\documentclass{mcom-l}\usepackage[active]{srcltx}
%\documentclass{article}

\newcommand{\bndone}{87}
\newcommand{\bndzero}{19}
\usepackage[all]{xy}
\include{macros}
%\bibliographystyle{amsalpha}

\newcommand{\extra}[1]{}

\title{Computational Verification of the Full Birch and
  Swinnerton-Dyer Conjecture for Certain Elliptic Curves}
%\author{Stephen Donnelly and Andrei Jorza and Stefan Patrikis and 
%William A. Stein and Michael Stoll\footnote{Some 
%of these authors might not even know they are authors, so don't blame them for any mistakes below.  Blame William Stein.}}
\author{Work in Progress -- don't trust anything}

\begin{document}
\maketitle
\tableofcontents

\edit{get bibliography to work}
\section{Introduction}
\edit{Write this last.}
\section{Background}

\edit{since everyone reading the paper knows what sha is already, and
  we likely want to safe space, should we omit the diagram and just
  define sha verbally? 

OK -- get rid of it...}

For an elliptic curve $E$ defined over a number field $K$ the
following diagram defines the Selmer and the Shafarevich-Tate groups
as $Sel(E/K)_p=\ker f,\Sha(E/K)=\ker g$:

\[\xymatrix{
0\ar[r] & (E(K)/pE(K)) \ar[r] & H^1(G(\bar{K}/K), E[p]) \ar[r]\ar[d]_{Res}\ar[rd]^f & H^1(G(\bar{K}/K), E)[p] \ar[d]^{g_p} &\\
& & H^1(G(\bar{K_\lambda}/K_\lambda), E[p]) & \prod_{v} H^1(G(\bar{K_v}/K_v), E)[p] &\\
}\]

Recall that $H^1(K, E)= \varinjlim H^1(L/K, E)$, where the direct
limit is taken over all finite Galois extensions $L/K$; since each one
of these groups is torsion, (killed by $[L:K]$,) so is $H^1(K, E)$.
Therefore, $\Sha(E/K)$ is a torsion group, a fact we will later to use
to conclude that $\Sha(E/K)=0$ for curves having $\Sha(E/K)[p]=0$ for
all primes $p$.  In what follows, we will obtain results of the form
$\Sha(E/K)[p]=0$ for almost all $p$, where $[K:\Q]=2$.  The canonical
map $\Sha(E/\Q) \rightarrow \Sha(E/K)$ has kernel contained in
$H^1(K/\Q, E)$, a finite abelian $2$-group, so $\Sha(E/K)[p]=0
\Rightarrow \Sha(E/\Q)[p]=0$ as long as $p \neq 2$.  The difficulty in
studying the Shafarevich-Tate group is the major obstacle to progress
on the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture:

\begin{conjecture}[Birch-Swinnerton-Dyer]
  Let $E$ be an elliptic curve defined over $\Q$.  Then the order of
  vanishing at $s=1$ of $L(E/\Q, s)$equals the rank of $E(\Q)$.  More
  precisely, letting $r= \hbox{rk}_\Z E(\Q)$, and phrasing the
  conjecture in terms of $\# \Sha(E/\Q)$, \[\# \Sha(E/\Q)=
  \frac{L^r(E/\Q,1) |E(\Q)_{tors}|^2}{r! R(E/\Q) \prod_v c_v(E)}\]
  $R(E/\Q)$ denotes the elliptic regulator, the determinant of the
  canonical height pairing matrix on a set of free generators.  The
  $c_v=[E(\Q_v):E_0(\Q_v)]$ for finite places are the Tamagawa
  numbers, measuring bad reduction at $v$ (in particular, they are $1$
  when $E$ has good reduction at $v$), and $c_{\infty}=
  \int_{E(\R)}|\omega|$, where $\omega$ is the invariant differential
  $\frac{dx}{2y+a_1x+a_3}$ attached to a global minimal Weierstrass
  equation.
\end{conjecture} 

Note that a theorem of Cassels (see \cite{MR31:3420}) asserts that,
assuming the Shafarevich-Tate group is finite, the full Birch and
Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture is invariant under isogeny.  For elliptic
curves of analytic rank at most 1, Kolyvagin showed that $\Sha(E/\Q)$
is finite; for these curves it is enough to check the full BSD
conjecture for one curve in the isogeny class.

\section{Derivatives of $L$-functions}

\subsection{Gross-Zagier}
One of the factors in the BSD formula is the derivative of the
$L$-function.  For $K=\Q(\sqrt{-D})$ a quadratic imaginary extension,
let $E^D$ be the quadratic twist associated with $D$, so
$L(E/K,s)=L(E/\Q,s)L(E^D/\Q,s)$.  \edit{necessary?:}If the newform of
$E$ is $f$, then the newform of $E^D$ is $f\otimes
\left(\frac{\cdot}{D}\right)$. On the level of Weierstrass equations,
if $E$ has equation $y^2=x^3+ax+b$, then $E^D$ has equation
$y^2=x^3+D^2ax+D^3b$.

We say that $K$ satisfies the Heegner hypothesis for the elliptic
curve $E/\Q$ of conductor $N$ if all prime factors of $N$ split in
$K$.  This allows the construction of a Heegner point $y_K$ on $E/K$.


The following limit formula was proved by Gross and Zagier
(\cite{gross-zagier}) \edit{we need gross-zagier for $(D, N)=1$. do we
  dig up another reference for this, or just assert it?  include
the theorem below, but dig up a reference for the general case.
Maybe in a paper of Zhang of Columbia University.}
\begin{theorem}[Gross-Zagier]
  If $(D,2N)=1$ then
  \[\hat{h}(y_K)=\frac{u^2\sqrt{D}}{c\int_{E(\mathbb{C})}\omega\wedge
    i\overline{\omega}}L'(E/K,1)=\alpha L'(E/K,1),\](where $\omega$ is
  the invariant differential associated with the elliptic curve and
  $u$ is half the number of units of $\mathcal{O}_K$).
\end{theorem}

The following decomposition theorem relates the behavior of the
$L$-function for $E/K$ and $E/\Q$:

\begin{proposition}
\[E(K)\otimes\Z\left[\frac{1}{2}\right]=E(\Q)\otimes\Z\left[\frac{1}{2}\right]\oplus E^D(\Q)\otimes\Z\left[\frac{1}{2}\right].\]
\end{proposition} 
\begin{proof}
Denote complex conjugation by $\tau$.  We will decompose $E(K)$
into its eigenspaces under the action of $\tau$.  Note that tensoring
with $\Z\left[\frac{1}{2}\right]$ kills 2-torsion.  For $P\in E(K)$ we
have the following decomposition into +1 and -1 eigenspaces of $\tau$:
\[
P= \frac{1+\tau}{2}P + \frac{1-\tau}{2}P.
\]  
But if $P=(x,y)\in E(K)$ satisfies $\tau P=P$, then $P\in E(\Q)$; if
$\tau P=-P= (x, -y)$, then $x\in \Q$ and $y\in \sqrt{D}\Q$.  In
particular, $(Dx, D\sqrt{D}y)\in E^D(\Q)$, and conversely we can
obtain any such point in the $-1$ eigenspace of $E(K)$ from a point of
$E^D(\Q)$.  We may rewrite the decomposition into eigenspaces as the
statement of the proposition.
\end{proof}

\edit{Add result about the index of $E(\Q)$ or $E^D(\Q)$ in $E(K)$, and make the above into a more precise result for whenever $E$ has no $2$-torsion.}

Assume that $L'(E^D/\Q,1)\neq 0$. For elliptic curves of rank 0 or 1
(the only ones for which we will check the full BSD conjecture) this
implies that $E(K)$ has rank 1 and exactly one of the groups
$E(\Q),E^D(\Q)$ has rank 1. By the Gross-Zagier formula, the Heegner point $y_K$ will have
infinite order.

The parity of the root number (the sign of the functional equation of
the $L$-function) is the same as the parity of the rank of $E/\Q$.

\begin{enumerate}

\item If the root number is $-1$ then a generator of $E(K)\otimes\Z\left[\frac{1}{2}\right]$ comes from a generator of $E(\Q)\otimes\Z\left[\frac{1}{2}\right]$ and \[L'(E/K,1)=L'(E/\Q,1)L(E^D/\Q,1).\]

\item If the root number is $+1$ then a generator of $E(K)\otimes\Z\left[\frac{1}{2}\right]$ comes from a generator of $E^D(\Q)\otimes\Z\left[\frac{1}{2}\right]$ and \[L'(E/K,1)=L(E/\Q,1)L'(E^D/\Q,1).\]

\end{enumerate}

Note that this method is faster than computing the rank directly.

\subsection{The Index of the Heegner point}

The Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture may be rephrased \cite{mccallum} using the Gross-Zagier formula as

\begin{conjecture}[Birch-Swinnerton-Dyer]\label{bsd-heegner}For $E$ an elliptic curve of rank 1 over $K$, a quadratic extension of $\Q$, we have \[|\Sha(E/K)|=\left(\frac{[E(K):\Z y_K]}{c\prod c_p}\right)^2.\]  Here the $c_p$ are the Tamagawa numbers, and $c$ is the Manin constant.
\end{conjecture}

To compute $\Sha(E/\Q)$, we will use a refinement of Gross's argument in \cite{}.  For this we need to compute $[E(K):\Z y_K]$ efficiently.

Note that $[E(K):\Z y_K]^2=h(y_K)/h(z)$, where $z$ is a generator of $E(K)$. We saw that we may compute $z$ up to a power of 2, which implies that we may compute $h(z)=2h_\Q(z)$ up to a power of 2.

All that is left is a computation of $L$-functions and of 
$\alpha = \frac{u^2 \sqrt{|D|}}{c\int_{E(\mathbb{C})}\omega\wedge i \overline{\omega}} $. We may compute

\begin{eqnarray*}\int_{E(\mathbb{C})}\omega\wedge i \overline{\omega}&=&
\int_{E(\mathbb{C})}\frac{dx}{y}\wedge i \overline{\frac{dx}{y}}=
i\int_{\mathbb{C}/\Lambda}\wp'(z)\frac{dz}{\wp'(z)}\wedge \overline{\wp'(z)\frac{dz}{\wp'(z)}}\\
&=&
i\int_{\mathbb{C}/\Lambda}dz\wedge d\bar{z}=\int (dx+idy)\wedge (idx+dy)=2\int dx\wedge dy=2a,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $a$ is the volume of the lattice $\mathbb{C}/\Lambda$.

