format: text

text:
# Radiative acceleration and transient, radiation-induced electric fields

## 1 Introduction

Particle acceleration is an ubiquitous feature in many classes of astrophysical objects, such as active galactic nuclei, gamma-ray bursts, pulsars. Despite several physical processes are know to be responsible for accelerating particles under different conditions, radiative acceleration has special importance. Gurevich and Rumyantsev (1965) were the first to study the acceleration of charged particles caused by scattering off a radiation beam. They derived the relativistic equation of motion for the electrons and assumed that the radiative force is applied directly to the electron-ion assembly. For the typical radiative fluxes produced in Type II supernovae, they found that ions may acquire energies of the order of their rest mass energy. Radiative acceleration was the subject of several further investigations in the ’80s, mainly connected with the possibility that this mechanism could drive relativistic collimated outflows, or jets, such as those observed in Active Galactic Nuclei (AGNs) and in some Galactic sources (e.g. SS433). Earlier studies (e.g. Abramowicz and Piran 1980; O’Dell 1981a; O’Dell 1981b; Cheng and O’Dell 1981; Sikora and Wilson 1981; Phinney 1982) dealt with the radiative acceleration of electrons assuming Thomson scattering in the particle frame and adopting a test-particle approach. This is fully justified when the medium is optically thin (for a discussion of the optically thick case see Turolla, Calvani and Nobili 1986) and allowed to clarify the role of Compton drag in establishing the limiting plasma velocity and the dynamical effects caused by anisotropic Compton losses of plasma internal energy (“Compton rocket”).

The first calculation of the radiative force acting on electrons taking into account the Klein-Nishina cross section was performed by Blumenthal (1974). More recently, Madau and Thompson (2000) re-addressed the issue of the dynamics of a cold plasma subject to an external radiation field in the Klein-Nishina regime. In a companion paper (Thompson and Madau, 2000), the feedback of pair creation on radiative acceleration was also considered. Contrary to earlier works, the main focus of these investigations is on the dynamics of the fireball expected to energize gamma-ray bursts. In such a scenario, the mean photon energy is large enough to give raise to copious pair production.

An interesting and related research thread is the acceleration by electrostatic fields generated by space charge separation. Shvartsman (1970) considered a mechanism suitable for positron acceleration in accreting neutron stars. He proposed that the radiation field incident on the plasma acts differently on electrons and ions because of the large difference in mass and cross section (cf. also Maraschi, Reina and Treves 1974; Maraschi, Reina and Treves 1978). Electrons are separated from ions and an electrostatic field arises to restore charge neutrality. The net electrostatic potential is able to accelerate positrons, which are limited by pair production and inverse Compton, but reach energies of tens of MeV. The calculation has been revised by Turolla et al. (1997), who found that the maximum energy attainable is limited to $``$ 400 keV. Treves and Turolla (1999) and Treves, Turolla and Popov (2000) investigated this scenario in connection with the vacuum breakdown near an accreting black hole, while Hirotani and Okamoto (1998) studied the case of a supermassive black hole in an AGN. Litwin and Rosner (2001) proposed another version, consisting of infalling blobs of plasma onto a neutron star, in which the electric field is generated by the co-rotation of the strong magnetic field of the star (cfr. also Hirotani and Shibata 2001). This mechanism has also several applications to particle acceleration in solar flares and planetary bow shocks (cf. Ball and Melrose 2001 and references therein).

In this Paper, we present a complete analysis of the acceleration of electrons and ions by electrostatic potential fields that arise in a low density plasma illuminated by a burst of radiation. Extending previous works (in particular that by Madau and Thompson 2000), the dynamical evolution of the charged particles under the joint action of the internal electrostatic and the external radiation forces is investigated. In § 2 we derive the non-relativistic and relativistic equations of motion for the charged plasma particles in presence of a Double Layer. Our results are presented in §3 and thoroughly discussed in §4. Conclusions follow in §5.

## 2 Radiative acceleration and electric restoring force in a plasma

In a plasma, any slight deviation from a condition of global electric neutrality gives rise to large restoring forces. Radiation impinging on a plasma acts differently on ions and electrons, because of their large difference in mass, generating a space charge separation. Therefore, an electric field rises to restore global neutrality. Since the resulting electric field is across two opposite space charge layers, it is often called “double layer” (DL), particularly with reference to studies in interplanetary bow shocks and solar flares (see e.g. Block 1978; Raadu 1989).

Consider a transient, compact source of high energy photons of luminosity $`L`$ surrounded by an optically thin shell of cold plasma. The plasma is composed of electrons and completely ionized ions of atomic number $`Z`$. The radiation flux is sufficiently strong that gravity can be neglected and, at the typical distances from the central source considered here, magnetic fields are assumed to be dynamically unimportant. The equations of motion of the electrons and ions (in a reference frame $`𝐊`$ at rest with respect to the central source) under the joint action of the radiative force and the restoring force of the DL are

$`\gamma _e{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(\gamma _em_e𝐯_e\right)=𝐅_{E,e}+𝐅_{rad}`$ (1)
$`\gamma _i{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(\gamma _im_i𝐯_i\right)=𝐅_{E,i},`$ (2)
where $`\gamma _{e,i}`$, $`𝐯_{e,i}`$ and $`m_{e,i}`$ are the Lorentz factor, 3-velocity and mass of electrons and ions, and $`𝐅_{rad}`$, $`𝐅_{E,e}`$ and $`𝐅_{E,i}`$ are the spatial components of the radiative and electric 4-forces acting on electrons and ions. The radiative force acting on the ions is neglected because it is a factor $`(m_e/m_i)^2`$ smaller than that on the electrons. Here we consider mono-energetic particles. If the charged particles have a momentum distribution, the previous equations must be averaged over the normalized phase-space density $`f_{e,i}(𝐯_{e,i})`$. We checked a posteriori that the radiation-reaction force due to the energy radiated by the accelerated particles is negligible and does not influence the dynamics.

The electric force is given by the spatial components of the Lorentz 4-force vector

$`𝐅_{E,e}=\gamma _eZe𝐄`$ (3)
$`𝐅_{E,i}=\gamma _iZe𝐄,`$ (4)
where $`𝐄`$ is the electric field and $`Z`$ the atomic number of the ions. The general expression for the spatial part of the radiative 4-force acting on the electrons is (cfr. Blumenthal 1974; Madau and Thompson 2000)

$$𝐅_{rad}=\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\frac{ϵ}{c}𝐤\right)\gamma _e\left(1\frac{𝐯_e𝐤}{c}\right)\frac{I_ϵ}{ϵ}\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_s}𝑑ϵ𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_s,$$
(5)
where $`ϵ`$ and $`𝐤`$ are the photon energy and unit propagation vector, $`I_ϵ`$ is the radiation specific intensity, $`d\sigma /d\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ is the differential scattering cross section, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the solid angle subtended by the source and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ that over the scattering angle. The first term $`\mathrm{\Delta }(ϵ𝐤/c)=(ϵ_1𝐤_1ϵ𝐤)/c`$ is the photon momentum change in a scattering ($`ϵ_1`$ and $`𝐤_1`$ are the photon energy and unit propagation vector after scattering), while the second $`\gamma _e[1(𝐯_e𝐤/c](I_ϵ/ϵ)(d\sigma /d\mathrm{\Omega }_s)dϵd\mathrm{\Omega }d\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ represents the rate at which photons with energies between $`ϵ`$ and $`ϵ+dϵ`$ and directions between $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }+d\mathrm{\Omega }`$ are Compton scattered by electrons with scattering angle between $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s+d\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$. The general expression for the differential scattering cross section is given by the Klein-Nishina formula

$$\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_s^{^{}}}=\frac{3}{16\pi }\sigma _T\left(\frac{ϵ_1^{^{}}}{ϵ^{^{}}}\right)^2\left(\frac{ϵ^{^{}}}{ϵ_1^{^{}}}+\frac{ϵ_1^{^{}}}{ϵ^{^{}}}\mathrm{sin}^2\chi _s^{^{}}\right),$$
(6)
where $`\sigma _T=6.65\times 10^{25}`$ cm-2 is the Thomson cross section, primed quantities are evaluated in the reference frame $`𝐊^{^{}}`$ comoving with the electron and $`\chi _s^{^{}}`$ is the (polar) angle between the incident and scattered photon directions. Equation (6) must be supplemented with the Compton formula for the energy of the scattered photon

$$ϵ_1^{^{}}=\frac{ϵ^{^{}}}{1+(ϵ^{^{}}/m_ec^2)(1\mathrm{cos}\chi _s^{^{}})}.$$
(7)
The corresponding unprimed quantities in the system frame $`𝐊`$ are obtained Lorentz transforming photon energies and directions by means of the the Doppler and aberration formulas.

In the following we will investigate radiative acceleration from an isotropic, spherically symmetric source of radiation. Then, the motion of the charged particles is radial and the equations simplify to

$`\gamma _e{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(\gamma _em_ev_e\right)=F_{E,e}+F_{rad}`$ (8)
$`\gamma _i{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(\gamma _im_iv_i\right)=F_{E,i},`$ (9)
where $`v_{e,i}`$ are the radial components of the electron and ion velocities, and $`F_{rad}`$, $`F_{E,e}`$ and $`F_{E,i}`$ are the radial components of the radiative and electric 4-forces acting on electrons and ions. They are given by

$`F_{E,e}=\gamma _eZeE`$ (10)
$`F_{E,i}=\gamma _iZeE`$ (11)
$`F_{rad}={\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_1\mu _1ϵ\mu }{c}\gamma _e\left(1\frac{v_e}{c}\mu \right)\frac{I_ϵ}{ϵ}\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_s}𝑑ϵ𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_s},`$ (12)
where $`E`$ is the radial component of the electric field, and $`\mu `$ ($`\mu _1`$) is the cosine of the angle between the radial and incident (scattered) photon directions. In terms of these angles and the polar $`\chi _s^{^{}}`$ and azimuthal $`\varphi _s^{^{}}`$ scattering angles in $`𝐊^{^{}}`$, it is $`\mu _1^{^{}}=\mu ^{^{}}\mathrm{cos}\chi _s^{^{}}+(1\mu _{}^{^{}}{}_{}{}^{2})^{1/2}\mathrm{sin}\chi _s^{^{}}\mathrm{cos}\varphi _s^{^{}}`$.

If there are no external magnetic fields and the plasma particles move along the radial direction, the radial component of the electric field $`E`$ can be obtained from the Gauss theorem. For a (geometrically thin) DL, we have

$$E=4\pi Zen\mathrm{\Delta }x,$$
(13)
where $`n`$ is the volume density of charged particles and $`\mathrm{\Delta }x=r_er_ir_{e,i}`$ is the displacement between the electron and ion positions $`r_e`$ and $`r_i`$. We checked a posteriori that the condition $`\mathrm{\Delta }xr_{e,i}`$ is satisfied.

### 2.1 The non-relativistic equations in the Thomson regime

The Newtonian equations for the radial motion of the electrons and ions under the joint action of the radiative force and the restoring force of the DL can be obtained from equations (8)–(12) neglecting terms $`O(v/c)`$. They read

$`m_e{\displaystyle \frac{d^2x_e}{dt^2}}=ZeE+F_{rad,T}^{nr}`$ (14)
$`m_i{\displaystyle \frac{d^2x_i}{dt^2}}=ZeE,`$ (15)
where $`x_{e,i}`$ are the displacements of electrons and ions from their initial position $`R`$ ($`x_{e,i}=r_{e,i}R`$). For Thomson scattering ($`ϵ_1^{^{}}ϵ^{^{}}`$) equation (12) gives

$$F_{rad,T}^{nr}=\sigma _T\frac{F}{c},$$
(16)
where $`F=I_ϵ\mu 𝑑ϵ𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }=L/4\pi r_e^2`$ is the radiative flux emitted by the central source at distance $`r_e=R+x_e`$.

By substituting equations (13) and (16) into equations (14) and (15), we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2x_e}{dt^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi Z^2e^2n}{m_e}}\mathrm{\Delta }x+{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _TF}{m_ec}}`$ (17)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2x_i}{dt^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi Z^2e^2n}{m_i}}\mathrm{\Delta }x.`$ (18)
These are the equations of motion of a particle oscillating with the plasma frequency (pulsation)

$$\omega _{e,i}=\sqrt{\frac{4\pi Z^2e^2n}{m_{e,i}}}.$$
(19)
In particular, the electron plasma frequency is

$$\omega _e=5.6\times 10^4Z\left(\frac{n}{1\mathrm{cm}^3}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{s}^1.$$
(20)
In a fully ionized hydrogen plasma (electrons and protons only), $`Z=1`$ and $`m_i=m_p`$. Finally, we can write two coupled equations for the displacements $`x_e`$ and $`x_i`$ in the form

$`\ddot{x}_e=\mathrm{\Delta }x+{\displaystyle \frac{}{(1+x_e/R)^2}}`$ (21)
$`\ddot{x}_i={\displaystyle \frac{m_e}{m_i}}\mathrm{\Delta }x,`$ (22)
where $`\ddot{x}_{e,i}=d^2x_{e,i}/d(\omega _et)^2`$ and

$`={\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _TL}{4\pi R^2cm_e\omega _e^2}}`$
$`=62Z^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{1\mathrm{cm}^3}}\right)^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{R}{10^9\mathrm{cm}}}\right)^2\times `$
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{L}{10^{38}\mathrm{ergs}^1}}\right)\mathrm{cm}`$ (23)
represents the amplitude of the radiation-induced oscillations (for small displacements $`x_eR`$; see eq. ).

