[n]`$ be the $`n`$torsion part of $`G`$. Take the following elliptic curve $`E^{}`$ and isogeny $`\phi `$ of degree 2.

$$E^{}:y^2=x^3\sigma 2(p+q)x^2+4x.(1.2)$$

$$\phi :EE^{},(x,y)(y^2/x^2,y(pqx^2)/x^2).$$

Then $`E[\phi ]=\{O,(0,0)\}`$ be the kernel of $`\phi .`$ The dual isogeny of $`\phi `$ is

$$\widehat{\phi }:E^{}E,(x,y)(y^2/4x^2,y(4x^2)/8x^2).$$

Theorem 3. Let $`E=E_+`$ be the elliptic curve in (1.1). Then on the Selmer groups $`S^{(2)}(E/𝐐),`$ $`S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐),`$ and $`S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E/𝐐);`$ Shafarevich-Tate group $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2],`$ Mordell-Weil group $`E(𝐐),`$ and rank$`E(𝐐)`$ of $`E,`$ we have the following results .

(1) $`S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)\{\begin{array}{cc}\{0\},\hfill & \text{ if }p1,3,5(\mathrm{mod}8),\hfill \\ 𝐙/2𝐙,\hfill & \text{ if }p\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}7}(\mathrm{mod}8).\hfill \end{array}`$

$`S^{\widehat{(\phi )}}(E^{}/𝐐)\{\begin{array}{cc}(𝐙/2𝐙)^2,\hfill & \text{ if }p\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}5}(\mathrm{mod}8),\hfill \\ (𝐙/2𝐙)^3,\hfill & \text{ if }p1,3,7(\mathrm{mod}8).\hfill \end{array}`$

(2) $`S^{(2)}(E/𝐐)\{\begin{array}{cc}(𝐙/2𝐙)^2,\hfill & \text{ if }p\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}5}(\mathrm{mod}8),\hfill \\ (𝐙/2𝐙)^3,\hfill & \text{ if }p1,3(\mathrm{mod}8),\hfill \\ (𝐙/2𝐙)^4,\hfill & \text{ if }p\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}7}(\mathrm{mod}8).\hfill \end{array}`$

(3) $`\mathrm{rank}E(𝐐)+\mathrm{dim}_{𝐅_2}`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]=\{\begin{array}{cc}0,\hfill & \text{ if }p\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}5}(\mathrm{mod}8),\hfill \\ 1,\hfill & \text{ if }p1,3(\mathrm{mod}8),\hfill \\ 2,\hfill & \text{ if }p\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}7}(\mathrm{mod}8).\hfill \end{array}`$

(4) If $`p5(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ , then

$`r=\mathrm{rank}E(𝐐)=0,`$

$`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]=\{0\},`$

$`E(𝐐)𝐙/2𝐙𝐙/2𝐙.`$

Theorem 4. Let $`E=E_{}`$ be the elliptic curve in (1.1). Then on the Selmer groups, Shafarevich-Tate group, and Mordell-Weil group of $`E`$, we have the following results

(1) $`S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)\{\begin{array}{cc}\{0\},\hfill & \text{ if }p3,5(\mathrm{mod}8),\hfill \\ 𝐙/2𝐙,\hfill & \text{ if }p1,7(\mathrm{mod}8).\hfill \end{array}`$

$`S^{\widehat{(\phi )}}(E^{}/𝐐)(𝐙/2𝐙)^2.`$

(2) $`S^{(2)}(E/𝐐)\{\begin{array}{cc}(𝐙/2𝐙)^2,\hfill & \text{ if }p3,5(\mathrm{mod}8),\hfill \\ (𝐙/2𝐙)^3,\hfill & \text{ if }p1,7(\mathrm{mod}8).\hfill \end{array}`$

(3) $`\mathrm{rank}E(𝐐)+\mathrm{dim}_{𝐅_2}`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]=\{\begin{array}{cc}0,\hfill & \text{ if }p3,5(\mathrm{mod}8),\hfill \\ 1,\hfill & \text{ if }p1,7(\mathrm{mod}8).\hfill \end{array}`$

(4) If $`p3,5(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ , then

$`r=\mathrm{rank}E(𝐐)=0,`$

$`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]=\{0\},`$

$`E(𝐐)𝐙/2𝐙𝐙/2𝐙.`$

Theorem 5. If $`p3(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ and $`q=a^2+b^2,(a+\epsilon )^2+(b+\delta )^2=c^2`$ for some rational integer $`a,b,c`$ and $`\epsilon ,\delta =\pm 1,`$ then the elliptic curve $`E=E_+`$ in (1.1) has rank

$$r=\mathrm{rank}E(Q)=1.$$

Example 1. Let $`(p,q)=(3,5),`$ consider the elliptic curve $`E:y^2=x(x+3)(x+5).`$ By Theorem 5 we have $`r=\mathrm{rank}E(𝐐)=1.`$ Thus $`E(𝐐)\{O,(0,0),(3,0),(5,0)\}𝐙.`$ We could also find a point in $`E(𝐐)`$ with infinite order: $`P=(4,2)`$.