\subsection{Precision} 
%\edit{change title?  this is more about computational precision than efficiency}

In the course of our computations of $[E(K):\Z
y_K]=\sqrt{h(y_K)/h(z)}$ we need to compute the heights with
sufficient precision to obtain the square of $[E(K):\Z y_K]$ after
rounding.

Assume that the rank of $E$ is 0, which is the case for most of the
curves in our databases.

Then $[E(K):\Z y_K]^2=h(y_K)/h(z)=\alpha L(E/\Q,1)L'(E^D/\Q,1)/h(z)$. 

\begin{enumerate}

\item To find $\alpha$ all we need to do is find the area of the period lattice, which can be done with fast convergence (\cite{cremona-algorithms}, section 3.7).

\item To find a generator $z$ of $E/\Q$ we use Cremona's mwrank (\cite{cremona-mwrank}).

\item The computation of the height of a generator of $E/\Q$ is described in detail in \cite{cremona-algorithms} (section 3.4). Moreover, the truncation error is exponentially small; there is an explicit bound on truncation that ensures an error of at most $10^{-k}/2$. \edit{what is $k$? number of terms?}
  
\item Using \cite{cremona-algorithms} section 2.13 we get that
  \[L(E/\Q,1)=2\sum\frac{a_n}{n}e^{-2\pi n/\sqrt{N}},\](where $a_n$
  are the Fourier coefficients of the normalized newform associated
  with $E$). We have the trivial bound $|a_n|\leq n$ and so the
  truncation error is $2\sum e^{-2\pi
    n/\sqrt{N}}=2/(1-e^{-2\pi/\sqrt{N}}) e^{-2\pi k/\sqrt{N}}$.
   \edit{Explain the trivial bound, which is likely true...
Use that $|a_p|<2\sqrt{p}$ and recursion.}
  
\item If $F$ is an elliptic curve of rank 1 and conductor $N$, then a
  similar formula in the same section yields that \[L'(F/\Q,1)=2\sum
  \frac{a_n}{n}G_1(2\pi n/\sqrt{N}),\]where $G_1(x)=\int_1^\infty
  e^{-xy}dy/y\leq e^{-x}/x$. Therefore we may get the same truncation
  bound as before. We apply this to the curve $F=E^D$

\end{enumerate}


\extra{In \cite{mazur-swinnerton-dyer:arithmetic} Mazur and
  Swinnerton-Dyer introduce an analytic and an algebraic $p$-adic
  $L$-function attached to $E$ and they conjecture that the two are
  equal. The analytic $L$-function satisfies a Gross-Zagier formula
  proved by Perrin-Riou (\cite{perrin-riou}):

\begin{theorem}
  Assume that $p$ splits in $K$. For any $\rho\in G(K_\infty/K)$
  (where $K_\infty$ is the unique $\Z_p^2$-extension of $K$) we have
\[\frac{d}{ds}L_p(f,1)(\rho^s)|_{s=0}=\left(1-\frac{1}{\alpha_p(f)}\right)^2\frac{\hat{h}(y_{1,K})}{hu^2},\]where $f$ is the newform attached to $E$, $h$ is the class number of $K$ and $\alpha_p(f)$ is the unit root of $X^2-a(p)X+p=0$.
\end{theorem}

The algebraic $p$-adic $L$-function is defined as the characteristic
series of the Pontryagin dual of the $p^\infty$ Selmer group. Rubin
proved the Mazur and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture for elliptic curves
with complex multiplication by $K$ and primes that split in $K$ so
that $E$ has ordinary good reduction at $p$
(\cite{rubin:main-conjectures}).  }

\section{Kolyvagin's Method and Consequences}


\subsection{Kolyvagin's approach to $\Sha_\textrm{tors}$}

\extra{Assume that $E$ does not have complex multiplication.} 

Let $E$ be an elliptic curve and $K$ be a quadratic extension
staisfying the Heegner hypothesis such that $L^{\prime}(E/K, 1)\neq
0$. Then $y_K$ has infinite order. Kolyvagin
(\cite{kolyvagin:euler_systems}) shows that in this case the rank of
$E(K)$ is 1 and $\Sha(E/K)$ is finite.

Following Gross's account of Kolyvagin's work
(\cite{gross:kolyvagin}), we get the following bounds on
$|\Sha(E/K)|$.

Assume that $E$ does not have complex multiplication.\edit{we don't
  want this to sound like we're assuming CM in what follows; this is
  only for the description of gross's work.  is the description of K's
  argument below necessary?  YES, add something about how we will
  strengthen his argument to say something in the CM case, though he
  did not.} Let $I_K= [E(K): \Z y_K]$.  There exists an integer
$t_{E/K}$ divisible only by primes $p$ (shown to be finite by Serre in
\cite{serre:propgal}) such that the representation
$G(\bar{\Q}/\Q)\rightarrow \hbox{Aut}(E[p])$ is not surjective; then
$|\Sha(E/K)|\hskip 5pt| t_{E/K}I_K^2$.  \edit{looks weird -- change 
all cardinialities to use $\#$ notation.  Use $\mid$ and $\nmid$
for divides and doesn't divide.}

\extra{The existence of an imaginary quadratic extension $K$
  satsifying the Heegner hypothesis and such that $L^{\prime}(E/K,
  1)\neq 0$ is assumed in Kolyvagin's paper; this result was
  simultaneously proven (using different methods) in
  \cite{MR92e:11050} and \cite{MR92a:11058}. Gross notes that if $E$
  is semistable then for all primes $p\geq 11$ the $p$-adic
  representation is surjective.}

\extra{ Kolyvagin uses an Euler system of Heegner points to construct
  certain cohomology classes. Then he applies Tate local duality to
  study the local cohomology classes associated with $Sel(E/K)_p$ and
  finally uses the Chebotarev density theorem to bound $Sel(E/K)_p$.
  The fundamental exact sequence
\[0\to E(K)/pE(K)\to \Sel(E/K)_p\to \Sha(E/K)[p]\to 0\]gives the triviality of $\Sha(E/K)[p]$ in all but finitely many cases.
}

The main assumption on the $p$ where Kolyvagin {\it does} prove
triviality of $p$-torsion of $\Sha$ (i.e., the surjectivity of the mod
$p$ representation) is used in two places in the argument.\edit{make
  clear that this is gross's argument, not kolyvagin's} \edit{these
  $2$ exact sequences below are awkwardly long}

\begin{enumerate}
  
\item The construction of the cohomology classes requires that
  restriction $\Res:H^1(K,E[p])\to H^1(K_n,E[p])^{G(K_n/K)}$ is an
  isomorphism, where $K_n$ is the ring class field of conductor $n$
  over $K$. 
The mod~$p$ representation $G_\Q \to \GL_2(\F_p)$ is surjective so 
$E(K_n)[p]=0$, hence
the inflation-restriction-transgression sequence implies
that $H^1(K,E[p])\to H^1(K_n,E[p])^{G(K_n/K)}$
is an isomorphism.

%an isomor
%\[H^1(K_n/K,E(K_n)[p])\to H^1(K,E[p])\to H^1(K_n,E[p])^{G(K_n/K)}\to H^2(K_n/K,E(K_n)[p]).\]
%The result follows from the fact that 


\item Surjectivity is used in the
  definition of a nondegenerate pairing
\[
H^1(K,E[p])\otimes G(K(E[p]))\to E[p].
\]
For simplicity of notation write $L=K(E[p])$. Again, the inflation
restriction sequence yields
\[H^1(L/K,E(L)[p])\to H^1(K,E[p])\to H^1(L,E[p])^{G(L/K)}\to H^2(L/K,E(L)[p]).\]
Since $G(L)$ acts trivially on $E[p]$, it is enough to prove that
$H^i(L/K,E[p])=0$. The surjectivity of the mod $p$ representation
implies that $G=G(L/K)=G(\Q(E[p])/\Q)\equiv GL_2(\F_p)$. If $Z$ is the
group of scalars the Hochschild-Serre spectral sequence
$H^i(G/Z,H^j(Z,E[p]))\Longrightarrow H^{i+j}(L/K,E[p])$ will give the
result since $|Z|=p-1$ and $E[p]$ is a $p$-group.  \edit{do we want to
  describe gross's argument like this, or just state the result
  needed?  ok as is, I think.}
\end{enumerate}

\subsection{Computational Difficulties}
\edit{rephrase this}
The main computational problem of this method is that there is no universal bound on $p$ so that the mod $p$ representation is surjective for all elliptic curves and primes larger than the bound.

There are a few results towards this bound:
\begin{enumerate}

\item For $E$ semi-stable the representation is surjective if $p\geq 11$ (\cite{gross:kolyvagin}).

\item For general $E$, the representation is surjective when $p\geq 1+ \frac {4\sqrt 6 N}{3} \prod_{l|N}\left(1+\frac{1}{l}\right)$ (\cite{grigor}).\edit{cite something
besides grigor's paper}

\end{enumerate}

Kolyvagin's method yields triviality of the $p$-primary component of $\Sha(E/\Q)$ for all primes that do not divide $I_K$ and for which the mod $p$ representation is surjective. For these primes, information about $\Sha$ may be obtained by using descents, which are very hard in general.

The equivalent statement of the BSD conjecture (\ref{bsd-heegner}) implies that $I_K$ will always be divisible by the Tamagawa numbers $c_p$. Therefore we may hope to reduce work by weakening the surjectivity hypothesis and by dealing with the primes that divide $I_K$ but not $\prod c_p$. \edit{awkward}

\section{Weakening the Hypotheses of Kolyvagin's Method}

In Gross's treatment of Kolyvagin's work, Gross uses the surjectivity of the mod $p$ representation only to prove that $H^i(K(E[p])/K,E[p])=0$ and $H^i(K_n/K,E(K_n)[p])=0$.  Our goal, therefore, is to determine weaker, and easily computable, conditions under which these cohomology groups are trivial.  

\subsection{Irreducibility of the mod $p$ representation}


In a recent thesis, Cha (\cite{cha:kolyvagin}) has in certain cases provided weaker conditions under which Kolyvagin's results hold.  Let $K$ be any finite extension of $\Q$ and let $p$ be an odd prime.  Cha assumes that
\begin{enumerate}

\item There is an unramified prime divisor $v$ of $p$ in $K/\Q$ such that $E$ has either good or multiplicative reduction at $v$.

\item $E(K)[p]=0$.

