Professional Documents
Culture Documents
OVER Fq [T ]
arXiv:1808.04001v2 [math.NT] 7 Sep 2019
1. Introduction
Our main results are the resolutions of two open problems in number
theory, except with the ring of integers Z replaced by the ring of polynomials
Fq [T ], under suitable assumptions on q.
We first fix some notation. Define the norm of a nonzero f ∈ Fq [T ] to be
(1.1) |f | = q deg(f ) = |Fq [T ]/(f )|.
The degree of the zero polynomial is negative ∞, so we set its norm to be 0.
1.1. The main result - twin primes. Our main result covers the twin
prime conjecture in its quantitative form. The latter is the 2-point prime
tuple conjecture of Hardy-Littlewood, predicting for a nonzero integer h that
X
(1.2) #{X ≤ n ≤ 2X : n and n+h are prime} ∼ S(h) 2 , X → ∞,
log (X)
where
Y
(1.3) S(h) = (1 − p−1 )−2 (1 − p−1 − p−1 1p∤h ),
p
Remark 1.2. Our proof of Theorem 1.1 establishes also the analog of the
Goldbach problem over function fields, and can be modified to treat more
general linear forms in the primes.
The proof of Theorem 1.1 passes through some intermediate results which
may be of independent interest. We will discuss these results in the remain-
der of the introduction. Once Theorem 1.7 and Theorem 1.9 below are
established, Theorem 1.1 will follow from a quick argument involving a con-
volution identity relating the von Mangoldt function, which can be used to
count primes, to the Möbius function.
For the function field analogue, we recall that the Möbius function of a
monic polynomial f is given by
2
0, #{P : P | f } > 0
(1.8) µ(f ) = 1, #{P : P | f } ≡ 0 mod 2
−1, #{P : P | f } ≡ 1 mod 2,
and denote by Fq [T ]+ the set of monic polynomials over Fq .
Theorem 1.3. For an odd prime number p, an integer k ≥ 1, and a power
q of p satisfying q > p2 k2 e2 , the following holds. For distinct h1 , . . . , hk ∈
Fq [T ] we have
X
(1.9) µ(f + h1 )µ(f + h2 ) · · · µ(f + hk ) = o(X), X → ∞.
f ∈Fq [T ]+
|f |≤X
Refining the method of Burgess is the focus of several works, but the expo-
nent 1/4 has not yet been improved (even conditionally). However, in the
function field setting, we can do better by a geometric method, as long as q
is sufficiently large.
Theorem 1.4. Fix η > 0. Then for a prime power q > e2 /η 2 the follow-
ing holds. For a squarefree M ∈ Fq [T ], a real number X ≥ |M |η , and a
nonprincipal Dirichlet character χ mod M , we have
X
(1.12) sup χ(s + a) = o(X), |M | → ∞.
s∈Fq [T ] |a|≤X
where f denotes the inverse of f mod M , and the implied constant depends
only on q and ǫ.
For nonzero M ∈ Fq [T ] we define Euler’s totient function by
(1.17) ϕ(M ) = (Fq [T ]/(M ))× ,
and for f ∈ Fq [T ]+ , we define the von Mangoldt function by
(
deg(P ), f = P n
(1.18) Λ(f ) =
0, otherwise.
1
Theorem 1.9. Fix δ < 126 .
For an odd prime p and a power q of p with
2
2 2 51 − 26δ
(1.19) q>p e ,
1 − 126δ
the following holds. For a squarefree M ∈ Fq [T ], a polynomial a ∈ Fq [T ]
1
coprime to M , and X a power of q with X 2 +δ ≥ |M | we have
X
X X
(1.20) Λ(f ) = +o , |M | → ∞.
+
ϕ(M ) |M |
f ∈Fq [T ]
|f |≤X
f ≡a mod M
1
We have not ventured too much into improving the constant 126 , as our
1
method cannot give anything above 6 , even if Theorem 1.8 would give square
root cancellation. Since our proof of Theorem 1.9 is based on the ‘convo-
lutional’ connection of von Mangoldt and Möbius, it is not surprising that
ON THE CHOWLA AND TWIN PRIMES CONJECTURES OVER Fq [T ] 7
2. Character sums
The main result of this section is the following.
