Processing math: 100%

Friday, April 29, 2016

Plane Curve Multiplicities Under Polynomial Mappings (3.1.8)

William Fulton Algebraic Curves, chapter 3, section 1, exercise 8:

MathJax TeX Test Page Let k be an algebraically closed field, Fk[x,y], and T:A2A2 be a polynomial map with T(P)=Q. Show that mPFTmQF, with equality achieved if the Jacobian of T, defined as the matrix (dTi/dxj(Q)) where T=(T1,T2), is invertible. Show that the converse is false in considering T=(x2,y) and F=yx2, P=Q=(0,0).

Proof: Suppose P=Q=(0,0). Then necessarily T1 and T2 are of the form T1=...+ax+by
T2=...+cx+dy
with no constant terms. Write F=Fm+...+Fn in terms of its form decomposition; then we see FT=FTm+...+FTn, and for each i, FTi contributes to the sum forms of degree i. This shows the nonzero forms in FT are all of degree m, so that m(0,0)FTm(0,0)F. Now consider the general case for points P,Q. Let S1,S2 be the translations mapping the origin to P,Q respectively. Then mQFT=m(0,0)FTS2=m(0,0)FS1S11TS2
=m(0,0)(FS1)S11TS2m(0,0)FS1=mPF
Now to consider the properties of the Jacobian: Again suppose P=Q=(0,0), and factor Fm into a product of linear factors. Since FTi for i>m only contribute forms of degree >m, it will suffice to show FTm contributes a nonzero form of degree m when the Jacobian is invertible. When the Jacobian is invertible, that is to say its rows are linearly independent, so that if ex+fy is a nonzero linear term, then T(ex+fy)=eT1(x)+fT2(y) will have a nonzero form of degree 1 in its decomposition. Since the smallest nonzero form of a product is the product of the smallest nonzero forms, we see that m(0,0)FT=m(0,0)F. The argument for the general case of P,Q is exactly as before, together with the observations that (1) the Jacobian of a composition of polynomial maps is the same as the matrix product of the Jacobian of polynomial maps at the appropriate points, and (2) that the Jacobians of translations are the identity. As for the demonstration that the converse is not in general true, we note that in the example given, m(0,0)F=1=m(0,0)yx4=m(0,0)FT despite the fact that the Jacobian of T at (0,0) is the noninvertible J(0,0)T=[0001]  

No comments:

Post a Comment