\end{enumerate}

He then proves the following two theorems:

\begin{enumerate}

\item $H^1(K(E[p^i])/K, E[p^i])=0$ for all $i \geq 1$ unless $p =3$ and $G(K(E[p])/K) \isom G_{except}$, where $G_{except}$ is the subgroup of $GL_2(\F_p)$ given by $$G_{except}= \left\{ \left( \begin{array}{cc}
a & b \\
0 & 1 \end{array} \right) | a \in \F_p^*, b \in \F_p \right\}.$$

\item When $K$ is an imaginary quadratic extension of $\Q$ satisfying the Heegner hypothesis, such that $E(K)$ has rank $1$, let $y_K \in E(K)$ denote the usual Heegner point.  Let $m= \ord_p [E(K):\Z y_K]$ be the largest integer such that $y_K \in p^m E(K)$ ($E(K)[p]=0$, by assumption); also assume $p$ does not divide the discriminant of $K$ and $E$ has good or multiplicative reduction at $p$.  Then if the Galois representation $$\rho_p : G(\bar{\Q}/\Q) \rightarrow Aut(E[p])$$
is irreducible, $$\ord_p |\Sha(E/K)| \leq 2m.$$

\end{enumerate}

Kolyvagin proved the following effective version of his theorem (see \cite{kolyvagin:euler_systems}):

\begin{theorem}[Kolyvagin] Let $R$ be the ring of endomorphisms of $E$, with $F$ its field of fractions.  Suppose the Heegner point $y_K$ has infinite order.  Then if $p$ is an odd prime unramified in $F$ such that $G(F(E[p])/F)= Aut_R(E[p])$, $$\ord_p |\Sha(E/K)| \leq 2 \ord_p [E(K): \Z y_K].$$
\end{theorem}


Assuming $E$ does not have complex multiplication, the hypotheses of both these theorems imply $E(K)[p]=0$, so, in particular, $\Sha(E/K)$ has no $p$-torsion if $p~\nmid~[E(K):~\Z y_K]$ (for a proof that irreducibility of the mod-$p$ representation over $\Q$ implies $E(K)[p]=0$, see Lemma~\ref{lemma:stein}).  

%% Mazur proves in \cite{mazur:rational} that for $p>37$ the
%% representation is irreducible for $E$ not having complex
%% multiplication. \edit{this next sentence is quite imprecise, and not
%%   entirely true}This reduces the calculation of $|\Sha(E/\Q)|$ to
%% dealing with its $p$-primary components for a few exceptional primes
%% $p$ (this means $p\leq 37$ in general and $p\leq 7$ for semistable curves) as well
%% as the primes dividing $I_K=[E(K):\Z y_K]$.

 \edit{add
  sentence: what ``these'' are.} These are generally dealt with by
$p$-descent, however, and Cha's assumption on the reduction of $E$ at
a given prime makes the result ineffective for potentially large prime
divisors of the conductor of $E$ (for which $E$ has additive
reduction).  The assumption on irreducibility of the Galois
representation is, from a computational perspective, a great
improvement on Kolyvagin's original assumption, but we can further
improve this hypothesis to one about torsion over $K$.



\subsection{Reducing the hypotheses to statements about torsion}~\label{proofs}

\subsubsection{The mod $p$ representation}

\extra{The following lemma (exercise $6$ in \cite{ribet-stein:serre}) will be useful in the next two propositions.}
\begin{lemma}\label{weil-pairing-lemma}
The determinant of the mod $p$ representation attached to $E$
is the cyclotomic character, and is therefore surjective. 
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
  The Weil pairing induces an isomorphism of $G(\bar{\Q}/\Q)$-modules
  $E[p] \wedge E[p] \cong \mu_{p}$.  Let us fix a basis $\{e_1, e_2\}$
  of $E[p]$, with respect to which $\rho_{p}(\sigma)$ has the form
  $\abcd{a}{b}{c}{d}$.  Then $$\sigma(e_1 \wedge e_2)= (ae_1+ce_2)
  \wedge (be_1+de_2)= \hbox{det}(\rho_{p}(\sigma))e_1 \wedge e_2.$$
  It
  follows that composition with the determinant gives the cyclotomic
  character (i.e., the action of $G(\bar{\Q}/\Q)$ on $\mu_{p}$), which
  is clearly surjective.

\end{proof}

Ultimately, we will choose the quadratic field $K$ to be linearly disjoint from $\Q(E[p])$, so $G(K(E[p]/K) \isom G(\Q(E[p])/\Q)$.  Thus, it will suffice to show vanishing of $H^i(\Q(E[p])/\Q, E[p])$.


Let $G=G(\Q(E[p])/\Q)$ be the image of the mod $p$ representation. If
$p\nmid |G|$, then $H^i(G,E[p])=0$ since $E[p]$ is a $p$-group.
Therefore we may assume $p\mid \#G$.  By Proposition $15$ of
\cite{serre:propgal}, $G$ either contains $SL_2(\F_p)$ or is contained
in a Borel subgroup of $GL_2(\F_p)$. \edit{should we define borel
  subgroups of $GL$?  definitely, but only in the ``extra'' part.}  If $G$ contains $SL_2(\F_p)$ then \extra{$G$
  contains the scalar $-1$.} Lemma \ref{weil-pairing-lemma} implies
that $\det: G \rightarrow \F_p^*$ is surjective, so $G= GL_2(\F_p)$.
\edit{is now a more appropriate time to note what andrei has shifted
  to proposition 5.5?}  \edit{should we throw out this lemma, since
  it's already proven in gross's paper?  it's the surjective
  representation case, which we already know.  YES, but just move it to ``extra''.}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma1}If $G=GL_2(\F_p)$ then $H^i(G,E[p])=0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $Z$ be the subgroup of scalars. Clearly $E[p]^Z=0$. Consider the Hochshild-Serre spectral sequence 
\[H^i(G/Z,H^j(Z,E[p]))\Longrightarrow H^{i+j}(G,E[p]);\]If $j>0$ then the group $H^j(Z,E[p])=0$ because $|Z|=p-1$ and $E[p]$ is a $p$-group. If $j=0$ then $H^j(Z,E[p])=E[p]^Z=0$. Therefore $H^i(G,E[p])=0$.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}\label{lemma2}
Assume that $G$ is contained in a Borel subgroup of $GL_2(\F_p)$. Moreover, assume that (with respect to some basis of $E[p]$), $G$ acts as $\abcd {\chi}{*}{0}{\psi}$   
%$\left(\begin{matrix}\chi&*\\0&\psi\end{matrix}\right)$% 
such that $\chi$ and $\psi$ are nontrivial characters. Then $H^i(G,E[p])=0$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Let $W$ be the (unique) $p$-Sylow subgroup of $\abcd {*}{*}{0}{*}$. 
%$\left( \begin{array}{cc}
%* & * \\
%0 & * \end{array} \right)$ consisting of matrices of the form $\left( \begin{array}{cc}
%1 & * \\
%0 & 1 \end{array} \right)$.  

We may assume $W \subset G$, for otherwise $G$ has order prime to $p$, and the cohomology clearly vanishes. 

We begin by explicitly computing $H^j(W, E[p])$ using the fact that $W$ is cyclic (generated by $w= \abcd {1}{1}{0}{1}$,
%\left( \begin{array}{cc}
%1 & 1 \\
%0 & 1 \end{array} \right)$
for instance).  Recall that for cyclic groups we can compute cohomology using the particularly simple projective resolution $$...\rightarrow \Z[W] \rightarrow \Z[W] \rightarrow \Z \rightarrow 0$$
where the boundary maps alternate between $w-1$ and $\hbox{Norm}= \sum_{i=0}^{p-1} w^i$ (i.e., the maps are given by multiplication in the group ring $\Z[W]$).  Then we immediately see that \[H^j(W, E[p])= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\hbox{ker}(1-w)/\hbox{im}(\hbox{Norm}(w))= \left\langle \left( \begin{smallmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{smallmatrix} \right) \right\rangle & \hbox{if $j$ is even}; \\
\hbox{ker(Norm}(w))/\hbox{im}(1-w)= \F_p^2/\left\langle \left( \begin{smallmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{smallmatrix} \right) \right\rangle & \hbox{if $j$ is odd} \end{array} \right\}.\]

Since $\chi$ and $\psi$ are nontrivial by assumption, the $G/W$-invariants for both of these groups are trivial.  Thus, $H^j(W, E[p])^{G/W}=0$ for $j \geq 0$.  Let us then consider the Hochschild-Serre spectral sequence $$H^i(G/W, H^j(W, \F_p^2)) \Rightarrow H^{i+j}(G, \F_p^2).$$

For $i>0$, since $|G/W|$ is prime to $p$, and $H^j(W, \F_p^2)$ is a $p$-group ($\forall j$), the group $H^i(G/W, H^j(W, \F_p^2))$ is trivial.  But when $i=0$ we have just computed that $H^i(G/W, H^j(W, \F_p^2))= H^j(W, \F_p^2)^{G/W}=0$, so the entire spectral sequence is trivial, and we conclude that $H^{n}(G, E[p])=0$ for all $n \geq 0$.   
\end{proof}

\extra{We will apply the previous two lemmas when $G$ is the image of the mod $p$ representation.}

%\subsubsection{Rational Torsion Points and Rational Isogenies}
\subsubsection{Vanishing of Cohomology Groups I}

%\edit{best section name? saying rational isogenies sounds like there's going to be 
% some irreducibility assumption lurking}

The next propositions show how to reduce the hypothesis that
$H^i(\Q(E[p])/\Q)=0$ to a statement about torsion and rational
isogeny. In terms of the mod $p$ representation, the fact that $E$ has
no $\Q$-rational $p$-isogeny corresponds to the irreducubility of the
representation.

\begin{proposition}
Suppose $E$ has no $\Q$-rational $p$-isogeny.  Then $H^i(\Q(E[p])/\Q, E[p])=0$ for all $i >0$.
\end{proposition} 

\begin{proof}
The assumption implies that the mod $p$ representation is irreducible.

As we already noted, the problem reduces to the case when either $G$ is contained in a Borel subgroup or $G=GL_2(\F_p)$. The latter case follows from Lemma \ref{lemma1}. The former case contradicts the hypothesis since $E[p]$ is reducible under the action of a Borel subgroup.
\end{proof}

For the above result, we used the irreducibility of the representation to deal with the case when $G$ was not contained in a Borel subgroup. The following proposition completes the proof of the general case:

\begin{proposition}
Suppose that for all elliptic curves $E'$ $p$-isogenous to $E$ over $\Q$ we have $E'(\Q)[p]=0$. Then $H^i(\Q(E[p]/\Q, E[p])=0$ for all $i>0$. 
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
The proof of the previous proposition works here except for the case when $G$ is contained in a Borel subgroup. For some basis of $E[p]$, $G$ acts as $\abcd {\chi}{*}{0}{\psi}$
%$\left( \begin{array}{cc}
%\chi & * \\
%0 & \psi \end{array} \right)$ 
for characters $\chi$ and $\psi$.  Lemma \ref{lemma2} proves the proposition if the characters are not trivial.

