A quintic surface with maximal Picard number arxiv: v1 [math.ag] 18 Dec 2008

Transcription

1 A quintic surface with maximal Picard number arxiv: v1 [math.ag] 18 Dec 2008 Matthias Schütt Abstract This paper gives the first example of a complex quintic surface in P 3 with maximal Picard number ρ = 45. We also investigate its arithmetic and determine the zeta function. Keywords: Picard number, Delsarte surface, automorphism, zeta function MSC(2000): 14J29; 11G40, 14G10, 14J50. 1 Introduction This paper concerns the problem of complex surfaces with maximal Picard number. Here maximality refers to attaining the Lefschetz bound ρ(x) h 1,1 (X). (1) There are a number of cases where the existence of such surfaces is known. These include surfaces with h 2,0 (X) = 0, abelian and K3 surfaces and certain double covers. We will review these results in Section 2. In general, however, the question of maximal Picard number is highly non-trivial. For instance, consider surfaces of degree d in P 3. These surfaces are known to attain the Lefschetz bound only in degree d 4 or d = 6 even if we allow isolated ADE singularities and consider the minimal resolution. This note complements these results by giving the first example of a complex quintic surface X in P 3 of maximal Picard number. The non-trivial Hodge numbers of X are h 2,0 (X) = 4, h 1,1 (X) = 45, h 0,2 (X) = 4. Our result answers a question raised by Shioda in [11]. So far, the record Picard number for quintics with at most ADE singularities was 41 due to Hirzebruch. He considered 5-fold covers of P 1 branched along five lines. Whenever the intersection points of the lines are distinct, the ten A 4 singularities give ρ 41 for a minimal desingularisation. Theorem 1 Let Y = {yzw 3 + xyz 3 + wxy 3 + zwx 3 = 0} P 3. Then Y has exactly four A 9 singularities where three coordinates vanish simultaneously. Denote a minimal resolution by X. Then X has maximal Picard number ρ(x) = 45. 1

2 2 Overview 2 We give three proofs of independent interest: The first proof exploits the fact that X is a Delsarte surface and thus covered by a Fermat surface; here we follow closely ideas of Shioda. For the second proof, we compute NS(X) explicitly up to finite index. Together, these two approaches enable us to compute the zeta function of X. The third proof uses an automorphism of order 15 on X to derive that the transcendental lattice has rank one over the cyclotomic field Q(ζ 15 ). We then apply similar ideas to Hirzebruch s five fold covers of P 2. We recover Shioda s result that always ρ = 41 unless the intersection points of the lines are not distinct. This result is derived in more generality for p-fold covers of P 2 branched along p lines. 2 Overview In this section, we review what seems to be known about surfaces with maximal Picard number. The main reference is Persson s paper [6] which established the existence for certain double covers. We will also comment on related arithmetic issues. There is one class of surfaces where the question of maximal Picard number has a trivial answer since every surface has maximal Picard number. Recall that Lefschetz bound (1) is a consequence of the more precise result that Pic(X) = H 2 (X, Z) H 1,1 (X). Hence h 2,0 (X) = 0 implies ρ(x) = h 1,1 (X). Thus we are led to consider surfaces with h 2,0 (X) 0. The problem of maximal Picard number was classically solved for abelian surfaces and K3 surfaces: Here the surfaces with maximal Picard number are often called singular and lie dense in the moduli space. The terminology does not refer to non-smoothness, but to the surfaces being exceptional. It is borrowed from the theory of elliptic curves with complex multiplication (CM), i.e. with extra endomorphisms. In fact, Shioda and Mitani proved in [14] that every singular abelian surface is isomorphic to the product of two isogenous elliptic curves with CM. For K3 surfaces, Kummer surfaces of singular abelian surfaces thus give infinitely many examples with maximal Picard number. To obtain all singular K3 surfaces, one can combine the Kummer quotient with a certain double cover. This was exhibited by Shioda and