### 2.2 The relativistic, Klein-Nishina regime

The coupled radial equations for the motion of electrons and ions in the reference frame $`𝐊`$ are (eqs.  and )

$`\gamma _e{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(\gamma _em_ev_e\right)=\gamma _eZeE+F_{rad}`$ (24)
$`\gamma _i{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(\gamma _im_iv_i\right)=\gamma _iZeE.`$ (25)
The radial component of the radiative force is calculated inserting the Klein-Nishina and Compton formulas (eqs.  and ) into equation (12) and performing the integral over $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$. We obtain (see e.g. Blumenthal 1974; Madau and Thompson 2000)

$`F_{rad}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _T}{c}}\gamma _e{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{K(x^{^{}})}{x^{^{}}}}\{\gamma _e^2[\mu (1+\beta _e^2)\beta _e(1+\mu ^2)]`$ (26)
$`+`$ $`x^{^{}}\mu (1\mu \beta _e)\}I_ϵdϵd\mathrm{\Omega },`$
where $`\beta _e=v_e/c`$, $`x^{^{}}=\gamma _e(ϵ/m_ec^2)(1\beta _e\mu )`$ and

$`K(x^{^{}})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sigma _T}}{\displaystyle x_1^{^{}}(1\mathrm{cos}\chi _s^{^{}})\frac{d\sigma }{d\mathrm{\Omega }_s^{^{}}}𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }_s^{^{}}}`$ (27)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4x_{}^{^{}}{}_{}{}^{2}}}[{\displaystyle \frac{x_{}^{^{}}{}_{}{}^{2}2x^{^{}}3}{2x^{^{}}}}\mathrm{ln}(1+2x^{^{}})`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{10x_{}^{^{}}{}_{}{}^{4}+51x_{}^{^{}}{}_{}{}^{3}+93x_{}^{^{}}{}_{}{}^{2}+51x^{^{}}+9}{3(1+2x^{^{}})^3}}].`$
For Thomson scattering, equation (26) reduces to

$$F_{rad,T}=\frac{\sigma _T}{c}\gamma _e^3\left[(1+\beta _e^2)Fv_e(U+P)\right],$$
(28)
where $`U=c^1I_ϵ𝑑ϵ𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`P=c^1I_ϵ\mu ^2𝑑ϵ𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }`$ are the radiation energy density and pressure. The same expression can be obtained Lorentz transforming the radiative force from the reference frame comoving with the electrons $`𝐊^{^{}}`$. In that frame it is $`F_{rad}^{^{}}=\sigma _TF^{^{}}/c`$ and $`F^{^{}}`$ is the radiative flux measured in the comoving frame. If the radiation field is stationary, the time component of the radiative 4-force is zero. Thus, in $`𝐊`$ it is $`F_{rad}=\gamma _eF_{rad}^{^{}}=\gamma _e\sigma _TF^{^{}}/c`$, where $`F^{^{}}`$ is given by the Lorentz transformation for the radiative flux

$$F^{^{}}=\gamma _e^2\left[(1+\beta _e^2)Fv_e(U+P)\right],$$
(29)
and one finally obtains equation (28).

For a point-like source or sufficiently far from a finite-size source the radiation field is in radial streaming, i.e. $`I_ϵ=I_{ϵ,0}\delta (\mu 1)`$ and $`F=cU=cP`$ (in both $`𝐊`$ and $`𝐊^{^{}}`$). In this limit equation (28) reduces to

$$F_{rad,T}^s=\frac{\sigma _TF}{c}\gamma _e^3(1\beta _e)^2.$$
(30)
If, in addition, the input radiation spectrum is monochromatic, $`I_{ϵ,0}=I_0\delta (ϵϵ_0)`$, then equation (26) becomes111Equation (31) corrects a typo contained in a similar equation (eq.) derived by Madau and Thompson (2000).

$$F_{rad}^s=\frac{\sigma _TF}{c}\gamma _e^3(1\beta _e)^2\left[\frac{K(x_0^{^{}})}{x_0^{^{}}}\left(1+\frac{ϵ_0}{\gamma _em_ec^2}\right)\right],$$
(31)
where $`x_0^{^{}}=\gamma _e(ϵ_0/m_ec^2)(1\beta _e)`$. The term in square brackets represents the Klein-Nishina correction to the radiative force. Finally, substituting equation (31) into equation (24) and using the expression for the electric field (eq. ), the equations of motion take the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(\gamma _em_ev_e\right)=4\pi Z^2e^2n\mathrm{\Delta }x`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _TF}{c}}\gamma _e^2(1\beta _e)^2\left[{\displaystyle \frac{K(x_0^{^{}})}{x_0^{^{}}}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_0}{\gamma _em_ec^2}}\right)\right]`$ (32)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(\gamma _im_iv_i\right)=4\pi Z^2e^2n\mathrm{\Delta }x.`$ (33)
Introducing the new variables $`y_{e,i}=v_{e,i}/\omega _e`$, equations (2.2) and (33) can be written

$`\gamma _e^3\dot{y}_e=\mathrm{\Delta }x+\gamma _e^2(1{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _ey_e}{c}})^2{\displaystyle \frac{}{(1+x_e/R)^2}}\times `$
$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{K(x_0^{^{}})}{x_0^{^{}}}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_0}{\gamma _em_ec^2}}\right)\right]`$ (34)
$`\gamma _i^3\dot{y}_i={\displaystyle \frac{m_e}{m_i}}\mathrm{\Delta }x,`$ (35)
where $`\dot{y}_{e,i}=dy_{e,i}/d(\omega _et)`$.

## 3 Results

Assuming that $`x_{e,i}R`$ and $`F=const`$ (i.e. the luminosity of the central source does not vary with time), the non-relativistic equations (eq.  and ) can be solved analytically. Taking as initial conditions $`x_{e,i}(0)=0`$ and $`dx_{e,i}/dt|_0=0`$, the displacements of electrons and protons are given by

$`x_e(t)=x_{eq}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\omega _r^2\omega _e^2)t^2+\left({\displaystyle \frac{\omega _e}{\omega _r}}\right)^2\left(1+\mathrm{\Theta }\right)\right]`$ (36)
$`x_i(t)=x_{eq}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\omega _i^2t^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\omega _i}{\omega _r}}\right)^2\left(1+\mathrm{\Theta }\right)\right],`$ (37)
where

$`\mathrm{\Theta }=\mathrm{sin}(\omega _rt\pi /2)`$ (38)
$`\omega _r=\left[4\pi Z^2e^2n\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_e+m_i}{m_em_i}}\right)\right]^{1/2}=\omega _e\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{m_e}{m_i}}\right)^{1/2}`$ (39)
$`x_{eq}={\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _TF}{cm_e\omega _r^2}}=\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{m_e}{m_i}}\right)^1.`$ (40)
The relativistic equations (eqs.  and ) have been integrated numerically by using a $`4^{th}`$–order Runge–Kutta method (see e.g. Press et al. 1993). The initial conditions are the same as in the non-relativistic case. Once a solution for $`x_{e,i}`$ is computed, the electric field of the DL is calculated from equation (13). We performed the integration for several values of the parameter $``$ and for flashes with two different durations ($`\tau =15.9(2\pi /\omega _e)`$ s and $`\tau =4.8\times 10^4(2\pi /\omega _e)`$ s). The results of our calculations are shown in Figs. 17 for $`R=10^9`$ cm, $`n=1`$ cm-3, $`Z=1`$.

## 4 Discussion

Equations (36) and (37) show the properties of the solution in the non-relativistic regime. The system is a coupled oscillator with a driving force (radiation). When the radiation flash hits the plasma shell, electrons are pushed outwards and begin to oscillate. Because of the restoring force of the DL, ions are dragged by the electrons. The whole system oscillates essentially at the electron plasma frequency ($`\omega _r/2\pi \omega _e/2\pi `$) and is accelerated outwards. The amplitude of the oscillations of the ions is a factor $`m_e/m_i`$ smaller than that of the electrons. From equation (36), it is easy to see that the mean acceleration imparted to the whole system by the radiation force is $`(\omega _r^2\omega _e^2)x_{eq}=\omega _i^2x_{eq}=\sigma _{es}F/(m_e+m_i)`$, as one could expect. The amplitude of the oscillation of the electrons relative to the ions is $`<\mathrm{\Delta }x>x_{eq}`$. Therefore, the average electric field of the DL is $`<E>4\pi Zen`$. In the non-relativistic limit, the velocity of the charged particles and the DL electric field increase linearly with $``$.

Fig. 1 shows the numerical solution of the relativistic equations (eqs.  and ) for a low luminosity ($`L=1.6\times 10^{36}`$ erg s-1), short duration ($`\tau =1.8`$ ms) flash. The energy of the input monochromatic radiation spectrum is $`ϵ_0/m_ec^2=0.01`$, sufficiently low that the Klein-Nishina correction to the scattering force is negligible. During the early evolution, the essential properties of the non-relativistic solution are recognizable. However, after a few plasma time-scales, oscillations are significantly damped. In fact, in the relativistic equations (e.g. eqs. \[2.2\] and ) the radiative term contains a dependence on the electron velocity $`v_e`$ that gives rise to a force formally similar to a “viscous” force. However, this is not a physical drag exerted by the radiation field onto the electrons because, by assumption, photons are streaming radially. This effect is simply a consequence of the Lorentz transformation for the radiation moments. In fact, the radiative flux measured in the comoving frame varies with respect to that measured in the system frame according to equation (29). In radial streaming, the term $`v_e(U+P)`$ becomes $`2\beta _eF`$. This accounts for the decrease (or increase) in the flux measured in the comoving frame caused by the electron motion and, ultimately, originates from the finite velocity of propagation of photons. This effect is already important at fairly modest electron speeds and, when $`v_e0.010.1c`$, the decrease of the radiative flux makes radiative acceleration less efficient. The change in the sign of $`v_e`$ induced by the plasma oscillations causes a decrease/increase of the radiative force (as seen in the comoving frame) that produces the same effect of a viscous force, damping the oscillations of the electrons on a few characteristic plasma time-scales (see Fig. 1)

For $`>10^6`$ cm, the system approaches the truly relativistic regime. As shown in Fig. 2, during the initial transient phase, the radiative force is so strong that electrons are accelerated rapidly to relativistic speeds while the ions lag behind owing to their larger inertia. This produces an electric restoring force that accelerates the ions for all the duration of the burst. Oscillations are completely damped. For a short duration flash, the final speeds and energies of the charged particles are rather modest. However, as shown in Fig. 3, for a long duration burst ($`\tau =5.4`$ s), the asymptotic speeds approach the velocity of light. This is more clearly shown in Figs. 4 and 5, where the initial transient is so rapid that $`v_ec`$ in less than a characteristic plasma time-scale and the ions are later effectively accelerated by the strong radiation-induced DL electric field up to $`\gamma 500`$. When the ions catch up with the electrons at $`t2000(2\pi /\omega _e)`$, the electric restoring force becomes negligible and the electrons are rapidly re-accelerated by the radiation field until their velocity becomes equal to that of the ions. In this asymptotic regime, the DL has already moved significantly from the initial position ($`r>10^{10}`$ cm) and the Lorentz factor has become so large that the radiative flux in the comoving frame becomes negligible. Radiative acceleration is no longer very efficient and electrons and ions are almost freely streaming, with the electrons oscillating around the ions (see Fig. 5). The asymptotic large amplitude oscillations achieved by the electrons may give rise to strong internal dissipation, thereby increasing the plasma temperature.

Models with $`10^{11}`$ cm suffer, however, from two major limitations. In fact, assuming $`R10^9`$ cm, the luminosity exceeds $`10^{47}`$ erg s-1 and the effective temperature of the radiation is $`10^9`$ K for a typical source size $`R_s10^7`$ cm. The mean photon energy is then sufficiently large that the Klein-Nishina correction to the radiative force (see eq.) starts to become significant. This is a fortiori true if the primary photon spectrum has a significant high-energy component. An example of the particles dynamics in this regime is illustrated in Fig. 6 for monochromatic input photons with $`ϵ_0/m_ec^2=10`$. As expected, the main effect of the reduction in the effective cross-section is to lower the terminal Lorentz factor of both ions and electrons, but this does not change the essential features of the acceleration process discussed above. The second issue concerns the possibility that the wind may become pair-loaded as a consequence of $`\gamma \gamma `$ interactions among primary photons or between primary and once-scattered photons. This effect is bound to increase dramatically the efficiency of radiative acceleration because it reduces the inertia of the plasma, as discussed in detail by Thompson and Madau (2000). Charge-separation in a pair-dominated medium is outside the scope of the present investigation, so in the following we restrict to cases with photon energies well below the threshold for pair production. For thermal radiation with effective temperature $`5\times 10^8`$ K, the fraction of photons with energy two times larger than the threshold energy ($`7`$ MeV, at which the cross section for pair-production peaks) is $`f10^{54}`$. The luminosity from a source of characteristic size $`10^7`$ cm is $`L5\times 10^{45}`$ erg s-1, corresponding to $`3\times 10^9`$ cm for $`R=10^9`$ cm. The optical depth for $`\gamma \gamma `$ interaction between two primary photons close to the source is $`\tau _{\gamma \gamma }n_{\gamma \gamma }\sigma _{\gamma \gamma }R_s`$, where $`\sigma _{\gamma \gamma }\sigma _T`$ for large scattering angles and $`n_{\gamma \gamma }(L/ϵ)\mathrm{\Delta }t/R_s^3`$ for a burst of duration $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$. Although $`\tau _{\gamma \gamma }`$ would be lower for beamed or anisotropic emission, close to an isotropic source it is much larger than unity and all photons above threshold can produce $`e^+e^{}`$ pairs. However, for $`T5\times 10^8`$ K, there are no photons with energy two times larger than the threshold energy ($`N_1f(L\mathrm{\Delta }t/ϵ)1`$) and hence the radiation field is pair-free. As for the photons scattered in an off-radial direction by the plasma electrons at radius $`R`$, their optical depth to primary photons is $`p\tau _{\gamma \gamma }`$, where $`pn\sigma _T\mathrm{\Delta }x<1`$ is the scattering probability. The value of $`p\tau _{\gamma \gamma }`$ can be larger or smaller than unity, depending on the plasma density. But, even if $`p\tau _{\gamma \gamma }>1`$, for $`T5\times 10^8`$ K no additional pair-loading is induced because there are no primary photons above threshold and once-scattered photons did not gain appreciable energy in the scattering. Therefore, for $`<10^{10}`$ cm the dynamics of the plasma shells is not influenced by pair-loading.