Example 2. Let $`(p,q)=(11,13),`$ consider the elliptic curve $`E:y^2=x(x+11)(x+13).`$ By Theorem 5 we have $`r=\mathrm{rank}E(𝐐)=1.`$ Thus $`E(𝐐)\{O,(0,0),(11,0),(13,0)\}𝐙.`$ By handcount, we find a point of infinite order in $`E(𝐐):`$

$$P=(243391201/1587600,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4094288981999}/2000376000).$$

II. Proofs of Theorem 1 and 2

First calculate quantities associated with the elliptic curve $`E`$ in (1.1) (for notations see ): $`a_1=a_3=a_6=0,a_2=\sigma (p+q),a_4=pq,`$ $`b_2=\sigma 4(p+q),b_4=2pq,b_6=0,b_8=p^2q^2,`$ $`c_4=16(p^2+2q),c_6=\sigma 32(p+q)(pq8),`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }(E)=64p^2q^2,j=j(E)=64(p^2+2q)^3/p^2q^2.`$

Lemma 2.1 (1) The equation (1.1) for $`E=E_\sigma `$ is a global minimal Weierstrass-equation.

(2) The reduction of $`E`$ is additive at 2, multiplicative at $`p`$ and $`q`$, and good at other primes.

(3) $`E_+`$ has a split multiplicative reduction at $`p`$ if and only if it does at $`q`$, which is just equivalent to $`(2/p)=1,i.e.,p1,7(mod8)`$.

(4) $`E_{}`$ has a split multiplicative reduction at $`p`$ if and only if $`(2/p)=1,i.e.,p1,3(mod8);`$ $`E_{}`$ has such reduction at $`q`$ if and only if $`(2/q)=1,i.e.,`$ $`q1,7(mod8)`$.

Proof. Let $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ denote the normalized $`\mathrm{}`$adic exponential valuation of $`𝐐`$ ($`\mathrm{}`$ is a prime number). (1) Since $`v_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Delta }(E))=v_{\mathrm{}}(64p^2q^2)<12`$ for every $`\mathrm{}`$, so equation (1.1) is minimal at every prime $`\mathrm{}`$, i.e., it is global minimal. (2) Note that $`v_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Delta })=0`$ when $`\mathrm{}2,p,q`$. And $`v_2(c_4)>0,v_p(c_4)=v_q(c_4)=0.`$ The assertion follows from Prop.5.1 of \[5, p180\]. (3) The reduction of $`E`$ at $`p`$ is $`y^2=x^2(x+2)`$, which has unique singular point at $`(0,0)`$ with “tangent” lines $`y^2=2x^2,`$ or $`y=\pm \sqrt{2}x`$. Thus the reduction is split if and only if 2 is a square residue modulo $`p,`$ i.e., $`(2/p)=1.`$ The same thing happens for $`q`$. (4) The proof is similar to that of (3).

Lemma 2.2. The elliptic curve $`E`$ in (1.1) is supersingular at prime $`\mathrm{}(2,p,q)`$ if and only if

$$\underset{k=0}{\overset{m}{}}(C_m^k)^2p^kq^{mk}0(mod\mathrm{}).(\mathrm{here}m=(\mathrm{}1)/2)$$

Proof. Let $`y^2=f(x)=x(x+\sigma p)(x+\sigma q)`$. The coefficient of $`x^\mathrm{}1`$ in $`f(x)^m`$ is

$$\underset{i+j=m}{}C_m^{mi}C_m^{mj}(\sigma p)^i(\sigma q)^j=\sigma ^m\underset{k=0}{\overset{m}{}}(C_m^k)^2p^kq^{mk}.$$

Now the lemma follows from Theorem 4.1 of \[5, p140\].

Lemma 2.3. Let $`E`$ be any elliptic curve over a number field $`K`$, $`\mathrm{}`$ a prime ideal of $`K`$ over a prime number $`\mathrm{}`$, $`k_{\mathrm{}}`$ the residue class field of $`K`$ modulo $`\mathrm{}`$, $`e=e(\mathrm{}|\mathrm{})`$ and $`f=f(\mathrm{}|\mathrm{})`$ the ramification index and residue class degree respectively of $`\mathrm{}`$ over $`\mathrm{}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ the reduced curve over $`k_{\mathrm{}}`$ of $`E`$ modulo $`\mathrm{}`$. Put $`t_{\mathrm{}}=0`$ (if $`\mathrm{}1>e`$) or max $`\{r:(\mathrm{}1)\mathrm{}^{r1}e,0<r𝐙\}`$ (otherwise).

