Solution

ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2007/iii/paper-29/3/b/solution

Use . For , differentiating the weight- law gives
The transformations of under the generators , and the chain rule for their compositions, give
Equivalently, one can check just in the next cancellation, since they generate the group. Substituting these formulas into
cancels the extra term and gives . Both constituents are holomorphic on and have Fourier expansions of a modular form with nonnegative exponents, so is holomorphic at the modular cusp. Thus
This operator is the Serre derivative.
If , then its derivative has constant coefficient zero, while has constant coefficient one. Therefore
For this vanishes exactly when , proving the claimed cusp form equivalence in the intended positive-weight setting. At weight zero the printed equivalence is false: is a noncuspidal weight-zero modular form, but belongs to . Indeed all weight-zero forms are constants by compactness of . Negative-weight level-one modular forms are zero by the valence formula for the modular group, so there is no further nonzero exception. The transformation and holomorphy conclusion for remains true at weight zero.

New to topics? Read the docs here!