For these values of the parameter $``$, the probability that once-scattered photons collide with another electron is actually larger than undergoing $`\gamma \gamma `$ interaction. If at the time of the second scattering event the electron has already acquired relativistic velocity, in the electron rest frame the energy of the scattered photon is boosted by a factor $`\gamma `$. So, if $`p`$ is the probability of the first scattering, the probability that a photon undergoes two scatterings is $`p^2/\gamma `$ (owing to the decrease in the Klein-Nishina cross section). Then, the number of twice scattered photons for a $`\mathrm{\Delta }t=1`$ s burst is $`(L\mathrm{\Delta }t/ϵ)p^2/\gamma 10^{50}p^2(L/10^{46}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1)`$. In order not to influence significantly the dynamics of the plasma shells, this number must be smaller than $`nR^2\mathrm{\Delta }x`$, which implies $`n10^{11}`$ cm-3 for $`\mathrm{\Delta }x10^7`$ cm. For plasma densities in excess of $`n10^{11}`$ cm-3, the dynamics of the plasma shells starts to be significantly influenced by Compton up-scattering of off-radial photons (Compton drag). Twice-scattered photons are boosted to very large energies. Energy conservation limits their maximum energy to $`\gamma m_ec^250`$ MeV, corresponding to a the total luminosity $`10^{46}p^2`$ erg s-1.

Compton drag caused by off-radial primary photons may also play an important role in the vicinity of the source. In order to understand qualitatively this effect, we solved the equations assuming a slight deviation of the radiation field from the perfect radial case (of the order of $`R_s^2/R^210^4`$). The solution is shown in Figure 7 where, in order to avoid the regime of pair-loading, $`3\times 10^9`$ cm. Compton drag decreases the electron Lorentz factor attainable during the electrostatic ion acceleration stage. Therefore, once the ions have been accelerated to relativistic energies by the radiation-induced DL electric field, they overtake the electrons and the DL reverses. At this stage the electrons are re-accelerated at the expense of the electrostatic potential energy of the DL and, ultimately, of the kinetic energy of the ions. The asymptotic Lorentz factors of ions and electrons are about 10 times smaller than those achieved for a perfectly radial radiation field (point source). Placing the plasma shell closer to the central source would end up in a sufficient deviation from radial streaming to cause too a large decrease of the overall efficiency of the acceleration mechanism.

We note that, even if the plasma is initially cold, random internal energy will be imparted to the electrons by the incident hard-X and gamma-rays, because direct energy and momentum transfer results when outward-directed photons are removed from nearly radially streaming radiation field and scattered away. In principle, if a sufficient amount of internal energy is transferred to the electron plasma, it can be effectively converted into bulk motion through the so-called “Compton rocket” (O’Dell 1981a; O’Dell 1981b; Cheng and O’Dell 1981). In this way, the energy lost to heat may be compensated by that gained by the electrons thanks to the additional Compton thrust. Although the study of this regime is beyond the scope of the present investigation, the outcome of the electron acceleration process with the additional Compton thrust may not be qualitatively different with respect to what found here.

The radiation-induced electrostatic acceleration of the plasma shells is effective if they are quite spatially concentrated and overdense with respect to the surrounding medium. In fact, if the shells are spatially extended, the escaping radiation would accelerate the plasma located at larger and larger radii at progressively lower speeds. The innermost, high velocity DLs would rapidly overtake the outer, low velocity ones, producing shocks and dissipation of kinetic energy into heat.

It is noteworthy that, for intense radiation fluxes ($`>10^810^9`$ cm), the asymptotic energies achieved by both ions and electrons are larger by a factor 2–4 (depending on the burst duration, see Fig.7) with respect to what one could naively expect assuming that the electron-ion system was rigidly coupled with a total mass ($`m_e+m_i`$) and electron scattering cross section $`\sigma _T`$ (see e.g. Gurevich and Rumyantsev 1965). This is caused by the fact that the radiative force is not conservative and hence the dynamical evolution of the system is of fundamental importance in determining the asymptotic energies. Thanks to the prompt response of the electrons, the work done by the radiation field is accumulated in the DL and is later effectively converted into kinetic energy of the ions through the acceleration produced by the DL electric field. As shown in Fig. 7, this process is significantly more effective than radiatively accelerating a rigidly coupled electron-ion system. In fact, ions become relativistic at $`t_130(2\pi /\omega _e)`$ and are electrostatically accelerated to large Lorentz factors up to $`t_2300(2\pi /\omega _e)`$, when they catch up with the electrons. In the interval $`t_1tt_2`$, the average velocity of the electrons is smaller then that of a rigidly coupled system and hence the radiative force is more effective. The net work done by the radiation field is 2–4 times larger than it would otherwise be and is stored in the DL as electrostatic potential energy. The maximum electric field and energy can be estimated assuming that, initially ($`0tt_1`$), the electrons travel at the speed of light while the motion of the ions is approximately non-relativistic. Then, $`x_ect`$ and $`d^2x_i/d(\omega _et)^2(m_e/m_i)x_e=(m_e/m_i)ct`$. Integrating this equation with $`x_i(0)=0`$ and $`dx_i/dt|_0=0`$, we can calculate the time $`t_1`$ at which $`v_ic`$ and the separation $`\mathrm{\Delta }x_{max}`$ at $`t_1`$. It is: $`t_1=(2m_i/m_e)^{1/2}(1/\omega _e)10(2\pi /\omega _e)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }x_{max}=(2\sqrt{2}/3)c/\omega _i2\times 10^7`$ cm. Substituting these expressions in equation (13), we obtain

$$E_{max}=\frac{8\pi \sqrt{2}}{3}\frac{Zenc}{\omega _i}0.13\left(\frac{n}{1\mathrm{cm}^3}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{stV}\mathrm{cm}^1,$$
(41)
in quite good agreement with the maximum electric field reported in Fig. 7. The distance traveled by the ions during the relativistic acceleration phase ($`t_1tt_2`$) is $`c(t_2t_1)`$ and then their asymptotic energy is approximately given by $`W_{max}eE_{max}c(t_2t_1)10^{11}`$ eV.

Despite the large asymptotic energies achieved by ions and electrons, the overall efficiency of this process is very low. The final energy acquired by an ion is $`E_{tot}Zm_pc^2\gamma _{\mathrm{}}5\times 10^2Z(\gamma _{\mathrm{}}/100)`$ erg. Comparing this energy with the total work done by the radiation field on $`Z`$ electrons, $`W_{rad}ZL\tau \sigma _T/4\pi R^25\times 10^2Z(L/10^{46}\mathrm{erg})`$ erg, we find that the efficiency is not larger than $`10^4(\gamma _{\mathrm{}}/100)`$.

## 5 Conclusions

We have shown that radiation-induced electric fields can increase significantly the terminal energy of a ion-electron plasma accelerated by a transient radiation source. The asymptotic Lorentz factors are a factor 2–4 larger than those attainable by radiative acceleration alone. The effect is maximum when both radiation drag and $`\gamma \gamma `$ interactions are negligible, i.e. when the central source is distant ($`R_s^2/R^210^4`$) or beamed, the plasma density is low ($`n10^{11}`$ cm-3) and the average photon energy is well below the threshold for pair production ($`T5\times 10^8`$ K). For $`R10^9`$ cm, these limitations imply $`L5\times 10^{45}`$ erg s-1, or $`3\times 10^9`$ cm. Decreasing/increasing the initial position of the plasma shell by an order of magnitude results in a corresponding decrement/increment of the maximum allowed luminosity ($`L5\times 10^{43}`$ erg s-1 and $`L5\times 10^{47}`$ erg s-1, respectively). However, because $``$ remains the same and, for a fixed duration burst, is proportional to the total work done by the radiation field on the ion-electron assembly, the dynamics and terminal energy are similar in all these cases.

Although direct astrophysical applications are outside the scope of the present investigation, it is quite interesting to note that giant flares from soft gamma repeaters (SGRs) are typically within the parameter range considered here. The total energy emitted in two giant flares observed from SGR 0525-66 and SGR 1900+14 was $`10^{44}10^{45}\mathrm{erg}`$ on a timescale $`1`$ s, with an implied luminosity of about the same order (see e.g. Hurley 2000 for a review). In the picture proposed by Thompson and Duncan (1995) the giant flare is produced by a large-scale instability of the neutron star magnetic field which leads to the formation of an expanding pair fireball. The radiative acceleration process presented in this paper has no direct connection with the dynamics of the baryon-sheathed pair fireball, whose characteristic size is $`10^610^7`$ cm. However, it is possible that the outflowing radiation front impinges on a low-density ordinary plasma at much larger distances, $`10^9`$ cm, accelerating protons and electrons to relativistic velocities as illustrated e.g. in Fig. 7.

This work has been partially supported by the Italian Ministry for Education, University and Research (MIUR) under grants COFIN-2000-MM02C71842 and COFIN-2002-027145. We thank an anonymous referee for helpful comments.


text:
# Infinite families of pairs of curves over ℚ with isomorphic Jacobians

## 1. Introduction

Torelli’s theorem shows that a curve is completely determined by its polarized Jacobian variety, but it has been known since the late 1800s that distinct curves can have isomorphic unpolarized Jacobians. In particular, the unpolarized Jacobian of a curve may not reflect all of the curve’s geometric properties. Proving that a particular property of curves cannot always be determined from the Jacobian is equivalent to showing that there exist two curves, one with the given property and one without, whose Jacobians are isomorphic to one another. Thus, for example, the pairs of curves written down in  show that one cannot tell whether or not a curve of genus $`3`$ over the complex numbers is hyperelliptic simply by looking at its Jacobian.

One would also like to find arithmetic properties of curves that are not determined by the Jacobian, but from an arithmetic perspective the heretofore-known explicit examples of distinct curves with isomorphic Jacobians (catalogued in the introduction to ) are not entirely satisfying. The primary complaint is that none of the examples involves curves that can be defined over $``$; in addition, for any given number field only finitely many of the examples can be defined over that field. Furthermore, all of the explicit examples in characteristic $`0`$ known before now involve curves with geometrically reducible Jacobians, and the arithmetic of such curves differs qualitatively from that of curves whose Jacobians are irreducible.

In this paper we address these concerns by providing three new explicit families of pairs of non-isomorphic curves with isomorphic Jacobians. Each family is parametrized by an open subset of $`^1`$, so each family gives an infinite number of examples over $``$. Also, the Jacobians of the curves in one of the families are typically absolutely simple. Using examples from these families, we show that the Jacobian of a genus-$`2`$ curve over $``$ does not determine whether or not the curve has rational points, or indeed whether or not the curve has real points. Liu, Lorenzini, and Raynaud  have used our results to show that the Jacobian of a genus-$`2`$ curve over $``$ does not determine the number of components on the reduction of a minimal model of the curve modulo a prime.

Our first family of pairs of curves can be defined over an arbitrary field $`K`$ whose characteristic is not $`2`$. If $`t`$ is an element of $`K`$ with $`t(t+1)(t^2+1)0`$ then the equation

$$(t+1)y^2=(2x^2t)(4t^2x^4+4(t^2+t+1)x^2+1)$$

defines a curve of genus $`2`$ that we will denote $`C(t)`$. Clearly the quotient of $`C(t)`$ by the involution $`(x,y)(x,y)`$ is an elliptic curve, so the Jacobian of $`C(t)`$ splits over $`K`$.

###### Theorem 1.

Let $`K`$ be a field of characteristic not $`2`$ and suppose $`t`$ is an element of $`K`$ such that $`t(t^21)(t^2+1)`$ is nonzero. Then $`C(t)`$ and $`C(t)`$ are curves of genus $`2`$ over $`K`$ whose Jacobians are isomorphic over $`K`$. Furthermore, $`C(t)`$ and $`C(t)`$ are geometrically non-isomorphic unless $`K`$ has characteristic $`11`$ and $`t^2\{3,4\}`$.

Our next family takes a little more effort to describe. In order to do so we must define the Richelot duals of a genus-$`2`$ curve over a field $`K`$ of characteristic not $`2`$ (see \[3, Ch. 9\], \[1, §3\]). Suppose $`C`$ is a genus-$`2`$ curve over $`K`$ defined by an equation $`\delta y^2=f`$, where $`\delta K^{}`$ and where $`f`$ is a monic separable polynomial in $`K[x]`$ of degree $`6`$. Let $`K\overline{}`$ be a separable closure of $`K`$, and suppose $`f`$ can be factored as a product $`g_1g_2g_3`$ of three monic quadratic polynomials in $`K\overline{}[x]`$ that are permuted by $`\mathrm{Gal}(K\overline{}/K)`$. For each $`i`$ write $`g_i=x^2t_ix+n_i`$ and suppose the determinant

$$d=\left|\begin{array}{ccc}1& t_1& n_1\\ 1& t_2& n_2\\ 1& t_3& n_3\end{array}\right|,$$

which is an element of $`K`$, is nonzero. Define three new polynomials by setting

$`h_1`$ $`=g_3{\displaystyle \frac{dg_2}{dx}}g_2{\displaystyle \frac{dg_3}{dx}}`$
$`h_2`$ $`=g_1{\displaystyle \frac{dg_3}{dx}}g_3{\displaystyle \frac{dg_1}{dx}}`$
$`h_3`$ $`=g_2{\displaystyle \frac{dg_1}{dx}}g_1{\displaystyle \frac{dg_2}{dx}}.`$
Then the product $`h_1h_2h_3`$ is a separable polynomial in $`K[x]`$ of degree $`5`$ or $`6`$.

