I am having trouble understanding the role primary decomposition plays in ``interpreting'' the geometric picture of a scheme. Here are the examples I am struggling with from Eisenbud's Commutative Algebra With a viewpoint towards Algebraic Geometry. Assume $k$ is algebraically closed.
Apparently $I = (x^2,y) \subset k[x,y]$ defines the geometric object of the origin in $k^2$ along with a (or lots?) of tangent vectors sticking out horizontally. Why?
Similarly $I = (x,y)^2 = (x^2,xy,y^2)$ defines the origin along with the ``first order infinitesimal neighbourhood around the origin." Again, why?
I don't understand his reasoning in either case, though apparently he looks at the primary decomposition of the ideals.
This was too long for a comment, but probably isn't the type of answer you are looking for:
This is purely intuition, a nice exposition of which, can be found in Vakil.
The idea is that $(x^2,y)$ has some 'fuzz' (Vakil's terminology) which keeps track of more information than just the point $(0,0)$. It keeps track of information about functions' $x$-component, which, if you think about it, is keeping track of their horizontal tangent vectors. Similarly, $(x,y)^2$ is keeping track of extra information in both the $x$ and $y$-direction. But, intuitively, if your ideal keeps track of two tangent vectors, it keeps track of linear combinations of them. So, since the $x$ and $y$ tangent vectors span the tangent space at $(0,0)$, we see that $(x,y)^2$ retains information for all the tangent vectors, or, in other words, the 'fuzz' (the extra data kept) goes in all directions.