1
$\begingroup$

I am reading a book and I am curious about a certain notion.

Consider $R = k[x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,t]$ and let $G = \{\underbrace{x_1 x_3-x_2^2 + t x_3^2}_{f_1}, \underbrace{x_1 x_4-x_2 x_3 +t x_2^2}_{f_2} \}$.

When $t=0$, we obtain the standard twisted cubic.

After imposing the following weights to the variables: $$ wt(x_i)=1 \mbox{ and } wt(t)=0. $$ does this mean I am viewing $t$ as a constant, and would you say $f_1$ and $f_2$ are homogeneous of degree 2, rather than think of it as a mixed degree polynomial? $$ $$ What if I, instead, impose the weights to be $$ wt(x_i)=2 \mbox{ and } wt(t)=1? $$

What is the purpose of giving variables different weights?

$$ $$ Addendum: is there a geometric significance to the notion of weights?

2 Answers 2

3

Setting different weights to a variable is changing the fact wether a polynomial is homogeneous or not. For a grading you might want to fix a factor $G$ of $\mathbb{Z}^n$ and give your indeterminates weights $g \in G$. After that you can talk about homogeneous elements and wether the ring or a module over it is generated in certain degree. You can also talk about wether a ring homomorphism is one of graded rings or not.

For me the main thing that changes is the set of homogeneous prime ideals of a graded ring $S$, the so called ${\rm proj}(S)$.

If K is an algebraically closed field and you have a look at the ring $$ S := K[x_0,x_1,x_2,x_3] $$ and take $G =\mathbb{Z}$ and ${\rm deg}(x_i) = 1$ for all $i$, then you get $$ {\rm proj}(S) \cong \mathbb{P}^2. $$ If you take $G = \mathbb{Z}^2$ and set ${\rm deg}(x_0)={\rm deg}(x_1)=(1,0)$ and ${\rm deg}(x_2)={\rm deg}(x_3)=(0,1)$ you get $$ {\rm proj}(S) \cong \mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1 \not\cong \mathbb{P}^2. $$

1

Yes. No. It is natural to do in certain arguments (e.g. to make certain polynomials one cares about homogeneous). Geometrically weights correspond to actions of the multiplicative group $k^{\ast}$ (for sufficiently large $k$); that is, giving $x_i$ a weight of $e_i$ corresponds to letting $a \in k^{\ast}$ act by $x_i \mapsto a^{e_i} x_i$.

For the general notion, see graded algebra.

  • 0
    I know that by giving variables different weights, we may pick out the leading term of a polynomial. In regards to what you said above (about the $k^*$-action on the variables), is this related to the leading term of a polynomial and thus the initial ideal? In the context of Cox, Little, O'Shea, they said the weights must be nonnegative, but from a geometric ($k^*$-invariant) perspective, we may impose negative weights. Something doesn't quite make sense.2012-05-24
  • 0
    @math: weights by themselves aren't enough to pick out leading terms in the sense that I understand the term; you need a monomial order. Non-negative weights seem to me more a matter of convenience than a conceptual necessity.2012-05-24
  • 0
    Thanks Qiaochu. That makes sense.2012-05-24