2
$\begingroup$

I'm beginning to study the functor of points of a scheme and ran into the classical example that, given an affine scheme $X=\text{Spec}\dfrac{\mathbb{Q}[x_1,...,x_n]}{(f)}$, which is (in the clear fashion) a $\mathbb{Q}$-scheme, choosing a $\mathbb{Q}[\varepsilon]/(\varepsilon^2)$-point of $X$ is equivalent to choosing a point $(a_1,...,a_n)\in\mathbb{Q}^n$ such that $f(a_1,...,a_n)=0$ and a vector $(b_1,...,b_n)$ tangent to the surface $f=0$. As hinted in the thread Correspondence between $k[\epsilon]/(\epsilon^2)$-points of a scheme, and points with tangent vectors, the method of expanding $f$ as a taylor series works as well for $\mathbb{Q}[\varepsilon]/(\varepsilon^n)$-points of $X$, but I'm having problems generalizing beyond the case $n=2$. For example: a $\mathbb{Q}[\varepsilon]/(\varepsilon^3)$-point of $X$ is "the same" as a morphism of $\mathbb{Q}$-algebras $\mathbb{Q}[x_1,...,x_n]/(f)\longrightarrow\mathbb{Q}[\varepsilon]/(\varepsilon^2)$. Of course, the only freedom in choosing such morphisms is in $x_i\longmapsto a_i+b_i\varepsilon+c_i\varepsilon^2$. But knowing that $f(x_1,...,x_n)=0$ implies (using the taylor expansion of $f$ first around ) that \begin{align} 0&= f(a_1+b_1\varepsilon+c_1\varepsilon^2,...,a_n+b_n\varepsilon+c_n\varepsilon^2)\\ &= f(a_1+b_1\varepsilon,...,a_n+b_n\varepsilon)+\sum_i\frac{\partial f}{\partial x_i}(a_1+b_1\varepsilon,...,a_n+b_n\varepsilon)c_i\varepsilon^2\\ &= f(a_1,...,a_n)+\sum_i\frac{\partial f}{\partial x_i}(a_1,...,a_n)b_i\varepsilon+\sum_i\left(\frac{\partial f}{\partial x_i}(a_1,...,a_n)+(...)\varepsilon+(...)\varepsilon^2\right)c_i\varepsilon^2\\ &= f(a_1,...,a_n)+\sum_i\frac{\partial f}{\partial x_i}(a_1,...,a_n)b_i\varepsilon+\sum_i\frac{\partial f}{\partial x_i}(a_1,...,a_n)c_i\varepsilon^2, \end{align} which implies that $(a_1,...,a_n)$ is a point (in the usual sense) of $f=0$, but both $(b_1,...,b_n)$ and $(c_1,...,c_n)$ are tangent vectors to that surface! Shouldn't $(c_1,...,c_n)$ have something to do with the second derivatives (or perhaps the hessian) of $f$?

| cite | improve this question | | | | |
$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

The solution to your extremely clever paradox is that the calculation of $f(a_1+b_1\varepsilon+c_1\varepsilon^2,...,a_n+b_n\varepsilon+c_n\varepsilon^2)$ does involve, despite appearances, the second derivatives of $f$ !
Take for example $f(x_1,\dots,x_n)=\lambda x_1^2-x_1$. Then your formula or a direct calculation yield $$ f(a_1+b_1\varepsilon+c_1\varepsilon^2,...,a_n+b_n\varepsilon+c_n\varepsilon^2)=\lambda(a_1^2+[b_1^2+2a_1b_1]\epsilon+2a_1c_1\epsilon^2 )-(a_1+b_1\epsilon +c_1\epsilon ^2)$$ from which you get the conditions $$\lambda a_1^2-a_1= \lambda [b_1^2+2a_1b_1] -b_1= 2\lambda a_1c_1-c_1=0 \quad \quad (\bigstar)$$ for a point $(a_1+b_1\varepsilon+c_1\varepsilon^2,...,a_n+b_n\varepsilon+c_n\varepsilon^2)\in (\mathbb Q[\varepsilon]/(\varepsilon^3))^n$ to correpond to a morphism $\dfrac{\mathbb{Q}[x_1,...,x_n]}{(f)}\to \mathbb Q[\varepsilon]/(\varepsilon^3)$
Solution of the paradox
The conditions $(\bigstar)$ do involve a second derivative of $f$, namely $$\large\lambda =\frac 1 2 \frac {\partial^2 f}{\partial x_1^2}(0)$$

| cite | improve this answer | | | | |
$\endgroup$

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.