In Number Theory, the study of the so-called Markov spectrum often relies upon the following classical fact relating continued fractions and the values of real indefinite binary quadratic forms at integral points:
and
coincide. (Here,
stands for continued fraction expansions.)
Remark 1 It is worth to note that the set
concerns only the real binary quadratic forms
with
such that the quantity
is finite. In particular, we are excluding real binary quadratic forms
with
.
In this post, we follow the books of Dickson and Cusick–Flahive in order to give a proof of this result via the classical reduction theory of binary quadratic forms.
1. Generalities on binary quadratic forms
A real binary quadratic form is with
. From the point of view of linear algebra, a binary quadratic form is
where is the usual Euclidean inner product of
,
is the column vector
, and
is the matrix
.
The discriminant of is
.
Remark 2 The values taken by
are very easy to describe: in particular,
in this context. Hence, by Remark 1, we can focus on
with
or
. Moreover, by symmetry (i.e., exchanging the roles of the variables
and
), we can assume that
. So, from now on, we shall assume that
.
Note that . Therefore,
is definite (i.e., its values are all positive or all negative) whenever the discriminant is
. Conversely, when
,
is indefinite (i.e., it takes both positive and negative values) whenever
. In view of the definition of
in the statement of Theorem 1 above, we will restrict ourselves from now on to the indefinite case
.
are the first and second roots of . In particular,
when
or
. So, by Remark 1, we will suppose from now on that
.
In summary, from now on, our standing assumptions on are
,
and
,
.
Remark 3 The first and second roots
,
and the discriminant
determine the coefficients
,
,
of the binary quadratic form
. Indeed, the formula
says that it suffices to determine
. On one hand, the modulus
is given by
. On the other hand, the fact that
is the 1st root and
is the 2nd root determines the sign of
: if we replace
by
in the formula
, then we obtain the binary quadratic form
whose 1st root is
and 2nd root is
; hence, an ambiguity on the sign of
could only occur when
, i.e.,
, in contradiction with our assumption
.
2. Action of on binary quadratic forms
A key idea (going back to Lagrange) to study the values of a fixed binary quadratic form is to investigate the equivalent problem of describing the values of a family of binary quadratic forms on a fixed vector.
More precisely, if a vector is obtained from a fixed vector
via a matrix
, i.e.,
,
, then the value of
at
equals the value of
at
. By (1), the binary quadratic forms
and
are related by:
Observe that (3) implies that the discriminant of is
. Thus,
and
have the same discriminant whenever
.
2.1. Action of on binary quadratic forms
The quantity appearing in the definition of
in the statement of Theorem 1 leads us to restrict our attention to the action of
on
. In fact, since
, we have that
where is the set of primitive vectors of
. So, it is natural to concentrate on
because it acts transitively on
.
Definition 2 Two binary quadratic forms
and
are equivalent whenever
for some
.
Note that two equivalent binary quadratic forms have the same discriminant. Furthermore, if is a factor of
and
,
with
, then
is a factor of
and, a fortiori,
is a factor of
. In particular, the roots of
are related to the roots of
via
In other words, and
are related to each other via the action of
by Möbius transformations. Actually, a direct calculation with the formulas for
and
in (4) and the fact that
show that (6) respect the order of the roots, i.e.,
where and
are the first roots, and
and
are the 2nd roots.
Remark 4 Note that
because
and we are assuming that the roots of
are irrational.
Lemma 3 Under our standing assumptions, any binary quadratic form
is equivalent to some
with
.
Proof: We will proceed in two steps: first, we apply certain elements of to ensure that
, and, after that, we use a parabolic matrix to obtain
.
By (4), the matrix converts
into
with
.
If , the choice of
with
in the discussion above leads to
with
In other terms, if , then
is equivalent to
with
, i.e.,
.
By iterating this process, we find a sequence of binary quadratic forms equivalent to
such that
whenever
. It follows that
is equivalent to some
with
.
Finally, by (4), the matrix converts
into
with
. Hence, the choice of
with
gives that
is equivalent to
with
.
2.2. Reduction theory (I)
In general, the study of the dynamics of the action of a group on a certain space
is greatly improved in the presence of nice fundamental domain, i.e., a portion
with good geometrical properties capturing all orbits in the sense that the
-orbit of any
intersects
.
In the setting of acting on binary quadratic forms, the role of fundamental domain is played by the notion of reduced binary quadratic form:
Definition 4 We say that
is reduced whenever
Remark 5 Suppose that
is reduced. Then,
thanks to the condition
. In particular,
, so that
. Hence,
thanks to the condition
. Note that the inequality
says that
. In other words,
reduced implies (
and)
.Conversely, the inequality
implies that (
and)
is reduced.
