1
$\begingroup$

Let $F_1(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}), \ldots, F_r(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y})$ be bihomogeneous polynomials with rational coefficients with bidegree $(d_1, d_2)$, which means $$ F_i( s x_1, \ldots, s x_{n_1} ; t y_1, \ldots, t y_{n_2} ) = s^{d_1} t^{d_2} F_i(\mathbf{x} ; \mathbf{y} ). $$ Let $V$ be the algebraic set defined by $F_1, \ldots, F_r$ in $\mathbb{C}^{n_1+ n_2}$, and let us denote $V_1, \ldots, V_T$ to be the irreducible components of $V$. Then I am guessing that the following is true, but I wasn't really sure how to prove or where to find a reference for: Let $1 \leq i \leq T$.

  1. Suppose the point $(u_1, \ldots, u_{n_1}, v_{1}, \ldots, v_{n_2}) \in \mathbb{C}^{n_1+n_2}$ is contained in $V_i$. Then for any $s,t \in \mathbb{C}$ the point $(su_1, \ldots, su_{n_1}, tv_{1}, \ldots, tv_{n_2})$ is also contained in $V_i$.

  2. $V_i$ contains points all points of the form $(0,\ldots, 0, t_1, \ldots, t_n)$ where $t_j \in \mathbb{C}$.

I would appreciate any comments or references. Thank you very much!

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$
  1. Since each $F_i(u_1,\dotsc,u_{n_1},v_1,\dotsc,v_{n_2})=0$, then $F_i(su_1,\dotsc,su_{n_1},tv_1,\dotsc,tv_{n_2}) = s^{d_1}t^{d_2} F_i(u_1,\dotsc,u_{n_1},v_1,\dotsc,v_{n_2})=s^{d_1}t^{d_2}0 = 0$. So certainly the point $(su_1,\dotsc,su_{n_1},tv_1,\dotsc,tv_{n_2}) \in V$. The map $\mathbb{C}^2 \to \mathbb{C}^{n_1+n_2}$ given by $(s,t)\mapsto (su_1,\dotsc,su_{n_1},tv_1,\dotsc,tv_{n_2})$ is regular, so the image is irreducible. This irreducible set is contained in $V$, so it must be contained in an irreducible component of $V$. Since $(u_1,\dotsc,u_{n_1},v_1,\dotsc,v_{n_2}) \in V_i$, so is $(su_1,\dotsc,su_{n_1},tv_1,\dotsc,tv_{n_2})$ for every $s,t$.

  2. This is not true. It's true that every such point is in $V$ (assuming $d_1>0$) but those points are not necessarily in each irreducible component $V_i$ of $V$. For example, with $n_1=n_2=d_1=d_2=1$, $V=V(xy)$ has two components, one of which contains the point $(0,t)$ if and only if $t=0$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I don't know what I was thinking in part (1). The irreducible set is contained in at least one irreducible component of $V$. But I don't know why it can't intersect other irreducible components. So, just containing one point of $V_i$ doesn't imply containment in $V_i$. The answer above is bogus. Sorry. $\endgroup$ – Zach Teitler Aug 21 '19 at 15:41
  • $\begingroup$ However it can be replaced. An affine variety is defined by a multihomogeneous ideal if and only if it's invariant under scaling by a certain product of tori. Then its irreducible components are each, individually, also invariant; check on general points (automatic on intersections). This is a positive answer to question (1). ... If I still feel good about this idea in a few days, and if I remember, I'll update my answer above. If you're reading this comment in the year 2099, I forgot... $\endgroup$ – Zach Teitler Aug 21 '19 at 15:47

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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