Assume that $\chi$ is trivial. Then all matrices of the above form fix 
$\left( \begin{smallmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{smallmatrix} \right)$.  Therefore there is a point of $E[p]$ fixed by the action of $G$, which contradicts the assumption that $E(\Q)[p]=0$.  

Assume that $\psi$ is trivial.  Matrices of the above form preserve the line generated by $\left( \begin{smallmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{smallmatrix} \right)$, so this line forms a $G(\bar{\Q}/\Q)$-stable subspace of $E[p]$.  In particular, there exists an isogeny over $\Q$ to a curve $E^\prime$ having this line as kernel.  The image of the complementary line generated by $\left( \begin{smallmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \end{smallmatrix} \right)$ is a $1$-dimensional subspace of $E^{\prime}[p]$, and if $\psi=1$, $G(\bar{\Q}/\Q)$ clearly acts trivially on this subspace (we have an isomorphism of Galois modules $E/\left\langle \left( \begin{smallmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{smallmatrix} \right) \right\rangle \cong E^\prime$).  Thus, $E^{\prime}(\Q)[p]$ is nontrivial, contradicting our assumption.  

\end{proof}

%\subsubsection{$K$-rational Torsion Points}
\subsubsection{Vanishing of Cohomology Groups II}

We will verify that $H^i(K_n/K,E(K_n)[p])=0$ under a simple condition
on $p$-torsion over $K$.

\begin{proposition}
Let $E$ be an elliptic curve with $E(K)[p]=0$, where $p>3$ or, if $p=3$, $K \neq \Q(\mu_3)$.  Let $L$ be a finite abelian extension of $K$.  Then $H^i(L/K, E(L)[p]) =0$ for all $i \geq 1$.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
  The proof is similar to the previous use of Sylow groups and the
  Hochschild-Serre spectral sequence.  
\edit{do we want to replace the
    spectral sequence with a more down-to-earth inf-res argument, or
    keep the exposition uniform? -- I'd say to use inf-res here.  Include
the spectral sequence version in the extra version.}  
Write the abelian group $G(L/K)$ as
  a direct sum $P \oplus P^\prime$, where $P$ is its Sylow
  $p$-subgroup, so $(p, \#{P^\prime})=1$.  We claim that the subgroup
  of $E(L)[p]$ invariant under $P^\prime$ is trivial.  Let $G =
  G(L/K)/H$, where $H$ is the subgroup of $G(L/K)$ that acts trivially
  on $E(L)[p]$.  If $(\#G, p)=1$, $P\subseteq H$, so $P^\prime$
  surjects onto $G$.  As there is no nontrivial element of $E(L)[p]$
  invariant under all of $G(L/K)$ (by the assumption on $E(K)[p]$),
  the same then holds for $P^\prime$.

If $p|\#G$, we cannot have $E(L)[p]= \F_p$: the latter group has
automorphism group isomorphic to $\F_p^*$, of order $p-1$, but if
$p|\#G$, $G$ would give rise to at least $p$ distinct automorphisms.
Thus, $E(L)[p]$ is the full $p$-torsion subgroup of $E$, and we can
identify $G$ with a subgroup of $GL_2(\F_p)$ acting on $E(L)[p]=
(\F_p)^2$.

We can choose a basis of $(\F_p)^2$ so that $G$ contains the
subgroup $\abcd{1}{x}{0}{1}$
%$\left( \begin{array}{cc}
%    1 & x \\
%    0 & 1 \end{array} \right)$, 
where $x \in \F_p$.  Being abelian, $G$ must be contained in the
normalizer of this subgroup, so 
%$G \subseteq \{ \left(
%  \begin{array}{cc}
%    a & b \\
%    0 & a \end{array} \right) | a,b \in \Z/p\Z \}$, 
$G \subseteq \{ \abcd{a}{b}{0}{a} : a \in \F_p^*, b \in \F_p \}$,
and we claim that
$G$ contains an element with $a \neq 1$.  Since $E[p]= E(L)[p]$, the
representation $G(\bar{\Q}/K) \rightarrow \hbox{Aut}(E[p])$ factors
through $G(L/K)$ (recall that the image of the representation is
$G(K(E[p])/K)$).  The determinant of the mod-$p$ representation of
$G(\bar{\Q}/\Q)$ is surjective (onto $\F_p^*$), and $[K:\Q]=2$, so the
character $G(\bar{K}/K) \rightarrow \F_p^*$ has image of index at most
$2$ in $F_p^*$.  That is, it contains at least $\frac{p-1}{2}$
elements, the squares in $\F_p^*$.  Thus, for $p>3$, $G$ contains an
element with non-trivial determinant having the form
$\abcd{a}{b}{0}{a}$
%%  $\left(
%%   \begin{array}{cc}
%%     a & b \\
%%     0 & a \end{array} \right)$ 
with $a \neq 1$.  Now, ${\abcd {a}{b}{0}{a}}^p= \abcd{a}{0}{0}{a}$
since we're working mod $p$, and it follows that $G(L/K)$ contains an
element that acts as a nontrivial scalar.  In particular, since the
group of scalars of $GL_2(\F_p)$ has $p-1$ elements, this nontrivial
scalar must be an element of $P^\prime$.  Therefore
$E(L)[p]^{P^\prime}=0$.

The result will now follow from the Hochschild-Serre spectral sequence
$$H^i(P',H^j(P,E(L)[p]^{P^\prime}))\Longrightarrow
H^{i+j}(L/K,E(L)[p]).$$ Then we must have $H^n(L/K,E(L)[p])=0$ for
$n>0$.

If $p=3$, $E(L)[3]=E[3] \Rightarrow \mu_3 \subset L \Rightarrow
K=\Q(\mu_3)$.  The last implication holds because $G(L/\Q)$ is abelian
since $G(K_n/K)$ and $G(K/\Q)$ are, so it has a unique index $2$
subgroup; both $K$ and $\Q(\mu_3)$ correspond to index $2$ subgroups
by elementary Galois theory.  This contradicts our assumption on $K$.
\end{proof}

\begin{corollary}
\edit{state hypothesis.}
\[H^i(K_n/K,E(K_n)[p])=0.\]
\end{corollary}

The relation between the two section is given by the following lemma:
\edit{this sentence is awkward; should we say something about the converse to the following statement NOT holding?}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:stein} Let $E/\Q$ be an elliptic curve, $K$ a quadratic extension of $\Q$, and $p>3$ an odd prime such that $E(K)[p] \neq 0$.  Then the mod-$p$ representation over $\Q$ is reducible.  In particular, $E$ has a $\Q$-rational $p$-isogeny.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  Let $P$ be a nontrivial element of $E(K)[p]$, and let $\tau$ be a
  lift of complex conjugation in $G(K/\Q)$ to $G(\bar{\Q}/\Q)$.  If
  $\tau P$ is a multiple of $P$, then the one-dimensional subspace of
  $E[p]$ generated by $P$ is $G(\bar{\Q}/\Q)$-stable, so the
  representation over $\Q$ is reducible.  Else, $P$ and $\tau P$
  generate all of $E[p]$.  By definition, $\tau P \in E(K)$, so
  $E(K)[p]= E[p]$, and because of the Weil pairing, $\mu_p \subset K$.
  For $p>3$, this is a contradiction.
\end{proof}

\edit{summarize the relation between the lemma and $E[p]$ being
irreducible.}

In summary, we can now apply Kolyvagin's \edit{Gross's?} arguments (as
given in \cite{gross:kolyvagin}) to show that $\Sha(E/\Q)[p]=0$ for
all odd primes $p$ such that all curves in the $\Q$-isogeny class of
$E$ have no $K$-rational $p$-torsion and $p \nmid I_K$ 

\extra{\begin{remark} If $E(K)[p] \neq 0$ the subsequent situation is
    particularly easy to deal with because $p$-descent is much more
    easily implemented with a known rational $p$-torsion point.
\end{remark}}


\subsubsection{Existence of K}~\label{Kexists}

Here we collect the results that imply the existence of quadratic
imaginary extensions $K/\Q$ such that $K$ satisfies the Heegner
hypothesis and $\ord_{s=1}L(E/K) =1$.  Then the Heegner point $y_K$
has infinite order, so we may apply the work of Kolyvagin to conclude
that $\Sha(E/K)$ is finite and $E(K)$ has rank $1$.  There are two
cases to consider:

\begin{enumerate}

\item If $\hbox{ord}_{s=1}L(E/\Q) =0$, then the papers \cite{MR92e:11050} and \cite{MR92a:11058} both imply the existence of infinitely many distinct $K$ (that is, with different fundamental discriminants) satisfying our two hypotheses.
  
\item If $\hbox{ord}_{s=1}L(E/\Q) =1$, then a result of Waldspurger
  (\cite{MR87g:11061b}) does the trick\edit{too colloquial}, as does the above result of
  Bump-Friedberg-Hoffstein.

\end{enumerate}

See also \cite{MR2020572} for a clear overview of how all of these results-- along with the work of Gross-Zagier and Kolyvagin-- fit together to settle the weak BSD conjecture for elliptic curves of analytic rank $0$ or $1$.

In our computations, however, we do not merely take any $K$ satisfying
the Heegner hypothesis and the analytic rank hypothesis.  We instead
choose $K$ to be linearly disjoint from the fields $\Q(E[p])$ for all
primes $p$, and we have observed \edit{reformat this section; at this
  point in the paper we haven't actually made this observation yet}
that a simple way to ensure this is to require the discriminant of $K$
($:= D$) to be divisible by at least $2$ distinct odd primes.  A
conjecture of Goldfeld says that the density of discriminants $D$ such
that $K= \Q(\sqrt{D})$ satisfies our hypotheses is roughly
$\frac{1}{2}$ (see \cite{MR81i:12014}).  Thus far the best proven
result is due to Ono and Skinner, who showed (\cite{MR2000a:11077})
that, in the case $\ord_{s=1}L(E/\Q)=0$, the number of such
discriminants has density at least on the order of magnitude of
$\frac{1}{\log X}$.  Unfortunately, this is precisely the density of
the prime numbers, so a density argument will not help us here (Ono
and Skinner's result also does not distinguish between discriminants
that give rise to the same imaginary quadratic extension).  Note that
Ono later improved this theorem (by a small power of $\log X$) under
the assumption that $E/\Q[2]=0$ (see \cite{MR2002a:11051}).

