Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $k$ be an algebraically closed field, and consider some subscheme $X\subset \mathbb{P}_k^n$. Let $x$ be a closed point of $X$, and $H$ a general hyperplane containing $x$. There is a regular map $\phi:\mathbb{P}^n\setminus{\{x\}}\rightarrow \mathbb{P}^{n-1}$ gotten by projecting from the point $x$.

My question: Is $\overline{\phi(H\setminus x)}\cap\overline{\phi(X\setminus x)}=\overline{\phi((X\cap H)\setminus x)}$?

This can be rephrased in terms of commutative algebra: Let $A=k[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$, $B=A[x_0]$, $I$ be a homogeneous ideal of $B$, and $h$ a general linear form of $A$. The question above is equivalent to the following: Is $(I\cap A)+h=(I+h)\cap A$?

More generally, what if we replace $H$ and $h$ by a general hypersurface/general polynomial of degree $d$?

If $h$ or $H$ isn't general, equality doesn't hold, even for $d=1$. Consider for example $n=3$ and take $I=\langle x_0x_1,x_2^2+x_0x_3\rangle$, and consider $h=x_3-x_1$. Then $I\cap A=\langle x_1x_2^2 \rangle$, so $(I\cap A)+h=\langle x_1x_2^2,x_1-x_3\rangle$, but $(I+h)\cap A=\langle x_2^2,x_1-x_3\rangle$.

share|improve this question
4  
Dear Nathan, you said nothing false but algebraically closed fields are automatically infinite. The proof is a variation of Euclid's argument that there are infinitely many primes. Namely, if you have a finite set of elements $a,b,... \in k$, the polynomial $(X-a)(X-b)...+1 $ has a zero $\in k$ , necessarily different from $a,b,...$ –  Georges Elencwajg Feb 16 '11 at 8:42
    
Thanks for pointing this out! I've changed the assumptions accordingly. –  Nathan Ilten Feb 16 '11 at 16:51

3 Answers 3

up vote 3 down vote accepted

EDITED to match clarifications in the question and in Sándor's answer.

The question is equivalent to asking whether the tangent cone at $x$ of the hyperplane section coincides with the hyperplane section of the tangent cone:

Blow up $x$, and denote $\tilde{\mathbb{P}}^n$, $\tilde X$, $\tilde H$ the resulting variety and the proper transforms of $X$ and $H$. Now $\phi$ extends to $\tilde \phi$, defined on the whole $\tilde{\mathbb{P}}^n$, and for every subvariety $Z\subset \mathbb{P}^n$, $\overline{\phi(Z\setminus \{x\})}=\tilde\phi(\tilde Z)$. Thus, $\overline{\phi(X)} \cap \overline{\phi(H)}= \tilde\phi(\tilde X) \cap \tilde\phi(\tilde H)=\tilde\phi(\tilde X\cap \tilde H)$, because $\tilde H=\tilde \phi^{-1}(\tilde \phi(\tilde H))$ as in Sándor's computation. On the other hand, $\overline{\phi(X \cap H)}=\tilde \phi(\widetilde{X\cap H})$.

So, whenever $\tilde X\cap \tilde H=\widetilde{X\cap H}$, your statement holds. Now we can work componentwise: assume $X$ is irreducible. It is clear that $\widetilde{X\cap H}=\tilde X \cap \tilde H$ unless $\tilde X \cap \tilde H$ has a component contained in the exceptional divisor $E\cong \mathbb{P}^{n-1}$. Since $\tilde X$ meets the exceptional divisor properly, the only case when $\tilde X \cap \tilde H$ can have a component contained in the exceptional divisor arises if $\tilde H$ does not meet $\tilde X \cap E$ properly. But if $H$ is general, so is $\tilde H \cap E=L$, and then it does meet $\tilde X \cap E$ properly!

In your example with non-general $H$, $\tilde X \cap E$ is a point which gives trouble because your $\tilde H$ happens to contain it.

share|improve this answer

I will use the notation that if $S\not\subseteq\{x\}$ then $\overline{\phi}(S):=\overline{\phi(S\setminus \{x\})}$.

Assume that $X\neq \{x\}$ and it is not a union of lines through $x$. See below for an explanation that this is equivalent to $X\cap H\not\subseteq \{x\}$. In this case the statement is true.

A general hyperplane through $x$ is the same as the closure of the preimage via the projection map of a general hyperplane $L\subset \mathbb P^{n-1}$. Then we have that $H=\overline{\phi^{-1}L}$ and since $L$ is general, its intersection with $\phi(X\setminus\{x\})$ is dense in its intersection with $\overline{\phi(X\setminus\{x\})}$ and then ${\overline{\phi}(X\cap H)}={\overline{\phi}(X)\cap L}$.


Remark: if $X\cap H\subseteq \{x\}$, then the statement cannot be true as stated. In that case $\overline{\phi((X\cap H)\setminus \{x\})}=\emptyset$ while $\overline{\phi(H\setminus \{x\})}$ is a hyperplane in $\mathbb P^{n-1}$ and $\overline{\phi(X\setminus \{x\})}$ is a nonempty closed subset so their intersection is non-empty.

However, this condition can only hold if $X=\{x\}$ or it is a union of lines: Assume that $X\neq\{x\}$ and replace $X$ with any of its irreducible components. In order for $X\cap H\subseteq \{x\}$, $X$ has to be a curve. In that case $x$ has to be a point of multiplicity $\deg X$ on $X$ and for $\deg X>1$ the above condition could only hold if $H$ contains the tangent space of $X$ at $x$. That would mean that $H$ is not general, so the only possibility allowed by the assumptions is $\deg X=1$, so $X$ is a line.


Notice that Laurent's complaints are covered by the above assumption and the fact that $H$ is general. In particular, quim's extra argument is not necessary.

Notice also that the generality of $H$ is needed so its image would intersect the image of $X$ in a set that's dense in the intersection of $H$ and the closure of the image of $X$.

share|improve this answer

You have to explain what you mean by these images since $\phi$ is not everywhere defined. For example, what if $X=\{x\}$?

A slightly less stupid example: if $X$ is a line through $x$, not contained in $H$, what is $\phi(H\cap X)$?

And another one: $n=2$ and $X$ is a cubic having a cusp at $x$ with tangent $H$.

My guess is that by $\phi(Z)$ you mean $\phi(Z\setminus\{x\})$, viewing $\phi$ as a morphism from $\mathbb{P}^n \setminus\{x\}$. In this case the answer is probably yes if no component of $X$ is a curve through $x$.

share|improve this answer
    
This is exactly what I meant; I've changed the statement of the problem accordingly. –  Nathan Ilten Feb 16 '11 at 16:57
    
Laurent, it seems to me that $X=\{x\}$ and $X$ a union of lines through $x$ are the only counter-examples if $H$ is general. –  Sándor Kovács Feb 17 '11 at 11:02
    
@Sándor: Right, in fact I had skipped "general" on first reading. –  Laurent Moret-Bailly Feb 18 '11 at 8:32

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.