Therefore,
is reduced if and only if
Furthermore, the identity
implies that
is reduced if and only if
In particular,
is reduced if and only
is reduced where
is the matrix
inducing the change of variables
,
.Moreover, if
is reduced, then
and
, i.e., the sign of
is opposite to the signs of
and
.
The next result says that reduced forms are a fundamental domain for the action on binary quadratic forms:
Theorem 5 Under our standing assumptions, any binary quadratic form
is equivalent to some reduced binary quadratic form.
Proof: By Lemma 3, we can assume that with
, so that
. Thus,
. By performing the change of variables
,
(i.e., applying the matrix
) if necessary, we can suppose that
.
Since we are assuming that , it is possible to choose
such that
. So, if we apply the matrix
(i.e.,
,
) to
, then we get the equivalent binary quadratic form
with
.
We affirm that is reduced. In fact, by Remark 5, our task is to show that we have strict inequalities
However, or
or
would imply that
or
is a root of
, a contradiction with our assumption that none of its roots is rational. Hence,
is reduced.
2.3. Reduction theory (II)
In this subsection, we use the matrices inducing the change of variables
,
(similar to an Euclidean division) to navigate through the set of reduced binary quadratic forms (cf. Lemma 6 below).
Before explaining this fact, let us introduce the following definition: we say that the binary quadratic forms , resp.
,
, are the right, resp. left neighbors of the binary quadratic form
.
The notion of neighbors is adapted to the investigation of reduced binary quadratic forms because of the following result:
Lemma 6 Under our standing assumptions, a reduced binary quadratic form has an unique reduced right neighbor and an unique reduced left neighbor.
Proof: Let us first show the existence and uniqueness of the reduced right neighbor of a reduced binary quadratic form .
Consider the 1st and 2nd roots and
of
. Since
is reduced, i.e.,
and
, the largest integer
is not zero. We take
with the same sign as
and
and, hence, opposite to
(cf. Remark 5).
By (4) and (7), the right neighbor is
with
and the roots of
satisfy
and
.
Thus, our choice of implies that
and
has opposite sign to
and
. Since
,
has opposite sign to (
and)
, we have that
has the same sign of
and
. In summary, the right neighbor
of
is reduced.
Moreover, this reduced right neighbor is unique because and
imply that
must be the unique integer with the same sign of
and
.
Finally, let us establish the existence and the uniqueness of the reduced left neighbor of . Consider the matrix
(with determinant
) inducing the change of variables
and
. By Remark 5, the fact that
is reduced implies that
is also reduced. In particular,
has an unique reduced right neighbor
. In particular,
is reduced. Since
we conclude that is the unique left neighbor of
.
This lemma allows us to organize the reduced binary quadratic forms into chains:
Definition 7 A chain
is a sequence of reduced binary quadratic forms such that
is the right neighbor
for all
.
2.4. Reduction theory (III)
The proof of Lemma 6 hints to a connection between chains and continued fraction expansions. More concretely, let be a chain, say
and the change of variables
,
converts
into
(i.e.,
). Note that
for all
. By Remark 5, since
is reduced, it follows that the sign of
is opposite to the sign of
. In particular, up to replacing each
by its right neighbor
, we can assume that
.
In this context, we write with
for all
. Since
, we have
where . As
(because
is reduced) and
for all
, the previous equation implies that
for all . Moreover,
means that the roots of
satisfy
In particular, and
where
describe the entries of the continued fraction expansions of
Moreover, the fact that and
(where
is the common discriminant of
), we have
2.5. Reduction theory (IV)
Coming back to our study of binary quadratic forms, we saw that, under our standing assumption, any binary quadratic form is equivalent to some chain of reduced forms.
The next fundamental result says that any equivalence class of binary quadratic forms contains an unique chain.
Theorem 8 Two equivalent reduced binary quadratic forms belong to the same chain.
As it turns out, one can deduce Theorem 1 directly from (11) and this theorem. For this reason, let us postpone the proof of Theorem 8 to the last portion of this section in order to complete the proof of Theorem 1.
2.6. End of proof of Theorem 1 (modulo Theorem 8)
Lagrange used Theorem 8 to obtain the following result:
Theorem 9 Let
be a chain of reduced binary quadratic forms with discriminant
. Then,
Proof: Fix and
such that
verifies
Take sending
to
. By definition,
. In other terms,
is equivalent to
. Similarly to the proof of Theorem 5, we can take
such that
satisfies
, so that the matrix
converts
into the equivalent binary quadratic form
. Note that
is reduced because
and
.
