Let be a scheme. An elliptic curve over
should be thought of as a continuously varying family of elliptic curves parametrized by
.
Definition 1 An elliptic curve over
is a proper, flat morphism
whose geometric fibers are curves of genus one together with a section
.
This is a reasonable notion of “family”: observe that a morphism can be used to pull back elliptic curves over
. The flatness condition can be thought of as “continuity.” For an algebraically closed field, this reduces to the usual notion of an elliptic curve.
A basic property of elliptic curves over algebraically closed fields is that they imbed into and are cut out by (nonsingular) Weierstrass equations of the form
This equation is unique up to an action of a certain four-dimensional group of transformations. The first goal is to show that, locally, the same is true for an elliptic curve over a base.
1. The zero section
Let be an elliptic curve over the scheme
, with zero section
. We are going to find an ample line bundle on
. To do so, observe that
(as a section to a separated morphism) imbeds
inside
as a closed subscheme. Observe that
is smooth over
, since it is flat and the fibers are smooth curves. The zero section
is thus cut out locally by one equation.
It follows now that can be used to define a line bundle
on
, which is compatible with base-change on
. When restricted to each fiber (an elliptic curve), it is the line bundle associated to the divisor at the origin
. There is a natural morphism
.
Now consider the line bundle . When restricted to each geometric fiber
, this is a very ample line bundle on the elliptic curve
associated to three times the origin. By Riemann-Roch, we have
for every geometric fiber.
By the theorem of cohomology and base change, we find that \( f_* \mathcal{L}^{3} \) is a vector bundle of rank three on , and that the maps
are isomorphisms: that is, any section along extends to a section in some neighborhood. Moreover, we find that the formation of the pushforward
commutes with base change
.
It follows now from very ampleness on the fibers that is a surjection of sheaves, so defines a map of
-schemes
Since commutes with base change, we find that
is a closed imbedding when restricted to any fiber. Hence,
is an imbedding and
is very ample.
Thus, given an elliptic curve over , we get a canonical imbedding
into the projectivization of a three-dimensional vector bundle on
.
2. Weierstrass equations
Suppose now given a trivialization , given by three sections
generating
. Assume that
, in fact (recall that there is a map
). Locally, we can always choose such a trivialization, but it is not unique. Then we have an imbedding of
-schemes
given by the sections generating
. Suppose
is, further, in the image of
(which is locally free of rank two).
The claim now is that is cut out as a subscheme of
by a Weierstrass equation. Here the reasoning is analogous as in the ordinary case when
. In fact, we note that
for each , by a Riemann-Roch calculation (and the
‘s are zero). It follows that
is locally free of rank six. The elements
are seven sections and consequently must be linearly dependent. They generate the vector bundle, too: this can be checked stalkwise and then one notes that the orders at zero are anywhere between
and
.
Locally on , we can find a relation of linear dependence (unique up to scaling) among all these involving functions of
. That is, we can find a relation
Now, the claim is that are necessarily invertible. In fact, we can check this after restricting to the geometric fibers: if when restricted to one geometric fiber exactly one of
vanished, then one side would have order six at the origin and one side would have order
. vanished, the left side and the right side could not have the same order either.
Anyway, rescaling we can get the appropriate equation where .
Proposition 2 Let
be an elliptic curve over
. Then, for each
, there is an open neighborhood
containing
such that the elliptic curve
has a Weierstrass equation as above.
In other words, locally on ,
looks like the zero locus of a Weierstrass equation when the
are taken as functions on (an open subset of)
.
There is thus a “Zariski locally universal” elliptic curve. Consider the scheme and the subscheme
of
cut out by the Weierstrass equation
. We have then a proper, flat morphism
Properness is clear, and flatness follows from the fact that the fibers all have the same Hilbert polynomial (they are cubic curves in ). There is an open locus
over which the fibers are smooth (i.e., where suitable discriminant polynomials are nonzero), and the restriction
of
is then an elliptic curve. The zero section
is given by the point at infinity.
Here the line bundle satisfies
restricted to
, and we take the sections
to imbed
in
.
3. Uniqueness
The choice of a Weierstrass equation is not unique. Given an elliptic curve , certain things were canonical: the line bundle
, the three-dimensional vector bundle
on
, and the imbedding
The element is canonical, but the choice of
is not (over a sufficiently small base that
is free). Given another choice
which satisfy a Weierstrass equation, we have
where are units. This follows because
generate the same two-dimensional subbundle
. Since
are required to satisfy a Weierstrass equation, we must have
this means that we can parametrize the pair via
. It follows that the general change of variables is
These transformations are parametrized by a group scheme, smooth and of finite type over .
4. The stack of elliptic curves
We define the following (pseudo)-functor
To a ring , we set
to be the collection of all elliptic curves over
, together with all
-isomorphisms between them; the pull-back is the pull-back of schemes. The claim is that
is a Deligne-Mumford stack.
First, we should see that is even a stack: given an étale morphism
, we should be able to “descend” elliptic curves over
to elliptic curves over
.
Proposition 3
is a stack for the flat topology.
Proof: Suppose given a faithfully flat morphism , and suppose given an elliptic curve
together with an isomorphism over
satisfying the cocycle condition. Let
be the three-dimensional vector bundle over
associated functorially to
; this comes equipped with the descent data to become canonically the base-change of an
-module
. It follows that we really have a descent problem for subschemes of
, which we can solve using standard flat descent.
In order to see this, we will need to produce a cover of . We will just produce a smooth cover here. Consider the map
classifying the elliptic curve which was “universal” for Weierstrass elliptic curves. The claim is that this is smooth and surjective. It is surjective because any elliptic curve is locally Weierstrass: stated stackily, any map
factors locally through
.
To see that it is smooth, we will argue more strongly, that is the quotient stack
for
a suitable (smooth) group scheme over
. In fact, this follows from our earlier analysis: étale (or Zariski) locally, any elliptic curve comes from a Weierstrass equation, and this Weierstrass equation is unique up to the action of
, where
is the group of transformations of Weierstrass equations as above.
(Actually, so far we have only proved that it is an Artin stack.)
June 13, 2012 at 9:33 pm
These are great notes. Can you give a reference?
June 14, 2012 at 6:19 am
Andre Henriques has some nice notes: http://math.mit.edu/conferences/talbot/2007/tmfproc/Chapter04/henriques.pdf. Otherwise, I only know of Deligne-Mumford and Deligne-Rapoport.
June 14, 2012 at 11:52 am
Actually, ch. 2 of Katz-Mazur’s “Arithmetic moduli of elliptic curves” is very nice (I think it was where I learned this material).