In the worst case, the only $K$ that exist and satisfy both of our
hypotheses have only a single odd prime divisor $p$ of their
discriminants.  But then for $\ell \neq p$, $K$ is linearly disjoint
from $\Q(E[\ell])$, so we can run our algorithm as before, only adding
$p$ to the list of ``bad primes'' on which we have to perform
descents.  We have used the fact that the only ramified primes in
$\Q(E[\ell])/\Q$ are, by the criterion of N\'eron-Ogg-Shafarevich (see
\cite{silverman:aec}), primes dividing the conductor $N$ of $E$ and
$\ell$ itself.

This bad prime $p$ might be large, however, making the $p$-descent
cumbersome.  In that case, it would be better in practice to produce a
second field $K'$ satisfying our hypotheses (recall that infinitely
many exist).  Unless $K'=K$, $K'$ is linearly disjoint from $\Q(E[p])$
since $p$ will not ramify in $K'$.  There is a good chance that we
might be able to show $\Sha(E/K)[p]=0$, but it is possible that a
curve in $E$'s isogeny class has $p$-torsion or that $y_K$ is a
multiple of $p$ in $E(K)$.  There are universal bounds on the possible
$p$-torsion for quadratic fields, so the problematic primes resulting
from torsion will still be 'small,' but the ever-mysterious index of
the Heegner point may keep us from getting information at large primes
(in particular, the contributions from nontrivial elements of the
Shafarevich-Tate group, or large Tamagawa numbers).  In practice, the
bad primes are usually small, but see \edit{later section for tamagawa
  discussion}.

\section{Elliptic Curves with Complex Multiplication}

Unlike Gross's result, which relies on Serre's theorem for elliptic
curves without complex multiplication, the results of section
\ref{proofs} do not make any assumptions on $\End(E)$.  In the case of
curves with complex multiplication, however, Rubin has obtained much
stronger results (see \cite{rubin:main-conjectures}).

Perrin-Riou proves \cite{perrin-riou} the following corollaries to the
$p$-adic Gross-Zagier type formula: \edit{necessary? or just state
  Rubin's results? move to extra.}

\begin{proposition}

\begin{enumerate}
  
\item If $f$ is the normalized newform attached to an elliptic curve
  with complex multiplication then $L_p$ has analytic rank 1 if and
  only if $L$ has analytic rank 1.
  
\item If the rank of $L_p$ is 1 then the $p$-part of the Birch and
  Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture is true up to a unit of $\Z_p$.

\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}

This follows from the Gross-Zagier type formula and a similar formula
for the algebraic $p$-adic $L$-series obtained in
\cite{perrin-riou:thesis}.

Rubin proves the following theorem (\cite{rubin:main-conjectures})

\edit{in item $1$ of the theorem, should it be $L(E/\Q, 1) \neq 0$; i.e., isn't this the rank $0$ case?  no, it's $K$ -- emphasize this!!!}
\begin{theorem} Let $E$ have complex multiplication by $K$. (Since the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture is isogeny-invariant we may assume that $End(E)=\mathcal{O}_K$.)
\begin{enumerate}
  
\item If $L(E/K,1)\neq 0$ then for all primes $\mathfrak{p}$ not
  dividing $|\mathcal{O}_K^\times|$ we have
  \[|\Sha[\mathfrak{p}^\infty]|=\mathbb{N}(\mathfrak{p})^{m(\mathfrak{p})},\]where
  $m(\mathfrak{p})=\ord_\mathfrak{p}\left(|E(K)|\frac{L(\bar{\psi},1)}{\Omega}\right)$,
  where $\psi$ is the Hecke character associated to $E$.
  
\item If the analytic rank of~$E$ over~$K$ is 1 then Perrin-Riou's work
  together with the conjecture of Mazur and Swinnerton-Dyer implies
  that $\Sha(E/\Q)[p]$ is as expected from the BSD conjecture whenever
  $p>2$ splits in $K$.

\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}

\edit{insert brief discussion of how rubin's results help, for example:}

If we choose $K$ such that $\mathcal{O}_K^*= \{\pm 1\}$, case $(1)$ of Rubin's result proves, modulo the $2$-component of $\Sha$, the full BSD conjecture for CM curves with analytic rank $0$.  Part $(2)$ of the theorem cannot be so systematically applied because of the condition that $p$ split in $K$, but at an {\em ad hoc} level it may help us resolve certain troublesome cases that arise in our computations.   

\section{Kato's Theorem}
\edit{write this section}

\section{Algorithm to Bound $\Sha$}


\begin{algorithm}
{\sf 
  
  Let $E$ be an elliptic curve over $\Q$ of analytic rank at most $1$.
  The following algorithm computes $|\Sha(E/\Q)[p]|$ for {\em all}
  primes $p$.
\begin{enumerate}
  
\item{}[Choose $K$] Choose two quadratic imaginary fields $K$ that
  satisfy the Heegner hypothesis, such that $E/K$ has analytic rank 1.
  
\item{}[Find $p$-torsion] Decide for which primes $p$ there is a
  curve $E'$ that is $\Q$-isogenous to $E$ such that $E'(\Q)[p]\neq 0$.
  Let $B$ be the product of these primes and 2.
  
\item{}[Root number] Compute the root number of $E$.
  
\item{}[Compute Mordell-Weil]
\begin{enumerate}
\item If the root number is $-1$, compute $E(\Q)$ and let $z$ be a
  generator modulo torsion.
\item If the root number is $+1$, compute $E^D(\Q)$, and let $z$ be a
  generator modulo torsion.
\end{enumerate}

\item{}[Height of Heegner point] Compute the \edit{is silverman's $\hat{h}$ standard for canonical height?} height $h_K(y_K)$.

%[[  and $\|\omega_E\|^2$ is the 
%volume of $E(\C)$, which is twice the volume of the
%period lattice $\Z\omega_1 + \Z\omega_2$ associated
%to $E$ and $\omega_E$. 
%The differential $\omega_E$ is the $c\cdot \omega$, where
%$c$ is the Manin constant for $E$ and $\omega$ is
%a N\'eron differential on $E$ (we are assuming $E$
%is modular here, which is OK.) 
% [[say something about
%computing $c\omega$... cite Section 2.14 of Cremona's
%book.]]   If $\pi:X_0(N)\to E$ is the modular parametrization,
%then $\pi^*(\omega) = c\cdot \omega_E$, where 
%$\omega_E = f(q)\frac{dq}{q} \in \H^0(X_0(N),\Omega_{X_0(N)})$
%is the normalized cuspidal eigenform corresponding to~$E$.]]

\item{}[Index of Heegner point] 
Compute 
\edit{only true up to $E(K)_{tors}$; do we want to rexpress in terms of $I_K'=[E(K)/E(K)_{tors}:\Z y_K]$?} $$I_K = \sqrt{h_K(y_K)/h_K(z)} = [E(K):\Z y_K].$$

\item{}[Annihilate $\Sha$] Then $\Sha(E/\Q)[p] = 0$ for all primes
  $p\nmid B \cdot I_K$.
  
\item{}[$p$-descent] For each prime $p\mid B \cdot I_K$, do a
  $p$-descent and compute $\Sha(E/\Q)[p]$.  
\edit{given the tamagawa problem, this note is false; but we should comment at some point that in many cases $p$-descent will be possible b/c rational $p$-isogenies exist (currently done in section \ref{descent}), but in many cases not!}
(Note that this is likely
  not too difficult because there is a $p$-torsion point over $K$ on a
  curve $F$ that is $\Q$-isogenous to $E$.  Ideas: If an isogeny from
  $E$ to $F$ has degree divisible by $p$, then $E$ has a rational
  $p$-isogeny, which makes $p$-descent easier.  If an isogeny from $E$
  to $F$ has degree coprime to $p$, then $\Sha(F/\Q)[p]\isom
  \Sha(E/\Q)[p]$, and $F$ has a $K$-rational $p$-torsion point, so
  $p$-descent on $F$ should be relatively easy.)  To reduce the number
  of $p$ for which one must do a $p$-descent, use several $K$.

\end{enumerate}
}
\end{algorithm}
 
\begin{proof}
  Step 1 guarantees that $G(K(E[p])/K)\isom G(\Q(E[p])/\Q)$.  The
  results cited in section ~\ref{Kexists} ensure that we can always
  find such $K$. Step 2 will determine the primes for which the
  weakened hypothesis fails and so the primes for which we must do
  descent.
  
  Since the root number and the rank have the same parity, the fact
  that the rank is at most 1 implies that the root number determines
  the rank of the curve over $\Q$. Therefore, by computing the
  Mordell-Weil group of $E$ or $E^D$ over $\Q$ (but only one of them)
  we can find a \edit{almost} generator of $E(K)$.  Step 6 computes the last set of
  primes at which we need descent.
  
  Finally, the last step takes care of the exceptional primes.
\end{proof}


\edit{omit the following comment?  but note that in certain cases we can use Rubin or Kato to get stronger results.
NO.  How about it two additional steps to the algorithm, one taking into
account CM possibility, the other taking into account Kato.  Then
reference CM and Kato sections in the proof of the algorithm.}
For elliptic curves with complex multiplication by $K$, if $E$ has
rank 0 we may just do descent for the primes dividing
$|\mathcal{O}_K^\times|$. If $E$ has rank 1, then we need to take care
of the primes that do not split in $K$. We may also apply Kolyvagin's
method with our weakened (computationally viable) hypotheses to
eliminate some of these primes. Then we may do descent on those.


