Affine Algebraic Curves - Kunz - Definition 1.1

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Ernst Kunz's Definition 1.1 from "Introduction to Plane Algebraic Curves," specifically regarding the interpretation of polynomials in the context of affine algebraic curves. Participants clarify that while coefficients of the polynomial \( f \in K_0[X,Y] \) originate from the subring \( K_0 \), the indeterminate variables \( X \) and \( Y \) can take values from the larger field \( K \). The conversation emphasizes that when plotting the zero sets of these polynomials, one evaluates \( X \) and \( Y \) using real values from \( K_0 \), such as \( \mathbb{R} \), to visualize the curves.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of affine algebraic curves
  • Familiarity with polynomial rings, specifically \( K_0[X,Y] \)
  • Knowledge of field theory, particularly the relationship between subrings and fields
  • Basic graphing skills for visualizing polynomial zero sets
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of indeterminate variables in polynomial equations
  • Explore the concept of zero sets in affine algebraic geometry
  • Learn about the intersection of algebraic sets with real and complex numbers
  • Investigate the graphical representation of polynomials in multiple dimensions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, algebraic geometers, and students studying algebraic curves who seek to deepen their understanding of polynomial behavior and visualization in affine spaces.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading Ernst Kunz book, "Introduction to Plane Algebraic Curves"

I need help with some aspects of Kunz' Definition 1.1.

The relevant text from Kunz' book is as follows:View attachment 4556In the above text, Kunz writes the following:

" ... ... If $$K_0 \subset K$$ is a subring and $$\Gamma = \mathscr{V} (f)$$ for a nonconstant polynomial $$f \in K_0 [X,Y]$$ ... ..."


My question is as follows:

Given $$f \in K_0 [X,Y]$$ means that the co-efficients of $$f$$ come from $$K_0$$ ... so if

$$f = aX + bY + c $$

then $$a,b,c$$ come from $$K_0$$ ... that is $$a,b,c \in K_0$$ ... ...

... BUT ... from where do we take the values of $$X$$ and $$Y$$ ... do they likewise come from $$K_0$$ ... or do they come from $$K$$ ...

Hope someone can help clarify this issue ...

Peter
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Note $X$ and $Y$ are indeterminate variables. Elements of $K_0[X,Y]$ are polynomials in $X$ and $Y$ with coefficients in $K_0$. Since $K_0$ is a subset of $K$, the coefficients must belong to $K$.
 
Euge said:
Note $X$ and $Y$ are indeterminate variables. Elements of $K_0[X,Y]$ are polynomials in $X$ and $Y$ with coefficients in $K_0$. Since $K_0$ is a subset of $K$, the coefficients must belong to $K$.
Thanks for your help Euge ...

Yes, I understand that $X$ and $Y$ are indeterminate variables, ... ... but then Kunz, in the examples following Definition 1.1, plots the zero sets i.e. 'plots' and displays $$f = 0$$ for a few curves, apparently taking values of $$X,Y$$ in $$K_0$$ ... but maybe you would say evaluating the points in $$K_0$$ ... ...

For example, see Example 1.2 (d) below where Kunz appears to take values of $$X, Y$$ in $$K_0 = \mathbb{R}$$ ... (indeed, slightly confusingly in a subset $$\mathbb{R} \subset \mathbb{R}_+$$ ... ... as follows:
View attachment 4557
Can you explain how one should view/understand these "plots" where $$X,Y$$ take values in $$K_0$$ ...

Peter
 
But wait, these graphs you've shown are traces of $\Bbb R$-rational points -- you take the zero set of the polynomial and intersect it with $\Bbb R^2$. So we substitute real values of $X$ and $Y$ to obtain the plots.
 
Euge said:
But wait, these graphs you've shown are traces of $\Bbb R$-rational points -- you take the zero set of the polynomial and intersect it with $\Bbb R^2$. So we substitute real values of $X$ and $Y$ to obtain the plots.
Thanks Euge ... most helpful ...

And presumably, we could graph the trace of the zero set anyway ... essentially graphing the $$\mathbb{C}$$-rational points ... that is take $$K_0 = K = \mathbb{C}$$ ... (if we had 4 dimensions to hand ... :) ...)

Is that right?

Peter
 
You've got the idea. ;)
 
Peter said:
Thanks Euge ... most helpful ...

And presumably, we could graph the trace of the zero set anyway ... essentially graphing the $$\mathbb{C}$$-rational points ... that is take $$K_0 = K = \mathbb{C}$$ ... (if we had 4 dimensions to hand ... :) ...)

Is that right?

Peter
Thanks for for all your help in this matter, Euge ...

Peter
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
980
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
928
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K