(1) If $`E`$ has good reduction at $`\mathrm{}`$, then

$$\mathrm{\#}E(K)_{tors}\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{~}{E}(k_{\mathrm{}})\mathrm{}^{2t_{\mathrm{}}}(1+\mathrm{}^f+2\mathrm{}^{f/2})\mathrm{}^{2t_{\mathrm{}}}.$$

(2) If $`E`$ has additive reduction at $`\mathrm{}`$, then

$$\mathrm{\#}E(K)_{tors}|12\mathrm{}^{2(t_{\mathrm{}}+1)}.$$

Proof of Theorem 1. By Lemma 2.1 we know $`E`$ has a good reduction $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ at 3. Now $`m=(31)/2=1,`$ so $`_{k=0}^m(C_m^k)^2p^kq^{mk}=p+q(1)+(1)0(\mathrm{mod}3)`$ since $`p,q`$ are twin prime numbers, which means, by Lemma 2.2, the reduced elliptic curve $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ over $`𝐅_3`$ is supersingular. In particular, we know #$`\stackrel{~}{E}(𝐅_3)=3+1=4`$ (See , p145, Exer. 5.10(b)).

Now, as an elliptic curve over $`K,`$ $`E`$ obviously has a good reduction at $`\mathrm{}`$ since $`\mathrm{}|3`$. If $`f=f(\mathrm{}|3)=1`$, then $`k_{\mathrm{}}=𝒪_K/\mathrm{}=𝐙/(3)=𝐅_3,`$ so the reduced curves of $`E`$ modulo $`\mathrm{}`$ and modulo $`3`$ is the same curve $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$, which is supersingular. Thus $`\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{~}{E}(k_{\mathrm{}})=\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{~}{E}(𝐅_3)=4.`$ By Lemma 2.3 we know $`\mathrm{\#}E(K)_{tors}|\mathrm{\#}\stackrel{~}{E}(k_{\mathrm{}})3^{2t_3}=49^{t_3},`$ where $`t_3`$ is as in Lemma 2.3. Also since $`E(K)[2]=E[2]E(K)_{tors},`$ so $`E(K)_{tors}/E(K)_3E(K)[2]𝐙/2𝐙𝐙/2𝐙.`$ (In fact we have ord$`{}_{3}{}^{}(\mathrm{\#}E(K)_3)2(1+\mathrm{log}_3(e/2))`$ by Lemma 2.3.) This proves (3).

Now if $`f=e=1,`$ then $`31>e`$, by Lemma 2.3 we know $`t_3=0`$, which proves (1).

If $`E`$ has an additive reduction at a prime $`\mathrm{}`$ of $`K`$, then by Prop.5.4(b) of \[5, p181\], we know $`E`$ has additive reduction at prime number $`\mathrm{}`$ under $`\mathrm{}`$ , and by Lemma 2.1 we know $`\mathrm{}=2`$, so $`\mathrm{}|2.`$ Thus by Lemma 2.3(2) we know $`\mathrm{\#}E(K)_{tors}`$ divides $`122^{2(t_2+1)}.`$ So $`\mathrm{\#}E(K)_{tors}`$ only has prime-factors 2 and 3, and the order of 3 in it is 0 or 1. This proves (4).

Combining (3) and (4) gives (2). This proves Theorem 1.

Proof of Theorem 2. By Lemma 2.1 and the definition of $`f_{\mathrm{}}`$ we know that $`f_{\mathrm{}}=2+\delta _2;1;`$ or $`0`$ respectively if $`\mathrm{}=2;\mathrm{}=p`$ or $`q;`$ or otherwise. We now use Tate’s method in  to determine $`\delta _2`$ and the type of Kodaira symbol. Make the isomorphic transformation $`\rho :EE^{},xx^{}+\sigma ,yy,`$ $`(\sigma =\pm 1)`$ then the elliptic curve $`E^{}`$ has the Weierstrass equation

$$E^{}:y_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=(x^{}+\sigma )(x^{}+\sigma +\sigma p)(x^{}+\sigma +\sigma q).$$

It is easy to see that the constants associated to $`E^{}`$ (defined as in \[5, p46\]) satisfy $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }(E^{})=64p^2q^2`$ $`a_3^{}a_4^{}a_6^{}b_2^{}0`$ $`(\mathrm{mod}2),`$ $`a_6^{}b_6^{}b_8^{}0(\mathrm{mod}4);`$ $`b_8^{}40`$ (mod 8). According to Tate’s criterion in \[6-7\], we know that the type of the Kodaira symbol of $`E`$ is III, and the local exponent $`f_{\mathrm{}}`$ of conductor $`N_E`$ is $`f_2=v_2(\mathrm{\Delta }(E))1=v_2(64p^2q^2)1=5,`$ so $`\delta _2=52=3`$. By Ogg’s formula \[5, p361\] we obtain that the number of irreducible components on the special fiber $`𝒞_{\mathrm{}}`$ is $`m_{\mathrm{}}=v_2(\mathrm{\Delta }(E))+1f_2=6+15=2.`$

Then consider the case of prime $`p`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)a_3a_4a_60(\mathrm{mod}p),b_20(\mathrm{mod}p),`$ $`v=v_p(\mathrm{\Delta }(E))=2,`$ so by Tate’s criteria in  we know that the Kodaira symbol of $`E`$ at $`p`$ is $`I_v=I_2`$. If $`E`$ has a non-split multiplicative reduction at $`p`$ , then the Tamagawa constant $`c_p=2`$ since $`v_p(\mathrm{\Delta })=2`$ is even. And if $`E`$ has a split multiplicative reduction at $`p`$, then $`c_p=v_p(\mathrm{\Delta })=2`$ by the Kodaira-Neron theorem \[5, p183, Thm. 6.1\]. Thus $`E(𝐐_p)/E_0(𝐐_p)𝐙/2𝐙`$ as desired. The case for $`q`$ goes similarly.

