Skip to main content

Timeline for Constructing M-curves à la Hilbert

Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0

9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Nov 16, 2020 at 21:22 vote accept Jose Capco
Nov 15, 2020 at 13:16 history edited Jose Capco CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 49 characters in body
Nov 15, 2020 at 12:39 history edited David Roberts CC BY-SA 4.0
title fix
Nov 15, 2020 at 11:23 history edited Jose Capco CC BY-SA 4.0
added 5 characters in body
Nov 15, 2020 at 11:04 answer added Jose Capco timeline score: 2
Nov 15, 2020 at 8:48 comment added Jose Capco You could write this as an answer so that I can mark the post as answerd once I checked this computationally. Thanks for the tip!
Nov 15, 2020 at 8:46 comment added Jose Capco Ah! That is a good idea. We should be able to assume that the intersection with the original ellipse in the construction is 0-dimensional and it is then easy to check if the points are real or not using almost any computer algebra system. Yeah, the vertical line construction should be wrong (it does not follow Hilbert's algorithm precisely). I think, 8 real intersection with one component 0 with the others is intended (otherwise you might have less component in the next M-curve). But I think I can modify the lines to make this happen (cont'd)
Nov 15, 2020 at 8:08 comment added Zach Teitler Hmm, those "prongs" in the drawing are wildly exaggerated. They cross a line 8 times. Going beyond just visually looking for "prongs", have you tried computationally finding the number of intersections of your perturbed curves with the original ones? With Macaulay2 it appears that in your example with horizontal lines, the perturbed curve has 8 real intersection points with each ellipse (but in the example with vertical lines, the intersection points are nonreal). Is it that you want 8 real intersections with one, and 0 with the other? Anyway try computational checking instead of visual.
Nov 14, 2020 at 17:55 history asked Jose Capco CC BY-SA 4.0