DOCSLIB.ORG

ON the ORDER of N+3 HYPERPLANES in N-DIMENSIONAL PROJECTIVE GEOMETRY

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ON the ORDER of N+3 HYPERPLANES in N-DIMENSIONAL PROJECTIVE GEOMETRY DEMONSTRATIO MATHEMATICA Vol Xin No 4 1910 Jerzy Osetek ON THE ORDER OF n+3 HYPERPLANES IN n-DIMENSIONAL PROJECTIVE GEOMETRY In this paper we consider certain relations concerning linear varieties in an n-dimensional projective space. Let Fn be the lattice of linear varieties in the n-dimensional projective space over the field of real numbers. By 0 and 1 we denote the minimal element of the lattice, i.e. the void variety, and the maximal element, i.e. the whole n-di- mensional space, respectively. We d-¡note by M^ the set of all k-dimensional (k = 0,1,2,... ,n-1) linear varieties, The elements of the sets M0, M-j and are called points, lines and hyperplanes, respectively. The lattice operations are denoted as usual by U and 0 . For s >n and p^ , p2,... , pg e M0> we say that these points are in general position, iff there is no hyperplane h e Mn_i containing n+1 points from among p^,p2,..•,pg. Then p • U p. U ... U p.- =1 for each permutation 11 2 n+1 (1) c i^ ,i2,... ,i0> of s-tuple < 1,2,... ,s> . Dually we introduce the general position of s-hyperplanes h^ ,h2,... ,hg e Mn_i (a >n), which holds whenever h, n h. n ... nh. = c 11 2 n+1 for each permutation (1) of indexes. - 883 - 2 j.ûsetek In [l] definitions of the relation ordering into cycles each n+3 p-ints in general position are given and the dual relation for hyperplanes is defined. Apart from the case n=1 and n=2 no geometrical intuition connected with these notions so far has been given. I'-'-.ote by D the relation defined in [l] for n+3 hyper- planes in n-dimensional space. I'he theorems Tn, 2n and 4n from [2] imply, in particular, that any n+3 hyperplanes (2) h1,h2,...thn+3e Mn-1 satisfying the additional condition that (3) h1,h2,...,hn+2 are in general position, are^orderable exactly in one way (up to the cyclic change of indexes and to inversion of them) namely <h, ,h, ,...,h. > 11 x2 n+3 so that the following condition is satisfied (h h h (4) Dnn i ' xi »•••» i ) 2 n+3 * In this paper we show what geometrical sense is related to the relation :Dn, for an arbitrary n. We show that be- tween connected regions, arising from division of the projec- tive space by hyperplanes h^,h2,...,hn+^, there are exactly n+3 simplexes which are placed in such a way that the simple- xes touching each other by vertices contitute a cycle, and their order in the cycle reflexes the order of hyperplanes satisfying the condition (4). In order to present this result more precisely, we procede as follows. - 884 - On the order of hyperplanes First of all, we fix in pQ the set of n+3 hyperplanes being in general position (5) H = jh^»• • • By £> we denote the set of all connected open regions, ob- tained from sections of the projective space by the hyperpla- nes from H. Each of the regions belonging to S is bounded by n+1, n+2, or n+3 hyperplanes belonging to H. A region s belonging to S is said to be a simplex when it is bounded exactly by n+1 hyperplanes from the set H, or to be more precise, v/hen there exists an (n+1)-tuple in+3> such that (7) (n+3)-tuple < ±1 ,ig,... ,in+3> is a permutation of the sequence < 1 ,2,... ,n+3> ajnd such that each point belonging to the boundary of s lies at least on one of the hyperplanes of the set. H', where (8) H =j h. ,h. ,...,h. I x2 ^+1 In other words, s e S is a simplex when there exists a se- quence (6) satisfying the condition (7), such that none of two hyperplanes (9) h. ,h. xn+2 n+3 has common points with the closure of the region s. In this case we say that hyperplanes (8) "determine the simplex s" or alternatively, that they are faces of this simplex, we deno- te the simplex by - 885 - 4 J.Osetek (10) s(i1ti2,...,in+1). Of course, the order of arguments in (10) is not important. In case n=2, the set S contains always eleven regions, fi- ve among which are simplexes. Such an example is presented in fig,1e The simplexes are distinguished in the picture by sha- dowing and are denoted by s1 ,sp,... ,St-. Prom condition (3) it follows that any n different hy- per planes (11) h± ,h± ,...,h± 12 n from the set H meet in one point (12) p = h. n h. n ... n h. 11 2 xn we say that the point p is "determined by hyperplanes" (11). In particular, if hyperplanes (11) are faces of a certain sim- plex s e S then p is said to be a vertex of the simplex s. It is evident that every simplex has exactly n+1 vertices. Hence, the vertices of the simplex will be the points - 886 - On the order of hyperplanes 5 (13) p, = h. n h. n „.nh. ol n ...nh, ; 3 X1 2 lj-1 j+1 n+1 j=1,2,...,n+1. Similarly from the condition (3) it follows that any n-1 dif- ferent hyperplanes (14) h, ,h, ....»h, X1 x2 n-1 from H meet one another along one line i = h. n h, n ... n h. X1 2 ln-1 This line ia said to be "determined by hyperplanes" (14). Now, we shall prove the following lemma. Lemma 1. If (7) holds then hyperplanes (8) deter- mine a simplex belonging to £> iff the condition (15) c(p, ,p. ; (p. U p, )n h. , (p, U Pi ¡nh. ) \ 31 d2 •s^ J2 n+2 J1 a2 n+3/ holds for each pair p. , p. of points determined by hyper- 31 32 planes belonging to H', (C denotes separation of pairs of points on the line). Proof. The hyperplanes belonging to the set h' decompose the projective space into k=2n connected regions s1 ,s2,... ,sk. I'hese hyperplanes determine precisely n+1 points (16) P-) » P2 » • • • • PQ+1 defined by formula (13). Moreover, they determine m = lines (17) l1tl2 lm. - 687 - 6 J.Os'etek On each of these lines 1. there are two points p. , p. from among the points (16), These points ¿ivide the line li into two projective segments, ¿ach of the regions s. has J m-edges which are just such projective segments - one from each of lines li. If condition (15) did not hold at least for one of L = pi U p, , then each of two projective seg- i j-j J2 ments on the line (with ends p. , p. ) would be cut by one of 3-1 J2 the hyperplanes h. ,h., and therefore none of the seg- n+2 ~n+3 ments could not be an edge of a simplex belonging to S. On the other hand, if condition (15) is satisfied by each pair of points determined by hyperplanes from the set H' then, as it will be proved, one of the regions s^ is divided nei- ther by h. nor by h. , hence it belongs to S. In or- n+2 n+3 der to prove this, it suffices to notice that adopting hH xn+2 as an improper hyperplane we obtain a division of the result- ing n-dimensional affine space by hyperplanes (8) into regions one of which is a simplex bounded by the hyperplanes. From con- dition (15) it follows that hyperplane h.Z n+3 does not meet the simplex, because it meets none of its edges. The main.result of our paper is expressed in the follow- ing theorem. Theorem. If hyperplanes (2) are in general posi- tion then exactly n+3 simplexes belong to the set S. If, furthermore, the condition (20) Dn(h1,h2,...,hn+3) holds, then the simplexes belonging to S are the following ones: s1 = s(1,2,...,n+1), s2 = s(2,3,...,n+1,n+2),..., = s(n+2,n+3,1 ,2,... ,n-1 ), sn4.-5 = s(n+3,1,2,...,n). - 888 - On the order of hyperplane3 7 In the case n=2 the following figure (fig.2) illustrates the the ore®. In the proof of the theorem we use Lemma 1, Theorem 4n from [2] p.232, and Lemma 2, given below, which is a corrolla ry from Theorem 5 proved in [2] p.235. Lemma 2. If (20) holds and (21 J i< j <k<m<n+3 and (22) 1 = i13km = ii-tn ...n hi_1 n hi+1 n ... nk^n hj+1 n ...n n n 0 0 n 0 0 \+1 • • •• V1 • •' • V3 then d1 (in ^,10 h^in hk,in hm). We give now the proof of our theorem. Prom Theorem 4n it follows that for the hyperplanes (2) there exists a permutation for which the relation Dn holds. - 889 - 8 J.Osetek After appropriate remuneration we can assume that condition (20) holds. Prom Lemma 2 we infer that for 1 = 1. „,_ where 10,n+2,n+3' the following condition holds Vinhi»inVinV2'inV3) and hence c(inhifinhjj inhn+2,inhn+3). Prom Lemma 1 it follows that hyperplanes h^ »hg,... de- termine a simplex s^ = a(1,2,...,n+1) belonging to S. The existence of the remaining simplexes in S, described in the conclusion of the theorem, can be proved in the some way.