Diamond’s Theorem. An elliptic curve $`E`$ defined over rationals $`𝐐`$ is modular if it has good or multiplicative reduction at 3 and 5.

Proof of Corollary 2.1. By Lemma 2.1 we know $`E`$ has good or multiplicative reduction at 3 and 5, so $`E`$ is modular via Diamond’s theorem. Thus Hasse-Weil conjecture is true for $`E`$.

III. Proof of Theorem 3 and 4

Denote by $`M_𝐐`$ the set of primes (or normalized valuations) of the rational field $`𝐐`$ containing the infinity prime $`\mathrm{}`$. Let $`S=\{\mathrm{},2,p,q\}`$, and define

$`𝐐(S,2)=\{d𝐙:d|4`$ is squarefree $`\}=\{\pm 1,\pm 2\}`$ (regarded as subgroup of $`𝐐^{}/𝐐_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$);

$`𝐐(S,2)^{}=\{d𝐙:d|pq`$ is squarefree $`\}=\{\pm 1,\pm p,\pm q,\pm pq\}`$ (as subgroup of $`𝐐^{}/𝐐_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$).

For $`d_1𝐐(S,2),d_2=4/d_1,`$ define the curve

$$C_{(d_1)}:y^2=d_1x^4\sigma 2(p+q)x^2+d_2.$$

For $`d_1𝐐(S,2)^{},d_2=pq/d_1,`$ define the curve

$$C_{(d_1)}^{}:y^2=d_1x^4+\sigma (p+q)x^2+d_2.$$

Then according to Cremona’s algorithm in \[11, p63-65\], we have

Lemma 3.1. $`S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)\{d_1𝐐(S,2):C_{(d_1)}(𝐐_v)\mathrm{},vS\}\{\pm 1,\pm 2\};`$

$$S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)\{d_1𝐐(S,2)^{}:C_{(d_1)}^{}(𝐐_v)\mathrm{},vS\}\{\pm 1,\pm p,\pm q,\pm pq\}.$$

Lemma 3.2 (Hensel’s lemma). Suppose that $`fR[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ is a polynomial over a complete ring $`R`$ with valuation $`v,`$ If there exists $`aR^n`$ such that $`v(f)>2v(f_k(a))`$ (for any $`k`$ with $`1kn),`$ then $`f`$ has a root in $`R^n.`$ (See \[5, p322, Ex.10.12\], Here $`f_k=f_{x_k}=f/x_k`$.)

Lemma 3.3. A unit $`\alpha 𝐐_2`$ is a square in $`𝐐_2`$ if and only if $`v_2(\alpha 1)3`$.

Lemma 3.4. Let $`𝐙_{\mathrm{}}`$ be the ring of $`\mathrm{}`$adic integers, $`\mathrm{}`$ a prime number. Consider $`y^2=f(x)`$ with $`f𝐙_{\mathrm{}}[x],\mathrm{deg}f=4,`$ discriminate $`\mathrm{disc}(f)0.`$ Denote by $`\overline{f}`$ the image of $`f`$ under the map $`𝐙_{\mathrm{}}[x]𝐅_{\mathrm{}}[x]`$ deduced from the natural map $`𝐙_{\mathrm{}}𝐅_{\mathrm{}}.`$ If $`\overline{f}`$ is not a constant modulo a square (i.e., $`\overline{f}=\overline{g}^2\overline{h}`$ with deg$`\overline{h}1,`$ deg$`\overline{g}0,`$ $`\overline{h}`$ is squarefree, $`\overline{g},\overline{h}𝐅_{\mathrm{}}[x]),`$ then $`y^2=f(x)`$ has a solution in $`𝐐_{\mathrm{}}`$. ( See \[10, p140, Lemma 14.\])

Proposition 3.5. Let $`C=C_{(2)}:y^2=f(x)=2x^4\sigma 2(p+q)x^2+2`$ be one of the $`C_{(d_1)}`$.