Theorem 2.1. Let t ≤ m be natural numbers, let f ∈ Fq [T ], let g ∈ Mm
be squarefree, and let χ : (Fq [T ]/g)× → C× be a nontrivial character. Then
X m−1 t
1/2
(2.1) χ(f + h) ≤ (q + 1) q2.
t
h∈Fq [T ]
d(h)<t
gcd(f +h,g)=1
X ′
(2.25) χ(f + h) ≪ q (1−β)t .
d(h)<t
Proof. If η ≥ 1, the left hand side vanishes and the bound is trivial. Other-
wise, we apply Theorem 2.1 to the left side, taking m = d(g), to obtain
X
1/2+1 m − 1 t/2
χ(f + h) ≤ (q ) q
t
d(h)<t
(2.26) −t
m t/2 t m − t t−m t/2
≪ q ≤ q
t m m
where the last inequality follows from
m k
t m−t m X m t m − t m−k
1= + =
m m k m m
(2.27) k=0
t
m t m − t m−t
≥ .
t m m
From the Taylor series we can see that − log(1 − x) ≤ x/(1 − x) if x > 0
so (1 − x)−(1−x)/x ≤ e. Applying this to x = t/m, we get
m − t t−m
(2.28) ≤ et
m
so we obtain
X −t
t
(2.29) χ(f + h) ≪ et q t/2 .
m
d(h)<t
2
Because q ≥ (eη −1 ) 1−2β and t/m ≥ η, we have
−1
t 1
(2.30) e ≤ eη −1 ≤ q 2 −β
m
hence
−t
t
(2.31) et q t/2 ≤ q (1−β)t ,
m
as desired.
To handle the case where t ≤ η · d(g) ≤ t′ , first note that we may assume
′
t ≤ m. We observe that the left hand side of Eq. (2.31) is an increasing
function of t because its logarithm
(2.32) t log m − t log t + t + t(log q)/2
has derivative
(2.33) log m − log t + (log q)/2
which is positive in the range t ≤ m. Thus we can get a bound for the
shorter sum which is at least as good as our bound for the longer sum.
ON THE CHOWLA AND TWIN PRIMES CONJECTURES OVER Fq [T ] 15
i=0 i=0
(3.3)
d(f ) q d(g) −1
d(f ) f
≡ ψ(an ) f (θ) 2 ≡ ψ(an )
g
which suffices for the lemma.
Given a D ∈ Fq [T ] we write rad(D) for the product of primes that appear
in the factorization of D, and rad1 (D) for the product of primes that appear
with odd multiplicity in the factorization of D. The derivative of D (with
respect to T ) is denoted by D ′ .
The next lemma interprets the Möbius function (on an arithmetic pro-
gression) as a Dirichlet character that ‘depends only on the derivative’.
Lemma 3.2. Let m, k ≥ 0, d ≥ 1 be integers with k 6= d+m. For M ∈ Mm ,
g ∈ Md , and a ∈ Mk coprime to M , define the polynomials
a ′ rad(D) rad1 (D)
(3.4) D = M 2 g + , E= , E1 = .
M gcd (M, rad(D)) gcd (M, rad1 (D))
Then
(3.5) µ(a + gM ) = S · χ(w + g)
where w = wa,M,g′ ∈ Fq [T ], χ = χa,M,g′ is a (real) multiplicative character
mod E with conductor E1 , and
(3.6) S = Sd,a,M,g′ ∈ {0, 1, −1}
with S = 0 if and only if D = 0.
16 WILL SAWIN AND MARK SHUSTERMAN
Proposition 4.3. Fix ǫ, δ > 0, 0 < β < 1/2, and a positive integer n. Let
q be a power of an odd prime p such that
2
1−2β
pne
(4.6) q> n o .
ǫ ǫδ
min ǫ+2 , ǫ+δ
Then for nonnegative integers d, m1 , . . . , mn , k1 , . . . , kn with
(4.7) d ≥ max{ǫm1 , . . . , ǫmn , δk1 , . . . , δkn }, ki 6= d + mi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n,
and pairs (ai , Mi ) ∈ Mki × Mmi for 1 ≤ i ≤ n such that the derivatives
′
ai
Mi are all distinct, we have
n
X Y 1− βp
(4.8) µ (ai + gMi ) ≪ |Md |
g∈Md i=1
By Lemma 3.2 (the notation of which is used throughout), our sum equals
XY n X Y n
(i)
(4.10) Sr χ(i)
r wr(i) + sp
r∈R i=1 d(s)<t i=1
(i) (i)
with χr a character to a squarefree modulus Er (defined in Lemma 3.2
(i) (i)
using Dr ). Hence, there exist fr ∈ Fq [T ] with
p
(4.11) fr(i) ≡ wr(i) mod Er(i) , 1 ≤ i ≤ n,
(i)
so using the fact that χr is real, we see that our inner sum equals
X Y n
(4.12) χ(i)
r f (i)
r + s .