###### Definition.

The Richelot dual of $`C`$ associated to the factorization $`f=g_1g_2g_3`$ is the genus-$`2`$ curve $`D`$ defined by $`d\delta y^2=h_1h_2h_3.`$

###### Theorem 2.

Let $`K`$ be a field of characteristic not $`2`$, let $`v`$ be an element of $`K\{0,1,4\}`$ such that

$$(v^2v+4)(v^2+v+2)(v^2+3v+4)(v^36v^27v4)(v^34v^2+7v+4)0,$$

let $`w`$ be a square root of $`v`$ in $`K\overline{}`$, and define numbers $`\rho _1,\mathrm{},\rho _6`$ by setting

$`\rho _1`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(2+w)(1+w)}{2w^2}}`$ $`\rho _2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(2w)(1w)}{2w^2}}`$
$`\rho _3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{2(2+w)}{(2+w)(1+w)}}`$ $`\rho _4`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(2w)(1w)}{(w)(1w)}}`$
$`\rho _5`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(2+w)(1+w)}{w(1+w)}}`$ $`\rho _6`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{2(2w)}{(2w)(1w)}}.`$
The $`\rho _i`$ are distinct from one another, so that if we let $`f=(x\rho _i)`$ then the curve $`D`$ over $`K`$ defined by $`y^2=f`$ has genus $`2`$. Set

$`g_1`$ $`=(x\rho _1)(x\rho _5)`$ $`g_1^{}`$ $`=(x\rho _1)(x\rho _3)`$
$`g_2`$ $`=(x\rho _2)(x\rho _4)`$ $`g_2^{}`$ $`=(x\rho _2)(x\rho _6)`$
$`g_3`$ $`=(x\rho _3)(x\rho _6)`$ $`g_3^{}`$ $`=(x\rho _4)(x\rho _5).`$
The Richelot duals $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ of $`D`$ with respect to the factorizations $`f=g_1g_2g_3`$ and $`f=g_1^{}g_2^{}g_3^{}`$ exist, and their Jacobians become isomorphic to one another over $`K(\sqrt{v(v4)})`$. The curves $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ are geometrically non-isomorphic unless one of the following conditions holds:

* $`\mathrm{char}K=3`$ and $`v^{10}v^8+v^7v^6v^5+v+1=0`$;
* $`\mathrm{char}K=19`$ and $`v+1=0`$;
* $`\mathrm{char}K=89`$ and $`v+36=0`$;
* $`\mathrm{char}K=1033`$ and $`v+508=0`$.

Furthermore, if $`K`$ has characteristic $`0`$ and if $`v`$ is not an algebraic number, then the Jacobians of $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ are absolutely simple.

In fact, when $`K`$ has characteristic $`0`$ it is very easy to find algebraic numbers $`v`$ in $`K`$ for which the Jacobians in Theorem 2 are absolutely simple. For example, suppose $`R`$ is a subring of $`K`$ for which there is a homomorphism $`\phi `$ to an extension of $`𝔽_{13}`$. We show in the proof of Theorem 2 that in this case the Jacobians of $`D`$ and $`D^{}`$ are geometrically irreducible whenever $`v`$ lies in $`\phi ^1(2)`$ or $`\phi ^1(6)`$.

Theorem 2 gives a $`1`$-parameter family of pairs of non-isomorphic curves with isomorphic Jacobians. In fact, we shall see that there is a family of such pairs of curves parametrized by an elliptic surface; over $``$, this surface has positive rank.

Our third family of pairs of curves with isomorphic Jacobians is again easy to write down. Suppose $`K`$ is a field of characteristic not $`2`$ and suppose $`t`$ is an element of $`K`$ with $`t(t+1)(t^2+1)(t^2+t+1)0`$. Let $`H(t)`$ be the genus-$`3`$ hyperelliptic curve defined by the homogeneous equations

(1) $`W^2Z^2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(t^2+1)}{t(t+1)(t^2+t+1)}}X^4{\displaystyle \frac{4(t^2+1)}{(t+1)(t^2+t+1)}}Y^4+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}}Z^4`$
(2) $`0`$ $`=X^2+2tY^2+(t+1)Z^2`$
and let $`Q(t)`$ be the plane quartic

(3)
$$\begin{array}{c}X^4+4t^2Y^4+(t+1)^2Z^4+(8t^2+4t+8)X^2Y^2\hfill \\ \hfill (4t^2+2t+2)X^2Z^2+(4t^2+4t+8)Y^2Z^2=0.\end{array}$$

###### Theorem 3.

Let $`K`$ be a field of characteristic not $`2`$ and let $`t`$ be an element of $`K`$ such that $`t(t+1)(t^2+1)(t^2+t+1)0`$. Then the Jacobians of the two genus-$`3`$ curves $`H(t)`$ and $`Q(t)`$ are isomorphic to one another over $`K`$.

In Section 2 we mention some simple facts about abelian surfaces with two non-isomorphic principal polarizations and we show how Richelot isogenies can in principle be used to produce such surfaces from an abelian surface that has nontrivial automorphisms. In Section 3 we prove Theorem 1. In Section 4 we review a result of Bending that shows how to obtain genus-$`2`$ curves over a given field $`K`$ whose Jacobians have real multiplication by $`\sqrt{2}`$ over $`K`$, and we show how to adapt Bending’s result to obtain curves over $`K`$ with real multiplication by $`\sqrt{2}`$ over a quadratic extension of $`K`$. In Section 5 we give some Galois restrictions on our generalization of Bending’s construction that ensure that the curves we construct have two rational Richelot isogenies to curves with isomorphic Jacobians. In Section 6 we show that there is a positive-rank elliptic surface whose points give rise to pairs of genus-$`2`$ curves with isomorphic Jacobians, and we prove Theorem 2. In Section 7 we prove Theorem 3. Finally, in Section 8 we provide some explicit examples of curves over $``$ produced by our theorems, and we show that the Jacobian of a curve over $``$ does not determine whether or not the curve has rational points, or even whether or not it has real points.

We relied heavily on the computer algebra system Magma  while working on this paper. Some of our Magma routines are available on the web: to find them, start at

http://alumni.caltech.edu/~however/biblio.html

and follow the links related to this paper.

## 2. Abelian surfaces with non-isomorphic polarizations

Weil  showed that an abelian surface with an indecomposable principal polarization is a Jacobian, so one of our goals in this paper is to write down abelian surfaces with two non-isomorphic principal polarizations. In this section we will make a few observations about such surfaces.

Suppose $`B`$ is an abelian surface with two principal polarizations $`\mu `$ and $`\mu ^{}`$, which we view as isogenies from $`B`$ to its dual variety $`\widehat{B}`$. The polarized varieties $`(B,\mu )`$ and $`(B,\mu ^{})`$ are isomorphic to one another if and only if there is an automorphism $`\beta `$ of $`B`$ such that $`\mu ^{}=\widehat{\beta }\mu \beta `$, where $`\widehat{\beta }`$ is the dual of $`\beta `$. We would like to write down an abelian surface $`B`$ with two non-isomorphic principal polarizations $`\mu `$ and $`\mu ^{}`$, so we would like to avoid the existence of such an automorphism $`\beta `$. We will accomplish this by obtaining $`\mu ^{}`$ from $`\mu `$ through the use of an automorphism of a surface isogenous to $`B`$. Our main tool is the following well-known construction:

Suppose $`(A,\lambda )`$ is a principally-polarized abelian surface over a field $`K`$, suppose $`n`$ is a positive integer, and suppose $`G`$ is a rank-$`n^2`$ subgroupscheme of the $`n`$-torsion $`A[n]`$ of $`A`$ that is isotropic with respect to the $`\lambda `$-Weil pairing on $`A[n]`$. Let $`B`$ be the quotient abelian surface $`A/G`$ and let $`\phi :AB`$ be the natural map. Then there is a unique principal polarization $`\mu `$ of $`B`$ that makes the following diagram commute:

A-⟶nλA^

φ

^φ
B-⟶μB^matrix𝐴superscript-⟶𝑛𝜆^𝐴

φ
missing-subexpression

^φ
𝐵superscript-⟶𝜇^𝐵\begin{matrix}A&\mathop{\relbar\joinrel\longrightarrow}\limits^{n\lambda}&\widehat{A}\\
\vbox{\vbox to4.0pt{}\vbox{\hbox{
\Big{\downarrow}\hbox to0.0pt{$\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle\varphi$}}$\hss}}\vfill}}&&\vbox{\vbox to4.0pt{}\vbox{\hbox{
\Big{\uparrow}\hbox to0.0pt{$\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle\widehat{\varphi}$}}$\hss}}\vfill}}\\
B&\mathop{\relbar\joinrel\longrightarrow}\limits^{\mu}&\widehat{B}\end{matrix}
Now suppose that $`A`$ has an automorphism $`\alpha `$ such that $`G^{}:=\alpha (G)`$ is also an isotropic subgroup of $`A[n]`$, and let $`(B^{},\mu ^{})`$ be the principally polarized abelian surface obtained from $`G^{}`$ as above.

###### Proposition 4.

The automorphism $`\alpha `$ of $`A`$ provides an isomorphism $`BB^{}`$. If we identify $`B^{}`$ with $`B`$ via this automorphism, then $`\mu ^{}=\widehat{\beta }\mu \beta `$, where $`\beta `$ is the image of $`\alpha ^1`$ in $`(\mathrm{End}B)`$.

###### Proof.

We have a commutative diagram with exact rows:

0GA-⟶φB0

α

α
0GA-⟶φB0,matrix0𝐺𝐴superscript-⟶𝜑𝐵0missing-subexpressionmissing-subexpression

α
missing-subexpression

α
missing-subexpressionmissing-subexpressionmissing-subexpressionmissing-subexpression0superscript𝐺𝐴superscript-⟶superscript𝜑superscript𝐵0\begin{matrix}0&\longrightarrow&G&\longrightarrow&A&\mathop{\relbar\joinrel\longrightarrow}\limits^{\varphi}&B&\longrightarrow&0\\
&&\vbox{\vbox to4.0pt{}\vbox{\hbox{
\Big{\downarrow}\hbox to0.0pt{$\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle\alpha$}}$\hss}}\vfill}}&&\vbox{\vbox to4.0pt{}\vbox{\hbox{
\Big{\downarrow}\hbox to0.0pt{$\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle\alpha$}}$\hss}}\vfill}}&&&&\\
0&\longrightarrow&G^{\prime}&\longrightarrow&A&\mathop{\relbar\joinrel\longrightarrow}\limits^{\varphi^{\prime}}&B^{\prime}&\longrightarrow&0,\end{matrix}
where $`\phi `$ and $`\phi ^{}`$ are the natural maps from $`A`$ to $`B`$ and $`B^{}`$, respectively. Completing the diagram, we find an isomorphism $`BB^{}`$. This proves the first statement of the theorem. The second statement follows by an easy diagram chase. ∎

This proposition leaves us some hope, because the $`\beta `$ in the proposition will not be an element of $`\mathrm{End}B`$ if $`GG^{}`$. Also, if we consider the case $`n=2`$ and if the principally-polarized surface $`(A,\lambda )`$ is given to us explicitly as either a Jacobian or a product of polarized elliptic curves, then the theory of the Richelot isogeny will allow us to write down $`(B,\mu )`$ and $`(B,\mu ^{})`$ explicitly as Jacobians, as we explain below. Thus, we would like to explicitly write down abelian surfaces $`A`$ with non-trivial automorphisms. In later sections we will consider two families of such explicitly-given surfaces: products of isogenous elliptic curves, and Jacobians with real multiplication by $`\sqrt{2}`$.

We close this section with a comment about Richelot duals and maximal isotropic subgroups. Suppose $`C`$ is a genus-$`2`$ curve defined by an equation $`\delta y^2=f`$ and suppose $`D`$ is the Richelot dual of $`C`$ corresponding to a factorization $`f=g_1g_2g_3`$. Then there is an isogeny from the Jacobian of $`C`$ to the Jacobian of $`D`$ whose kernel is the order-$`4`$ subgroup $`G`$ of $`\mathrm{Jac}C`$ containing the classes of the divisors $`(a_i,0)(b_i,0)`$, where $`a_i`$ and $`b_i`$ are the roots of $`g_i`$ in $`K\overline{}`$ (see \[3, Ch. 9\]). The subgroup $`G`$ is a maximal isotropic subgroup of the $`2`$-torsion of $`\mathrm{Jac}C`$ under the Weil pairing. Conversely, every $`K`$-defined maximal isotropic subgroup $`G`$ of $`(\mathrm{Jac}C)[2]`$ arises in this way. Thus, given a $`K`$-defined maximal isotropic subgroup $`G`$, we can define the $`G`$-Richelot dual of $`C`$ to be the Richelot dual of $`C`$ with respect to the factorization $`f=g_1g_2g_3`$ that gives rise to $`G`$.