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kernelization of the Subset General Position Problem in Geometry Jean-Daniel Boissonnat, Kunal Dutta, Arijit Ghosh, Sudeshna Kolay
    Kernelization of the Subset General Position problem in Geometry Jean-Daniel Boissonnat, Kunal Dutta, Arijit Ghosh, Sudeshna Kolay To cite this version: Jean-Daniel Boissonnat, Kunal Dutta, Arijit Ghosh, Sudeshna Kolay. Kernelization of the Subset General Position problem in Geometry. MFCS 2017 - 42nd International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, Aug 2017, Alborg, Denmark. 10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2017.25. hal-01583101 HAL Id: hal-01583101 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01583101 Submitted on 6 Sep 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Kernelization of the Subset General Position problem in Geometry Jean-Daniel Boissonnat1, Kunal Dutta1, Arijit Ghosh2, and Sudeshna Kolay3 1 INRIA Sophia Antipolis - Méditerranée, France 2 Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, India 3 Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands. Abstract In this paper, we consider variants of the Geometric Subset General Position problem. In defining this problem, a geometric subsystem is specified, like a subsystem of lines, hyperplanes or spheres. The input of the problem is a set of n points in Rd and a positive integer k. The objective is to find a subset of at least k input points such that this subset is in general position with respect to the specified subsystem.
    [Show full text]
  • Homology Stratifications and Intersection Homology 1 Introduction
    ISSN 1464-8997 (on line) 1464-8989 (printed) 455 Geometry & Topology Monographs Volume 2: Proceedings of the Kirbyfest Pages 455–472 Homology stratifications and intersection homology Colin Rourke Brian Sanderson Abstract A homology stratification is a filtered space with local ho- mology groups constant on strata. Despite being used by Goresky and MacPherson [3] in their proof of topological invariance of intersection ho- mology, homology stratifications do not appear to have been studied in any detail and their properties remain obscure. Here we use them to present a simplified version of the Goresky–MacPherson proof valid for PL spaces, and we ask a number of questions. The proof uses a new technique, homology general position, which sheds light on the (open) problem of defining generalised intersection homology. AMS Classification 55N33, 57Q25, 57Q65; 18G35, 18G60, 54E20, 55N10, 57N80, 57P05 Keywords Permutation homology, intersection homology, homology stratification, homology general position Rob Kirby has been a great source of encouragement. His help in founding the new electronic journal Geometry & Topology has been invaluable. It is a great pleasure to dedicate this paper to him. 1 Introduction Homology stratifications are filtered spaces with local homology groups constant on strata; they include stratified sets as special cases. Despite being used by Goresky and MacPherson [3] in their proof of topological invariance of intersec- tion homology, they do not appear to have been studied in any detail and their properties remain obscure. It is the purpose of this paper is to publicise these neglected but powerful tools. The main result is that the intersection homology groups of a PL homology stratification are given by singular cycles meeting the strata with appropriate dimension restrictions.