Inose in [13] in terms of elliptic fibrations. It is a consequence of these constructions that singular abelian and K3 surfaces share many arithmetic properties with CM elliptic curves. For instance, they can always be defined over some number field, and over some finite extension, the zeta function is known. Explicit relations with modular forms and class group theory can be found in [2] and [7]. In this spirit, we will also investigate the arithmetic of our maximal quintic X. It should be pointed out that there are surfaces which do not attain the Lefschetz bound. For instance, Livné derived a surface as quotient of the unit ball with ρ < h 1,1, but without deformations [4]. We now give a summary of the other known cases. The case of K3 surfaces shows the existence of quartic surfaces with maximal Picard number in P 3. Explicit models have been derived by Inose in [3]. In general, surfaces in P 3 are known to attain the Lefschetz bound only in degree d 4 or d = 6 (see the next

3 2 Overview 3 section for the latter case). This even holds true if we allow isolated ADE singularities which is a natural concession since it preserves the deformation type. In [6], Persson was able to extend the existence results for surfaces of maximal Picard number to certain double covers of rational surfaces. The crucial point about double covers is the following: if the branch curve has at most ade singularities, then the double cover has at most isolated ADE singularities. Thus one can try to impose enough singularities on the branch curve to obtain a surface with maximal Picard number as the resolution of the double cover. Persson mainly considered Horikawa surfaces, i.e. surfaces attaining Noether s inequality K 2 X 2 p g (X) 4. He showed that Horikawa surfaces with maximal Picard number exist if the congruence condition on the Euler characteristic χ 0 mod 6 is fulfilled. His approach also applies to double covers of P 2 branched along a curve of even degree with at most isolated ade singularities. An even better situation occurs for elliptic surfaces with section: For elliptic surfaces over P 1 of any Euler number e = 12 n > 0, the existence of a surface with maximal Picard number follows from work by Stothers [15]. In detail, Stothers showed that there is a complex elliptic surface with maximal singular fibre of type I 10 n 1. Then ρ(x) = 10 n = h 1,1 (X) by the Shioda-Tate formula. In fact, one can always degenerate the singular fibers in many ways such that the Picard number becomes maximal. In essence, this is a consequence of the Tate algorithm which describes the singular fibres in terms of the vanishing order of discriminant and j-invariant of the surface. Each degeneration of the singular fibres requires a multiple zero of the discriminant, hence imposes one condition on the parameters. Since there are 10 n 2 parameters and ρ(x) 2, the claim can be seen. By construction, these elliptic surfaces are extremal, i.e. the group of sections is finite. Another arithmetic side-note is due to Nori [5]: she showed that the usual such surface X (i.e. with non-constant j-invariant and no singular fibres of type II ) is modular. After Shioda [9], X comes endowed with a subgroup Γ of finite index in SL 2 (Z) not containing 1. There is a canonical isomorphism H 2,0 (X) = S 3 (Γ), identifying holomorphic 2-forms on X and cusp forms of weight 3 with respect to Γ. If Γ is a congruence subgroup, then this isomorphism carries over to the zeta function of X. In general, however, Γ will not be a congruence subgroup. Hence there cannot be a direct relation between the zeta function of X and the cusp forms of weight 3 with respect to Γ. For elliptic surfaces over general curves C with section, surfaces with maximal Picard number can be derived from extremal elliptic surfaces over P 1 by base change ramified at the singular fibres. This solves the existence problem for elliptic surfaces with section. We shall now turn to the quintic surface X. The next sections elaborate three proofs that X has maximal Picard number. We shall also investigate the arithmetic of X and determine the zeta function.