## 3. Proof of Theorem 1

In this section we will prove Theorem 1 by following the outline given in Section 2 in the case where $`A`$ is a split abelian surface.

Let $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$ be elliptic curves over a field $`K`$ of characteristic not $`2`$ and suppose there is a $`2`$-isogeny $`\psi `$ from $`E`$ to $`E^{}`$. Let $`Q`$ be the nonzero element of $`E[2](K)`$ in the kernel of $`\psi `$, and let $`P`$ and $`R`$ be the other two geometric $`2`$-torsion points of $`E`$. Let $`Q^{}=\psi (P)=\psi (R)`$, so that $`Q^{}`$ is a nonzero element of $`E^{}[2](K)`$, and let $`P^{}`$ and $`R^{}`$ be the other geometric $`2`$-torsion points of $`E^{}`$. Suppose the discriminants of $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$ are equal up to squares, so that the fields $`K(P)`$ and $`K(P^{})`$ are the same.

Let $`A`$ be the surface $`E\times E^{}`$ and let $`\lambda `$ be the product principal polarization on $`A`$. Let $`\alpha `$ be the automorphism of $`A`$ that sends a point $`(U,V)`$ to $`(U,V+\psi (U))`$. Let $`G`$ be the $`K`$-defined subgroup

$$G=\{(O,O),(P,P^{}),(Q,Q^{}),(R,R^{})\}$$

of $`A[2]`$ and let $`G^{}=\alpha (G)`$, so that $`G^{}`$ is the $`K`$-defined subgroup

$$G^{}=\{(O,O),(P,R^{}),(Q,Q^{}),(R,P^{})\}.$$

Let $`(B,\mu )`$ and $`(B,\mu ^{})`$ be the principally-polarized surfaces obtained from $`G`$ and $`G^{}`$ as in Section 2. The polarizations $`\mu `$ and $`\mu ^{}`$ will be indecomposable except in unusual circumstances, so there will usually be curves $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ whose polarized Jacobians are isomorphic to $`(B,\mu )`$ and $`(B,\mu ^{})`$, respectively. If $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$ are given to us by explicit equations, then $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ can also be given by explicit equations — see \[5, §3.2\], where the unusual circumstances are also explained.

To make this outline explicit and to prove Theorem 1 we must start with an explicit $`2`$-isogeny $`\psi :EE^{}`$, where the discriminants of $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$ are equal up to squares. Let $`t`$ be an element of $`K`$ such that $`t(t^2+1)(t^21)`$ is nonzero, and let $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$ be the elliptic curves

$`E:y^2`$ $`=x(x^24(t^2+1)x+4(t^2+1))`$
$`E^{}:y^2`$ $`=x(x^2+8(t^2+1)x+16t^2(t^2+1)).`$
It is easy to check that the discriminants of $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$ are both equal to $`t^2+1`$, up to squares.

Let $`s`$ be a square root of $`t^2+1`$ in an algebraic closure of $`K`$, so that the $`2`$-torsion points of $`E`$ are

$`P`$ $`=(2t^2+2+2st,0)`$
$`Q`$ $`=(0,0)`$
$`R`$ $`=(2t^2+22st,0)`$
and the $`2`$-torsion points of $`E^{}`$ are
$`P^{}`$ $`=(4t^24+4s,0)`$
$`Q^{}`$ $`=(0,0)`$
$`R^{}`$ $`=(4t^244s,0).`$
It is easy to check that the map

$$(x,y)(\frac{y^2}{x^2},\frac{(x^24(t^2+1))y}{x^2})$$

defines a $`2`$-isogeny $`\psi :EE^{}`$ that kills $`Q`$ and that sends $`P`$ to $`Q^{}`$ (see \[10, Example III.4.5\]). Let $`G`$ and $`G^{}`$ be the subgroups of $`A[2]`$ defined above and let $`(B,\mu )`$ and $`(B,\mu ^{})`$ be the principally-polarized surfaces obtained from $`G`$ and $`G^{}`$ as above. If we apply \[5, Prop. 4\] we find that $`(B,\mu )`$ is isomorphic over $`K`$ to the polarized Jacobian of the curve $`y^2=h_t`$, where

$$h_t=2^{38}t^6(t+1)^3(t^2+1)^{12}(2x^2t)(4t^2x^4+4(t^2+t+1)x^2+1).$$

Furthermore, $`(B,\mu ^{})`$ is isomorphic to the polarized Jacobians of the curve $`y^2=h_t`$. Scaling $`h_t`$ and $`h_t`$ by squares in $`K`$, we find that $`y^2=h_t`$ is isomorphic to the curve $`C(t)`$ of Theorem 1 and that $`y^2=h_t`$ is isomorphic to the curve $`C(t)`$.

To complete the proof of Theorem 1 we must show that $`C(t)`$ and $`C(t)`$ are geometrically non-isomorphic, except for the special cases listed in the theorem. The simplest way to do this is to use Igusa invariants (see ). Facilities for computing Igusa invariants are included in the computer algebra package Magma .

Let us begin by working over the ring $`[t]`$, where $`t`$ is an indeterminate. Let $`J_2(t),J_4(t),J_6(t),J_8(t),`$ and $`J_{10}(t)`$ be the Igusa invariants of the twist $`y^2=(2x^2t)(4x^4+4(t^2+t+1)x^2+1)`$ of $`C(t)`$. (The invariants $`J_{2i}(t)`$ of this curve, scaled by $`4^i`$, can be computed in Magma using the function ScaledIgusaInvariants.) Let

$`R_2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{J_4(t)J_2(t)^2J_4(t)J_2(t)^2}{t(t^2+1)^3}}`$
$`R_3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{J_6(t)J_2(t)^3J_6(t)J_2(t)^3}{t^3(t^2+1)^3}}`$
$`R_5`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{J_{10}(t)J_2(t)^5J_{10}(t)J_2(t)^5}{t^3(t^2+1)^7}},`$
all of which we view as elements of $`[t]`$. If $`C(t)`$ and $`C(t)`$ are isomorphic for a given value of $`t`$ in a given field $`K`$, then the polynomials $`R_2,R_3,`$ and $`R_5`$ must all evaluate to $`0`$ at this value. But we compute that

$$\mathrm{gcd}(\mathrm{resultant}(R_2,R_3),\mathrm{resultant}(R_2,R_5))=2^{980}3^{48}11^8,$$

so if the characteristic of $`K`$ is neither $`3`$ nor $`11`$ then the two curves $`C(t)`$ and $`C(t)`$ are geometrically non-isomorphic for every value of $`t`$ in $`K`$ with $`t(t^2+1)(t^21)0`$.

We repeat the above calculation in the ring $`𝔽_3[t]`$, only now we define

$`R_2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{J_4(t)J_2(t)^2J_4(t)J_2(t)^2}{t(t^21)^2(t^2+1)^7}}`$
$`R_3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{J_6(t)J_2(t)^3J_6(t)J_2(t)^3}{t^3(t^2+1)^9}}.`$
We find that $`\mathrm{gcd}(R_2,R_3)=1`$, so the two curves $`C(t)`$ and $`C(t)`$ are geometrically non-isomorphic for every value of $`t`$ in characteristic $`3`$, as long as $`t(t^2+1)(t^21)0`$.

Next we repeat the above calculation in the ring $`𝔽_{11}[t]`$, with

$`R_2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{J_4(t)J_2(t)^2J_4(t)J_2(t)^2}{t(t^2+1)^3}}`$
$`R_3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{J_6(t)J_2(t)^3J_6(t)J_2(t)^3}{t^3(t^2+1)^3}}.`$
We find that $`\mathrm{gcd}(R_2,R_3)=(t^2+3)(t^2+4)`$, so that the two curves are geometrically non-isomorphic in characteristic $`11`$ except possibly when $`t^2`$ is $`3`$ or $`4`$.

Finally we note that in characteristic $`11`$, when $`t^2`$ is $`3`$ or $`4`$ the curve $`C(t)`$ is geometrically isomorphic to the supersingular curve $`y^2=x^6+x^4+4x^2+7`$. Thus, $`C(t)`$ and $`C(t)`$ are geometrically isomorphic for these values of $`t`$. ∎

###### Remark.

It was not critical in our construction that the isogeny $`\psi :EE^{}`$ have degree $`2`$. Similar constructions can be made with other kinds of isogenies.

## 4. Jacobians with real multiplication by $`\sqrt{2}`$

In this section we review a construction of Bending  that produces every genus-$`2`$ curve over a given field $`K`$ whose Jacobian has a $`K`$-rational endomorphism that is fixed by the Rosati involution and whose square is $`2`$. We will give a variant of Bending’s construction that produces curves over $`K`$ with a not-necessarily $`K`$-rational endomorphism that is fixed by Rosati and whose square is $`2`$. We do not claim that our construction will produce all such curves.

First we recall Bending’s construction. Let $`K`$ be a field of characteristic not $`2`$ and let $`A`$, $`P`$, and $`Q`$ be elements of $`K`$ with $`P`$ nonzero. Define

$`B`$ $`=(APQQ^2+4P^2+1)/P^2`$
$`C`$ $`=4(APQ)/P`$
$`R`$ $`=4P`$
and let $`\alpha _1`$, $`\alpha _2`$, $`\alpha _3`$ be the roots of $`T^3+AT^2+BT+C`$ in a separable closure $`K\overline{}`$ of $`K`$. For $`i=1,2,3`$ let

$$G_i=X^2\alpha _iX+P\alpha _i^2+Q\alpha _i+R,$$

and suppose that the product $`G_1G_2G_3K[X]`$ has nonzero discriminant. Let $`D`$ be a nonzero element of $`K`$.

###### Theorem 5.

The Jacobian of the genus-$`2`$ curve $`DY^2=G_1G_2G_3`$ has a $`K`$-rational endomorphism that is fixed by the Rosati involution and whose square is $`2`$. Furthermore, if $`\mathrm{\#}K>5`$ then every curve over $`K`$ whose Jacobian has such an endomorphism is isomorphic to a curve that arises in this way from some choice of $`A`$, $`P`$, $`Q`$, and $`D`$ in $`K`$.

###### Proof.

See \[1, Theorem 4.1\]. Bending assumes that the base field $`K`$ has characteristic $`0`$, but his proof works over an arbitrary field $`K`$ of characteristic not $`2`$ so long as every genus-$`2`$ curve over $`K`$ can be written in the form $`y^2=\text{(sextic)}`$. This is the case for every field with more than $`5`$ elements. ∎

The endomorphism of $`DY^2=G_1G_2G_3`$ whose existence is claimed by Theorem 5 is obtained by noting that the obvious Richelot dual of the curve is isomorphic over $`K`$ to the curve itself. Thus the degree-$`4`$ isogeny from the Jacobian of the curve to the Jacobian of its dual can be viewed as an endomorphism of the curve’s Jacobian, and this endomorphism has the properties claimed in the theorem.

We will want to consider curves over $`K`$ whose Jacobians have real multiplication by $`\sqrt{2}`$ that is not necessarily defined over $`K`$. For this reason, we will require the following variant of Bending’s construction:

Suppose $`r`$, $`s`$, and $`t`$ are elements of a field $`K`$ of characteristic not $`2`$, with $`s0`$, $`s1`$, and $`t1`$. Let

$`c_2`$ $`=r+4t`$
$`c_1`$ $`=4t(r+s^3s^2t2s^2+5s+t)`$
$`c_0`$ $`=4t(s1)(rs^2rstrsrt8st)`$
and suppose that the polynomial $`T^3c_2T^2+c_1Tc_0`$ has three distinct roots $`\beta _1`$, $`\beta _2`$, $`\beta _3`$ in $`K\overline{}`$. For $`i=1,2,3`$ let

$$g_i=x^22\beta _ix+(1s)\beta _i^24s(s1)^2t(st1),$$

and suppose that the discriminant of the product $`f=g_1g_2g_3`$ is nonzero. Let $`𝒞(r,s,t)`$ be the curve over $`K`$ defined by $`y^2=f`$.

###### Theorem 6.

The Richelot dual of $`𝒞(r,s,t)`$ associated to the factorization $`f=g_1g_2g_3`$ is isomorphic over $`K(\sqrt{st})`$ to $`𝒞(r,s,t)`$. The endomorphism of $`\mathrm{Jac}𝒞(r,s,t)`$ (over $`K(\sqrt{st})`$) obtained by composing the Richelot isogeny with the natural isomorphism from the dual curve to $`𝒞(r,s,t)`$ is fixed by the Rosati involution, and its square is the multiplication-by-$`2`$ endomorphism.

###### Proof.

This theorem can be proven by direct calculation, but here we will prove it by relating the curve $`𝒞(r,s,t)`$ back to Bending’s construction. Let $`Q`$ be a square root of $`st`$ in $`K\overline{}`$, let $`P=(1s)/4`$, let $`A=(r+6st2t)/(4PQ)`$, let $`D=1`$, and let $`𝒞^{}`$ be the curve over $`K(Q)`$ defined by using this $`A`$, $`P`$, $`Q`$, and $`D`$ in Bending’s construction. Then the $`\alpha _i`$ are related to the $`\beta _i`$ by

$$Q\alpha _i=\beta _i/(s1)+2t,$$

and the curve $`Y^2=G_1G_2G_3`$ is isomorphic $`y^2=g_1g_2g_3`$ via the relation $`x=2(s1)(QX+t)`$. This shows that $`𝒞(r,s,t)`$ is isomorphic to its Richelot dual over $`K(Q)`$. The rest of the theorem follows from Bending’s theorem. ∎

###### Remark.

Bending’s family of curves has three “geometric” parameters $`A`$, $`P`$, and $`Q`$ and one “arithmetic” parameter $`D`$ (which parametrizes quadratic twists of the curve determined by $`A`$, $`P`$, and $`Q`$). Since the moduli space $``$ of genus-$`2`$ curves with real multiplication by $`\sqrt{2}`$ is a two-dimensional rational variety, one might hope to replace Bending’s three-geometric-parameter family with a two-parameter family. But there is an obstruction, which stems from the fact that $``$ is a coarse moduli space and not a fine one: A $`K`$-rational point on $``$ does not necessarily give rise to a curve over $`K`$. Indeed, Mestre  has shown that to every $`K`$-rational point $`P`$ on the moduli space of genus-$`2`$ curves there is naturally associated a genus-$`0`$ curve over $`K`$, and $`P`$ corresponds to a curve over $`K`$ if and only if the genus-$`0`$ curve has a $`K`$-rational point.

