0
$\begingroup$

Let $Y$ be a submanifold of a complex manifold $X$, and $a$ be an ideal on $X$ which does not vanish along the entire $Y$. Consider a point $\xi$ on $Y$, there are the vanishing order $ord_{\xi}a$ and the vanishing order $ord_{\xi}a\cdot O_{Y}$. Is there any relation between the two numbers?

$\endgroup$
7
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Once you know precisely what the definition of the order of vanishing is, it should be easy to see that the order of vanishing of the restriction is at least as large as the original order of vanishing. Furthermore, if Y is a generic submanifold passing through the point, equality is expected. $\endgroup$ Apr 2, 2012 at 7:32
  • $\begingroup$ I guess the equality should be expected in any case... $\endgroup$
    – Zhengyu Hu
    Apr 2, 2012 at 11:56
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I don't think equality should be expected in general. For example, consider the ideal $a = (y) \subseteq k[x,y]$. This vanishes to order $1$ at the origin. Now we restrict this idea to $Y = V(y-x^2)$. In the ring $k[x,y]/(y-x^2) \cong k[x]$, the ideal $(a)O_Y = (y)O_Y = (x^2)O_Y$ vanishes to order 2 at the origin. $\endgroup$ Apr 2, 2012 at 14:09
  • $\begingroup$ I figure it out... In fact, the two vanishing orders has no relation.. $f=y+x^{n}$ would give an example... $\endgroup$
    – Zhengyu Hu
    Apr 3, 2012 at 5:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Maybe I'm just not understanding what you are saying, but I would say there is a relation: the order of vanishing on $Y$ is at least as big as the order of vanishing on $X$. It is correct to say, however, that there are no further relations: if $X$ is at least 2-dimensional, then for any positive integers $m\leq n$ there exists an ideal $a$ and a submanifold $Y$ such that the order of vanishing in $X$ is $m$ and the order of vanishing in $Y$ is $n$. $\endgroup$ Apr 3, 2012 at 16:35

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.