    [Show full text]
  • Projective Geometry: a Short Introduction
    Projective Geometry: A Short Introduction Lecture Notes Edmond Boyer Master MOSIG Introduction to Projective Geometry Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Objective . .2 1.2 Historical Background . .3 1.3 Bibliography . .4 2 Projective Spaces 5 2.1 Definitions . .5 2.2 Properties . .8 2.3 The hyperplane at infinity . 12 3 The projective line 13 3.1 Introduction . 13 3.2 Projective transformation of P1 ................... 14 3.3 The cross-ratio . 14 4 The projective plane 17 4.1 Points and lines . 17 4.2 Line at infinity . 18 4.3 Homographies . 19 4.4 Conics . 20 4.5 Affine transformations . 22 4.6 Euclidean transformations . 22 4.7 Particular transformations . 24 4.8 Transformation hierarchy . 25 Grenoble Universities 1 Master MOSIG Introduction to Projective Geometry Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Objective The objective of this course is to give basic notions and intuitions on projective geometry. The interest of projective geometry arises in several visual comput- ing domains, in particular computer vision modelling and computer graphics. It provides a mathematical formalism to describe the geometry of cameras and the associated transformations, hence enabling the design of computational ap- proaches that manipulates 2D projections of 3D objects. In that respect, a fundamental aspect is the fact that objects at infinity can be represented and manipulated with projective geometry and this in contrast to the Euclidean geometry. This allows perspective deformations to be represented as projective transformations. Figure 1.1: Example of perspective deformation or 2D projective transforma- tion. Another argument is that Euclidean geometry is sometimes difficult to use in algorithms, with particular cases arising from non-generic situations (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpolation
    Current Developments in Algebraic Geometry MSRI Publications Volume 59, 2011 Interpolation JOE HARRIS This is an overview of interpolation problems: when, and how, do zero- dimensional schemes in projective space fail to impose independent conditions on hypersurfaces? 1. The interpolation problem 165 2. Reduced schemes 167 3. Fat points 170 4. Recasting the problem 174 References 175 1. The interpolation problem We give an overview of the exciting class of problems in algebraic geometry known as interpolation problems: basically, when points (or more generally zero-dimensional schemes) in projective space may fail to impose independent conditions on polynomials of a given degree, and by how much. We work over an arbitrary field K . Our starting point is this elementary theorem: Theorem 1.1. Given any z1;::: zdC1 2 K and a1;::: adC1 2 K , there is a unique f 2 K TzU of degree at most d such that f .zi / D ai ; i D 1;:::; d C 1: More generally: Theorem 1.2. Given any z1;:::; zk 2 K , natural numbers m1;:::; mk 2 N with P mi D d C 1, and ai; j 2 K; 1 ≤ i ≤ kI 0 ≤ j ≤ mi − 1; there is a unique f 2 K TzU of degree at most d such that . j/ f .zi / D ai; j for all i; j: The problem we’ll address here is simple: What can we say along the same lines for polynomials in several variables? 165 166 JOE HARRIS First, introduce some language/notation. The “starting point” statement Theorem 1.1 says that the evaluation map 0 ! L H .ᏻP1 .d// K pi is surjective; or, equivalently, 1 D h .Ᏽfp1;:::;peg.d// 0 1 for any distinct points p1;:::; pe 2 P whenever e ≤ d C 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Projective Geometry of the Spacetime Yielded by Relativistic Positioning Systems and Relativistic Location Systems Jacques Rubin
    The projective geometry of the spacetime yielded by relativistic positioning systems and relativistic location systems Jacques Rubin To cite this version: Jacques Rubin. The projective geometry of the spacetime yielded by relativistic positioning systems and relativistic location systems. 2014. hal-00945515 HAL Id: hal-00945515 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-00945515 Submitted on 12 Feb 2014 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. The projective geometry of the spacetime yielded by relativistic positioning systems and relativistic location systems Jacques L. Rubin (email: [email protected]) Université de Nice–Sophia Antipolis, UFR Sciences Institut du Non-Linéaire de Nice, UMR7335 1361 route des Lucioles, F-06560 Valbonne, France (Dated: February 12, 2014) As well accepted now, current positioning systems such as GPS, Galileo, Beidou, etc. are not primary, relativistic systems. Nevertheless, genuine, relativistic and primary positioning systems have been proposed recently by Bahder, Coll et al. and Rovelli to remedy such prior defects. These new designs all have in common an equivariant conformal geometry featuring, as the most basic ingredient, the spacetime geometry. In a first step, we show how this conformal aspect can be the four-dimensional projective part of a larger five-dimensional geometry.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical Algebraic Geometry
    CLASSICAL ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY Daniel Plaumann Universität Konstanz Summer A brief inaccurate history of algebraic geometry - Projective geometry. Emergence of ’analytic’geometry with cartesian coordinates, as opposed to ’synthetic’(axiomatic) geometry in the style of Euclid. (Celebrities: Plücker, Hesse, Cayley) - Complex analytic geometry. Powerful new tools for the study of geo- metric problems over C.(Celebrities: Abel, Jacobi, Riemann) - Classical school. Perfected the use of existing tools without any ’dog- matic’approach. (Celebrities: Castelnuovo, Segre, Severi, M. Noether) - Algebraization. Development of modern algebraic foundations (’com- mutative ring theory’) for algebraic geometry. (Celebrities: Hilbert, E. Noether, Zariski) from Modern algebraic geometry. All-encompassing abstract frameworks (schemes, stacks), greatly widening the scope of algebraic geometry. (Celebrities: Weil, Serre, Grothendieck, Deligne, Mumford) from Computational algebraic geometry Symbolic computation and dis- crete methods, many new applications. (Celebrities: Buchberger) Literature Primary source [Ha] J. Harris, Algebraic Geometry: A first course. Springer GTM () Classical algebraic geometry [BCGB] M. C. Beltrametti, E. Carletti, D. Gallarati, G. Monti Bragadin. Lectures on Curves, Sur- faces and Projective Varieties. A classical view of algebraic geometry. EMS Textbooks (translated from Italian) () [Do] I. Dolgachev. Classical Algebraic Geometry. A modern view. Cambridge UP () Algorithmic algebraic geometry [CLO] D. Cox, J. Little, D.
    [Show full text]
  • Convex Sets in Projective Space Compositio Mathematica, Tome 13 (1956-1958), P
    COMPOSITIO MATHEMATICA J. DE GROOT H. DE VRIES Convex sets in projective space Compositio Mathematica, tome 13 (1956-1958), p. 113-118 <http://www.numdam.org/item?id=CM_1956-1958__13__113_0> © Foundation Compositio Mathematica, 1956-1958, tous droits réser- vés. L’accès aux archives de la revue « Compositio Mathematica » (http: //http://www.compositio.nl/) implique l’accord avec les conditions gé- nérales d’utilisation (http://www.numdam.org/conditions). Toute utili- sation commerciale ou impression systématique est constitutive d’une infraction pénale. Toute copie ou impression de ce fichier doit conte- nir la présente mention de copyright. Article numérisé dans le cadre du programme Numérisation de documents anciens mathématiques http://www.numdam.org/ Convex sets in projective space by J. de Groot and H. de Vries INTRODUCTION. We consider the following properties of sets in n-dimensional real projective space Pn(n &#x3E; 1 ): a set is semiconvex, if any two points of the set can be joined by a (line)segment which is contained in the set; a set is convex (STEINITZ [1]), if it is semiconvex and does not meet a certain P n-l. The main object of this note is to characterize the convexity of a set by the following interior and simple property: a set is convex if and only if it is semiconvex and does not contain a whole (projective) line; in other words: a subset of Pn is convex if and only if any two points of the set can be joined uniquely by a segment contained in the set. In many cases we can prove more; see e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Geometry of Algebraic Curves
    Geometry of Algebraic Curves Fall 2011 Course taught by Joe Harris Notes by Atanas Atanasov One Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA 02138 E-mail address: [email protected] Contents Lecture 1. September 2, 2011 6 Lecture 2. September 7, 2011 10 2.1. Riemann surfaces associated to a polynomial 10 2.2. The degree of KX and Riemann-Hurwitz 13 2.3. Maps into projective space 15 2.4. An amusing fact 16 Lecture 3. September 9, 2011 17 3.1. Embedding Riemann surfaces in projective space 17 3.2. Geometric Riemann-Roch 17 3.3. Adjunction 18 Lecture 4. September 12, 2011 21 4.1. A change of viewpoint 21 4.2. The Brill-Noether problem 21 Lecture 5. September 16, 2011 25 5.1. Remark on a homework problem 25 5.2. Abel's Theorem 25 5.3. Examples and applications 27 Lecture 6. September 21, 2011 30 6.1. The canonical divisor on a smooth plane curve 30 6.2. More general divisors on smooth plane curves 31 6.3. The canonical divisor on a nodal plane curve 32 6.4. More general divisors on nodal plane curves 33 Lecture 7. September 23, 2011 35 7.1. More on divisors 35 7.2. Riemann-Roch, finally 36 7.3. Fun applications 37 7.4. Sheaf cohomology 37 Lecture 8. September 28, 2011 40 8.1. Examples of low genus 40 8.2. Hyperelliptic curves 40 8.3. Low genus examples 42 Lecture 9. September 30, 2011 44 9.1. Automorphisms of genus 0 an 1 curves 44 9.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Positive Geometries and Canonical Forms
    Prepared for submission to JHEP Positive Geometries and Canonical Forms Nima Arkani-Hamed,a Yuntao Bai,b Thomas Lamc aSchool of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA bDepartment of Physics, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA cDepartment of Mathematics, University of Michigan, 530 Church St, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA Abstract: Recent years have seen a surprising connection between the physics of scat- tering amplitudes and a class of mathematical objects{the positive Grassmannian, positive loop Grassmannians, tree and loop Amplituhedra{which have been loosely referred to as \positive geometries". The connection between the geometry and physics is provided by a unique differential form canonically determined by the property of having logarithmic sin- gularities (only) on all the boundaries of the space, with residues on each boundary given by the canonical form on that boundary. The structures seen in the physical setting of the Amplituhedron are both rigid and rich enough to motivate an investigation of the notions of \positive geometries" and their associated \canonical forms" as objects of study in their own right, in a more general mathematical setting. In this paper we take the first steps in this direction. We begin by giving a precise definition of positive geometries and canonical forms, and introduce two general methods for finding forms for more complicated positive geometries from simpler ones{via \triangulation" on the one hand, and \push-forward" maps between geometries on the other. We present numerous examples of positive geome- tries in projective spaces, Grassmannians, and toric, cluster and flag varieties, both for the simplest \simplex-like" geometries and the richer \polytope-like" ones.
    [Show full text]
  • Bertini Type Theorems 3
    BERTINI TYPE THEOREMS JING ZHANG Abstract. Let X be a smooth irreducible projective variety of dimension at least 2 over an algebraically closed field of characteristic 0 in the projective space Pn. Bertini’s Theorem states that a general hyperplane H intersects X with an irreducible smooth subvariety of X. However, the precise location of the smooth hyperplane section is not known. We show that for any q ≤ n + 1 closed points in general position and any degree a > 1, a general hypersurface H of degree a passing through these q points intersects X with an irreducible smooth codimension 1 subvariety on X. We also consider linear system of ample divisors and give precise location of smooth elements in the system. Similar result can be obtained for compact complex manifolds with holomorphic maps into projective spaces. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 14C20, 14J10, 14J70, 32C15, 32C25. 1. Introduction Bertini’s two fundamental theorems concern the irreducibility and smoothness of the general hyperplane section of a smooth projective variety and a general member of a linear system of divisors. The hyperplane version of Bertini’s theorems says that if X is a smooth irreducible projective variety of dimension at least 2 over an algebraically closed field k of characteristic 0, then a general hyperplane H intersects X with a smooth irreducible subvariety of codimension 1 on X. But we do not know the exact location of the smooth hyperplane sections. Let F be an effective divisor on X. We say that F is a fixed component of linear system |D| of a divisor D if E > F for all E ∈|D|.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Quantum Entanglement Via a Hypercube of Segre Embeddings
    Characterization of quantum entanglement via a hypercube of Segre embeddings Joana Cirici∗ Departament de Matemàtiques i Informàtica Universitat de Barcelona Gran Via 585, 08007 Barcelona Jordi Salvadó† and Josep Taron‡ Departament de Fisíca Quàntica i Astrofísica and Institut de Ciències del Cosmos Universitat de Barcelona Martí i Franquès 1, 08028 Barcelona A particularly simple description of separability of quantum states arises naturally in the setting of complex algebraic geometry, via the Segre embedding. This is a map describing how to take products of projective Hilbert spaces. In this paper, we show that for pure states of n particles, the corresponding Segre embedding may be described by means of a directed hypercube of dimension (n − 1), where all edges are bipartite-type Segre maps. Moreover, we describe the image of the original Segre map via the intersections of images of the (n − 1) edges whose target is the last vertex of the hypercube. This purely algebraic result is then transferred to physics. For each of the last edges of the Segre hypercube, we introduce an observable which measures geometric separability and is related to the trace of the squared reduced density matrix. As a consequence, the hypercube approach gives a novel viewpoint on measuring entanglement, naturally relating bipartitions with q-partitions for any q ≥ 1. We test our observables against well-known states, showing that these provide well-behaved and fine measures of entanglement. arXiv:2008.09583v1 [quant-ph] 21 Aug 2020 ∗ [email protected] † [email protected] ‡ [email protected] 2 I. INTRODUCTION Quantum entanglement is at the heart of quantum physics, with crucial roles in quantum information theory, superdense coding and quantum teleportation among others.
    [Show full text]
  • PROJECTIVE GEOMETRY Contents 1. Basic Definitions 1 2. Axioms Of
    PROJECTIVE GEOMETRY KRISTIN DEAN Abstract. This paper investigates the nature of finite geometries. It will focus on the finite geometries known as projective planes and conclude with the example of the Fano plane. Contents 1. Basic Definitions 1 2. Axioms of Projective Geometry 2 3. Linear Algebra with Geometries 3 4. Quotient Geometries 4 5. Finite Projective Spaces 5 6. The Fano Plane 7 References 8 1. Basic Definitions First, we must begin with a few basic definitions relating to geometries. A geometry can be thought of as a set of objects and a relation on those elements. Definition 1.1. A geometry is denoted G = (Ω,I), where Ω is a set and I a relation which is both symmetric and reflexive. The relation on a geometry is called an incidence relation. For example, consider the tradional Euclidean geometry. In this geometry, the objects of the set Ω are points and lines. A point is incident to a line if it lies on that line, and two lines are incident if they have all points in common - only when they are the same line. There is often this same natural division of the elements of Ω into different kinds such as the points and lines. Definition 1.2. Suppose G = (Ω,I) is a geometry. Then a flag of G is a set of elements of Ω which are mutually incident. If there is no element outside of the flag, F, which can be added and also be a flag, then F is called maximal. Definition 1.3. A geometry G = (Ω,I) has rank r if it can be partitioned into sets Ω1,..., Ωr such that every maximal flag contains exactly one element of each set.
    [Show full text]