\section{Other Algorithms}

\subsection{Computing the Mordell-Weil group}

While in general an unsolved problem, finding a complete set of (free)
Mordell-Weil generators when the rank of the curve is already known is
a fairly simple, if sometimes time-consuming, problem.  Basically, one
searches for points by naive height until a point of infinite order is
found (the easiest way to check whether a point on $E(\Q)$ has
infinite order is to compute its multiples up to $12$; if none of
these is zero, the point cannot have finite order by Mazur's theorem
on torsion subgroups of elliptic curves over $\Q$).  The first point
of infinite order found (call it $P$) may not be a generator, however:
it may only generate a finite-index subgroup of $E(\Q)$.  But if it is
a nontrivial multiple of a generator, the canonical height of the
generator is at most $\frac{1}{4} \hat{h}(P)$ (the canonical height).
By a result of Silverman \edit{should we cite silverman, or the better
  result of siksek? we should definitely cite siksek, i.e., both.}, the naive
height of the generator may then be bounded, and an exhaustive
computation will then turn it up if it exists.  For more details on
both the theory and implementation of this method, see
\cite{cremona:algs} or the updated version available on Cremona's
webpage (http://www.maths.nott.ac.uk/personal/jec/book/fulltext/index.html).
\edit{move to bibliography.}

\subsection{p-descents}~\label{descent}

Traditionally, performing a $p$-descent on $E/\Q$ means computing the
quotient group $E(\Q)/pE(\Q)$ by first computing the $p$-Selmer group
and then somehow trying to get a handle on $\Sha(E/\Q)[p]$.  Our task
is much simpler since we already know the rank of any curve we are
working with (by Kolyvagin's theorem).  In particular,
$\hbox{dim}_{\F_p} E(\Q)/pE(\Q) = \hbox{rk}_\Z E(\Q) +
\hbox{dim}_{\F_p}E(\Q)[p]$; we know all of these quantities, so we can
compute $\Sha(E/\Q)[p]$ (our ultimate goal) by simply finding the
order of the $p$-Selmer group and applying the fundamental exact
sequence $$0 \rightarrow E(\Q)/pE(\Q) \rightarrow Sel^p(E/\Q)
\rightarrow \Sha(E/\Q)[p] \rightarrow 0.$$

$Sel^p(E/\Q)$ is effectively computable, so this poses no problem for
the validity of our algorithm.  In all cases this calculation can be
reduced to ``standard'' computations over number fields.  In
particular, for $S$ a set of ``bad primes'' (traditionally $p$ and
places of bad reduction for $E/\Q$), we have to determine the $p$-part
of the $S$-class group and a basis of the $S$-units modulo
$p^{th}$-powers.  For a full discussion and improvements to the basic
approach, see \cite{MR2004g:11045}.  The method is practical when
$p=2$ or $p=3$ (given that we are working over $\Q$), but for larger
primes current limitations in computational number theory may make the
theoretically possible calculations infeasible.  Fortunately, many of
our examples are exceptional cases having $K$-rational $p$-torsion.
This implies they have rational $p$-isogenies (for a proof, see lemma \ref{lemma:stein}), and Schaefer and Stoll, for instance, perform a successful
$13$-descent on a curve using the fact that it has a rational
$13$-isogeny.

\edit{the following 2 sections were never really written; do we want as much as sections 9.1 and 9.2 for these (for consistency), or is that just a waste of space?  One
paragraph each.  If referee complains remove.}
\subsection{Finding Isogenies}
Cremona (\cite{cremona:algorithms}, section 3.8) describes an
algorithm to compute all isogenous curves for any given elliptic curve
over $\Q$.

\edit{what is this table doing at the top of the page?}

\subsection{Root Number}
Cremona's reference?

\section{Results of Computations}

\subsection{Introduction}
This project begins with the following lofty goal:
\begin{goal}\label{goal:bsd}
Prove the full Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer for every elliptic
curve over~$\Q$ of conductor at most $1000$.
\end{goal}

The BSD conjecture asserts that
$\ord_{s=1}L(E,s) = \dim E(\Q)\tensor\Q$
and
$$
  \frac{L^{(r)}(E,1)}{r!} = 
   \frac{\Omega_E \cdot \prod c_p \cdot \Reg_E\cdot \#\Sha(E)}
    {\#E(\Q)_{\tor}^2} 
$$

The rank part is a theorem of Kolyvagin, when
$\ord_{s=1}L(E,s) \leq 1$.

By Tate's theorem about isogeny invariance of the BSD conjecture, to
achieve the goal it suffices to prove the conjecture for each optimal
elliptic curve quotient of $X_0(N)$ for $N\leq 1000$.  The rank part
of the conjecture (when $\ord_{s=1}L(E,s)>1$) has been verified by
Cremona for curves with $N\leq 25000$, and all of the quantities in
the conjecture, except for $\#\Sha(E/\Q)$ have been computed for
curves of conductor $\leq 25000$.  Inspecting that data shows that
Goal~\ref{goal:bsd} amounts to proving that $\Sha(E)$ is {\em trivial}
for all but four optimal elliptic curves with conductor at most $1000$.
The four exceptions are given in Table~\ref{tab:sha}.

We can prove that $\Sha(E)$ is at least as big as expected for $571A$
using the method of Cremona-Mazur or a $3$-descent, and expect to be
able to show that $\Sha(E)$ is at most of order $9$ using the thoerem
stated at the beginning of McCallum's article on Kolyvagin's work, and
possibly also Kato's theorem.  We can hopefully show the $2$-primary
part of $\Sha(E)$ is exactly as predicted for the other three curves
by computing $\Sel^{(4)}(E/\Q)$ for each of them (note that the two
curves of conductor 960 have rational $2$-torsion, which might
simplify this computation).

\begin{table}
\caption{The 4 optimal curves with nontrivial $\Sha(E)_?$ and $N_E\leq 1000$\label{tab:sha}}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|l|c|}\hline
Curve & Equation & $\Sha(E)_?$\\\hline
571A& [0,-1,1,-929,-105954] & 4\\
681B&[1,1,0,-1154,-15345] & 9\\
960D& [0,-1,0,-900,-10098] & 4\\
960N& [0,1,0,-20,-42]      & 4\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}

Another critical obstruction to Goal~\ref{goal:bsd} is that nobody has
proved that $\Sha(E)$ is finite for {\em any} elliptic curve of rank
greater than $1$.  Up to isogeny, there are $18$ such curves with
conductor at most $1000$: 
%was@form:~/people/cremona/data$  awk '$5==2 && $1<=1000 {print $1$2" & "$4"\\\\"}' curves.1-8000
\begin{center}
389A,
433A,
446D,
563A,
571B,
643A,
655A,
664A,
681C,\\
707A,
709A,
718B,
794A,
817A,
916C,
944E,
997B,
997C
\end{center}

For
these curves we have no hope, using present techniques, to show that
$\Sha(E)$ is trivial, let alone finite.  We make the following new goal:
\begin{goal}\label{goal:bsd2}
Prove the full Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer for every elliptic
curve over~$\Q$ of conductor at most $1000$ and rank zero or one.
(The rank condition excludes the $18$ curves of rank two.)
\end{goal}

\subsection{The Plan}
There are $2463$ optimal curves of conductor at most $1000$.  Of these,
$18$ have rank~$2$, which leaves $2445$ curves.  
Our plan for computationally verifying the full BSD
conjecture for these curves is as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{step:refine} Prove a refinement of Kolyvagin's theorem, which bounds 
$\Sha(E)$ for elliptic curves of (analytic) rank at most one.
(Stefan will talk about this).  Also read about Kato's theorem, which
applies to $E$ of rank $0$.

\item \label{step:alg} Create an algorithm based on a refined
  Kolyvagin theorem and Kato's theorem that with the following input
  and output (Andrei's talk is about this):
\begin{quote}
{\sf 
\par\noindent{}Input: An elliptic curve over $\Q$.
\par\noindent{}Output: A square-free integer $B$ such that if a~$p$
is a prime and $p\nmid B$, then $p\nmid \#\Sha(E)$.
}
\end{quote}
Note that if $E$ has (analytic) rank greater than one, then this
algorithm outputs $B=0$.  When $E$ has analytic rank at most one, it
would be desirable that~$B$ only be divisible by primes such that it is
reasonably easy to compute $\dim_{\F_p}\Sel^{(p)}(E/\Q)$, e.g., when
there is a rational $p$-isogeny; our current algorithm sometimes fails
in this regard.

\item \label{step:implement} Implement the algorithm from step 2 in
  MAGMA, then run it on the curves of conductor at most $1000$.  One
  step of the algorithm is to find generators for the Mordell-Weil
  groups of certain elliptic curves of rank one.  MAGMA does not
  include a command that finds such generators with certainty, so we
  record the curve along with the generators MAGMA claims are correct.
  
\item \label{step:correctgen} Prove correct the generators that MAGMA
  claims are correct, probably using a new program of Cremona for
  saturating Mordell-Weil groups.

\item \label{step:sel} 
Compute $\dim_{\F_2}\Sel^{(2)}(E/\Q)$ for all $E$, in order
to prove that $\Sha(E)[2]=0$ for most $E$, by using the exact sequence
$$0\to E(\Q)/2 E(\Q) \to \Sel^{(2)}(E/\Q) \to \Sha(E)[2]\to 0.$$

\item \label{step:analysis} Analyze the output from the previous steps
  to see how often a difficult bound on $\Sha(E/\Q)$ arises.
  
\item\label{step:tamagawa} Prove a new theorem that allows us to show
  triviality of $\Sha(E)$ for the curves with a difficult $B$.  It
  appears that the one case in which $p\mid B$ but there is no
  rational $p$-isogeny and $\Sha(E/\Q)[p]=0$ is when $p$ divides some
  Tamagawa number and $E$ has rank $1$ (when $E$ has rank $0$, a
  theorem of Kato applies).
  
\item\label{step:lower} Prove correctness of the order of $\Sha(E)$
  for the four examples with nontrivial $\Sha(E)$ (see discussion
  above).
  
\item\label{step:os} Recode everything using only open source
  programs (e.g., C++, PARI), and rerun it to see that we get the
  same results.
  
\item\label{step:publish} Publish with complete source code that other
  people can read and run.
\end{enumerate}

\subsection{Status}

We have completed steps~\ref{step:refine}--\ref{step:implement}, and
run the program on all curves of conductor up to $25000$, but stop
the program for a given curve after a certain amount of time (so the
data is incomplete).  We have so far done nothing about
step~\ref{step:correctgen}.  Regarding step~\ref{step:sel}, we have
computed $\dim \Sel^{(2)}(E/\Q)$ using MAGMA for most curves of
conductor up to $25000$, and expect this computation to finish in a few
days.  We have not done steps~\ref{step:tamagawa}--\ref{step:publish}
yet. See Section~\ref{sec:analysis} for step~\ref{step:analysis}.

\begin{remark} Tony Scholl mentioned to me last week that even if $E$ has
  rank~$1$ over~$\Q$, over the cyclotomic $\Z_p$ extension $\Q_\infty$ of~$\Q$
  it has bounded rank, and Kato gives information about~$E$ over
  $\Q_\infty$, i.e., about the $p$-adic $L$-function of~$E$.
\end{remark}

\subsection{Analysis}\label{sec:analysis}
This is a snapshot of the situation as of August 18, at 2pm.  I ran
the first computation with each job limited to 2 minutes of real time,
so a heavily loaded processor would stop prematurely.  I then reran
the jobs that failed, but now limiting to 30 minutes, and after 18
hours all levels up to 360 had rerun (these really do take a long
time).  Recall that we are considering all $2463$ optimal 
curves of level up to $1000$.