## 5. Galois restrictions

In order to prove Theorem 2 we will apply the construction outlined in Section 2 to a Jacobian with real multiplication by $`\sqrt{2}`$ that we will obtain from Theorem 6; we will take the automorphism $`\alpha `$ to be $`1+\sqrt{2}`$. The construction requires that we find a Galois-stable maximal isotropic subgroup $`G`$ of the $`2`$-torsion of the Jacobian such that $`G^{}=(1+\sqrt{2})(G)`$ is a maximal isotropic subgroup different from $`G`$. This requirement imposes some restrictions on the values of $`r`$, $`s`$, and $`t`$ that we will be able to use in Theorem 6. In this section we will make these restrictions explicit, and in Section 6 we will find an elliptic surface that parametrizes a subset of the allowable values of $`r`$, $`s`$, and $`t`$.

Recall the basic outline of Theorem 6: Given three elements $`r`$, $`s`$, $`t`$ of our base field $`K`$, we define a polynomial $`h=T^3c_2T^2+c_1Tc_0`$ in the polynomial ring $`K[T]`$, and we assume that $`h`$ is separable. We use the roots $`\beta _1`$, $`\beta _2`$, $`\beta _3`$ of $`h`$ to define three polynomials $`g_1`$, $`g_2`$, $`g_3`$ in the polynomial ring $`K\overline{}[x]`$, we assume that the product $`f=g_1g_2g_3`$ is separable, and we define a curve $`C`$ by $`y^2=f`$. Then we show that the Richelot dual of $`C`$ corresponding to the factorization $`f=g_1g_2g_3`$ is geometrically isomorphic to $`C`$ itself.

Let $`L`$ be the quotient of the polynomial ring $`K[T]`$ by the ideal generated by the polynomial $`h`$ and let $`\beta `$ be the image of $`T`$ in $`L`$. Since $`h`$ is separable, the algebra $`L`$ is a product of fields. Let $`gL[x]`$ be the polynomial

$$g=x^22\beta x+(1s)\beta ^24s(s1)^2t(st1).$$

Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }K^{}`$ be the discriminant of $`h`$ and let $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}L^{}`$ be the discriminant of $`g`$.

###### Theorem 7.

There are distinct Galois-stable maximal isotropic subgroups $`G`$ and $`G^{}`$ of $`(\mathrm{Jac}C)[2]`$ with $`G^{}=(1+\sqrt{2})(G)`$ if and only if $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ is a square in the algebra $`L`$.

###### Proof.

Let the roots of $`g_1`$ (respectively, $`g_2`$, $`g_3`$) be $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ (respectively, $`r_3`$ and $`r_4`$, $`r_5`$ and $`r_6`$). For each $`i`$ let $`W_i`$ be the Weierstraß point of $`C`$ corresponding to the root $`r_i`$ of $`f=g_1g_2g_3`$. The kernel $`H`$ of the Richelot isogeny multiplication-by-$`\sqrt{2}`$ on the Jacobian $`J`$ of $`C`$ is the order-$`4`$ subgroup containing the divisor classes $`[W_1W_2]`$, $`[W_3W_4]`$, and $`[W_5W_6]`$.

Suppose there are distinct Galois-stable maximal isotropic subgroups $`G`$ and $`G^{}`$ of $`(\mathrm{Jac}C)[2]`$ with $`G^{}=(1+\sqrt{2})(G)`$. Then clearly $`GH`$, so $`\mathrm{\#}(GH)`$ is either $`2`$ or $`1`$. Suppose $`\mathrm{\#}(GH)=2`$. By renumbering the polynomials $`g_i`$ and by renumbering their roots, we may assume that $`G`$ is the order-$`4`$ subgroup

$$G=\{0,[W_1W_2],[W_3W_5],[W_4W_6]\}.$$

Then $`\sqrt{2}`$ kills the first two elements of $`G`$ and sends the second two elements to $`[W_1W_2]`$, and it follows that $`(1+\sqrt{2})(G)=G`$, contradicting our assumption that $`G`$ and $`G^{}`$ are distinct.

So now we know that $`GH=\{0\}`$. By renumbering the polynomials $`g_i`$ and by renumbering their roots, we may assume that $`G`$ is the order-$`4`$ subgroup

$$G=\{0,[W_1W_5],[W_2W_4],[W_3W_6]\}.$$

It is not hard to show that the automorphism $`1+\sqrt{2}`$ of $`J`$ sends $`[W_1W_5]`$ to $`[W_2W_6]`$, $`[W_2W_4]`$ to $`[W_1W_3]`$, and $`[W_3W_6]`$ to $`[W_4W_5]`$, so we have

$$G^{}=\{0,[W_1W_3],[W_2W_6],[W_4W_5]\}.$$

Suppose $`\sigma `$ is an element of the Galois group such that $`r_1^\sigma =r_2`$. Since $`G`$ is Galois stable, it follows that $`\sigma `$ sends $`[W_1W_5]`$ to $`[W_2W_4]`$, and therefore $`r_5^\sigma =r_4`$. But since $`G^{}`$ is Galois stable, we see that $`\sigma `$ must send $`[W_4W_5]`$ to itself, and it follows that $`r_4^\sigma =r_5`$. Continuing in this manner, we find that $`r_2^\sigma =r_1`$ and $`r_6^\sigma =r_3`$ and $`r_3^\sigma =r_6`$. Thus, $`\sigma `$ acts on the roots of $`f`$ according to the permutation $`(12)(36)(45)`$ of the subscripts.

By considering the other choices for $`r_1^\sigma `$ and using the same reasoning as above, we find that the image of the absolute Galois group of $`K`$ in the symmetric group on the the roots of $`f`$ is contained in the subgroup

$$S=\{\mathrm{Id},(12)(36)(45),(13)(24)(56),(146)(235),(15)(26)(34),(164)(253)\};$$

here of course we identify the root $`r_i`$ with the integer $`i`$. In particular, note that the action of $`\sigma `$ on the $`r_i`$ is determined by the action of $`\sigma `$ on the $`\beta _i`$.

To show that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ is square in the algebra $`L`$, we will consider three cases, depending on the splitting of the polynomial $`h`$.

*Case 1.* Suppose $`h`$ is irreducible. Then $`L`$ is a field, and the condition that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ be a square in $`L`$ is equivalent to saying that $`g`$ defines the Galois closure $`M`$ of $`L`$ over $`K`$. So suppose, to obtain a contradiction, that $`g`$ does not define $`M`$ over $`L`$. There are two ways that this can happen: either the roots of $`g`$ do not lie in $`M`$, or $`M`$ is a quadratic extension of $`L`$ and the roots of $`g`$ lie in $`L`$.

Suppose that the roots of $`g`$ do not lie in $`M`$. Then there is an element $`\sigma `$ of the absolute Galois group of $`K`$ that fixes $`M`$ but that moves the roots of $`g`$. But this contradicts the fact that the the action of $`\sigma `$ on the roots of $`g`$ is determined by the action of $`\sigma `$ on the $`\beta _i`$.

Suppose $`M`$ is a quadratic extension of $`L`$, so that the image of the absolute Galois group in the symmetric group on the $`\beta _i`$ is the full symmetric group. Then the image of the absolute Galois group in the symmetric group on the $`r_i`$ must be the entire group $`S`$ given above, which acts transitively on the $`r_i`$. But if the roots of $`g`$ lie in $`L`$, then the $`r_i`$ will form two orbits under the action of the absolute Galois group, giving a contradiction.

*Case 2.* Suppose $`h`$ factors as a linear polynomial times an irreducible quadratic. Then one of the $`\beta _i`$, say $`\beta _1`$, lies in $`K`$, while $`\beta _2`$ and $`\beta _3`$ are conjugate elements in a quadratic extension $`M`$ of $`K`$. With the labelings we have chosen, this means that the image of the absolute Galois group in the symmetric group on the $`r_i`$ must be equal to the two-element group

$$S^{}=\{\mathrm{Id},(12)(36)(45)\};$$

In particular, we see that $`r_3`$ and $`r_6`$ (and $`r_4`$ and $`r_5`$) are quadratic conjugates of one another, so they all must be elements of $`M`$. This means that the image of $`g`$ in $`K[x]`$ (obtained by sending $`\beta `$ to $`\beta _1`$) is an irreducible polynomial that defines $`M`$, while the image of $`g`$ in $`M[x]`$ (obtained by sending $`\beta `$ to $`\beta _2`$) splits into two linear factors. Thus, the discriminant $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ of $`g`$ in $`L=K\times M`$ is equal to the discriminant of $`M`$ (up to squares) in the first component, and is a square in the second component. But $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ has this same property, so the product $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ is a square in $`L`$.

*Case 3.* Suppose $`h`$ splits over $`K`$ into three linear factors, so that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a square in $`K`$. Then the absolute Galois group of $`K`$ acts trivially on the $`\beta _i`$, so it must act trivially on the $`r_i`$ as well. This means that the discriminant $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ of $`g`$ must be a square in each factor of $`L=K\times K\times K`$, so $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ is a square in $`L`$ as well.

We see that if there are subgroups $`G`$ and $`G^{}`$ as in the statement of the theorem then $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ must be a square in $`L`$. We leave the details of the proof of the converse statement to the reader; the point is that in each of the three cases above, the reasoning is reversible. ∎

## 6. Application of our construction to <br>curves with real multiplication

In this section we will follow the outline given in Section 2 in the case where $`A`$ is a Jacobian with real multiplication by $`\sqrt{2}`$ that has appropriate Galois-stable subgroups. Theorem 2 will follow quickly from the result we obtain.

We will continue to use the notation from previous sections:

* $`r`$, $`s`$, and $`t`$ will be elements of a field $`K`$;
* $`h`$ will be a polynomial in $`K[T]`$ defined in terms of $`r`$, $`s`$, and $`t`$;
* $`L`$ will be the algebra $`K[T]/(h)`$;
* $`\beta `$ will be the image of $`T`$ in $`L`$;
* $`g`$ will be a polynomial in $`L[x]`$ defined in terms of $`r`$, $`s`$, $`t`$, and $`\beta `$;
* $`\mathrm{\Delta }K^{}`$ will be the discriminant of $`h`$; and
* $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}L^{}`$ will be the discriminant of $`g`$.

###### Theorem 8.

Let $`K`$ be a field of characteristic not $`2`$, suppose $`r`$, $`s`$, and $`t`$ are elements of $`K`$ that satisfy the hypotheses appearing before the statement of Theorem 6, and let $`C`$ be the curve $`𝒞(r,s,t)`$ from Theorem 6. Suppose further that the product $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ is a square in $`L^{}`$, so that there are Galois-stable subgroups $`G`$ and $`G^{}`$ of $`(\mathrm{Jac}C)[2]`$ as in the statement of Theorem 7. Then the Jacobian of the $`G`$-Richelot dual of $`C`$ is isomorphic over $`K(\sqrt{st})`$ to the Jacobian of the $`G^{}`$-Richelot dual of $`C`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`D`$ be the $`G`$-Richelot dual of $`C`$ and let $`D^{}`$ be the $`G^{}`$-Richelot dual of $`C`$. Theorem 6 and Theorem 7, combined with the argument in Section 2, show that the Jacobian of $`D`$ becomes isomorphic to the Jacobian of $`D^{}`$ when the base field is extended to $`K(\sqrt{st})`$. ∎

###### Remark.

Since $`D`$ and $`D^{}`$ are defined over $`K`$, and since their Jacobians become isomorphic over $`K(\sqrt{st})`$, it is tempting to think that $`\mathrm{Jac}D`$ must be isomorphic over $`K`$ to either the Jacobian of $`D^{}`$ or the Jacobian of the standard quadratic twist of $`D^{}`$ over $`K(\sqrt{st})`$. But in fact this is not the case. It is true that $`\mathrm{Jac}D^{}`$ is a $`K(\sqrt{st})/K`$-twist of $`\mathrm{Jac}D`$, but the twist is by an automorphism of $`\mathrm{Jac}D`$ that does not come from an automorphism of $`D`$. Indeed, generically the automorphism group of $`D`$ contains $`2`$ elements, while the automorphism group of $`\mathrm{Jac}D`$ is isomorphic to the unit group of $`[2\sqrt{2}]`$.

###### Proposition 9.

Suppose $`t=s1`$ and let $`u=r+2`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ is a square in $`L`$ if and only if $`(u^2+a)^2+8bu+4c`$ is a square in $`K`$, where

$`a`$ $`=4s(s^2+11s11)`$
$`b`$ $`=8s^2(s1)(4s1)`$
$`c`$ $`=16s^2(s1)(28s^219s+1).`$
###### Proof.