4 3 Delsarte surfaces 4 3 Delsarte surfaces Any irreducible projective surface in P 3 given by a four-term monomial is called Delsarte surface. Shioda showed that Delsarte surfaces are dominated by Fermat surfaces [12]. He also described an algorithm to find the covering Fermat surface. The Delsarte surface X is birational to the quotient of the Fermat surface S by a finite group, the covering group G. One obtains the transcendental subspace of H 2 (X) as the G-invariant transcendental subspace of H 2 (S), since it is a birational invariant. Since algebraic and transcendental subspaces are encoded in the decomposition of H 2 (S) into eigenspaces with character for a certain subgroup of the automorphism group of S m, it is possible to compute the Picard number ρ(x). This was Shioda s original motivation to study Delsarte surfaces. In our case, we can work with the Fermat surface of degree 15, but we give a general account in terms of the degree m: S m = {s m + t m + u m + v m = 0} P 3. The Fermat surface S m admits coordinate multiplications by m-th roots of unity, so µ 3 m Aut(S m ). The cohomology of S m can be decomposed into eigenspaces with character for the induced action of µ 3 m. Here it suffices to consider the character group of µ 3 m, A m := {α = (a 0, a 1, a 2, a 3 ) (Z/m Z) 4 a i 0 (mod m), 3 a i 0 (mod m) }. For α A m, let V (α) denote the corresponding eigenspace with character. Here we let g = (ζ 1, ζ 2, ζ 3 ) µ 3 m operate on S as [s, t, u, v] [s, ζ 1 t, ζ 2 u, ζ 3 v]. Then the subspace V (α) H 2 (S) is determined by the condition i=0 g V (α) = α(g) = ζ a1 1 ζa2 2 ζa3 3 g = (ζ 1, ζ 2, ζ 3 ) µ 3 m. By results of Katz and Ogus (more generally true for Fermat varieties of any dimension), V (α) is one-dimensional, and H 2 (S) = V 0 α A m V (α) where V 0 corresponds to the trivial character and is spanned by the hyperplane section. To decide whether V (α) is algebraic, we let (Z/m Z) operate on A m coordinatewise by multiplication. Let T m A m consist of all those α A m such that the (Z/m Z) -orbit of α contains an element (b 0,..., b 3 ) with canonical representatives 0 < b i < m and 3 b i 2 m. i=0 Then the eigenspace V (α) is transcendental if and only if α T m. We obtain the transcendental subspace T(S) of H 2 (S m ) as T(S) = α T m V (α).

5 4 Néron-Severi group 5 Example 2 (Fermat Quintic) For the Fermat quintic S 5, one easily finds that T 5 consists of four (Z/5Z) orbits corresponding to the element (1, 1, 1, 2) T 5 and the coordinate permutations. Hence dim(t(s 5 )) = 16 and ρ(s 5 ) = 37. Since h 1,1 (S 5 ) = 45 as in the introduction, S 5 does not have maximal Picard number. One can easily show that in higher degree m > 5, the Fermat surface S m has maximal Picard number if and only if m = 6. In fact, the (Z/m Z) -orbit of (1, 1, 1, m 3) T m contains a character with eigenspace of Hodge weight (1, 1) if and only if φ(m) > 2. By definition, this eigenspace in non-algebraic for m > 3. Alternatively, one can compare the asymptotic growth of ρ(s m ) as 3 m 2 (cf. [10]) against h 1,1 which is asymptotic to 2 m 3 /3. The exceptional property of the Fermat sextic was noticed by Beauville. By definition, a Delsarte surface is covered by a suitable Fermat surface. Shioda gave an algorithm to find the Fermat degree m