\begin{itemize}
\item  There are $18$ curves of rank greater than one.
\begin{verbatim}
was$ awk '$5>=2' 00001-00999-shabound  |wc -l
18
was$ awk '$5>=2' 00001-00999-shabound
389   A    1    0    2    2    0.38  [0,0] [0,0] [0,1,1,-2,0]
433   A    1    0    2    2    0.45  [0,0] [0,0] [1,0,0,0,1]
446   D    1    0    2    2    0.59  [0,0] [0,0] [1,-1,0,-4,4]
563   A    1    0    2    2    0.48  [0,0] [0,0] [1,1,1,-15,16]
571   B    1    0    2    2    0.43  [0,0] [0,0] [0,1,1,-4,2]
643   A    1    0    2    2    0.44  [0,0] [0,0] [1,0,0,-4,3]
655   A    1    0    2    2    0.47  [0,0] [0,0] [0,0,1,-13,18]
664   A    1    0    2    2    0.61  [0,0] [0,0] [0,0,0,-7,10]
681   C    1    0    2    2    0.46  [0,0] [0,0] [0,-1,1,0,2]
707   A    1    0    2    2    0.53  [0,0] [0,0] [0,1,1,-12,12]
709   A    1    0    2    2    0.45  [0,0] [0,0] [0,-1,1,-2,0]
718   B    1    0    2    2    0.43  [0,0] [0,0] [1,0,1,-5,0]
794   A    1    0    2    2    0.54  [0,0] [0,0] [1,0,1,-3,2]
817   A    1    0    2    2    0.39  [0,0] [0,0] [0,1,1,1,6]
916   C    1    0    2    2    0.54  [0,0] [0,0] [0,0,0,-4,1]
944   E    1    0    2    2    0.54  [0,0] [0,0] [0,0,0,-19,34]
997   B    1    0    2    2    0.47  [0,0] [0,0] [0,-1,1,-5,-3]
997   C    1    0    2    2    0.44  [0,0] [0,0] [0,-1,1,-24,54]
\end{verbatim}
\item  There are $318$ curves for which the computation still doesn't
complete in the alloted time.   For these curves, we set $B=0$
and do not include them in the lists below.
\begin{verbatim}
was$ grep timeout 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
318
\end{verbatim}
\item There are $1363$ curves for which $B=1$ (note that $B$ incorporates
the $2$-descent computation).
\begin{verbatim}
was$ awk '$4==1' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
1363
\end{verbatim}
\item There are  curves for which $B$ is divisible by $2$ and nonzero.
\begin{verbatim}
was$ awk '$4%2==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
10
was$ awk '$4%2==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound 
278   B    1    6    0    -1   233.0 [6,6] [-15,-15]
571   A    1    2    0    2    1.19  [14,2] [-7,-8] 
786   C    1    2    1    -1   73.2  [46,94] [-23,-47] 
804   B    1    6    1    -1   1.31  [6,6] [-95,-95] 
873   C    1    2    1    -1   43.8  [2,22] [-8,-11] 
886   C    1    2    0    -1   23.9  [14,2] [-7,-15] 
906   A    1    2    1    -1   3.84  [46,142] [-23,-71] 
954   E    1    6    1    -1   2.35  [282,42] [-47,-95] 
960   D    1    2    0    3    2.64  [142,2] [-71,-119] 
960   N    1    2    0    3    2.58  [142,2] [-71,-119] 
\end{verbatim}
The $6$th column is the dimension of the $2$-selmer group, and the $-1$
means the computation failed, hence we can't rule it.  The $3$ that don't
have $-1$ really do have nontrivial $\Sha$ of order $2$.
There are $14$ curves where computation of the $2$-selmer group
failed for some reason:
\begin{verbatim}
was$ awk '$6==-1' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
14
was$ awk '$6==-1' 00001-00999-shabound
278   B    1    6    0    -1   233.0 [6,6] [-15,-15] 
645   C    1    0    0    -1   0     [0,0] [0,0] timeout
658   A    1    0    0    -1   0     [0,0] [0,0] timeout
742   F    1    0    0    -1   0     [0,0] [0,0]  timeout
774   C    1    0    0    -1   0     [0,0] [0,0] timeout
777   B    1    0    0    -1   0     [0,0] [0,0] timeout
786   C    1    2    1    -1   73.2  [46,94] [-23,-47]
804   B    1    6    1    -1   1.31  [6,6] [-95,-95] 
873   C    1    2    1    -1   43.8  [2,22] [-8,-11] 
886   C    1    2    0    -1   23.9  [14,2] [-7,-15] 
906   A    1    2    1    -1   3.84  [46,142] [-23,-71] 
942   B    1    0    0    -1   0     [0,0] [0,0] timeout
954   E    1    6    1    -1   2.35  [282,42] [-47,-95] 
978   C    1    0    0    -1   0     [0,0] [0,0]  timeout
\end{verbatim}

\item There are 94 curves for which $B\geq 11$.
\begin{verbatim}
was$ awk '$4> 10' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
93
\end{verbatim}
\item There are $39$ curves for which $B\geq 19$.
\begin{verbatim}
was$ awk '$4>=19' 00001-00999-shabound  |wc -l
39
was$ awk '$4>=19' 00001-00999-shabound
348   D  1  21 1  1    1.35  [966,2982] [-23,-71]
350   F  1  33 1  1    1.96  [2046,66] [-31,-111]
462   E  1  21 1  2    3.75  [42,42] [-215,-215]      warning
470   F  1  21 1  1    0.99  [1302,42] [-31,-39] 
494   D  1  39 1  1    2.11  [8034,9906] [-103,-127] 
550   I  1  21 1  1    8.89  [3318,42] [-79,-391]     warning
574   I  1  21 1  1    3.67  [1302,42] [-31,-87] 
600   E  1  21 1  1    1.69  [2982,42] [-71,-119] 
618   F  1  77 1  1    1.72  [10934,154] [-71,-95]    warning
650   K  1  21 1  1    3.72  [8358,42] [-199,-231]    warning
670   D  1  19 1  1    1.79  [1178,38] [-31,-111] 
674   C  1  31 1  1    1.75  [434,62] [-7,-39] 
682   B  1  57 1  1    10.8  [30894,114] [-271,-415]  warning
702   K  1  21 1  1    3.2   [966,8022] [-23,-191]    warning
702   M  1  57 1  1    18.9  [29982,114] [-263,-623]  warning
706   B  1  23 1  1    0.84  [46,46] [-15,-15] 
715   B  1  21 1  1    1.02  [42,42] [-51,-51] 
730   J  1  21 1  1    1.47  [2982,3318] [-71,-79] 
735   F  1  21 1  1    10.3  [10542,42] [-251,-404]   warning
762   E  1  33 1  1    1.65  [66,66] [-95,-95]        warning
786   J  1  21 1  1    1.13  [966,1974] [-23,-47] 
786   L  1  35 1  1    1.55  [1610,4970] [-23,-71]    warning
804   D  1  21 1  1    1.51  [42,42] [-95,-95] 
806   D  1  33 1  1    29.9  [17358,66] [-263,-703]   warning
854   D  1  21 1  1    2.95  [1974,7014] [-47,-167] 
858   F  1  55 1  1    40.0  [110,110] [-959,-959]    warning
861   C  1  35 1  1    1.58  [70,70] [-20,-20] 
870   F  1  35 1  2    9.21  [16730,30170] [-239,-431]warning
886   D  1  19 1  1    3.57  [266,38] [-7,-15] 
894   E  1  23 1  1    1.71  [46,46] [-95,-95] 
894   G  1  77 1  1    1.64  [154,154] [-95,-95]      warning
906   H  1  55 1  1    2.48  [7810,110] [-71,-143]    warning
910   H  1  51 1  1    5.64  [20298,31722] [-199,-311] 
910   K  1  35 1  2    2.48  [70,70] [-159,-159] 
918   H  1  33 1  1    4.97  [3102,17358] [-47,-263]  warning
975   I  1  21 1  1    2.22  [42,42] [-116,-116]      warning
986   E  1  35 1  1    3.31  [7210,70] [-103,-111] 
988   B  1  39 1  1    81.5  [6162,8034] [-79,-103] 
996   B  1  39 1  1    2.35  [5538,78] [-71,-143] 
\end{verbatim}
Note that in every case the rank (column 5) is $1$.

\item The largest $B$ is $77$.
\begin{verbatim}
was$ sort -n -r -k 4 00001-00999-shabound |more
894   G  1  77 1  1    1.64  [154,154] [-95,-95] warning
618   F  1  77 1  1    1.72  [10934,154] [-71,-95] warning
\end{verbatim}
\item The largest prime divisor of a $B$ is $31$.
\begin{verbatim}
was$ awk '$4%17==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
5
was$ awk '$4%19==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
4
was$ awk '$4%23==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
2
was$ awk '$4%29==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
0
was$ awk '$4%31==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
1
was$ awk '$4%37==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
0
was$ awk '$4%43==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
0
was$ awk '$4%47==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
0
was$ awk '$4%53==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
0
was$ awk '$4%59==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
0
was$ awk '$4%61==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
0
was$ awk '$4%67==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
0
was$ awk '$4%71==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
0
was$ awk '$4%73==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound |wc -l
0
was$ awk '$4%31==0 && $4 != 0' 00001-00999-shabound
674   C  1  31 1  1    1.75  [434,62] [-7,-39] 
\end{verbatim}
\end{itemize}  

\subsection{A Potentially Serious Obstruction}\label{sec:level}
  We next list the most difficult curves, from our point of view.
  These are the curves with $E$ of rank $1$ such that $B$ is divisible
  by a prime $p\geq 5$ for which no element of the $\Q$-isogeny class of
  $E$ has a $K$-rational point of order $p$, i.e., such that
  divisor~$p$ of $B$ also divides $[E(K)_{/\tors} : \Z y_K]$ for the
  two $K$ we chose.  We consider $p\geq 5$, because it is 
   standard to do a $p$-descent in general for $p=2,3$, and we consider
only rank $1$, since when the rank is $0$ Kato's theorem gives
extremely strong results independent of the index.

There are $176$ such curves in our data, for levels $\leq 1000$, and
for which our computation of Heegner points succeeded, and these are
displayed below.  The notation of the table is $(E,n)$, where $n$
is the greatest common divisor of the odd parts of the two indexes
$[E(K)_{/\tors} : \Z y_K]$.  Again, we emphasize that every
curve below has rank $1$.
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|lc|}\hline
141A1 & 7\\
190A1 & 11\\
214A1 & 7\\
238A1 & 7\\
258C1 & 5\\
262A1 & 11\\
274A1 & 7\\
280B1 & 15\\
285A1 & 5\\
286B1 & 13\\
302C1 & 5\\
303A1 & 7\\
309A1 & 5\\
318D1 & 11\\
322D1 & 5\\
326B1 & 5\\
346B1 & 7\\
348D1 & 21\\
350F1 & 33\\
354F1 & 7\\
357D1 & 7\\
362B1 & 7\\
364A1 & 15\\
366G1 & 5\\
381A1 & 5\\
408D1 & 5\\
414D1 & 5\\
418B1 & 13\\
430B1 & 5\\
430D1 & 75\\
434D1 & 5\\
446B1 & 7\\
458B1 & 5\\
462E1 & 21\\
470C1 & 7\\
470F1 & 21\\
474B1 & 5\\
490G1 & 5\\
494D1 & 39\\
497A1 & 5\\
498B1 & 5\\
506D1 & 5\\
506F1 & 13\\
522I1 & 5\\
\hline\end{tabular}\qquad
\begin{tabular}{|lc|}\hline
522J1 & 13\\
530C1 & 5\\
542B1 & 7\\
550I1 & 21\\
550J1 & 11\\
551C1 & 7\\
558F1 & 5\\
558G1 & 7\\
560E1 & 5\\
561B1 & 5\\
574G1 & 11\\
582C1 & 5\\
585I1 & 7\\
594D1 & 5\\
598D1 & 17\\
600E1 & 21\\
605A1 & 15\\
605C1 & 5\\
608E1 & 5\\
615B1 & 7\\
618D1 & 5\\
618E1 & 5\\
618F1 & 77\\
620B1 & 15\\
622A1 & 7\\
629D1 & 5\\
642C1 & 13\\
650K1 & 21\\
658E1 & 11\\
665A1 & 5\\
666D1 & 5\\
666E1 & 13\\
670A1 & 11\\
670C1 & 5\\
670D1 & 19\\
672B1 & 15\\
674C1 & 31\\
678C1 & 7\\
681E1 & 5\\
682B1 & 57\\
690E1 & 5\\
696C1 & 5\\
700D1 & 15\\
702K1 & 21\\
\hline\end{tabular}\qquad
\begin{tabular}{|lc|}\hline
702L1 & 15\\
702M1 & 57\\
705B1 & 15\\
705E1 & 5\\
706B1 & 23\\
706D1 & 5\\
710B1 & 17\\
710C1 & 7\\
715B1 & 21\\
726E1 & 5\\
726G1 & 15\\
730I1 & 7\\
730J1 & 63\\
735F1 & 21\\
738E1 & 5\\
738F1 & 11\\
742E1 & 5\\
742G1 & 5\\
762D1 & 5\\
762E1 & 33\\
777E1 & 5\\
777G1 & 5\\
786H1 & 7\\
786J1 & 21\\
786L1 & 35\\
794C1 & 5\\
798C1 & 5\\
798D1 & 5\\
798G1 & 15\\
804D1 & 21\\
806C1 & 5\\
806D1 & 33\\
814B1 & 5\\
816I1 & 11\\
817B1 & 5\\
822D1 & 5\\
830C1 & 5\\
831A1 & 5\\
834F1 & 7\\
842B1 & 13\\
850D1 & 7\\
850L1 & 7\\
854D1 & 21\\
858F1 & 55\\
\hline\end{tabular}\qquad
\begin{tabular}{|lc|}\hline
861B1 & 17\\
861C1 & 35\\
861D1 & 5\\
870F1 & 35\\
874D1 & 5\\
876B1 & 15\\
880G1 & 5\\
886D1 & 19\\
886E1 & 5\\
890F1 & 13\\
894E1 & 23\\
894F1 & 5\\
894G1 & 77\\
897D1 & 15\\
897E1 & 5\\
901E1 & 15\\
906H1 & 55\\
910F1 & 55\\
910G1 & 5\\
910H1 & 51\\
910K1 & 35\\
912H1 & 5\\
918H1 & 33\\
920A1 & 15\\
924B1 & 15\\
924E1 & 15\\
930D1 & 7\\
930H1 & 15\\
933B1 & 11\\
938B1 & 5\\
939C1 & 5\\
942C1 & 5\\
954H1 & 7\\
954I1 & 5\\
954J1 & 17\\
974H1 & 15\\
975I1 & 21\\
975J1 & 5\\
978F1 & 11\\
978G1 & 7\\
986E1 & 35\\
987E1 & 15\\
988B1 & 39\\
996B1 & 39\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}

If we assume the BSD conjecture, then the formulas at the beginning of
McCallum's article suggest that in each case one of the following occurs:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We did not choose enough $K$'s.
\item If $p$ is a prime that divides the gcd of indexes, then 
$p$ divides some Tamagawa number $c_\ell$ of $E$.
\end{enumerate}

In the latter case all of the points $P_n$ of McCallum's article are
``divisible by $p$, in the sense described in that article, and
Kolyvagin's method doesn't seem to yield the precise bound we require.

We now consider the first examples in more detail.  The curve $E$ called
141A and given by $y^2 + y = x^3 + x^2 - 12x + 2$ has rank 1,
conductor $141=3\cdot 47$, has $c_3 = 7$, and using all the results I
know toward BSD we only see that $\Sha(E)$ is finite of order a power
of $7$.  The curve $E$ is isolated in its isogeny class.  The modular
degree of $E$ is divisible by $7$.  The Jacobian $J_0(47)$ is of rank
$0$ and is simple of dimension $4$, and we find that $E[7]$ sits in
the old subvariety of $J_0(3\cdot 47)$.  Thus my hope is that proving
something about the Shafarevich-Tate group of simple rank $0$ abelian
variety $J_0(47)$ will imply something about $\Sha(E)[7]$.  Also we
have $L(J_0(47),1)/\Omega = 16/23$, so BSD predicts that the Selmer
group of $J_0(47)$ at $7$ is trivial (since we know $c_{47}=23$...).

\begin{question}[Gross]
  In your data, do all the Tamagawa numbers divide the index of the
  Heegner point?
\end{question}

I don't have things setup so I can trivially check whether all these
indexes also come from Tamagawa numbers.  However, I just tried
three more examples:
\begin{itemize}
\item 190A1:  We have $190=2\cdot 5\cdot 19$ and $c_{2}=11$.  There
is a $4$-dimensional abelian variety over rank $0$ and level $95$
with $\Sha[11]$ trivial that contains $E[11]$.

\item 214A1:  We have $214=2\cdot 107$ and $c_{2}=7$.  There is
a rank $0$ simple abelian variety over level $107$ and dimension $7$
that contains $E[7]$.

\item 674C1:  We have $214=2\cdot 337$ and $c_{2}=31$.  For this one,
there is a rank $0$ simple abelian variety of level $337$ and
dimension $15$ that contains $E[31]$ and according to BSD has
trivial $\Sha[31]$.
\end{itemize}

Is there a connection with Gross's recent work on level raising, Heegner
points, and Selmer group? First, he has the hypothesis $p\not\cong 1\pmod{\ell}$.
For the 141A example, $p=3$ and $\ell=7$, which is OK.  For the 190A,
214A, and 674A examples, $p=2$ and $\ell\geq 5$ is odd, so in each 
case that hypothesis is satisfied.


\subsection{Some Other Questions (for Dick Gross)}
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\int \omega \wedge \overline{(i\omega)} < 0$?
{\em I think it's right, but maybe not...}
\item Density $\alpha x/\log(x)$.  What is $\alpha$?
{\em I don't know.}
\item Connection between level changing idea (Section~\ref{sec:level})
and your (Gross's) research from one year ago.
{\em My was sort of the other direction, but it seems similar.}
\item CM curves:  Unramified in $F$.  Rank 0, OK; Rank 1, only get
$p$ that split.
{\em Yes.  Ben Howard adds that in principal one could use the Mazur-Rubin
machinery in the case of Kolyvagin's Euler system to prove this in
rank 1, but nobody has done this.  In Ben Howard's thesis he pushes
through this approach, but avoids Tamagawa numbers (for simplicity),
and does some Iwasawa theory (for complexity).}
\item In the Gross-Zagier formula, is it necessary that $(D,2N)=1$?
{\em No.  We only wrote it up that way so that $D$ would be square
free.  Ben Howard adds that published work of Zhang should already
deal with the case that $D$ is even.}
\end{enumerate}


%\bibliography{biblio}

\providecommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\thinspace}
\providecommand{\MR}{\relax\ifhmode\unskip\space\fi MR }
% \MRhref is called by the amsart/book/proc definition of \MR.
\providecommand{\MRhref}[2]{%
  \href{http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=#1}{#2}
}
\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}
\begin{thebibliography}{Maz78}

\bibitem[Cre97]{cremona:algs}
J.\thinspace{}E. Cremona, \emph{Algorithms for modular elliptic curves}, second
  ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997.

\bibitem[Gro91]{gross:kolyvagin}
B.\thinspace{}H. Gross, \emph{Kolyvagin's work on modular elliptic curves},
  $L$-functions and arithmetic (Durham, 1989), Cambridge Univ. Press,
  Cambridge, 1991, pp.~235--256.

\bibitem[GZ86]{gross-zagier}
B.~Gross and D.~Zagier, \emph{Heegner points and derivatives of
  \protect{${L}$}-series}, Invent. Math. \textbf{84} (1986), no.~2, 225--320.
  \MR{87j:11057}

\bibitem[Kol90]{kolyvagin:euler_systems}
V.~A. Kolyvagin, \emph{Euler systems}, The Grothendieck Festschrift, Vol.\ II,
  Birkh\"auser Boston, Boston, MA, 1990, pp.~435--483. \MR{92g:11109}

\bibitem[Maz78]{mazur:rational}
B.~Mazur, \emph{Rational isogenies of prime degree (with an appendix by {D}.
  {G}oldfeld)}, Invent. Math. \textbf{44} (1978), no.~2, 129--162.

\bibitem[Rub91]{rubin:main-conjectures}
K.~Rubin, \emph{The ``main conjectures'' of {I}wasawa theory for imaginary
  quadratic fields}, Invent. Math. \textbf{103} (1991), no.~1, 25--68.
  \MR{92f:11151}

\bibitem[Ser72]{serre:propgal}
J-P. Serre, \emph{Propri\'et\'es galoisiennes des points d'ordre fini des
  courbes elliptiques}, Invent. Math. \textbf{15} (1972), no.~4, 259--331.

\bibitem[Sil92]{silverman:aec}
J.\thinspace{}H. Silverman, \emph{The arithmetic of elliptic curves},
  Springer-Verlag, New York, 1992, Corrected reprint of the 1986 original.

\end{thebibliography}

\end{document}