d(s)<t i=1
Since gcd(Eer(i) , E
br(i) ) = 1, we get that gcd(Ur , E br(i) ) = 1 for 1 ≤ i ≤ n.
(i) (i) br(i) . Summing trivially
Hence, there exist Vr ∈ Fq [T ] with Ur Vr ≡ 1 mod E
over u, we may thus consider
Yn X Y n
(i)
(4.21) χbr (Ur ) br(i) fr(i) Vr(i) + uVr(i) + h .
χ
i=1 d(h)<t−ℓr i=1
er , E (i) (i)
br ) = 1 we moreover conclude that {E
br }n are pairwise (i)
From gcd(E i=1
coprime. The Chinese remainder theorem then gives an fr,u ∈ Fq [T ] with
(4.22) b(i) ,
fr,u ≡ fr(i) Vr(i) + uVr(i) mod E 1 ≤ i ≤ n,
r
(1) (n) br , the sum
br · · · E (1) (n)
so defining the character χr = χ
br · · · χ
br , mod Er = E
above becomes
X
(4.23) χr (fr,u + h).
d(h)<t−ℓr
We have
n o
ǫ ǫδ
t t min ǫ+2 , ǫ+δ
(4.24) ≥ = =·· η
d(Er ) n max{d + 2d/ǫ, d/δ + d/ǫ} pn
′
so if χr is nonprincipal, Corollary 2.7 bounds the sum above by ≪ q (1−β )t ,
for some β ′ > β + pγ, with γ > 0 arbitrarily small. Because we have
2
1−2β
pne
(4.25) q> n o
ǫ ǫδ
min ǫ+2 , ǫ+δ
by assumption, using our definition of η this can be writeen as
2
(4.26) q > eη −1 1−2β
and therefore
2
(4.27) q > eη −1 1−2β ′
We can absorb this into our bound by slightly increasing β so that it still
satisfies the strict inequality (4.6).
Theorem 4.5. Fix ǫ, δ > 0, 0 < β < 1/2, and a positive integer n. Let q
be a power of an odd prime p such that
2
1−2β
pne
(4.33) q> n o .
ǫ ǫδ
min ǫ+2 , ǫ+δ
with d(P ) = o(d). Let t′ = d(P ). Splitting our initial sum according to the
residue class z of g mod P we get
X X n
Y
(4.37) µ (ai + zMi + f Mi P ) .
d(z)<t′ f ∈Md−t′ i=1
We can bound the sums over residue classes by applying Proposition 4.3.
Indeed, if for some 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n we have
ai + zMi ′ aj + zMj ′
(4.38) =
Mi P Mj P
then we get that ai Mj ≡ aj Mi mod P , a contradiction. Because the
′
length of the sum in this case is q d−t , we obtain a savings in each term
′
of q (d−t )β/2p from Proposition 4.3. To obtain our desired savings of q dβ/2p ,
we must choose β + o(1) instead of β in the statement of Proposition 4.3 .
Similarly to ensure that d − t′ ≥ max{ǫm1 , . . . , ǫmn , δk1 , . . . , δkn } we must
choose ǫ − o(1) and δ − o(1). However because the inequality from Eq. (4.33)
is strict, we may increase β by o(1) and reduce ǫ and δ by o(1) in such a
way that this inequality is still satisfied.
We prove two corollaries that give weaker results under conditions that
are simpler to state.
ON THE CHOWLA AND TWIN PRIMES CONJECTURES OVER Fq [T ] 23
as d → ∞ for fixed ǫ, δ, n, q.
Proof. The assumed lower bound on q is equivalent to
2
pne
(4.42) q> n o .
ǫ ǫδ
min ǫ+2 , ǫ+δ
If q satisfies this inequality, we can take β small enough that the inequality
2
1−2β
pne
(4.43) q> n o
ǫ ǫδ
min ǫ+2 , ǫ+δ
as d → ∞ for fixed q, n, ai , Mi .
