MHB Algebraic Geometry - D&F Section 15.1, Exercise 24

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
Dummit and Foote Section 15.1, Exercise 24 reads as follows:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let V = \mathcal{Z} (xy - z) \subseteq \mathbb{A}^3.

Prove that $$ V $$ is isomorphic to \mathbb{A}^2

and provide an explicit isomorphism \phi and associated k-algebra isomorphism \widetilde{\phi} from k[V] to k[ \mathbb{A}^2] along with their inverses.

Is V = \mathcal{Z} (xy - z^2) isomorphic to \mathbb{A}^2?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would appreciate some help and guidance with getting started with this exercise [I suspect I might need considerable guidance! :-( ]Some of the background and definitions are given in the attachment.Peter
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter said:
Dummit and Foote Section 15.1, Exercise 24 reads as follows:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let V = \mathcal{Z} (xy - z) \subseteq \mathbb{A}^3.

Prove that $$ V $$ is isomorphic to \mathbb{A}^2

and provide an explicit isomorphism \phi and associated k-algebra isomorphism \widetilde{\phi} from k[V] to k[ \mathbb{A}^2] along with their inverses.

Is V = \mathcal{Z} (xy - z^2) isomorphic to \mathbb{A}^2?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would appreciate some help and guidance with getting started with this exercise [I suspect I might need considerable guidance! :-( ]Some of the background and definitions are given in the attachment.Peter

I am still working on this problem. Here are some more thoughts I've had ... however I am struggling to make a great deal of progress and still need substantial help ...

We have to show that $$ V $$ is isomorphic to \mathbb{A}^2

We also have to provide an explicit isomorphism \phi and associated k-algebra isomorphism \widetilde{\phi} from k[V] to k[ \mathbb{A}^2] along with their inverses!

... ... ... well, we must look for a mapping from $$ V \subseteq \mathbb{A}^3 $$ to $$ W = \mathbb{A}^2 $$, so I would say we need a morphism or polynomial map $$ \phi : \ V \to W $$.

D&F (Section 15.1, page 662) define a morphism as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definition. A map $$ \phi : \ V \to W $$ is called a morphism or polynomial map or regular map of algebraic sets if there are polynomials $$ \phi_1, ... \ ... \phi_m \in k[x_1, x_2, ... \ ... x_n] $$ such that

$$ \phi ((a_1, a_2, ... \ ... , a_n)) = ( \phi_1(a_1, a_2, ... \ ... , a_n) ... \ ... \phi_m(a_1, a_2, ... \ ... , a_n)) $$ for all $$ (a_1, a_2, ... \ ... , a_n) \in V $$

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D&F (seemingly importantly for our problem) go on to say:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The map $$ \phi : \ V \to W $$ is an isomorphism of algebraic sets if there is a morphism $$ \psi : \ W \to V $$ with $$ \phi \circ \psi = 1_W $$ and $$ \psi \circ \phi = 1_V $$.

... ... ...

... $$ \phi $$ indices a well defined map from the quotient ring $$ k[x_1, ... \ ... , x_m]/ \mathcal{I}(W) $$ to the quotient ring $$ k[x_1, ... \ ... , x_m]/ \mathcal{I}(V) $$:

$$ \widetilde{\phi}: \ k[W] \to k[V] $$

$$ f \mapsto f \circ \phi $$

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So the above are the concepts I now believe need to be applied, but I lack the skills and knowledge to apply them in this specific case

I would really appreciate some help.

Peter
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
814
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K