Could anyone explain why singular cubic has only one singularity?

1.9k Views Asked by At

I'm reading Klaus Hulek's algebraic geometry and have encountered this. It is the page 124 of the book and C means irreducible singular cubic plane curve.

enter image description here

Here the sentece says if C has more than two singularities, the line through two singular points intersect C in at least 4 points. Why is it so? Could anyone explain?

2

There are 2 best solutions below

0
On

The explanation is already written in that text. The intersection multiplicity of the curve with a line passing through a singular point is larger than one ($\geq 2$). If you take a line passing through both singularities (assuming more than one) then you have $\geq 4$ multiplicity. But for a cubic we must have $\leq 3$.

The counting of $4$ is including multiplicity. So the intersection of $y=x^3$ and $y=0$ is one point (but $3$ counting multiplicity).

0
On

This is appealing, I'd imagine, to what is often times called 'Bezout's theorem'. It says that for two projective plane curves $C,C'\subseteq\mathbb{P}^2$ of degrees $d$ and $d'$, then their intersection has 'size' $dd'$. Here 'size' means number of intersection points, counted with multiplicities.

Now, for a cubic curve $C$ and a line $\ell$, the above says that $C\cap\ell$ has 'size' $3$. Now, suppose that $C$ has two singular points, $p,p'$. This means that at each point, $C$ can't be 'locally generated' by a single function. If the line intersected $C$ with multiplicity $1$ at either $p$ or $p'$, then the equation of the line would generate $C$ locally, contradicting that the point is singular. So, $\ell$ has to intersect each $p$ and $p'$ with multiplicity greater than $1$. But, this means then that $C$ and $\ell$ have intersect with size at least $2+2=4$, this contradicts Bezout's theorem.

More rigorously, if you know the language, here's what's happening. The intersection multiplicity of two curves $C$ and $D$ in $\mathbb{P}^2$ is defined to be

$$\langle C,D\rangle=\sum_{x\in C\cap D}m_x(C,D)$$

where

$$m_x(C,D)=\ell_{\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2,x}}\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2,x}/(f,g)$$

where $f,g$ are equations cutting $C$ and $D$ out respectively at $p$.

Bezout's theorem then says that if $C$ and $D$ are degrees $d$ and $d'$ respectively (meaning they are cut out by polynomials of that degree) that

$$\langle C,D\rangle=dd'$$

Now, we say that $C$ and $D$ intersect transversely at $x$ if $m_x(C,D)=1$. It's clear then that $C$ and $D$ must be non-singular at $x$ since then the maximal ideals of $\mathcal{O}_{C,x}$ and $\mathcal{O}_{D,x}$ are principle.

So, assume that $C$ is a degree $3$ curve with two singularities, $p$ and $p'$. Let $\ell\subseteq\mathbb{P}^2$ be the line connecting these two points. Then, since $\ell$ is degree $1$, Bezout's lemma implies that $\langle C,\ell\rangle=3\cdot 1=3$. That said, since $p$ and $p'$ were assumed singular points of $C$, $C$ and $\ell$ can't meet transversely at $p$ or $p'$. So

$$3=\langle C,C'\rangle\geqslant m_p(C,\ell)+m_{p'}(C,\ell)\geqslant 2+2=4$$

which is a contradiction.