Proof. We can take ǫ, δ large enough that
2 1 1 2
(4.46) q > p2 n2 e2 max 1 + , + .
ǫ ǫ δ
For this ǫ and δ, the inequalities
(4.47) d ≥ max{ǫm1 , . . . , ǫmn , δk1 , . . . , δkn }, ki 6= d + mi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n,
will be satisfied for all d sufficiently large. We can then apply Corollary 4.6
to deduce the claim.
24 WILL SAWIN AND MARK SHUSTERMAN
5. Level of distribution
The following will be obtained using the techniques of [FM98] and [FKM14]
in the appendix.
Theorem 5.1. Fix an odd prime power q. Then for any θ > 0, for non-
negative integers d, m with d ≤ m, squarefree M ∈ Mm , and an additive
character ψ mod M , we have
X 3 25
(5.1) µ(g)ψ(g) ≪ q ( 16 +θ)m+ 32 d
g∈Md
(g,M )=1
Proof. The left hand side above is the sum of the first d coefficients of the
power series
d Y
∞
d X −k k X
u q u µ(A) = u 1 − ud(P ) |P |−1
du du
k=1 A∈Mk P ∤M
(A,M )=1
d Y −1
= u (1 − u) 1 − ud(P ) |P |−1 .
du
P |M
d(P ) !−1
r r −1
(5.6) 1− ≤ 1− .
q q
d
X X X
(5.7) Λ(f ) = − k µ(A).
k=1 A∈Mk B∈Md−k
AB=f
Corollary 5.3. For any 0 < ω < 1/32, for any odd prime p and power q
2
50
of p such that q > p2 e2 1 + 1−32ω , the following holds. For nonnegative
integers d, m with d ≥ (1 − ω)m,, squarefree M ∈ Mm , and a ∈ Fq [T ] with
d(a) < d + m and coprime to M , we have
X q d+m
(5.8) Λ(a + gM ) = + Eq
ϕ(M )
g∈Md
Proof. We can assume ℓ = m, and use Eq. (5.7) to write our sum as
X d+m
X X X
(5.9) Λ(f ) = − k µ(A) 1
f ∈Mm+d k=1 A∈Mk B∈Mm+d−k
f ≡a mod M (A,M )=1 AB≡a mod M
6. Twins
6.1. Chowla sums over primes. We establish cancellation in Möbius au-
tocorrelation over primes.
Corollary 6.1. Fix ǫ̃, δ̃ > 0, 0 < α < 1, 0 < β < 1/2, and a positive integer
n. Let q be a power of an odd prime p such that
!! 2
2 + 2α + 4ǫ̃−1 1 + α + 2ǫ̃−1 + 2δ̃−1 1−2β
g∈Md i=1
and we again apply Theorem 4.5 to the innermost sum, with the same values
of ǫ and δ. Everything is the same as before, with c replaced by b, except
for two things.
(1) We can no longer use the inequality b ≤ m+d2 , but rather the slightly
m+d+1
weaker inequality c ≤ .
2
(2) The term µ a+LM
C + hM appears, which means we must check that
a + LM
(6.8) (d − c) ≥ ǫm, (d − c) ≥ ǫd .
C
However (1) is no difficulty as we may assume d sufficiently large and
perturb the parameters ǫ and δ slightly to insure the inequalities of Theo-
rem 4.5 still hold. For this reason we will assume c ≤ m+d
2 while handling
(2) as well.
To check that (d−c) ≥ ǫm we observe that, because c ≤ m+d
2 and d < αm,
we have d − c ≥ d−m 2 , and thus d−c
m ≥ 1−α
2α ≥ 1−α
1+α ≥ ǫ.
To check that
a + LM
(6.9) d ≤ max(m + d − c, m + n) ≤ δ−1 (d − c)
C
we observe
1−α 2(d − m) 1 1 d−c
δ≤ = = m ≤ m = .
1+α d+m (d−m)/2 +1 d−c+1 m+d−c
The following propositon allows us to identify the main term in our twin
prime number theorem. An analogous result over the integers is proved in
[GY03, Lemma 2.1].