and the dominant map ϕ [12]. In case of X from Theorem 1, one finds m = 15 and ϕ : S 15 X [s, t, u, v] [t u 3 v 7, s t 3 u 7, v s 3 t 7, u v 3 s 7 ]. The Delsarte surface X is birational to the quotient S m /G where G is the covering group corresponding to ϕ, i.e. ϕ = ϕ g for all g G. Since the Lefschetz number λ(x) = b 2 (X) ρ(x) is a birational invariant, we can compute it (and thus ρ(x)) through the quotient S m /G. Let T G m consist of all those α T m such that all elements in G act as identity on V (α). This is computed as follows: Write G g = (ζ 1, ζ 2, ζ 3 ), operating on S m as [s, t, u, v] [s, ζ 1 t, ζ 2 u, ζ 3 v]. Let α = (a 0, a 1, a 2, a 3 ) A m. Then V (α) is G-invariant if and only if 3 i=1 For the Lefschetz number, we obtain ζ ai i = 1 g = (ζ 1, ζ 2, ζ 3 ) G. λ(x) = λ(s m /G) = #T G m. In our case, one easily finds that T G 15 is the (Z/15 Z) orbit of a single element, say (1, 2, 4, 8). Hence λ(x) = 8 and ρ(x) = 45 as claimed in Thm Néron-Severi group Our motivation in determining the precise shape of the Néron-Severi group is twofold. On the one hand, this will give an alternative proof of Theorem 1. On the other hand, the knowledge about explicit generators of NS(X) will enable us to compute the zeta function of X in the next section. We first have to consider the resolution of singularities on Y. It is easily checked that the only singularities occur at [0, 0, 0, 1] and permutations, and that they have type A 9. Hence we already have ρ(x) 37. We consider three further groups of rational curves on X:

6 4 Néron-Severi group 6 1. The strict transforms of the six lines in P 3 passing through any two nodes of Y : l xy = {x = y = 0} P 3, l xz = The five lines l α = {x = α z, y = α 7 w} X, α 5 = The images of the non-contracted lines on S 15 C = {[ i µ 3, λµ 2, i λ 3, µ λ 2 ]; [λ, µ] P 1 }, D = {[ λµ 2, i λ 3, µ λ 2, i µ 3 ]; [λ, µ] P 1 }, 3 = 1. The intersection behaviour with the exceptional locus is sketched in the following figure for the node [0, 0, 0, 1]. Here we number the components of the exceptional divisor from 1 to 9 while D stands for all three rational curves with 3 = l xz l xy l yz D The verification is straight forward by computing the resolution of the A 9 singularity. The intersection behaviour at the other nodes is obtained by cyclic permutation of coordinates [x, y, z, w] [w, x, y, z]. All other non-zero intersection numbers are given as follows: C.D 2 = 5, C.l α = D.l α = 1, C.l xz = C.l yw = D.l xz = D.l yw = 1. Finally for the self-intersection numbers, we let H denote the hyperplane section. Then l.h = 1, C.H = D.H = 3. Hence the adjunction formula with K X = H gives l 2 = 3, C2 = D2 = 5. We will now give a rational basis of NS(X). Consider the following 45 rational curves on X: B = {4 A 9, l xy, l yz, l xz, C ( 1), l α (α 1)}. Their intersection matrix has determinant = Since ρ(x) 45 by Lefschetz bound (1), we deduce ρ(x) = 45. The above curves give a rational basis of NS(X), i.e. they generate NS(X) up to finite index. Remark 3 A joint paper with Shioda introduces a supersingular reduction technique to prove that NS(S m ) is integrally generated by lines for m = 5, 7, 11 and 13 [8]. The same method should be applicable here for X where one could work with the supersingular reduction at p = 29.

