Help with Exercise 3(c) in Cox et al's Projective Algebraic Geometry

In summary, the conversation revolves around Exercise 3(c) in Section 8.1 of the undergraduate introduction to algebraic geometry entitled "Ideals, Varieties and Algorithms" by Cox et al. The reader, Peter, is seeking help in understanding how to approach the exercise, which deals with projective space and homogeneous coordinates. Through further discussion and clarification, it is determined that a non-zero value can be used as a "lambda" value for multiplication or division in projective space. Peter expresses gratitude for the help provided by GJA.
  • #1
Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
3,990
48
I am reading the undergraduate introduction to algebraic geometry entitled "Ideals, Varieties and Algorithms: An introduction to Computational Algebraic Geometry and Commutative Algebra (Third Edition) by David Cox, John Little and Donal O'Shea ... ...

I am currently focused on Chapter 8, Section 1: The Projective Plane ... ... and need help getting started with Exercise 3(c) ... Exercise 3 in Section 8.1 reads as follows:
View attachment 5726
I would very much appreciate someone helping me to start Exercise 3(c) ... ... My thoughts so far are as follows ... I would be grateful if someone could critique my analysis ...
I am assuming that a point \(\displaystyle (x, y)\) in \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R}^2\) can be written as \(\displaystyle (x, y, 1)\) in \(\displaystyle \mathbb{P}^2 ( \mathbb{R} )\) ... as homogeneous coordinates ...So \(\displaystyle ( \frac{1+t^2}{1 - t^2} , \frac{2t}{1 - t^2} )\) in \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R}^2\) becomes \(\displaystyle ( \frac{1+t^2}{1 - t^2} , \frac{2t}{1 - t^2} , 1 )\) in \(\displaystyle \mathbb{P}^2 ( \mathbb{R} )\)Now we can multiply or divide through homogeneous coordinates by a constant without altering the coordinate ... BUT ... what gives us the right to multiply by the variable \(\displaystyle (1-t^2 )\) ... ... in order to get \(\displaystyle ( \frac{1+t^2}{1 - t^2} , \frac{2t}{1 - t^2} , 1 ) = (1 + t^2, 2t, 1 - t^2 )\)Then ... I assume that \(\displaystyle t = \pm 1\) ... since it leads to \(\displaystyle z = 0\) in the homogeneous coordinates ... gives points at infinity ... BUT ... is that correct? ... AND ... is there any more that can be deduced ... ... ?hope that someone can help ...

Peter======================================================================To give readers of the above post some idea of the context of the exercise and also the notation I am providing some relevant text from Cox et al ... ... as follows:
View attachment 5727
View attachment 5728
View attachment 5729
View attachment 5730
View attachment 5731
View attachment 5732
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi Peter,

This is correct

Peter said:
My thoughts so far are as follows ... I would be grateful if someone could critique my analysis ...
I am assuming that a point \(\displaystyle (x, y)\) in \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R}^2\) can be written as \(\displaystyle (x, y, 1)\) in \(\displaystyle \mathbb{P}^2 ( \mathbb{R} )\) ... as homogeneous coordinates ...So \(\displaystyle ( \frac{1+t^2}{1 - t^2} , \frac{2t}{1 - t^2} )\) in \(\displaystyle \mathbb{R}^2\) becomes \(\displaystyle ( \frac{1+t^2}{1 - t^2} , \frac{2t}{1 - t^2} , 1 )\) in \(\displaystyle \mathbb{P}^2 ( \mathbb{R} )\)
The next question is a good one and highlights what can certainly be a confusing element of dealing with projective space

Peter said:
Now we can multiply or divide through homogeneous coordinates by a constant without altering the coordinate ... BUT ... what gives us the right to multiply by the variable \(\displaystyle (1-t^2 )\) ... ... in order to get \(\displaystyle ( \frac{1+t^2}{1 - t^2} , \frac{2t}{1 - t^2} , 1 ) = (1 + t^2, 2t, 1 - t^2 )\)

The rule is that you're allowed to multiply by any non-zero number. As the authors say, two points $(x_{1},y_{1},z_{1})$ and $(x_{2},y_{2},z_{2})$ are equivalent provided there is some non-zero $\lambda$ such that $(x_{1},y_{1},z_{1})=\lambda (x_{2},y_{2},z_{2})$; i.e. $\lambda$ is a variable that can take on any non-zero value and, in doing so, completely assembles all of the elements in the equivalence class of the point $(x_{1},y_{1},z_{1})$. So, as long as $t\neq\pm 1,$ $(1-t^2)\neq 0$ and so can be used as a "lambda" value.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
GJA said:
Hi Peter,

This is correct

The next question is a good one and highlights what can certainly be a confusing element of dealing with projective space
The rule is that you're allowed to multiply by any non-zero number. As the authors say, two points $(x_{1},y_{1},z_{1})$ and $(x_{2},y_{2},z_{2})$ are equivalent provided there is some non-zero $\lambda$ such that $(x_{1},y_{1},z_{1})=\lambda (x_{2},y_{2},z_{2})$; i.e. $\lambda$ is a variable that can take on any non-zero value and, in doing so, completely assembles all of the elements in the equivalence class of the point $(x_{1},y_{1},z_{1})$. So, as long as $t\neq\pm 1,$ $(1-t^2)\neq 0$ and so can be used as a "lambda" value.
THanks GJA ... appreciate the help ...

Peter
 

1. What is Exercise 3(c) in Cox et al's Projective Algebraic Geometry?

Exercise 3(c) in Cox et al's Projective Algebraic Geometry is a problem that asks you to show that the intersection of two projective varieties is again a projective variety.

2. Why is Exercise 3(c) important in the study of projective algebraic geometry?

Exercise 3(c) is important because it helps us understand how projective varieties behave when they intersect. This is a fundamental concept in projective algebraic geometry and has many applications in mathematics and other fields.

3. What is the general approach to solving Exercise 3(c)?

The general approach to solving Exercise 3(c) is to use the definition of a projective variety and the properties of homogeneous polynomials. You can also use the fact that the intersection of two affine varieties is a projective variety to help with the proof.

4. Are there any tips for successfully completing Exercise 3(c)?

One tip for completing Exercise 3(c) is to carefully review the definitions and properties of projective varieties and homogeneous polynomials. It may also be helpful to work through some simpler examples before attempting the proof for the general case.

5. Can Exercise 3(c) be solved using other techniques or theorems?

Yes, there are other techniques and theorems that can be used to solve Exercise 3(c). For example, you can use the Segre embedding or the Veronese embedding to show that the intersection of two projective varieties is again a projective variety. You can also use the fact that projective varieties are defined by homogeneous ideals to help with the proof.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
1K
Back
Top