(1) If $`p7(\mathrm{mod}8)`$, then $`C_{(2)}(𝐐_2)\mathrm{}.`$

(2) $`C_{(2)}(𝐐_p)\mathrm{}`$ if and only if $`(2/p)=1,i.e.,p1,7(\mathrm{mod}8).`$

(3) $`C_{(2)}(𝐐_q)\mathrm{}`$ if and only if $`(2/q)=1,i.e.,q1,7(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ (that is $`p5,7(\mathrm{mod}8)`$)

Proof. We prove for $`\sigma =1`$. (1) Let $`g(x,y)=f(x)y^2`$, then $`g(1,2)=4(p+1),g_y(1,2)=4`$. If $`p7(\mathrm{mod}8)`$, then $`v_2(g(1,2))>2v_2(g_y(1,2))`$. Hensel’s lemma tells us $`C(𝐐_2)\mathrm{}.`$

(2) If $`C(𝐐_p)\mathrm{}`$, we assert that $`C(𝐙_p)\mathrm{}.`$ In fact, if $`(x,y)C(𝐐_p),`$ then by the equation obviously $`(1/x,y/x^2)`$ is also in $`C(𝐐_p)`$. So we have either $`v_p(x)0`$ (and then $`v_p(y)0`$), or else $`v_p(x)<0`$ (and then $`v_p(1/x)>0`$ and $`v_p(y/x^2)0`$), our assertion follows. Now assume $`(x,y)C(𝐙_p),`$ so $`y^2=f(x)=2(x^21)^24px^2.`$ Thus $`y^22(x^21)^2(\mathrm{mod}p),`$ which means $`(2/p)=1`$ (Note that $`y0(\mathrm{mod}p),`$ otherwise we’d have $`x^210(\mathrm{mod}p),`$ $`x0(\mathrm{mod}p),`$ so $`v_p(y^2)=v_p(4px^2)=1,`$ a contradiction). Conversely, if $`(2/p)=1,`$ then $`2a^2(\mathrm{mod}p),`$ $`a𝐙`$. Then obviously $`v_p(g(p,a))>0,v_p(g_y(p,a))=v_p(2a)=0`$. So $`C(𝐐_p)\mathrm{}`$ by Hensel’s lemma.

(3) The proof is similar to that of (2).

Proposition 3.6. For the curve $`C^{}=C_{(1)}^{}:y^2=f(x)=x^4+(p+q)x^2pq`$, we have

(1) $`C^{}(𝐐_p)\mathrm{};`$ $`C^{}(𝐐_q)\mathrm{};`$

(2) $`C^{}(𝐐_2)\mathrm{}`$ if and only if $`p1,3,7(\mathrm{mod}8).`$

Proof. (1) Note $`f=(x^2p)(x^2q),`$ so $`fx^2(x^2+2)(\mathrm{mod}p).`$ Since $`x^2+2`$ is not a square in $`𝐅_p[x]`$, Lemma 3.4 tells us $`C^{}(𝐐_p)\mathrm{}.`$ The case for $`q`$ is Similar.

(2) Consider the sufficiency first. (i) If $`p1(\mathrm{mod}8),`$ then $`p=\alpha ^2`$ for some $`\alpha 𝐐_2`$ (by Lemma 3.3), then it is easy to see $`(\alpha ,0)`$ is a point of $`C^{}`$. (ii) If $`p3,7(\mathrm{mod}8),`$ then let $`g(x,y)=y^2f,`$ so $`g(0,p)=pq+p^2=p(p+q)=2p(p+1),g_y(0,p)=2p.`$ So $`v_2(g(0,p))=v_2(2p(p+1))1+2=3>2v_2(g_y(0,p))`$. Thus $`C^{}(𝐐_2)\mathrm{}`$ by Hensel’s lemma.

For necessity, assume $`(a,b)C^{}(𝐐_2)`$, then obviously $`b^2=1(a^2p1)^2`$. If $`b`$ is not a 2-adic integer, then $`a`$ too; assume $`a=2^na_0,b=2^{2n}b_0,v_2(a_0)=v_2(b_0)=0`$ (since $`v_2(b^2)=2v_2(a^2p1)=2v_2(a^2));`$ so $`2^{4n}b_0^2=1(2^{2n}a_0^2p1)^2,`$ $`b_0^2+a_0^4=2^{2n}(2^{2n}+2(p+1)a_0^22^{2n}(p+1)^2)0(\mathrm{mod}4)`$, contradict to $`b_0^2+a_0^41+1(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ by Lemma 3.3. Thus $`b𝐙_2`$. Then, since $`b^2=1(a^2p1)^2=1c^2`$, there are only two possibilities: $`(b^2,c^2)(1,0)`$ or $`(0,1)(\mathrm{mod}8)`$. (i) $`c^20(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ means $`pa^2101(\mathrm{mod}4).`$ (ii) $`c^21(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ means $`a1(\mathrm{mod}2).`$ By Lemma 3.3 we know $`b^2=1c^20(\mathrm{mod}16)`$. Rewrite $`b^2=1c^2`$ as $`b^2=1p^2(a^21)^2+2p(a^21)`$, then by Lemma 3.3 we know $`0b^21p^2+0+0(\mathrm{mod}16),`$ that is $`p\pm 1(\mathrm{mod}8).`$ This proves Proposition 3.6.

Proof of Theorem 3.

(1) Consider $`S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)`$. Look at Lemma 3.1 and definitions before it, if $`d_1𝐐(S,2)`$ and $`d_1<0`$, then $`d_2=4/d_1<0`$ ; then obviously $`C_{(d_1)}`$ has no solution in $`𝐑=𝐐_{\mathrm{}}`$; so we must have $`d_10,i.e.,`$ $`S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)\{1\}`$ or $`\{1,2\}.`$ Also obviously $`(0,\sqrt{2})C_{(2)}(𝐑),`$ so $`2S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)C_{(2)}(𝐐_v)\mathrm{}`$ (for $`v=2,p,q`$) $`p7(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ (The last step is via Proposition 3.5). Thus $`S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)(0)`$ (if $`p1,3,5(\mathrm{mod}8))`$ or $`𝐙/2𝐙`$ (if $`p7(\mathrm{mod}8)`$).

As for $`S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐),`$ obviously $`C_{(p)}^{}`$ and $`C_{(q)}^{}`$ both have rational point $`(1,0)`$, so $`p,qS^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)`$, $`\{1,p,q,pq\}S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐).`$ Note that $`(\sqrt{p},0)`$ is a real point of $`C_{(1)}^{}`$, so, by Proposition 3.6, $`1S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)p1,3,7(\mathrm{mod}8).`$ This gives $`S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)`$ as desired.

(3) Since $`E^{}(𝐐)[\widehat{\phi }]=\{O,(0,0)\}=\phi (E(𝐐)[2]),`$ so by the exact sequence (see \[5, p301\]) :

$$0\frac{E^{}(𝐐)[\widehat{\phi }]}{\phi (E(𝐐)[2])}\frac{E^{}(𝐐)}{\phi (E(𝐐))}\stackrel{\widehat{\phi }}{}\frac{E(𝐐)}{2E(𝐐)}\frac{E(𝐐)}{\widehat{\phi }(E^{}(𝐐))}0,$$

we have the isomorphism of vector spaces over the finite field $`𝐅_2:`$

$$E(𝐐)/2E(𝐐)\frac{E^{}(𝐐)}{\phi (E(𝐐))}\frac{E(𝐐)}{\widehat{\phi }(E^{}(𝐐))}.$$

On the other hand, denote $`r=\mathrm{rank}E(𝐐),`$ we have

$$\frac{E(𝐐)}{2E(𝐐)}(𝐙/2𝐙)^rE(𝐐)[2](𝐙/2𝐙)^{r+2},$$

So we have the following dimension formula (here $`\mathrm{dim}=\mathrm{dim}_{\stackrel{}{𝐅_2}}`$ ) :

$$r=\mathrm{dim}\frac{E^{}(𝐐)}{\phi (E(𝐐))}+\mathrm{dim}\frac{E(𝐐)}{\widehat{\phi }(E^{}(𝐐))}2.$$

From the following exact sequences (and their duals) (see \[5, p298, 314\]):

$`0E^{}(𝐐)/\phi (E(𝐐))S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[\phi ]0;`$

$`0`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[\phi ]`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]\stackrel{\widehat{\phi }}{}`$ $`\text{Sh}(E^{}/𝐐)[\widehat{\phi }]0,`$

we have

$`S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)E^{}(𝐐)/\phi (E(𝐐))`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[\phi ];`$

$`S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)E(𝐐)/\widehat{\phi }(E^{}(𝐐))`$ $`\text{Sh}(E^{}/𝐐)[\widehat{\phi }];`$

$`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[\phi ]`$ $`\text{Sh}(E^{}/𝐐)[\widehat{\phi }].`$

Take together we have

$`r=\mathrm{dim}S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)\mathrm{dim}`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[\phi ]+\mathrm{dim}S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)\mathrm{dim}`$ $`\text{Sh}(E^{}/𝐐)[\widehat{\phi }]2`$

$`=\mathrm{dim}S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)+\mathrm{dim}S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)\mathrm{dim}`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]2.`$

Then by the result in (1) we obtain $`r+\mathrm{dim}`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]=0,1,2`$ in cases as in Theorem 3(3).

(2) From the exact sequence (\[5, p305\]) :

$`0E(𝐐)/2E(𝐐)S^{(2)}(E/𝐐)`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]0,`$

we have $`S^{(2)}(E/𝐐)E(𝐐)/2E(𝐐)`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2],`$ thus obtain the dimension formula $`\mathrm{dim}S^{(2)}(E/𝐐)=2;3;4`$ if $`p5;1`$ or $`3;7(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ respectively, from which we obtain easily the isomorphic type of $`S^{(2)}(E/𝐐)`$ as Theorem 3(2) asserted.

(4) By (3) we now have $`r=\mathrm{dim}`$ $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]=0,`$ so $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]=\{0\},`$ and $`E(𝐐)=E(𝐐)_{tors}𝐙/2𝐙𝐙/2𝐙`$ by theorem 1. This proves Theorem 3.

