Timeline for Zariski openness of Newton non-degenerate polynomials
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 19, 2017 at 18:32 | vote | accept | Templeman | ||
| Feb 19, 2017 at 18:31 | comment | added | Templeman | Thank you very much! You are right, and thanks to your example, I could notice that my definition of Newton non-degeneracy was wrong. I would like to modify the definition as follows. Under the same setting, $f(x)$ is said to be Newton non-degenerate if for any face $\Delta^\prime <\Delta,$ the $\Delta^\prime$ principal part $$f_{\Delta^\prime}(x)=\sum_{\alpha\in\Delta^\prime}a_\alpha x^\alpha$$ satisfies $$\{x\in(\mathbb{C}^*)^n|\frac{\partial f_{\Delta^\prime}}{\partial x_1}(x)=\cdots =\frac{\partial f_{\Delta^\prime}}{\partial x_n}(x)=0\}=\phi.$$ Isn't it still Zariski open? | |
| Feb 19, 2017 at 18:22 | comment | added | Templeman | Thank you very much! You are right, and thanks to your example, I could notice that my definition of Newton non-degeneracy was wrong. | |
| Feb 18, 2017 at 12:29 | history | answered | David E Speyer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |