On Jul 31, 2014, at 7:37, William Stein <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 7:51 AM, John Cremona <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I am implementing a method for elliptic curves over number fields to
>> detect CM.   I want to distingish between E.has_cm() and
>> E.has_potential_cm().  The latter only depends on the j-invariant, and
>> will return either (False, None) or (True, (d,f)) if j(E) is the
>> j-invariant of the order with discriminant d*f^2 (of index f in the
>> maximal order with discriminant d).  The former, E.has_cm(), will only
>> retrun True (with (d,f) as above if in addition d is a square in
>> E.base_field() so that the additional endomorphisms are defined over
>> the base field.
>> 
>> With this convention, elliptic curves over Q never have CM, they can
>> only have potential CM (iff the j-invariant is one of the 13 famous
>> values).
>> 
>> BUT the class EllipticCurve_rational_field already has a method
>> has_cm() which returns the same as what I want to call
>> has_potential_cm() (but without the discriminant), so this is
>> inconsistent with what I want to do over other number fields.
> 
> If a mathematician says "let E/Q be an elliptic curve with CM" that
> *means* something.
> Sage shouldn't be inconsistent with that...  Also, I've never
> seen the phrase "potential CM" in any paper (though maybe you have).

For the record, I've seen it in the wild, e.g., the recent "CM lifting" book by 
Chai-Conrad-Oort, and here:
  <http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0312319.pdf>

Justin

--
Justin C. Walker
Curmudgeon-at-large
Director
Institute for the Absorption of Federal Funds
----
186,000 Miles per Second
Not just a good idea: it's the law!
----

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-nt" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-nt.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to