Now consider the proof of Theorem 4, then we have $`\sigma =1,E=E_\sigma =E_{}`$. We use the same formulae as above (but $`\sigma =1`$) to define set $`S`$, $`𝐐(S,2),`$ $`𝐐(S,2)^{},`$ $`C_{(d_1)},`$ and $`C_{(d_1)}^{}.`$ Then it is easy to show that Lemma 3.1 and Proposition 3.5 are still valid (for $`\sigma =1`$). In addition we could prove in a similar way the following propositions.

Proposition 3.7. Consider the curve $`C_{(2)}:y^2=2x^4+2(p+q)x^22`$ .

(1) If $`p1(\mathrm{mod}8)`$, then $`C_{(2)}(𝐐_2)\mathrm{}.`$

(2) $`C_{(2)}(𝐐_p)\mathrm{}`$ if and only if $`(2/p)=1,i.e.,p1,3(\mathrm{mod}8).`$

(3) $`C_{(2)}(𝐐_q)\mathrm{}`$ if and only if $`(2/q)=1,i.e.,q1,3,`$ $`p1,7(\mathrm{mod}8).`$

Proposition 3.8. Consider the curve $`C_{(1)}:y^2=x^4+2(p+q)x^24`$ .

(1) $`C_{(1)}(𝐐_p)\mathrm{}`$ if and only if $`(1/p)=1,i.e.,p1(\mathrm{mod}4).`$

(2) $`C_{(1)}(𝐐_q)\mathrm{}`$ if and only if $`(1/q)=1,i.e.,q1(\mathrm{mod}4).`$

Proof of Theorem 4. By Lemma 3.1 and Proposition 3.5 we obtain $`2S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)p7(\mathrm{mod}8).`$ Lemma 3.1 and Proposition 3.7 give us $`2S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)p1(\mathrm{mod}8).`$ And Lemma 3.1 and Proposition 3.8 tell us $`1S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐).`$ Therefore we have $`S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)\{1\}𝐐_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2};\{1,2\}𝐐_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2};\mathrm{or}\{1,2\}𝐐_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$ if $`p3,5;1;\mathrm{or}7(\mathrm{mod}8)`$ respectively. That is, $`S^{(\phi )}(E/𝐐)(0)`$ (if $`p3,5(\mathrm{mod}8))`$ or $`𝐙/2𝐙`$ (if $`p1,7(\mathrm{mod}8)`$) as desired.

Consider $`S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐).`$ Since $`C_{(p)}^{}`$ and $`C_{(q)}^{}`$ both contain point $`(1,0)`$, so $`p,qS^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)`$, $`\{1,p,q,pq\}S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐).`$ On the other hand, if $`d_1𝐐(S,2)^{}`$ is negative, then $`d_2`$ is negative, $`C_{d_1,d_2}^{}`$ has no real point, so $`d_1S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)`$. Therefore $`S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)E(𝐐)/\widehat{\phi }(E^{}(𝐐))\{1,p,q,pq\}𝐐^2𝐙/2𝐙𝐙/2𝐙.`$ The other part of the proof goes similarly as for Theorem 3.

IV. Criteria and Proof of Theorem 5

Proposition 4.1. Let $`C^{}=C_{(1)}^{}:y^2=x^4+(p+q)x^2pq`$ be as in Proposition 3.6.

(i) $`C^{}`$ has a rational integer point if and only if $`p=3.`$

(ii) $`C^{}`$ has a rational point if and only if the following equation (I) or (II) has a primary solution, i.e., a rational integer solution $`(X,Y,S,T)`$ with $`(X,Y)=1`$:

$$(I)\{\begin{array}{c}X^2pY^2=S^2\hfill \\ X^2qY^2=T^2\hfill \end{array}\mathrm{or}$$

$$(II)\{\begin{array}{c}X^2pY^2=2S^2\hfill \\ X^2qY^2=2T^2\hfill \end{array}$$

(iii) If $`q=a^2+b^2,(a+\epsilon )^2+(b+\delta )^2=c^2`$ for some rational integer $`a,b,c`$ and $`\epsilon ,\delta =\pm 1,`$ then the equation (I) in (ii) has a primary solution, and $`C^{}`$ has a rational point.

Proof. (i) If $`p=3,q=5,`$ then $`(2,1)`$ is an integer point of $`C^{}`$ (and obviously all the integer points of $`C^{}`$ are just the four points $`(\pm 2,\pm 1)`$ ) . On the other hand, if $`(a,b)`$ is a rational point of $`C^{}`$, then $`b^2=(a^2p)(qa^2)`$, so $`p<a^2<q=p+2,a^2=p+1,p=3.`$

(ii) If $`(a,b,c,d)`$ is a primary solution of equation (I) (or II), then obviously $`(a/b,cd/b^2)`$ (or $`(a/b,2cd/b^2)`$) is a rational point of $`C^{}`$. On the other hand, if $`(a/b,c/d)`$ is a rational point of $`C^{}`$ (and we may assume they are positive and $`(a,b)=1`$, $`(c,d)=1`$), then $`(cb^2/d)^2=(a^2pb^2)(qb^2a^2)`$. So $`u=cb^2/d𝐙,d|b^2`$, $`(X,Y,Z)=(a,b,u)`$ is a solution of $`Z^2=(X^2pY^2)(qY^2X^2)`$. It is easy to show $`(a^2pb^2,qb^2a^2)=1`$ or $`2`$. Put $`u=u_1u_2`$ or $`2v_1v_2`$ with $`(u_1,u_2)=1,(v_1,v_2)=1`$, then $`(a,b,u_1,u_2)`$ or $`(a,b,v_1,v_2)`$ is a primary solution of (I) or (II).

