2
$\begingroup$

Let $[X_0:X_1:X_2:X_3]$ be coordinates on $\mathbb{P}^3(\mathbb{C})$. I want to show that given a point $[X_0:X_1:X_2:X_3]\in Z(X_0X_3-X_1X_2)\subset \mathbb{P}^3(\mathbb{C})$, there are precisely two lines in $Z(X_0X_3-X_1X_2)$ containing $[X_0:X_1:X_2:X_3]$ and that any two lines in $Z(X_0X_3-X_1X_2)$ have either $0$ or $1$ point in common.

For the first part, I take a point $[w:x:y:z]\in Z(X_0X_3-X_1X_2)$, a distinct point $[a:b:c:d]\in \mathbb{P}^3$ and a line through these points, namely $$[sw+at:sx+bt:sy+ct:sz+dt].$$ Then I write $$(sz+dt)(sw+at)=(sx+bt)(sy+ct)$$ and by equating coefficients I have $$wd+az=xc+by,\ ad=bc,\ xy=wz.$$

As @GeorgesElencwajg ponted out, I can write $[w:x:y:z]=[a_0b_1:a_0b_1:a_1b_0:a_1b_1]$ for a unique pair of points $[a_0:a_1]$, $[b_0:b_1]\in\mathbb{P}^1$. Then the above system of three equations is equivalent to the following system of two equations: $$a_0b_0d+a_1b_1a=a_0b_1c+a_1b_0b,\ ad=bc.$$

It suffices to consider 4 cases: $a_0,b_0\ne 0$, $a_0,b_1\ne 0$, $a_1,b_0\ne 0$, $a_1,b_1\ne 0$. They are all analogous to one another. Let me consider the first case.

Case 1. $a_0\ne 0, b_0\ne 0$. Set $a_1/a_0=\alpha$ and $b_1/b_0=\beta$. Then $[a_0:a_1]=[1:\alpha],\ [b_0:b_1]=[1:\beta]$. The first equation implies $d=\beta c + \alpha b - \alpha \beta a$, and the second one says $a\beta c + a \alpha b - \alpha \beta a^2 - bc=0$ or equivalently $(c-\alpha a)(b - a\beta)=0$. That is, either $c=a\alpha$ or $b=a\beta$.

But why does the above imply that (in this case) there are precisely two lines through $[w:x:y:z]$? Specifically, consider the case $c=a\alpha$. Then $d=b\alpha$ and $[a:b:c:d]=[a:b:a\alpha:b\alpha]$. Three cases:

  • $a=0,b\ne 0\implies [a:b:c:d]=[0:1:0:\alpha]$, this point determines a unique line
  • $a\ne 0, b=0 \implies [a:b:c:d]=[1:0:\alpha:0]$, this point determines a unique line
  • $a\ne 0, b\ne 0 \implies c\ne 0, d\ne 0$. Why does the point $[a:b:c:d]=[a:b:a\alpha:b\alpha]$ determine a unique line in this case?

For the second part, how should I start at least?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think your confusion stems from using the same letters for a special point and the variables. Denote the point by $ [a_0:a_1:a_2:a_4]$ and see what happens. $\endgroup$ – Mohan Mar 27 '17 at 8:12
  • $\begingroup$ @user428554: The second part is exactly Bézout's theorem, have you studied it? (I guess that the problem should say "$0$ or $1$ points in common in $Z(X_0X_3 - X_1X_2)$", because otherwise any two projective lines intersect in a single point if they do not coincide.) $\endgroup$ – Alex M. Mar 27 '17 at 17:23
  • $\begingroup$ Your 6th line does not make sense in projective space. You must write the parametric equation of a line through $[w:x:y:z]$ as $$[sw+at:sx+bt:sy+ct:sz+dt]$$ (and assume $[w:x:y:z]\neq [a:b:c:d]$) $\endgroup$ – Georges Elencwajg Mar 27 '17 at 20:05
  • $\begingroup$ @GeorgesElencwajg, could you please clarify why the 6th line does not make sense in projective space? $\endgroup$ – user428554 Mar 27 '17 at 20:15
  • $\begingroup$ Moreover, if I write the parametric equation of a line as $$[sw+at:sx+bt:sy+ct:sz+dt]$$ then this will yield the same system of three equations. $\endgroup$ – user428554 Mar 27 '17 at 20:32
3
$\begingroup$

Use the Segre embedding $\mathbb P^1\times \mathbb P^1 \hookrightarrow \mathbb P^3$, which implies that :

1) Every point $P\in Z=Z(X_0X_3-X_1X_2)$ can (and should!) be written $P=(a_0b_0:a_0b_1:a_1b_0:a_1b_1)$ for a unique pair $(a_0:a_1), (b_0:b_1)\in \mathbb P^1$
2) The two lines lying on the quadric $Z$ and passing through $P$ are given parametrically by: $$(a_0u:a_0v:a_1u:a_1v)_{(u:v)\in \mathbb P^1} \quad \operatorname {and}\quad (b_0s:b_1s:b_0t:b_1t)_{(s:t)\in \mathbb P^1}$$

$\endgroup$

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.