TITLE: Non-vanishing of p-adic L-functions
QUESTION [18 upvotes]: In Non-vanishing of L-series of modular forms (easy case?) it was answered that for a cuspidal newform $f$ of weight strictly greater than 2, then $L(f,1)$ is non-zero.  (Here the $L$-series is normalized so that the center of the critical strip is given by $s=k/2$.)  In particular, for such modular forms, their associated $p$-adic $L$-functions are non-zero.  As far as I know the non-vanishing of $p$-adic $L$-functions in the weight 2 case is a highly non-trivial result and relies upon a non-vanishing theorem of Rohrlich on twisted $L$-values.  Further, from the non-vanishing of the $p$-adic $L$-function, one can deduce that $L(f,\chi,j)$ is non-zero for all but finitely many pairs $(\chi,j)$ where $\chi$ is a Dirichlet character of $p$-power conductor and $j$ is an integer between $1$ and $k-1$, as long as $p$ is an ordinary prime for $f$.
My questions:
1) Is there a direct argument to prove the non-vanishing of $L(f,\chi,j)$ for all but finitely many $\chi$ and $j$ in the ordinary and weight greater than 2 case (which doesn't use $p$-adic $L$-functions).
2) Is this result known in the non-ordinary case?

REPLY [5 votes]: These arguments on the non-vanishing of $p$-adic $L$-functions are great!  I had never seen them before.
What I'm writing here is neither an answer to your question nor an actual proof of any sort.  But I think it at least follows the general theme of what you are asking.
Namely, I tried to use 2-variable p-adic L-functions and the non-vanishing of $p$-adic $L$-functions of higher weight modular forms to deduce Rohrlich's theorem in the weight 2 case (i.e. the non-vanishing of $L(f,\chi,1)$ for $f$ a form of weight 2 for all but finitely many $\chi$ of $p$-power conductor).  It didn't actually work as I need to assume the non-vanishing of some mu-invariant which is deep stuff, but I think the argument is amusing enough to present in any case.
Here's the argument: put the original weight 2 form $f$ into a Hida family, and write down the corresponding 2-variable $p$-adic $L$-function.  For simplicity, let me assume that the ordinary Hecke algebra in this case is just $\Lambda = {\bf Z}_p[[S]]$.  Here one sets $S=\gamma^k-1$ to specialize to weight $k$ where $\gamma$ is some topological generator of ${\bf Z}_p^\times$.  
Then the two-variable $p$-adic $L$-function can be thought of as a power series in ${\bf Z}_p[[S,T]]$.  Say
$$
L_p(S,T) = a_0(S) + a_1(S)T + a_2(S)T^2 + \dots
$$
First let me point out that this power series is non-zero.  Indeed, it interpolates the $p$-adic $L$-functions of each classical form in the Hida family which have already been observed to be non-zero in weight greater than 2 (without invoking Rohrlich's theorem).
Now let's assume that at least one form in the Hida family has zero $\mu$-invariant.  This means there is some weight k such that 
$$
L_p(f_k,T) = L_p(\gamma^k-1,T) = a_0(\gamma^k-1) + a_1(\gamma^k-1)T + a_2(\gamma^k-1)T^2 + \dots
$$
has non-zero $\mu$-invariant.  In particular, for some $i \geq 0 $, $a_i(\gamma^k-1)$ is not divisible by $p$.  This implies that $a_i(S)$ is a unit in ${\bf Z}_p[[S]]$, and in particular is non-zero.  Thus, the $p$-adic $L$-function in weight 2
$$
L_p(f_2,T) = L_p(\gamma^2-1,T) = a_0(\gamma^2-1) + a_2(\gamma^2-1)T + \dots + a_i(\gamma^2-1)T^2 + \dots
$$
is non-zero as $a_i(\gamma^2-1)$ is non-zero.
Let me point out that one needs to confront this $\mu$ issue in some way.  Possibly the two-variable $p$-adic $L$-function could have looked like
$$
L_p(S,T) = (S - (\gamma^2-1)) + 0T + 0T^2 + \dots
$$
The specialization of this power series to weight 2 then vanishes.  But note, this would mean that every form in this Hida family has positive $\mu$-invariant, and moreover, these $\mu$-invariants blow up as you approach weight 2.  (Possibly there is some easy reason why this can't happen, but I can't see one.)