7 5 Zeta function 7 5 Zeta function We are now in the position to determine the zeta function of X. We will deal with the algebraic part NS(X) and the transcendental part T(X) separately. For the algebraic part, we consider NS(X) as a subspace of H 2 (X) in some étale cohomology. Hence the eigenvalues of Frobenius are p times roots of unity. Note that the rational basis B is Galois invariant. Hence the contribution of NS(X) to the zeta function is as follows: Lemma 4 Let K resp. L denote the third resp. fifth cyclotomic field over Q. Then L(NS(X), s) = ζ Q (s 1) 39 ζ K (s 1)ζ L (s 1). For the transcendental part, Weil translated the motivic decomposition of H 2 (S m ) into Jacobi sums [16]. We follow his description of the local Euler factors for a suitable prime power q = p r such that q 1 mod m. On the field F q of q elements, we fix a character χ : F q C of order exactly m. For any α A m, we then define the Jacobi sum j(α) = χ(v 1 ) a1 χ(v 2 ) a2 χ(v 3 ) a3. (2) v 1, v 2, v 3 F q v 1 + v 2 + v 3 = 1 Theorem 5 (Weil) In the above notation, consider the Fermat surface S m over F q with Frobenius morphism Frob q. Then Frob q has the following characteristic polynomial on H 2 (S m ): P(T) = (T q) α A m (T j(α)). We will now use Theorem 5 to determine the local Euler factors of the transcendental subspace T(X). We are concerned with the covering Fermat surface S 15. By section 3, T(X) is identified with a single (Z/15Z) -orbit T(X) = V (α) = V (k (1, 2, 4, 8)). k (Z/15Z) α T G 15 Since the dominant rational map S m X is defined over Q, we obtain Lemma 6 Let q 1 mod 15. Then the local Euler factor of T(X) at q is L q (T(X), s) = α T G 15 (1 j(α)q s ). Together, Lemma 4 and 6 determine the zeta function of X:

8 6 Automorphisms 8 Proposition 7 Let L(T(X), s) denote the L-series of T(X) as given by the local Euler factors in Lemma 6. Then ζ(x, s) = ζ Q (s)ζ Q (s 1) 39 ζ K (s 1)ζ L (s 1)L(T(X), s)ζ Q (s 2). 6 Automorphisms The third proof of Theorem 1 could be considered most ad hoc. In fact, we employed these ideas to search for Y in a systematic manner. This will be explained in section 7. The basic idea is to combine the existence of an automorphism of order 15 on X (which comes of course from the covering Fermat surface S 15 ) with just a little knowledge about NS(X). Here the operation of the automorphism on the holomorphic 2-forms on X will enable us to see ρ(x) = 45 easily. The quintic surface X admits an automorphism g of order 15. Let ζ denote a primitive 15th root of unity. Then g can be given by g(x, y, z, w) = [ζ x, ζ 3 y, ζ 7 z, w] We determine the operation of g on H 2,0 (X). We express a basis of H 2,0 (X) in the affine chart w = 1 in terms of ω = dy dz x F = dy dz y z 3 + y z x 2. By Griffiths residue theorem, a basis of H 2,0 (X) and the operation of g is as follows: basis ω xω y ω z ω g ζ ζ 2 ζ 4 ζ 8 For our purposes, it is crucial that these eigenvalues amount for exactly half of all complex embeddings Q(ζ) C. Since there are no conjugate duplicates involved, the eigenvalues in fact form a CM-type of Q(ζ). It follows that g endows T(X) with the structure of a Q[ζ]-vector space. In particular 8 = φ(15) dim(t(x)). (3) Here the four A 9 singularities on Y give ρ(x) 37, so T(X) has dimension 8 or 16. In fact, taking the strict transforms of any two distinct lines through two nodes of Y, we see ρ(x) 38 and dim(t(x)) 15. By (3), this implies dim(t(x)) = 8 and thus ρ(x) = 45. This completes the third proof of Theorem 1. 7 Systematic approach We shall now sketch how we used the above ideas systematically to search for the surface Y. Generally, we are looking for a hypersurface Y of degree d Y = {F = 0} P 3 which admits an automorphism g acting as coordinate multiplication by n-th roots of unity (n = ord(g)). We are interested in the special case where g makes T(Y ) a