When $`t=s1`$ and $`r=u2`$, we find that the coefficients of the polynomial $`h`$ used to define the algebra $`L`$ are

$`c_2`$ $`=4s+u6`$
$`c_1`$ $`=4(s1)(s^26su+3)`$
$`c_0`$ $`=4(s1)^3(8su+2),`$
and we compute that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=16s(s1)^2((u^2+a)^2+8bu+4c),$$

where $`a`$, $`b`$, and $`c`$ are as in the statement of the proposition. Furthermore, the polynomial $`gL[x]`$ defined in Section 5 is $`x^22\beta x+(1s)\beta ^2`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}=4s\beta ^2`$. We see that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ is a square in $`L`$ if and only if the element $`\delta =(u^2+a)^2+8bu+4c`$ of $`K`$ is a square in $`L`$. If $`L`$ is a field then it is a cubic extension of $`K`$, and $`\delta `$ is a square in $`L`$ if and only if it is a square in $`K`$. If $`L`$ is not a field then it has $`K`$ as a factor, and again $`\delta `$ is a square in $`L`$ if and only if it is a square in $`K`$. ∎

###### Proposition 10.

Let $`K=(s)`$ be the function field in the variable $`s`$ over $``$, let

$`a`$ $`=4s(s^2+11s11)`$
$`b`$ $`=8s^2(s1)(4s1)`$
$`c`$ $`=16s^2(s1)(28s^219s+1),`$
let $`F`$ be the curve over $`K`$ defined by

$$z^2=(u^2+a)^2+8bu+4c,$$

and let $`E`$ be the elliptic curve over $`K`$ defined by

$$y^2=x^3ax^2cx+b^2.$$

Then

* the map $`u=(yb)/x`$, $`z=2xu^2a`$ gives an isomorphism from $`E`$ to $`F`$, whose inverse is $`x=(z+u^2+a)/2`$, $`y=ux+b`$;
* the point $`P=(0,b)`$ on $`E`$ has infinite order;
* the point $`T=(4s^2(1s),0)`$ on $`E`$ has order $`2`$;
* the isomorphism in statement (a) takes the involution $`(u,z)(u,z)`$ on $`F`$ to the involution $`QQP`$ on $`E`$;
* the isomorphism in statement (a) takes $`P`$ and the origin of $`E`$ to the two infinite points on $`F`$.

###### Proof.

An easy calculation shows that statement (a) is true; the particular values of $`a`$, $`b`$, and $`c`$ are irrelevant to the calculation.

To show that the point $`P`$ has infinite order, it suffices to show that when we specialize $`s`$ to a particular value the specialized $`P`$ has infinite order. For example, if we set $`s=2`$, then $`E`$ becomes the curve

$$y^2=x^3+120x^2+4800x+50176$$

and $`P`$ becomes the point $`(0,224)`$. Translating $`x`$ by $`40`$, we find a new equation for $`E`$: $`y^2=x^313824,`$ where now $`P=(40,224)`$. But $`7`$ divides $`224`$ and $`7`$ does not divide $`13824`$, so by the Lutz-Nagell theorem \[10, Cor. VIII.7.2\] the point $`P`$ has infinite order. This proves statement (b).

Statement (c) is clear.

Let $`R`$ be a point $`(u,z)`$ on $`F`$ and let $`\stackrel{~}{R}=(u,z)`$ be its involute. Let $`Q`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ be the images of $`R`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{R}`$ on $`E`$. Clearly $`Q`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ both lie on the line $`y=ux+b`$, and the third intersection point of this line with $`E`$ is easily seen to be $`P`$. Thus, the involution on $`E`$ satisfies $`\stackrel{~}{Q}+Q=P`$, and this is statement (d).

The equations for the isomorphism show that $`P`$ is mapped to an infinite point on $`F`$, and statement (d) shows that $`O_E`$ gets mapped to an infinite point as well. ∎

###### Remark.

If we view the curve $`FE`$ as an elliptic surface $`S`$ over $``$, then the points $`P`$ and $`T`$ of Proposition 10 can be viewed as rational curves on $`S`$. By adding multiples of $`P`$ and $`T`$ together, we get a countable family of rational curves on $`S`$. But $`S`$ contains more rational curves than just the ones in this family. For example, we have the curves

$`s`$ $`=5/4`$
$`u`$ $`=(4w^2+5w+40)/(4w)`$
$`z`$ $`=(2w^4+5w^350w200)/(2w^2)`$
and

$`s`$ $`=1`$
$`u`$ $`=(2w^210w4)/w`$
$`z`$ $`=(4w^440w^380w16)/w^2,`$
where $`w`$ is a parameter; the curve

$`s`$ $`=(5w^2)/4`$
$`u`$ $`=(w^4+w^3+7w^25w10)/(4w+8)`$
$`z`$ $`=(w^8+9w^7+22w^618w^5135w^4135w^3)/(8w^2+32w+32),`$
which corresponds to a $`3`$-torsion point on $`E`$ defined over a genus-$`0`$ extension of the function field $`(s)`$; five curves in which $`u`$ is a linear expression in $`s`$, for example

$`s`$ $`=4(w^2+9w+19)/w`$
$`u`$ $`=s`$
$`z`$ $`=16(16w^6+283w^5+1555w^429545w^2102163w109744)/w^3;`$
and three curves in which $`u`$ is a quadratic expression in $`s`$, for example

$`s`$ $`=(w^2+3w+1)/w`$
$`u`$ $`=4s^26s`$
$`z`$ $`=4(4w^8+35w^7+105w^6+119w^5119w^3105w^235w4)/w^4.`$
###### Remark.

One can check that the image of the elliptic surface $`S`$ in the moduli space of genus-$`2`$ curves is $`2`$-dimensional. To check this, one need only write explicitly the Igusa invariants of the genus-$`2`$ curve obtained from a pair $`(s,u)`$ and verify that the rank of the Jacobian matrix of the mapping from $`(s,u)`$-pairs to Igusa invariants at some arbitrary point is $`2`$.

We now have enough machinery available to prove Theorem 2.

###### Proof of Theorem 2.

Consider the point $`P=(0,b)`$ from statement (b) of Proposition 10. The $`u`$-coördinate of its image on the curve $`F`$ is

$$u=(28s^219s+1)/(14s).$$

So given any $`sK`$, we will obtain a curve satisfying the conclusion of Theorem 8 if we set

$`t`$ $`=s1`$
$`r`$ $`=2+(28s^219s+1)/(14s)`$
and set $`C=𝒞(r,s,t)`$. Given a $`vK\{0,1,4\}`$, let us apply the preceding observation with $`s=v/4`$, so that

$`s`$ $`=v/4`$
$`t`$ $`=(v4)/4`$
$`r`$ $`=(7v^211v4)/(44v).`$
The coefficients of the polynomial $`h`$ used in the construction of Section 4 are

$`c_2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{3v^2+9v20}{4(1v)}}`$
$`c_1`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(v4)(v^3+3v^24v32)}{16(1v)}}`$
$`c_0`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(v4)^3(v^2+3v+4)}{64(1v)}},`$
and over $`K(w)`$ the roots of $`h`$ are

$`\beta _1`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(2+w)(2w)}{4}}`$
$`\beta _2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(2+w)^2(2w+w^2)}{4(1+w)}}`$
$`\beta _3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{(2w)^2(2+w+w^2)}{4(1w)}}.`$
Each polynomial $`g_i`$ is $`x^22\beta _ix+(1s)\beta _i^2`$ and has roots $`\beta _i(1\pm w/2)`$, so we calculate that the roots of $`g_1`$ are

$`r_1`$ $`=(1/8)(2w)^2(2+w)`$
$`r_2`$ $`=(1/8)(2w)(2+w)^2,`$
the roots of $`g_2`$ are
$`r_3`$ $`=(1/8)(2+w)^3(2w+w^2)/(1+w)`$
$`r_4`$ $`=(1/8)(2w)(2+w)^2(2w+w^2)/(1+w),`$
and the roots of $`g_3`$ are
$`r_5`$ $`=(1/8)(2w)^2(2+w)(2+w+w^2)/(1w)`$
$`r_6`$ $`=(1/8)(2w)^3(2+w+w^2)/(1w).`$
These roots are indexed in a manner consistent with the indexing of the roots in the proof of Theorem 7. Note that the $`r_i`$ are related to the $`\rho _i`$ of Theorem 2 by the relation

$$r_i=4s(s1)\rho _i2(s1)^2,$$

so the $`r_i`$ are distinct exactly when the $`\rho _i`$ are distinct. It is easy to check that when $`(v^2+3v+4)(v^2v+4)(v^36v^27v4)0`$ the $`\rho _i`$ are distinct, so in this case the curve $`D`$ of Theorem 2 has genus $`2`$. Furthermore, we see that $`D`$ is isomorphic to the curve $`𝒞(r,s,t).`$

For each $`i`$ let $`W_i`$ be the point $`(\rho _i,0)`$ of $`D`$. Let $`G`$ be the Galois-stable subgroup of the Jacobian of $`D`$ that consists of the divisor classes

$$\{[0],[W_1W_5],[W_2W_4],[W_3W_6]\}$$

and let $`G^{}`$ be the Galois-stable subgroup

$$\{[0],[W_1W_3],[W_2W_6],[W_4W_5]\}.$$

An easy computation shows that when $`v^34v^2+7v+4`$ and $`v^2+v+2`$ are nonzero the $`G`$-Richelot dual of $`D`$ and the $`G^{}`$-Richelot dual of $`D`$ are defined (that is, the determinants mentioned in the definition of the two Richelot duals are nonzero). Then the results of Section 4 show that the $`G`$-Richelot dual of $`D`$ and the $`G^{}`$-Richelot dual of $`D`$ become isomorphic over $`K(\sqrt{st})=K(\sqrt{v(v4)})`$.

The proof that these two Richelot duals of $`D`$ are geometrically non-isomorphic to one another (except in the special cases listed in the theorem) is a computation along the same lines as the proof of the corresponding statement of Theorem 1. We leave the details to the reader.

Finally, suppose that $`K`$ has characteristic $`0`$ and suppose that there is a ring homomorphism from $`[v]`$ to $`𝔽_{13}`$ that takes $`v`$ to either $`2`$ or $`6`$. Then the curve $`D`$ reduces modulo $`13`$ to one of the curves over $`𝔽_{13}`$ obtained when $`v=2`$ or $`v=6`$. One can compute that the characteristic polynomials of Frobenius for the Jacobians of these two curves are $`t^44t^3+22t^252t+169`$ and $`t^4+4t^3+22t^2+52t+169`$, respectively. Then \[6, Thm. 6\] shows that the Jacobians are absolutely simple. Since $`D`$ modulo $`13`$ is absolutely simple, so is $`D`$ itself. And finally, since $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ have Jacobians isogenous to that of $`D`$, we see that their Jacobians are absolutely simple too. The final statement of the theorem then follows from the observation that if $`v`$ is not algebraic, then there is a homomorphism $`[v]𝔽_{13}`$ that sends $`v`$ to any given element. ∎

###### Remark.

We used the field $`𝔽_{13}`$ at the end of the proof simply because it is the smallest prime field that contains values of $`v`$ that give rise to absolutely simple Jacobians. Other prime fields have a larger proportion of good values of $`v`$. For example, there are $`341`$ values of $`v`$ in $`𝔽_{769}`$ that give rise to absolutely simple Jacobians. For three-digit primes $`p`$ the number of good $`v`$-values is typically greater than $`0.3p`$. This implies that for a “randomly chosen” rational number $`v`$, it is almost certainly the case that $`v`$ will give rise to an absolutely simple Jacobian.

## 7. Proof of Theorem 3

The proof of Theorem 3 is very much like the proof of Theorem 1: We will produce three elliptic curves $`E_1`$, $`E_2`$, $`E_3`$, two maximal isotropic subgroups $`G`$, $`G^{}`$ of the $`2`$-torsion of $`A=E_1\times E_2\times E_3`$, and an automorphism $`\alpha `$ of $`A`$ that takes $`G`$ to $`G^{}`$. Then we will produce a hyperelliptic curve whose Jacobian is $`A/G`$ and a plane quartic whose Jacobian is $`A/G^{}`$. To produce these curves we will use the results of \[5, §4\]. Our notation will be chosen to match that of , except that we will continue to call our base field $`K`$, instead of $`k`$.

Let $`K`$ be an arbitrary field of characteristic not $`2`$ and let $`t`$ be an element of $`K`$ with $`t(t+1)(t^2+1)(t^2+t+1)0`$. Let $`s=(t^2+t+1)`$ and let $`r`$ be a square root of $`t^2+1`$ in an algebraic closure of $`K`$. Let

| $`A_1=2(t^2+1)s`$ | $`B_1=(t^2+1)s^2`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`A_2=4(t^2+1)s`$ | $`B_2=4t^2(t^2+1)s^2`$ |
| $`A_3=2(t^2+t+1)s`$ | $`B_3=(t+1)^2(t^2+1)s^2`$ |

and for each $`i`$ let

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$ $`=A_1^24B_1=4t^2(t^2+1)s^2`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ $`=A_2^24B_2=16(t^2+1)s^2`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_3`$ $`=A_3^24B_3=4t^2s^2.`$
Note that the $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ and the $`B_i`$ are nonzero, so we may define for each $`i`$ an elliptic curve $`E_i`$ by

$$y^2=x(x^2+A_ix+B_i).$$

We define $`2`$-torsion points $`P_i`$ on the $`E_i`$ by setting

$`P_1`$ $`=((t^2+1)srts,0)`$
$`P_2`$ $`=(2(t^2+1)s2rs,0)`$
$`P_3`$ $`=((t^2+t+1)sts,0)`$
and for each $`i`$ we let $`Q_i`$ be the $`2`$-torsion point $`(0,0)`$ on $`E_i`$ and we let $`R_i=P_i+Q_i`$.