ON THE CHOWLA AND TWIN PRIMES CONJECTURES OVER Fq [T ] 29
The first product above is independent of a and converges on the disc where
|u| < q. On a circle of radius r, the value of each term in the second product
is at most
!−1 −1
r d(P ) r
(6.16) 1 − d(P ) ≤ 1−
q −1 q−1
and thus is bounded, and the number of terms is o(d(a)), so the product is
subexponential in a.
30 WILL SAWIN AND MARK SHUSTERMAN
6.3. Hardy-Littlewood.
Theorem 6.3. For every odd prime number p, and power q of p with
(6.17) q > 685090p2 ,
there exists λ > 0 such that the following holds. For nonnegative integers
d > ℓ, and a ∈ Mℓ we have
X
(6.18) Λ(f )Λ(f + a) = Sq (a)q d + O q (1−λ)d
f ∈Md
and this is done by applying Corollary 6.1 to the innermost sum with
d−k
(6.23) n = 1, ǫ̃ = ∞, δ̃ = ∞, α = 1 − ω >
k
and β > 0 but very small. This requires
2 2
2 + 2 − 2ω 4
(6.24) q > 2pe 1 + = 2pe −1
ω ω
and Corollary 5.3 requires
2
50
(6.25) q > p2 e2 1 +
1 − 32ω
so the optimal bound is obtained by solving
4 50
(6.26) 2 −1 =1+
ω 1 − 32ω
ON THE CHOWLA AND TWIN PRIMES CONJECTURES OVER Fq [T ] 31
whose solution is
q
30803
103 − 3
(6.27) ω= = .0261 . . .
64
which satisfies
2
4
(6.28) 2e −1 < 685090.
ω
where k ≤ 18 d(M ) + 7
16 d, k + r ≤ d, |γf | ≤ 1 and sums of type II:
(II)
X X
(A.3) Σk,r = γf δg ψ(f g)
f ∈Mk g∈Mr
(f g,M )=1
7
with k ≥ 81 d(M ) + 16 d, r ≥ 7
16 d − 38 d(M ), k + r ≤ d, |δg | ≤ 1. For every
ǫ > 0, we need the bounds
3 25 1 k
Σk,r ≪ q ( 16 +ǫ)d(M )+ 32 d , Σk,r ≪ q d+ǫd(M )− 2 + q d+( 4 +ǫ)d(M )− 2
(I) (II) r
(A.4)
that are analogous to [FM98, Equation 6.4]. The bounds (A.4) then imply
(5.1) by the argument of [FM98, Section 6].
A.1. Sums of type I. Following first the bilinear shifting trick argument
of [FM98, §4], we obtain the inequality
1 X X X X
(I) −1
(A.5) Σk,r ≪ ψ af (a g + b)
V
a∈MdA f ∈Mk g∈Mr b∈MdB
(a,M )=1 (a−1 g+b,M )=1
3r − k k+r
(A.6) dA = , dB = −1
4 4
and
The parameter t and the term e(−bt) from [FM98] do not appear here,
as they arise from the failure of an archimedean interval to be perfectly
invariant under a shift.
34 WILL SAWIN AND MARK SHUSTERMAN
where A = Fq [T ]/(M ),
(A.9) b = (b1 , b2 , b3 , b′1 , b′2 , b′3 ) ∈ Fq [T ]6 ,
and the function ∆b (h, s) is defined by
X3
1 1
(A.10) ∆b (h, s) = − .
(h + bi )s (h + b′i )s
i=1
In order to treat the innermost sum on the right hand side, we note that
3
1X 1 1
(A.12) ∆b (h, s) + zs = − + zs
s (h + bi ) (h + bi′ )
i=1
so the aforementioned innermost sum over s is a Kloosterman sum. We put
(A.13) Ab = x ∈ A : (x + b1 ) · · · (x + b′3 ) ∈ A× ,
define a function Rb : Ab → A by
3
X
1 1
(A.14) Rb (x) = − ,
x + bi x + b′i
i=1
ON THE CHOWLA AND TWIN PRIMES CONJECTURES OVER Fq [T ] 35
so it is nonzero whenever these two numbers are not equal, except when
p = 3, one of these numbers is 3, and the other is zero. Hence, Rb has a
pole unless each bi is equal to some bσ(i)′ , or p = 3, all the bi are equal, and
the b′i are also all equal.
Excluding these ‘trivial’ values of b for z = 0, we get that the rational
function Rb is nonconstant and at most 6 to 1. Hence, if Rb (x) 6= 0 we get
S(Rb (x), 0) = −1, while for the values of x with Rb (x) = 0, at most 6 in
number, we have
(A.24) S(0, 0) = |A| − 1.
In total, we get
X
(A.25) S(Rb (x), 0) ≤ |A| + 6|A| = 7|A|.
x∈A\{b1 ,...,b′ }
3
We can thus assume that Rb is nonconstant, and let Kℓ2 be the Kloosterman
sheaf defined by Katz. With this notation, our sum can be written as
X
− tr Frob|A| , (Kℓ2 )Rb (x)z =
x∈A\{b1 ,...,b′3 }
X
− tr Frob|A| , ([zRb ]∗ Kℓ2 )x =
(A.27)
x∈A\{b1 ,...,b′3 }
2
X
− (−1)i tr Frob|A| , Hci A1Fq \ {−b1 , . . . , −b′3 }, [zRb ]∗ Kℓ2
i=0
by the Grothendieck-Lefschetz fixed point formula. Because the geometric
monodromy group of Kℓ2 is SL2 , which is connected, the geometric mon-
odromy group of its pullback by any finite covering map is SL2 , which has
no monodromy coinvariants, so the cohomology groups in degree 0 and 2
vanish. As Kℓ2 is pure of weight 1, its pullback by a finite covering map
is mixed of weight at most 1, so by Deligne’s theorem, the eigenvalues of
Frob|A| on Hc1 (A1F \ {−b1 , . . . , −b′3 }, [zRb ]∗ Kℓ2 ) have absolute value at most
q
|A|. Hence, in order to bound our sum by 16|A|, it suffices to prove that the
dimension of the above cohomology group is at most 16.
By the aforementioned vanishing of cohomology in degrees 0 and 2, the
dimension of our cohomology group equals minus the Euler characteristic.
Since [zRb ]∗ Kℓ2 is lisse of rank 2 on AF1 \ {−b1 , . . . , −b′3 }, its Euler char-
q
acteristic is twice the Euler characteristic of A1F \ {−b1 , . . . , −b′3 }, which
q
ON THE CHOWLA AND TWIN PRIMES CONJECTURES OVER Fq [T ] 37
is
(A.28) 2 1 − #{−b1 , . . . , −b′3 } ,
minus the sum of the Swan conductors at each singular point. Because
the rational function mRb has a zero at ∞ and a pole of order at most 1
at each bi or b′i , the Swan conductor of [mRb ]∗ Kℓ2 at ∞ vanishes and the
Swan conductor of [zRb ]∗ Kℓ2 at bi or b′i is at most 1, so the total Euler
characteristic is at least
(A.29) 2 − 3#{−b1 , . . . , −b′3 } ≥ 2 − 3 · 6 = −16.
Corollary A.2. Keeping the same notation, we have if p > 3
X X
3(r+k)
ψ (∆b (h, s)) ≪ d2 (M )5 |M | + q 4 lcmσ∈S3 Mσb .
h∈Ab s∈A×
d(s)≤k+dA
b also included in the lcm.
and, if p = 3, the same bound but with M△
Proof. Using Eq. (A.11), Eq. (A.16), and Proposition A.1 we get a bound
of
X
k+dA 4
(A.30) ≪q d2 (M ) lcmσ∈S3 gcd Mσb , z
z∈Fq [T ]
d(z)<d(M )−k−dA
for the left hand side above. Summing over the possible values of the least
common multiple, we get
3(r+k) X X
≪ q 4 d2 (M )4 |L| 1
L|lcmσ∈S3 Mσb z∈Fq [T ]
3(r+k)
d(z)<d(M )− 4
(A.31) L|z
3(r+k) X n 3(r+k)
o
≪q 4 d2 (M )4 |L| max q d(M )− 4 −d(L) , 1 .
L|lcmσ∈S3 Mσb
3(r+k)
The contribution of q d(M )− 4 −d(L) (respectively, of 1) is the first (respec-
tively, the second) summand of the right hand side in our corollary.