In summary, and
are equivalent reduced binary quadratic forms. By Theorem 8,
and
belong to the same chain, i.e., there exists
such that
. By definition, this means that
.
This result yields the following fact about the values of binary quadratic forms:
Proposition 10 Let
be a binary quadratic form satisfying our standing assumptions. Denote by
the unique chain in the equivalence class of
(coming from Theorems 5 and 8). Then,
Proof: Since for all
, there is no loss of generality in applying Theorem 5 in order to assume that
is reduced, say
. In this situation,
, so that
, i.e.,
. Hence,
The desired conclusion now follows from Theorem 9.
The proof of Theorem 1 is now very easy to complete: indeed, it suffices to put together (5), Proposition 10 and (11).
At this stage, it remains only to prove Theorem 8. This matter is the purpose of the remainder of this section.
2.7. Four basic properties of continued fractions
Before starting our discussion of Theorem 8, we need to recall the following four basic properties of continued fractions:
Proposition 11 Given a sequence
,
, let
be the
th convergent of
. Then:
- one has the recurrence relation
with the convention that
;
;
and
.
;
The reader can prove this elementary proposition along the following lines. An induction argument based on the fact that gives the recurrence relations
and
implying the first three items of the proposition. Finally, the third item is a consequence of the first item because the matrix
has determinant
. For more details, the reader is invited to consult the book of Cusick–Flahive and/or Dickson.
2.8. Reduction theory (IV) bis: proof of Theorem 8
Let and
be two equivalent reduced binary quadratic forms. By replacing
and/or
by their right neighbors if necessary, we can assume that
. In this case, the 1st and 2nd roots of
satisfy
and
.
Denote by the matrix realizing the equivalence between
and
, so that
and
(cf. (7)).
Since there is nothing to prove when is the identity matrix (i.e.,
), we will assume that
. Up to replacing
by
if necessary, we can further assume that either
or
and
.
Proof: Indeed, and
would imply that
(because
). Therefore,
and
, i.e.,
a contradiction.
Proposition 13 If
is not the identity matrix, then
.
Proof: If , then
(because
and Proposition 12 ensures that
). This would imply that
, i.e.,
Since , one would get
, i.e.,
, so that
would be the identity matrix. Similarly, if
, then one would have
, so that
. Since
, this would force
, i.e.,
, so that
would be the identity matrix.
Proof: By the previous proposition, our task is to prove that
.
If , then
(as
and Proposition 12 says that
). By (12), it follows that
. Since
, one gets that
that is, .
Similarly, if , then
. By (12), one gets that
. Thus,
(as
and
). This completes the argument.
The previous propositions allow us to suppose that and
. Since
(as
), we also have
. Moreover, up to exchanging the roles of
and
, i.e., replacing
by its inverse
if necessary, we can assume that
,
. Finally, the proof of Proposition 14 also tells us that
,
. In particular, the fact that
says that
,
.
In summary, we can (and do) assume from now on that
Therefore, and
is a solution of the equation
with and
.
Proposition 15 The equation
has an unique solution with
and
.
Proof: Since any solution of this equation satisfies and we have that
(as
), there exists
with
On the other hand, if and
, then
and
. It follows that
and, a fortiori,
. This completes the proof.
We affirm that
and
are determined by a continued fraction expansion of
.
In fact, let us write with
even and
for all
: this is always possible because if
is odd, then we replace the term
in the continued fraction expansion by
, resp.
when
, resp.
. Denoting by
we have from Proposition 11 that and
,
. By Proposition 15, this implies that
and
, i.e.,
Moreover, Proposition 11 also tells us that
Since , we have that
,
, are the first entries of the continued fraction expansion of
. Furthermore, (10) says that
where
is the first root of the
th element
of the chain containing
. In other words,
and
have the same discriminant and the same first root
.
At this point, we are ready to complete the proof of Theorem 8. For this sake, it suffices to establish the following fact:
Proposition 16 One has
. In particular,
and
belong to the same chain.
Proof: We saw that and
share the same discriminant and 1st root. Since a binary quadratic form is determined by its discriminant and its 1st and 2nd roots (cf. Remark 3), our task is simply to show that
and
have the same 2nd root
.
By Proposition 11, the fact that and
implies
,
and, hence,
Since , it follows from (10) that
, i.e.,
.
Leave a Reply