9 7 Systematic approach 9 one-dimensional vector space over the n-th cyclotomic field Q(ζ n ). Since eventually we aim at surfaces with maximal Picard number ρ(y ) = h 1,1 (Y ), we thus require φ(n) = 2 p g (Y ). So in the case of quintics, we need φ(n) = 8. Finally we ask that the eigenvalues of g on H 2,0 (Y ) constitute a CM type of Q(ζ n ) over Q. In generality, these eigenvalues can be computed on a basis of H 2,0 (Y ) after Griffiths residue theorem. Here we can work affinely in the chart w = 1. As before, we fix the form ω = Then a basis of H 2,0 (Y ) is given by the set dy dz F x. B = {x i y j z k ω; i, j, k 0, i + j + k d 4}. But then the eigenvalues of g on H 2,0 (Y ) do only depend on g F and the operation of g on coordinates. This can be encoded in a 4-tuple (i, j, k, l) (Z/nZ) 4 up to normalising (j, k, l) by (Z/nZ) where g F = ζ i n F, g(x, y, z, w) = [ζj n x, ζk n y, ζl n z, w]. Hence our search proceeds as follows: 1. Find all tuples (i, j, k, l) such that the eigenvalues of g on H 2,0 are a CM type of Q(ζ n ). In particular, this implies φ(n) dim(t(y )) and allows equality. 2. For each tuple as above, find all monomials of degree d in x, y, z, w such that g acts as multiplication by ζn i. This gives all possible F. 3. If there are at least four monomials, check which polynomials F have at most isolated ADE singularities. For d = 5 and all n with φ(n) = 8, the above algorithm returns exactly three tuples up to isomorphism: n (i, j, k, l) # monomials surface (F=0) 15 (10, 1, 3, 7) 4 Y (1, 1, 6, 10) 4 singular along line z = w = 0 (3, 3, 5, 9) 6 two-dimensional family Z b,c We shall now analyse the family Z a,b in more detail. The general member can be given as Z b,c = {w 4 x + b z 2 w 3 + y 3 z 2 + z w x 3 + w y 3 x + c z 3 x 2 = 0} P 3. Here b c 0 since otherwise the singularities degenerate badly. The general surface in the family has the following seven singularities [1, 0, 0, 0] [0, 1, 0, 0] [0, 0, 1, 0] [0,, 0, 1], 3 = 1 A 8 A 1 D 4 A 1 Hence ρ(z b,c ) 17, which in fact implies ρ 21 by the divisibility of dim(t(z b,c )) due to the particular g action. Upon specialising c = 1, the A 8 singularity at [1, 0, 0, 0] is promoted to type A 23. Writing Z b = Z b,1, we obtain ρ(z b ) 32. As before, this yields ρ(z b ) = 37 or 45. At b = 1, the surface Z b becomes reducible. Otherwise all Z b behave similarly:

10 7 Systematic approach 10 Lemma 8 Let k be an algebraically closed field of characteristic 2, 3, 5. If b 0, 1, then Z b has exactly the following singularities over k: [1, 0, 0, 0] [0, 1, 0, 0] [0, 0, 1, 0] [0,, 0, 1], 3 = 1 A 23 A 1 D 4 A 1 Proof: The partial derivative of the defining equation of Z b with respect to y factors as 3 y 2 (z 2 + xw). A case by case-analysis reveals that singularities occur exactly at the above points. The resolution turns out to be independent of the characteristic. In fact, we can easily find 37 independent rational curves in NS(Z b ): the exceptional divisors, the lines {x = z = 0} and {z = w = 0}, two of the lines given by {x = y 3 + b w 3 = 0}, two of the lines given by {z = w 3 + y 3 = 0}. Their intersection matrix has determinant Lemma 9 The general member of the family Z b has Picard number 37. The lemma is a consequence of the generic Torelli theorem for projective hypersurfaces by Donagi [1]. Indeed ρ > 37 implies ρ = 45 by the property 8 dim(t(x)). This cannot