Let $`A=E_1\times E_2\times E_3`$ and let $`G`$ be the subgroup of $`A[2]`$ generated by $`(P_1,P_2,P_3)`$, $`(Q_1,Q_2,0)`$, and $`(Q_1,0,Q_3)`$. Associated to these choices of $`A`$ and $`G`$ there is a quantity called the twisting factor $`T`$ (see \[5, §4\]). Using the formula in \[5, §4\] we find that for our $`A`$ and $`G`$ the twisting factor is $`0`$, so we may apply \[5, Prop. 14\] to find a hyperelliptic genus-$`3`$ curve whose Jacobian is isomorphic over $`K`$ to $`A/G`$. The curve given by \[5, Prop. 14\] is defined by two equations in $`^3`$, namely

(4) $`W^2Z^2`$ $`=aX^4+bY^4+cZ^4`$
(5) $`0`$ $`=dX^2+eY^2+fZ^2`$
where

$`a`$ $`=4t(t+1)(t^2+1)^3s^5`$
$`b`$ $`=16t^2(t+1)(t^2+1)^3s^5`$
$`c`$ $`=4t(t+1)^2(t^2+1)^2s^6`$
$`1/d`$ $`=2t(t+1)(t^2+1)s^2`$
$`1/e`$ $`=(t+1)(t^2+1)s^2`$
$`1/f`$ $`=2t(t^2+1)s^2.`$
If we replace $`W`$ by $`2t(t+1)(t^2+1)s^3W`$ in Equation 4 and divide out common factors, we get Equation 1, and if we multiply Equation 5 by $`2t(t+1)(t^2+1)s^2`$ we get Equation 2. This shows that the Jacobian of $`H(t)`$ is isomorphic to $`A/G`$.

Now let $`G^{}`$ be the subgroup of $`A[2]`$ generated by $`(P_1,P_2,R_3)`$, $`(Q_1,Q_2,0)`$, and $`(Q_1,0,Q_3)`$, and let $`T^{}`$ be the twisting factor associated to $`A`$ and $`G^{}`$. The formula in \[5, §4\] shows that

$$T^{}=64(t^2+1)^2(t^2+t+1)s^3=64(t^2+1)^2s^4,$$

so the twisting factor is a nonzero square. Then \[5, Prop. 15\] shows that there is a plane quartic whose Jacobian is isomorphic (over $`K`$) to $`A/G^{}`$. The plane quartic is given by

(6)
$$B_1X^4+B_2Y^4+B_3Z^4+d^{}X^2Y^2+e^{}X^2Z^2+f^{}Y^2Z^2=0$$

where

$`d^{}`$ $`=4(t^2+1)(2t^2+t+2)s^2`$
$`e^{}`$ $`=2(t^2+1)(2t^2+t+1)s^2`$
$`f^{}`$ $`=4(t^2+1)(t^2+t+2)s^2.`$
Dividing Equation 6 by $`(t^2+1)s^2`$ gives Equation 3, so the Jacobian of $`Q(t)`$ is isomorphic to $`A/G^{}`$.

To complete the proof we must show that $`A/GA/G^{}`$. Note that there is a $`2`$-isogeny $`\psi `$ from $`E_1`$ to $`E_2`$ that kills $`Q_1`$ and that takes $`P_1`$ and $`R_1`$ to $`Q_2`$ (see \[10, Example III.4.5\]). Consider the automorphism $`\alpha `$ of $`A`$ that sends a point $`(S_1,S_2,S_3)`$ to $`(S_1,S_2+\psi (S_1),S_3)`$. It is easy to check that $`\alpha (G)=G^{}`$, and it follows that $`A/GA/G^{}`$, as desired, so the Jacobians of $`H(t)`$ and $`Q(t)`$ are isomorphic over $`K`$. ∎

## 8. Examples

###### Example 11.

The curves

$$3y^2=(x^24)(x^4+7x^2+1)$$

and

$$y^2=(x^2+4)(x^4+3x^2+1)$$

over $``$ are geometrically non-isomorphic, and yet their Jacobians are isomorphic to one another over $``$.

###### Proof.

If we take the two curves obtained by taking $`t=2`$ in Theorem 1, replace $`x`$ by $`x/2`$ in each equation, and twist both curves by $`2`$, we get the two curves given above. ∎

###### Example 12.

The curves

$$5y^2=6x^664x^5113x^4+262x^3331x^2+584x+232$$

and

$$2y^2=21x^6236x^5+45x^4440x^3615x^276x553$$

are geometrically non-isomorphic, but their Jacobians become isomorphic to one another over $`(\sqrt{1})`$. Furthermore, their Jacobians are absolutely simple.

###### Proof.

Take $`v=2`$ in Theorem 2. We find that $`\rho _1=w/4`$, $`\rho _2=w/4`$, $`\rho _3=2w+2`$, $`\rho _4=w1`$, $`\rho _5=w1`$, and $`\rho _6=2w+2`$, where $`w=\sqrt{2}`$. The curves $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ in the theorem are $`y^2=f_1`$ and $`y^2=f_2`$, where

$`f_1`$ $`=(30625/32)x^6(67375/16)x^5(305025/64)x^4`$
$`(23765/16)x^3+(28665/16)x^2+(1715/2)x(735/2)`$
and

$$f_2=(553/2)x^6+38x^5(615/2)x^4+220x^3+(45/2)x^2+118x(21/2).$$

Replacing $`x`$ with $`2/(x+1)`$ in $`f_1`$ and multiplying the result by $`(1/5)(2/7)^2(x+1)^6`$ gives rise to the first curve given in the example. Replacing $`x`$ with $`1/x`$ in $`f_2`$ and multiplying the result by $`2x^6`$ gives rise to the second curve. Thus the Jacobians of the two curves become isomorphic to one another over $`(\sqrt{v(v4)})=(\sqrt{1})`$. The Jacobians are simple because we chose our $`v`$ to be $`2`$ modulo $`13`$. ∎

###### Example 13.

The curves

$$y^2+(x^3+x^2+x)y=31x^638x^5217x^4380x^3+304x^2+501x366$$

and

$$11y^2=49x^6378x^5755x^4+110x^32285x^2+732x1368$$

are geometrically non-isomorphic, but their Jacobians are isomorphic to one another over $``$. Furthermore, their Jacobians are absolutely simple.

###### Proof.

Take $`v=4/3`$ in Theorem 2. The curves $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ we obtain are $`y^2=f_1`$ and $`y^2=f_2`$, where

$`f_1`$ $`=(28125/268912)x^6(11250/16807)x^5`$
$`+(3154875/1882384)x^4(812325/470596)x^3`$
$`(57675/470596)x^2+(26325/16807)x(2025/2401)`$
and

$`f_2`$ $`=(131769/38416)x^6+(11979/343)x^5`$
$`(5595645/38416)x^4+(62535/196)x^3`$
$`(3735435/9604)x^2+(86229/343)x(23199/343).`$
If we replace $`x`$ with $`(2x+2)/(x+2)`$ in $`f_1`$, multiply the result by $`(343/5)^2(x+2)^6`$, and twist by $`3`$, we get the curve

$$y^2=125x^6150x^5865x^41518x^3+1217x^2+2004x1464;$$

replacing $`y`$ with $`2y+(x^3+x^2+x)`$ gives the first curve in the example. If we replace $`x`$ with $`(x+2)/(x+1)`$ in $`f_2`$, multiply the result by $`(1/11)196^2(x+1)^6`$, and twist by $`3`$, we get the second curve in the example. The Jacobians of the two curves become isomorphic to one another over $`(\sqrt{v(v4)})=`$. The Jacobians are absolutely simple because their reductions modulo $`17`$ are absolutely simple. ∎

###### Remark.

It is easy to see that the first curve in Example 13 has real-valued points, while the second curve does not. It follows that the real topology of a curve over $``$ is not determined by its Jacobian. Furthermore, suppose we choose a positive integer $`d`$ such that the quadratic twist of the second curve by $`d`$ has rational points. The quadratic twist of the first curve by $`d`$ will still not have any real points, let alone any rational points, so we see that the existence of rational points on a genus-$`2`$ curve over $``$ is not determined by its Jacobian, even if the Jacobian is absolutely simple.

There are also triples $`(r,s,t)`$ that satisfy the hypotheses of Theorem 8 but that do not lie on the elliptic surface discussed in Section 6.

###### Example 14.

The curves

$$y^2=x^624x^4+80x^363x^224x2$$

and

$$y^2=2x^6+6x^5+9x^448x^3+162x171$$

are geometrically non-isomorphic, but their Jacobians become isomorphic to one another over $`(\sqrt{2})`$. Furthermore, their Jacobians are absolutely simple.

###### Proof.

We take $`r=7/4`$ and $`s=1/2`$ and $`t=1/4`$ in Theorem 8. Let $`\xi `$ be a root of the irreducible polynomial

$$x^6+6x^4+9x^2+16$$

and let $`K`$ be the number field generated by $`\xi `$. The polynomial $`h`$ of Section 5 is

$$h=T^3+3/4T^2+9/16T+3/64$$

and its roots are the elements

$`\beta _1`$ $`=(\xi ^47\xi ^212)/16`$
$`\beta _2`$ $`=(\xi ^5+\xi ^45\xi ^3+7\xi ^210\xi )/32`$
$`\beta _3`$ $`=(\xi ^5+\xi ^4+5\xi ^3+7\xi ^2+10\xi )/32`$
of $`K`$. The polynomials $`g_i`$ are given by

$$g_i=x^22\beta _ix+\beta _i^2/2+3/32,$$

and their roots (indexed in accordance with the proof of Theorem 7) are

$`r_1`$ $`=(\xi ^4\xi ^37\xi ^27\xi 12)/16`$
$`r_2`$ $`=(\xi ^4+\xi ^37\xi ^2+7\xi 12)/16`$
$`r_3`$ $`=(\xi ^5\xi ^43\xi ^33\xi ^28\xi 8)/32`$
$`r_4`$ $`=(\xi ^5+3\xi ^47\xi ^3+17\xi ^212\xi +8)/32`$
$`r_5`$ $`=(\xi ^5+3\xi ^4+7\xi ^3+17\xi ^2+12\xi +8)/32`$
$`r_6`$ $`=(\xi ^5\xi ^4+3\xi ^33\xi ^2+8\xi 8)/32`$
We note that the two subgroups $`G`$ and $`G^{}`$ that appear in the proof of Theorem 7 are indeed Galois stable. We compute that the two Richelot duals are $`y^2=f_1`$ and $`y^2=f_2`$, where

$`f_1`$ $`=(81/512)x^6(1215/1024)x^5(21141/8192)x^4(8991/8192)x^3`$
$`(19683/131072)x^2(2187/262144)x+(729/2097152)`$
$`f_2`$ $`=(1863/256)x^6(3159/512)x^5(26973/4096)x^4(11421/4096)x^3`$
$`(76545/65536)x^2(28431/131072)x(13851/1048576).`$
Evaluating $`f_1`$ at $`(2x)/(4x)`$ and multiplying the result by $`(256/9)^2x^6`$ gives the first curve mentioned in the example; evaluating $`f_2`$ at $`x/(4x8)`$ and multiplying the result by $`(128/9)^2(x2)^6`$ gives the second curve. These curves are geometrically non-isomorphic, and their Jacobians become isomorphic over $`(\sqrt{st})=(\sqrt{2})`$. Furthermore, their Jacobians are absolutely simple because their reductions modulo $`7`$ are absolutely simple. ∎

###### Remark.

We obtained Example 14 from a triple $`(r,s,t)`$ that does not lie on the elliptic surface from Section 6, but the same example can be obtained from the triple $`(r,s,t)=(10,1,2)`$, which *does* lie on the surface.

We computed all triples $`(r,s,t)`$ of naïve height at most $`20`$ for which the curve $`𝒞(r,s,t)`$ has two $``$-rational Richelot duals whose Jacobians are absolutely simple and isomorphic over $``$. Of all the examples we found, the triple $`(r,s,t)=(19/3,6,1/6)`$ gave rise to the curves with the smallest coefficients:

###### Example 15.

The curves

$$y^2=9x^6+6x^547x^414x^35x^236x72$$

and

$$y^2=8x^660x^5+235x^4186x^3239x^230x1$$

are geometrically non-isomorphic, but their Jacobians are isomorphic to one another over $``$. Furthermore, their Jacobians are absolutely simple. ∎

###### Example 16.

The Jacobian of the hyperelliptic curve

$$3v^2=17u^8+56u^784u^6+56u^570u^456u^384u^256u17$$

and the Jacobian of the plane quartic

$$x^4+4y^4+4z^4+20x^2y^28x^2z^2+16y^2z^2=0$$

are isomorphic to one another over $``$.

###### Proof.

We take $`t=1`$ in Theorem 3. The plane quartic $`Q(1)`$ from the theorem is the plane quartic given in the example. The hyperelliptic curve from the theorem is given by the pair of homogeneous equations

(7) $`W^2Z^2`$ $`=(1/3)X^4(4/3)Y^4+Z^4`$
(8) $`0`$ $`=X^2+2Y^2+2Z^2.`$
We dehomogenize the equations by setting $`Z=1`$, and we parametrize the conic given by Equation 8 by setting

$`X`$ $`=2(u^2+1)/(u^2+2u1)`$
$`Y`$ $`=(u^22u1)/(u^2+2u1).`$
Taking $`W=v/(u^2+2u1)^4`$ then gives us the hyperelliptic curve in our example. ∎

###### Remark.

We note that the discriminant of the degree-$`8`$ polynomial used to define the hyperelliptic curve in Example 16 is $`2^{94}`$!