Corollary A.3. Notation unchanged, we have
X X X 6
(A.32) ψ (∆b (h, s)) ≪ |M |d2 (M )12 q 4 (k+r)
b1 ,...,b′3 ∈MdB h∈Ab s∈A×
d(s)≤k+d A
Expanding the brackets above, we see that each exponent is a linear function
of τ , hence maximized either at τ = 0 or at τ = d(M ). Using Eq. (A.6), one
3(r+k)
observes that the maximal terms q 6dB +d(M ) and q 3db + 4
+d(M )
agree and
arrives at the right hand side of Eq. (A.32).
It then follows from Eq. (A.8), Eq. (A.32), and the divisor bound that
X X X X
41 21 1
ψ af (a−1 g + b) ≪ q 24 r+ 24 k+( 6 +ǫ)d(M )
a∈MdA f ∈Mk g∈Mr b∈MdB
(a,M )=1
and thus (matching the ℓ = 3 case of [FM98, (1.2.3)] we get
(I) 17 7 1
(A.41) Σk,r ≪ q 24 r+ 8 k+( 6 +ǫ)d(M )
ON THE CHOWLA AND TWIN PRIMES CONJECTURES OVER Fq [T ] 39
A.2. Sums of type II. Keeping the same notation, we follow the proof of
[FKM14, Theorem 1.17]. Applying Cauchy’s inequality and Polya-Vinogradov
completion as in [FKM14, Section 3], we get
X X
(II) 2
Σk,r ≤ q k δg1 δg2 ψ(f g1 − f g2 )
g1 ,g2 ∈Mr f ∈Mk
(f g1 ,M )=(f g2 ,M )=1
(A.42) X X
≤ qk q k−d(M ) C(g1 − g2 , h).
g1 ,g2 ∈Mr h∈Fq [T ]
d(h)<d(M )−k
where
X
(A.43) C(g, h) = ψ(gz)ep TrA
Fp (hz) , g, h ∈ Fq [T ].
z∈A×
Proof. Since both C(g, h) and our putative bound are multiplicative in M ,
it suffices to show that for a prime P we have
p
(A.45) |C(g, h)| ≤ 2 |P |
unless g ≡ h ≡ 0 mod P . To demonstrate that, take f ∈ Fq [T ]/(P ) with
F [T ]/(P )
(A.46) ψ(z) = ep TrFpq (f z)
so setting ξ = d(L) and applying the divisor bound once again, we arrive at
ξ d(M )
(A.51) max q 2k+ 2 +r+max{r−ξ,0}+max{d(M )−k−ξ,0}− 2
+ǫd(M )
.
0≤ξ≤d(M )
References
[BBSR15] E. Bank, L. Bary-Soroker, L. Rosenzweig, Prime polynomials in short intervals
and in arithmetic progressions, Duke Math. J. 164.2 (2015): 277-295.
[BGP92] E. Bombieri, A. Granville, J. Pintz, Squares in arithmetic progressions, Duke
Math. J. 66.3 (1992): 369-385.
[BZ02] E. Bombieri, U. Zannier, A Note on squares in arithmetic progressions, II, Atti
della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Classe di Scienze Fisiche, Matematiche e Nat-
urali. Rendiconti Lincei. Matematica e Applicazioni 13.2 (2002): 69-75.
[Bur63] D. A. Burgess (1963), On Character Sums and L-Series II, Proc. Lond. Math.
Soc. 3(1), 524-536.
[Ca15] D. Carmon, The autocorrelation of the Möbius function and Chowla’s conjecture
for the rational function field in characteristic 2, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 2015.
[CaRu14] D. Carmon, Z. Rudnick, The autocorrelation of the Möbius function and
Chowla’s conjecture for the rational function field, Q. J. Math. (2014) 65 (1):53–61.
[CHLPT15] A. Castillo, C. Hall, R. Lemke Oliver, P. Pollack, L. Thompson, (2015)
Bounded gaps between primes in number fields and function fields, Proc. Amer. Math.
Soc.143(7), 2841-2856.
[CG07] J. Cilleruelo, A. Granville, Lattice points on circles, squares in arithmetic progres-
sions and sumsets of squares, Additive combinatorics, 43, 241-262, Amer. Math. Soc.
Providence, RI, 2007.
[CCG08] B. Conrad, K. Conrad, and R. Gross (2008) Prime specialization in genus 0,
Transactions of the AMS, 360(6), 2867-2908.
ON THE CHOWLA AND TWIN PRIMES CONJECTURES OVER Fq [T ] 41