happen globally. An alternative proof can be based on arithmetic properties. Because the Picard number cannot decrease upon smooth specialisation, it suffices to show ρ(z) = 37 for one smooth surface Z in the family Z b. Assuming on the contrary ρ(z) > 37, the induced action of g would make T(Z) a one-dimensional Q(ζ 15 ) vector space. As in section 3, the Galois representations associated to T(Z) would come from a Größencharacter of Q(ζ 15 ), expressed in terms of Jacobi sums as in (2). This gives a very limited number of possibilities for the eigenvalues of Frobenius on T(Z). With the Lefschetz fixed point formula, one can try to derive a contradiction thanks to the relation #Z(F q ) 1 + tr Frob q(t(z)) mod q (q = p r ). For instance for p = 31, there are 180 possibilities for the characteristic polynomial of Frob p on T(Z). All residue classes mod p occur as trace, so point counting over F p alone cannot be sufficient to rule out ρ(z) > 37. However, counting rational points on Z over F p and F p 2 one can often establish a contradiction to the assumption ρ(z) > 37. Applying this technique to Z b for all b F p, we deduce that ρ(z b ) = 37 for all b Q with b 0, 1, mod 31. It is unclear to us whether the parametrising curve of the family Z b might be interpreted as modular curve or as Shimura curve (as for K3 surfaces with ρ 19). The above calculations in characteristic p = 31 might serve as a hint to the contrary that there are no specialisations with maximal Picard number ρ = 45. We intend to pursue this problem in a future project. For another family, the Hirzebruch quintics, the next section will in fact show the possibility that there are no specialisations at all with Picard number increasing.

11 8 Hirzebruch surface 11 8 Hirzebruch surface We now return to the previous record quintics in P 3, as considered by Hirzebruch. In fact, we investigate the case of general degree n. Then our ideas apply to n = p prime, in particular to the quintic case which has already been studied by Shioda in [11]. Let Y be the (minimal resolution of the) cyclic covering of P 2 of degree n branched along n lines l i = 0 with distinct intersection points: n Y : w n = l i (x, y, z). Let H denote a hyperplane section. Since K Y = (n 4)H, Noether s formula gives Moreover we have i=1 K 2 Y = n (n 4)2, b 2 (Y ) = 12 p g (Y ) + 10 K 2 Y. (4) ( ) n 1 p g (Y ) =. 3 To see this, we can write down an explicit basis for H 2,0 (Y ) using Griffiths residue theorem as in the previous section. In the sequel, it will be useful to work in the affine chart x = 1. Write dy dz ω = w n 1. Then a basis of H 2,0 (Y ) is given by the set B = {y j z k w l ω; j, k, l 0, j + k + l n 4} with non-negative exponents. Obviously there are ( ) n 1 3 such monomials. For ρ(y ), we have a trivial lower bound coming from the ( n 2) singularities of type An 1 that we resolve: ( ) n ρ(y ) 1 + (n 1) (5) 2 For n = 5, this exactly gives the previous record ρ(y ) 41. We will show that in the non-degenerate case, equality holds. For this we consider the natural automorphism of order n on Y : ϕ : w ζ w, ζ n = 1. By definition, all basis elements from B are eigenforms for the indued action ϕ. If ζ is primitive, then the eigenvalue ζ occurs with multiplicity exactly ( ) n 2 2. The corresponding eigenforms are all those basis elements in B with exponent l = 0. In consequence, we obtain a lower bound for the Lefschetz number: ( ) n 2 λ(y ) φ(n) (6) 2 where φ denotes Euler s φ-function. This bound is optimal if n = p is prime, since then φ(p) = p 1. Combining (5) and (6) and comparing against (4), we obtain ( ) ( ) n n 2 b 2 (Y ) = ρ(y ) + λ(y ) 1 + (n 1) + φ(n) n=p = b 2 (Y ). (7) 2 2 Hence in the non-degenerate case where the intersection points of the lines are distinct, we obtain ( ) p n = p ρ(x) = 1 + (p 1). 2