(iii) Since $`q>2`$, we may assume $`a+\epsilon 0`$. Consider the equation $`(a+\epsilon )x^22(b+\delta )x(a+\epsilon )=0`$, its discriminate is $`4c^2`$ so it has two rational roots $`u,v`$, so $`\epsilon u^22\delta u\epsilon =(1u^2)a+2ub`$, $`2(1+u^2)^2=(\epsilon u^2+2\delta u\epsilon )^2+(\epsilon u^22\delta uϵ)^2`$, $`q(1+u^2)^2=((1u^2)a+2ub)^2+(2ua+(u^21)b)^2`$. Thus $`(2ua+(u^21)b,1+u^2,\epsilon u^2+2\delta u\epsilon ,\epsilon u^22\delta u\epsilon )`$ is a nontrivial rational solution of equation (I), from which a primary solution of (I) could be deduced easily.

Proof of Theorem 5. Since $`p3(\mathrm{mod}8)`$, so by Proposition 3.6 we have $`1S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)`$. By Proposition 4.1 (iii), $`C^{}`$ has rational point, so $`1E(𝐐)/\widehat{\phi }(E^{}(𝐐)).`$ From the exact sequence

$`0E(𝐐)/\widehat{\phi }(E^{}(𝐐))S^{(\widehat{\phi })}(E^{}/𝐐)`$ $`\text{Sh}(E^{}/𝐐)[\widehat{\phi }]0;`$

we have $`\text{Sh}(E^{}/𝐐)[\widehat{\phi }]=\{0\}.`$ And since $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[\phi ]=\{0\},`$ so $`\text{Sh}(E/𝐐)[2]=\{0\}.`$ Thus by Theorem 3 we know $`r=1`$.

Now consider Examples in Section I. Among all twin primes $`p,q<100,`$ only $`(3,5)`$ and $`(11,13)`$ satisfy the condition of Theorem 5: $`5=1^2+2^2,(11)^2+(21)^2=1^2;`$ $`13=2^2+3^2,(2+1)^2+(3+1)^2=5^2.`$ So we know $`\mathrm{rank}(E)=1.`$ For $`(p,q)`$=$`(3,5)`$, the equation (I) in Proposition 4.1(ii) has solution $`(2,1,1,1)`$. For $`(p,q)`$=$`(11,13)`$, the equation (I) has solution $`(18,5,7,1)`$.

References

\] A. Bremner, On the equation $`y^2=x(x^2+p),`$ in Number Theory and Applications (R. A. Mollin , ed.), Kluwer, Dordrecht, 3-23, 1989.

\] A. Bremner and J. W. S. Cassels, On the equation $`y^2=x(x^2+p),`$ Math. Comp. 42(1984), 257-264.

\] R. J. Strocker and J. Top, On the equation $`y^2=(x+p)(x^2+p^2),`$ , Rocky Mountain J. of Math. 24(1994), 1135-1161.

\] J. P. Buhler, B. H. Gross and D. B. Zagier, On the conjecture of Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer for an elliptic curve of rank 3, Math. Comp. 44(1985), 473-481.

\] J. H. Silverman, The Arithmetic of Elliptic Curves, GTM 106, Springer-Verlag, 1986.

\] J. H. Silverman, The Advanced Topics in the Arithmetic of Elliptic Curves, GTM 151, Springer-Verlag, 1994.

\] J. Tate, Algorithm for determining the type of singular fibber in an elliptic pencil, Modular Functions of One Variable IV, Lect. Notes Math. 476, Springer-Verlag, 1975, 33-52.

\] F. Diamond, On deformation rings and Hecke rings, Annals of Math. 144(1996), 137-166.

\] H. H. M$`\ddot{u}`$ller, H. Str$`\ddot{o}`$her and H. G. Zimmer, Torsion subgroups of elliptic curves with integral j-invariant over quadratic fields, J. Reine angew. Math., 397(1989), 100-161.

\] J. R. Merriman, S. SikSek and N. P. Smart, Explicit 4-descents on an elliptic curves, Acta Arithmetica, LXXVII, 4(1996), 385-404.

\] J. E. Cremona, Algorithms for modular elliptic curves, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1992.

\] J. W. S. Cassels, Lectures on Elliptic Curves, LMS Student Texts, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991.

TSINGHUA UNIVERITY

DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES

BEIJING 100084, P. R. CHINA

E-mail address: xianke@tsinghua.edu.cn

(This paper was published in: Science In China, A45(2002.11), No.11, 1372-1380)