1
$\begingroup$

In my algebraic geometry course we've seen the notion of tangent cone and tangent space at the origin, $T_0X$ and $C_0 X$ respectively, as follows $$T_0 X = V(f_1: f \in I(X)) \quad \text{and} \quad C_0Y = V(f^{in}: f \in J)$$ for $Y = V(J)$ with $J$ an ideal of $k[x_1, \ldots, x_n]$, $f_1$ the linear term of $f$ and $f^{in}$ the lowest degree term. We can see that it is important in the definition of tangent space that $I(X)$ is the radical ideal with $X$ as zero locus. Indeed, for $(x)$ and $(x^2)$ in $k[x]$, then $V(x) = V(x^2) = \{0\}$ but $x^2$ has no linear term. I was wondering if the choice of the ideal $J$ in the definition of tangent cone is also important. It seems not but I have some troubles to write down a formal proof, any help ?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

If you're working with just classical varieties (not schemes), it's true that the tangent cone is insensitive to the ideal of definition of your variety. To be more precise, let $I$ be a radical ideal and let $J$ be any other ideal with $\sqrt{J}=I$. Let $I^{in}$ be the ideal generated by the initial terms of elements of $I$, and similarly for $J^{in}$ and $J$. We'll show that $\sqrt{I^{in}}=\sqrt{J^{in}}$.

As $J\subset \sqrt{J}=I$, we have that $J^{in}\subset I^{in}$ and thus $\sqrt{J^{in}}\subset \sqrt{I^{in}}$, while it remains to prove the reverse inclusion. Since initial ideals are homogeneous and radicals of homogeneous ideals are homogeneous, we need only concern ourselves with homogeneous elements. Suppose $f\in \sqrt{I^{in}}$ is a homogeneous element, so we can write $f^n$ as the leading term of some element $\alpha\in I$. But $\alpha^p\in J$ for some $p\geq0$, and initial terms and powers commute for elements of $k[x_1,\cdots,x_n]$ so we have the result. (I've left some details a little sketchy - please leave a comment if you get stuck expanding some of them.)

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Comment: "We can see that it is important in the definition of tangent space that I(X) is the radical ideal with X as zero locus."

Response: Let $A$ be a commutative ring and let $A_{red}:=A/nil(A)$ where $nil(A)$ is the nilradical. Let $\mathfrak{m} \subseteq A$ be a maximal ideal with $\overline{\mathfrak{m}}:=\mathfrak{m}A_{red}$ with corresponding point $x\in S:=Spec(A)$.

You may define the tangent cone $C_x(S)$ at $x$ as

$$C1.\text{ } C_x(S):=Spec(Gr(\mathfrak{m}))$$

where

$$C2.\text{ }Gr(\mathfrak{m}):= \oplus \mathfrak{m}^n/\mathfrak{m}^{n+1}:=A/\mathfrak{m} \oplus \mathfrak{m}/\mathfrak{m}^2\oplus \cdots.$$

Question: "I was wondering if the choice of the ideal J in the definition of tangent cone is also important. It seems not but I have some troubles to write down a formal proof, any help?"

Answer: Since the cotangent space $\mathfrak{m}/\mathfrak{m}^2$ depends on the reduced structure a similar result holds for the tangent cone. You may define the tangent cone in terms of the local ring: Let $S:=Spec(A)$ and let $\mathfrak{m} \in S$ be a maximal ideal. It follows

$$\mathcal{O}_{S, \mathfrak{m}} \cong A_{\mathfrak{m}}$$ and there is an inclusion

$$ \mathfrak{m}_{\mathfrak{m}} \subseteq \mathcal{O}_{S,\mathfrak{m}}$$ and we may define

$$C3.\text{ }Gr(\mathfrak{m}_{\mathfrak{m}}):= \oplus_n \mathfrak{m}_{\mathfrak{m}}^n/\mathfrak{m}_{\mathfrak{m}}^{n+1}.$$

there is a canonical isomorphism

$$\mathfrak{m}_{\mathfrak{m}}^n/\mathfrak{m}_{\mathfrak{m}}^{n+1} \cong \mathfrak{m}^n/\mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$$

and an isomorphism of rings

$$Gr(\mathfrak{m}) \cong Gr(\mathfrak{m}_{\mathfrak{m}}),$$

hence the definition in $C2$ may be done using the local ring at $\mathfrak{m}$. The definition in $C3$ is intrinsic since it is defined using the local ring and the local ring does not depend on an embedding of $S$ into some affine space: If $A$ is a finitely generated $k$-algebra for some field $k$ you may choose a set of generators $a_1,..,a_n \in A$ and a presentation

$$A\cong k[x_1,..,x_n]/I$$

giving an embedding

$$i:S \rightarrow \mathbb{A}^n_k$$

as a closed sub-scheme of affine $n$-space. The local ring of $S$ at $x$ and the cone $C_x(S)$ does not depend on the embedding $i$ - it depends on the maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}_{\mathfrak{m}}$.

As you have observed: A similar statement is true for the tangent space.

If your variety/scheme $S \subseteq \mathbb{A}^n_k$ contains the origin $(0)$ with corresponding ideal $\mathfrak{m}:=(x_1,..,x_n)$, you must prove that your definition of $C_0(S)$ agrees with the definition in $C1$.

If $A$ is a $k$-algebra with $k$ a field and if $I \subseteq A \otimes_k A$ is the ideal of the diagonal. Assume $I^n/I^{n+1},A\otimes_k A/I^{n+1}$ is a projective $A$-module for all $n\geq 1$. It follows the module $I^n/I^{n+1}$ has the property that

$$ I^n/I^{n+1}\otimes_A A/\mathfrak{m}\cong \mathfrak{m}^n/\mathfrak{m}^{n+1}$$

for any maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ with $A/\mathfrak{m} \cong k$.

If you define $Gr(I):= \oplus_n I^n/I^{n+1}$ you get a map

$$\pi: Spec(Gr(I)) \rightarrow Spec(A)$$ with the property that for any such maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}\in Spec(A)$ it follows

$$\pi^{-1}(\mathfrak{m}) \cong Gr(\mathfrak{m}).$$

Hence $Spec(Gr(I))$ has the tangent cone $C_x(S)$ as fibers.

This is similar to the definition of the cotangent sheaf $\Omega:=\tilde{\Omega^1_{A/k}}$: There is an isomorphism

$$ \Omega_x \otimes_{\mathcal{O}_{S,x}} \kappa(x) \cong \mathfrak{m}/\mathfrak{m}^2$$

where $\mathfrak{m}$ is the ideal of the $k$-rational point $x$.

Note: The maximal ideals $\mathfrak{m}$ and $\overline{\mathfrak{m}}$ have the same residue field. On page 303 in Mumford's "The red book.." you will find this discussed and a relation between the tangent cone and "blowing up" a variety/scheme at a point.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I am really sorry but I am not very confortable with the notion of Schemes etc., is there no more "intuitive" way to understand that ? $\endgroup$ – Falcon 2 days ago

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.