12 8 Hirzebruch surface 12 Proposition 10 If n = p, then Y gives a (2 p 8)-dimensional family of projective surfaces with constant Picard number ρ(y ) = 1 + ( p 2) (p 1), parametrised by the space of p lines in P 2 with distinct intersection points. To the best of our knowledge, these Picard numbers attain the current record for general degree. Remark 11 For non-prime n, inequality (6) can be improved by considering eigenforms for imprimitive n-th roots of unity and their conjugates separately. Namely, for d n, the ϕ -eigenspace with eigenvalue ζ d has dimension ( ) n 1 d. Summing up gives as in [11, Lem. 3.1] (( ) ( )) n 1 d d 1 λ(y ) + φ(n/d) 2 2 d n d n 3 However, this bound will not imply an equality as in (7) unless n is prime or n = 4. In the latter case, Y is a K3 surface without moduli. Here ρ(y ) 19 and 2 dim(t(y )) combine to give ρ(y ) = 20. Hence Y is a singular K3 surface. Normalising the lines as {x = 0}, {y = 0}, {z = 0}, {x + y + z = 0} one can easily exihibit a dominant map of degree 16 from the Fermat quartic S 4 to Y : S 4 Y [s, t, u, v] [x, y, z, w] = [s 4, t 4, u 4, ζ 8 s t u v]. 2 Acknowledgement: The problem of complex surfaces with maximal Picard number was brought to our attention by T. Shioda. We are grateful to him and to B. van Geemen for many helpful comments and discussions. References [1] Donagi, R.: Generic Torelli for projective hypersurfaces, Compositio Math. 50 (1983), no. 2-3, [2] Elkies, N. D., Schütt, M.: Modular forms and K3 surfaces, preprint (2008), arxiv: [3] Inose, H.: Defining equations of singular K3 surfaces and a notion of isogeny. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Algebraic Geometry (Kyoto Univ., Kyoto, 1977), Kinokuniya Book Store, Tokyo (1978), [4] Livné, R.: On Certain Covers of the Universal Elliptic Curve, PhD thesis, Harvard University (1981). [5] Nori, M., On certain elliptic surfaces with maximal Picard number, Topology 24 (1985), no. 2, [6] U. Persson, Horikawa Surfaces with maximal Picard number, Math. Ann. 259, (1982).

13 8 Hirzebruch surface 13 [7] Schütt, M.: K3 surfaces with Picard rank 20 over Q, preprint (2008), arxiv: [8] Schütt, M., Shioda, T.: Lines on the Fermat quintic surface, preprint (2008), arxiv: [9] Shioda, T.: On elliptic modular surfaces, J. Math. Soc. Japan 24 (1972), [10] Shioda, T.: On the Picard number of a Fermat surface, J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. IA Math. 28 (1981), no. 3, [11] Shioda, T.: On the Picard number of a complex projective variety, Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4) 14 (1981), no. 3, [12] Shioda, T.: An explicit algorithm for computing the Picard number of certain algebraic surfaces, Amer. J. Math. 108, No. 2 (1986), [13] Shioda, T., Inose, H.: On Singular K3 Surfaces, in: Baily, W. L. Jr., Shioda, T. (eds.), Complex analysis and algebraic geometry, Iwanami Shoten, Tokyo (1977), [14] Shioda, T., Mitani, N.: Singular abelian surfaces and binary quadratic forms, in: Classification of algebraic varieties and compact complex manifolds, Lect. Notes in Math. 412 (1974), [15] Stothers, W. W.: Polynomial identities and Hauptmoduln, Quart. J. Math. Oxford (2), 32 (1981), [16] Weil, A.: Numbers of solutions of equations in finite fields, Bull. AMS 55 (1949), Matthias Schütt Department of Mathematical Sciences University of Copenhagen Universitetsparken Copenhagen Denmark mschuett@math.ku.dk