# Are all Finite Subsets of Affine n-space Algebraic sets, and related question [closed]

For an algebraicaly closed field $k$ are all finite subsets of Affine $n$-space $A^{n}\left(k\right)$ algebraic sets (here for $n>1$), and if so, for a given finite set $X\subset A^{n}\left(k\right)$ what set of polynomials in $k\left[x_{1},\dots,x_{n}\right]$ has $X$ as its common zero set? This probably has an answer, I just don't know how to phrase the question so as to get an answer by internet search engine.

Also if I have a set of polynomials $P_{1},\dots,P_{k}\in\mathbb{Q}\left[x_{1},\dots,x_{n}\right]$ such that the common zero set $Z(P_{1},\dots,P_{k})$ is a finite set of size $m$, i.e. $X=\{(z_{11},\dots,z_{1n}),\dots,(z_{m1},\dots,z_{mn})\}$, does this imply that each coordinate $z_{ij}$ is algebraic over $\mathbb{Q}$. I asked someone this question, and he felt that each $z_{ij}$ should turn out to be algebraic, but I can't see how this is proved?

Algebraic geometry is not my area, I just was wondering about these questions and am having a hard time tracking down an answer on the internet.

-

## closed as too localized by Dan Petersen, Felipe Voloch, Benjamin Steinberg, Ryan Budney, Andrés CaicedoDec 29 '11 at 6:56

This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

@Jason: To answer your first question quickly: Yes. Any single point is an algebraic set, and any finite union of algebraic sets is algebraic. This is a consequence of the fact that the lattice of algebraic sets is the lattice of closed subsets of a topological space. – Zhen Lin Dec 28 '11 at 7:59
Thank you too everyone who pointed this out. – Jason Suagee Dec 29 '11 at 3:41
@Jason: I responded to your specific question concerning my response, see below. – GH from MO Dec 29 '11 at 3:47

Let $I\subset \mathbb Q[x_1,...,x_n]$ be the ideal generated by the polynomials $P_1,...,P_k$ and $A$ the $\mathbb Q$-algebra $A=\mathbb Q[x_1,...,x_n]/I$.
You are interested in the scheme $V=Spec(A)\subset \mathbb A^n_\mathbb Q= Spec(\mathbb Q[x_1,...,x_n])$ and its $k$-points for $k$ an extension field of $\mathbb Q$.

A $\: k$-point is a point in $z=(z_1,...,z_n) \in k^n$ such that for all $P\in I$ we have $P(z)=0$ or equivalently a morphism of $\mathbb Q$-algebras $\phi : A\to k$ ( the equivalence is given by the formula $\phi (\bar x_i)=z_i$). The set of $k$-points of $V$ is denoted by $V(k)$.

Now if $k$ is algebraically closed and if $V(k)$ is finite, it follows (from Noether's normalization theorem for example), that $A$ has Krull dimension zero and that it is finite dimensional over $\mathbb Q$ .
Any $\mathbb Q$-algebra morphism $\phi : A\to k$ then satisfies $\phi(A)\subset \overline {\mathbb Q}\subset k$ and the corresponding point $z=(z_1,...,z_n) \in k^n$ thus satisfies $z=(z_1,...,z_n) \in {\overline {\mathbb Q}}^n \subset k^n$

-
As a complement, one can also say that the dimension of $A$ as a $\mathbf{Q}$-vector space is equal to $\# V(k)$. This is because dimension is invariant under base change by $k$, and one can prove (by interpolation, for example) that every function $V(k) \to k$ comes from a polynomial. – François Brunault Dec 28 '11 at 11:00
Dear François, this is not quite correct. For example, if $n=1$ and $A=\mathbb Q[x]/(x^2)$,we have $V(k)=\lbrace 0 \rbrace \subset \mathbb A^1_k$, so that $\text {card } V(k)=1$ but $dim_\mathbb QA=2$ . What is true is the inequality $\text {card } V(k) \leq dim_\mathbb QA$, which follows from, say, Dedekind's theorem on independance of homomorphisms. – Georges Elencwajg Dec 28 '11 at 12:14
Dear Georges, you're right, thanks. I think I had in mind the case $A$ is the ring of regular functions on some finite set, so that it's automatically reduced. – François Brunault Dec 28 '11 at 13:15

Here is a simple argument for the second question. I renamed the field $k$ to $K$ for clarity.

Observe that $K^{\mathrm{Aut}(K/\mathbb{Q})}=\mathbb{Q}$, because $K$ is algebraically closed. For any $g\in\mathrm{Aut}(K/\mathbb{Q})$ and any $x\in X$ we have $x^g\in X$, since $$P_l(x^g) = P_l^g(x^g) = P_l(x)^g = 0^g=0,\qquad 1\leq l\leq k,$$ using that the coefficients of $P_l$ are rational. This shows that the polynomials $$Q_j(z):=\prod_{i=1}^m(z-z_{ij}),\qquad 1\leq j\leq n,$$ are invariant under $\mathrm{Aut}(K/\mathbb{Q})$, i.e. they also have rational coefficients. It follows that the coordinates $z_{ij}\in K$ are algebraic over $\mathbb{Q}$.

P.S. Thanks to Qiaochu Yuan and Kevin Ventullo.

-
I thought I understood this argument, but now I'm not so sure. If $K = \overline{\mathbb{Q}(t)}$, for example, then $K$ isn't an algebraic extension of $\mathbb{Q}$, so in particular isn't a Galois extension. – Qiaochu Yuan Dec 28 '11 at 20:29
@Qiaochu: For this argument to work, you only need $K^{\operatorname{Aut}(K/\mathbb{Q})} = \mathbb{Q}$, which is true for any algebraically closed field $K$. Perhaps GH meant Galois in Pete Clark's sense (mathoverflow.net/questions/11958/transcendental-galois-theory)? – Kevin Ventullo Dec 28 '11 at 21:54
@Qiaochu and Kevin: You are right, I meant $\mathrm{Aut}(K/\mathbb{Q})$ in place of $\mathrm{Gal}(K/\mathbb{Q})$. I will edit and if you like it please give back the lost points. – GH from MO Dec 29 '11 at 0:40
I was confused about this also. Thank you for clarifying this Qiaochu and Kevin. However I am stuck on the last part: You end up with a set of $nm$ symmetric polynomials in $z_{ij}$ each equal to a rational, since the coefficients of $Q_j(z)$ are all rational. This is an improvement since all polynomials are now symmetric, but I can't connect the dots to the conclusion. Is the "it follows.." part a one liner or is there some further manipulation involved? – Jason Suagee Dec 29 '11 at 3:36
@Jason: Each $z_{ij}$ is algebraic over $\mathbb{Q}$, because it is the root of $Q_j\in\mathbb{Q}[z]$. Note that there are $n$ polynomials, and they are not symmetric in any sense. – GH from MO Dec 29 '11 at 3:46

1) The point $(p_1, ... p_n)$ is the vanishing set of the polynomials $x_i - p_i$, and a finite union of algebraic sets is algebraic.

2) Yes. This should follow concretely from results in elimination theory of which I am totally unaware, and abstractly from Chevalley's theorem.

-
Qiaochu, please read the comment under my response. – GH from MO Dec 29 '11 at 0:43