Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge / 2007 / iii / Paper 29 / 3 / b

Use $\Theta =(2\pi i{)}^{-1}d/d\tau$. For $\gamma =\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)$, differentiating the weight-$k$ law givesThe transformations of $E_2$ under the generators $S,T$, and the chain rule for their compositions, giveEquivalently, one can check just $S,T$ in the next cancellation, since they generate the group. Substituting these formulas intocancels the extra term and gives $(D_{k}f)(\gamma \tau )=(c\tau +d{)}^{k+2}{D}_{k}f(\tau )$. Both constituents are holomorphic on $\mathbb{H}$ and have Fourier expansions of a modular form with nonnegative exponents, so $D_{k}f$ is holomorphic at the modular cusp. ThusThis operator is the Serre derivative.

If $f={\sum }_{n\ge 0}{a}_n{q}^n$, then its derivative has constant coefficient zero, while $E_2$ has constant coefficient one. ThereforeFor $k\ne 0$ this vanishes exactly when $a_0(f)=0$, proving the claimed cusp form equivalence in the intended positive-weight setting. At weight zero the printed equivalence is false: $f=1$ is a noncuspidal weight-zero modular form, but $D_{0}f=0$ belongs to $S_2$. Indeed all weight-zero forms are constants by compactness of $X(1)$. 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 $D_{k}f$ remains true at weight zero.