Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Plane Curves, Local Intersection Multiplicity, and Bézout — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

The examples and counterexamples compute local intersection multiplicities and exhibit each hypothesis of Bézout's theorem as necessary. The line x0=0 is a common component of V(x0) and V(x0x1), so the local multiplicities along it are infinite and the intersection sum is not finite. The imaginary conic x02+x12+x22 meets the line x1=0 in two conjugate non-real points, so the count of real intersection points is zero while the complex count is the full degree total. At the cusp y2=x3 the tangent line meets the curve with multiplicity three and the transverse line x=0 with multiplicity two; at the node y2=x2(x+1) in characteristic ≠2 each tangent line has contact multiplicity three and other lines through the node meet it with multiplicity two. The parallel affine lines x=0 and x=1 are disjoint while their projective closures meet at a point at infinity, in characteristic ≠3 the cubic and triangle examples verify the nine-point transverse count 3⋅3, and a tangent line to a conic shows a single distinct intersection point carrying multiplicity two. The last item records the flex [1:−1:0] of the Fermat cubic in characteristic ≠3, where the tangent line restricts to x23 and contact order three is visible in homogeneous coordinates.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

A common component makes the intersection sum infinite

Statement refuted

False claim: Bezout's identity ∑pIp(C,D)=de holds for all pairs of plane curves, without the hypothesis that the curves have no common component.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC The Axiom of Choice, the algebraically closed field k, the plane projective curves C=V(x0) of degree one and D=V(x0x1) of degree two, and an arbitrary point p of the shared line. In a chart xi=1 containing p (where i=1 or 2), write f=x0/xi and g=(x0/xi)(x1/xi) for the local equations.

[F1]

x0 and x0x1 are nonconstant square-free forms, so C and D are plane projective curves; V(x0) is an irreducible component of both, so C and D share the component V(x0) Plane projective curves and their components.

[F2]

At p∈V(x0) the local ideal is (f,g)=(x0/xi), whose nonunit irreducible generator is a local coordinate vanishing on the line; hence O/(f,g) is not of finite length and the definition records Ip(C,D)=∞ Local intersection multiplicity of two plane curves, Finite local length exactly when no common local branch, Prime ideals and maximal ideals in a commutative ring.

[F3]

The Bezout theorem is stated under the no-common-component hypothesis; it computes a finite sum of finite multiplicities Bezout's theorem for plane projective curves. A module of infinite length is not a finite summand Composition series and length of a module.

Counterexample

1.1F1given

The curves C and D share the line V(x0), by [F1], and at every point p of that line the local ideal is generated by the common irreducible factor x0/xi.

1.2F2given

At such a point the quotient O/(x0/xi) is the local ring of the line, of infinite length as an O-module, so Ip(C,D)=∞ by [F2]; in particular the local multiplicities do not form a finite sum.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2F3∎

The line has infinitely many points, already the points [0:1:b] for b∈k with k infinite by Plane projective curves and their components (Remarks). Since the sum ∑pIp(C,D) contains infinitely many infinite terms, it is not the finite number de=2: the hypothesis of no common component cannot be dropped from the Bezout identity, whose statements are those of [F3].

CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Bezout needs algebraic closure: an imaginary conic has no real point

Statement refuted

False claim: over an arbitrary field k, the degree identity ∑pIp=de holds for the k-rational intersection points of two plane curves.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC The Axiom of Choice, the imaginary conic C=V(x02+x12+x22) and the line L=V(x1), first over the ordered field R The reals form a totally ordered field and then over the algebraically closed field C: the complex field construction C=R[x]/(x2+1) is a field, every element is uniquely a+bi, and every nonzero element has inverse (a−bi)/(a2+b2) and the root theorem Fundamental theorem of algebra: every nonconstant complex polynomial has a complex root give the latter assertion.

[F1]

The derivatives of the quadratic are 2x0,2x1,2x2. Any repeated irreducible factor would divide all three, impossible since these coordinates have no common nonconstant factor; thus the quadratic is square-free, as is the linear form x1. Their degrees are two and one. Over C they define curves in the convention of Plane projective curves and their components. Over R, C(R) and L(R) mean the rational zero sets of these homogeneous equations; the degrees refer to the equations (or their geometric curves after extension to C), and no degree is assigned to the empty real point set.

[F2]

A point [a0:a1:a2]∈L has a1=0 and satisfies the conic equation exactly when a02+a22=0. In an ordered field a nonzero square is positive by trichotomy and closure of the positive cone Ordered field, so over R the sum of the two squares can be zero only if a0=a2=0, impossible for a projective point; over C the solutions are [1:0:i] and [1:0:−i] (or [i:0:1], [−i:0:1]) Evaluation and roots of a polynomial in a commutative target ring, An algebraically closed field: every nonconstant polynomial has a root in the field.

[F3]

Over the algebraically closed field, the Bezout identity gives ∑pIp(C,L)=2⋅1=2 Bezout's theorem for plane projective curves. At p=[1:0:i] the gradients of x02+x12+x22 and x1 are (2,0,2i) and (0,1,0), both nonzero, so both curves are smooth at p with tangent lines x0+ix2=0 and x1=0, which are distinct; hence Ip(C,L)=1 Transversal smooth curves meet with multiplicity one, Multiplicity one characterises smooth points with a unique tangent, and symmetrically at the conjugate point Intersection multiplicity dominates the product of multiplicities, with equality for separated tangent cones, Local intersection multiplicity of two plane curves. The two points are conjugate, with non-real coordinates, and are not R-rational: at either point the ratio x2/x0=±i is non-real, since a real square cannot equal −1 C=R[x]/(x2+1) is a field, every element is uniquely a+bi, and every nonzero element has inverse (a−bi)/(a2+b2), Ordered field.

Counterexample

1.1F2givenF1

The real intersection: by [F2] the sets C(R) and L(R) are disjoint, since a02+a22=0 has only the trivial real solution; hence the sum of multiplicities over R-rational points is 0.

1.2F2F3given

Over C the two curves meet in exactly the two conjugate points [1:0:±i], each with multiplicity one, so the multiplicity-weighted complex sum is 2=de.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2F3given∎

The k-rational count gives 0, while the degree identity requires 2=de; the missing contributions are exactly the two conjugate non-rational points, so Bezout's identity cannot be read as a statement about k-rational points when k is not algebraically closed.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Line multiplicities at a cusp

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice, inherited from the cited local-length, smoothness or Bezout suppliers.

Let C=V(y2z−x3)⊆P2 be the cuspidal cubic at the cusp p=[0:0:1], so mp(C)=2 with double tangent line T=V(y). Then

Ip(C,T)=3,Ip(C,V(x))=2,

and both values agree with the local lengths ℓ(k[x,y](x,y)/(y2−x3,y))=3 and ℓ(k[x,y](x,y)/(y2−x3,x))=2.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC The Axiom of Choice, an algebraically closed field k, the curve C=V(y2z−x3) with the affine chart z=1, affine equation f=y2−x3, the cusp p=(0,0), and O=k[x,y](x,y).

[F1]

The homogeneous equation y2z−x3 is primitive and linear in z over k[x,y], so it is irreducible by Gauss lemma over a UFD, Every finite-variable polynomial ring over a field is a UFD, with prime irreducibles and principal height-one primes. Its dehomogenisation is square-free, so C is a plane projective curve; in the chart z=1 the point p has mp(C)=2 and the lowest-degree part of f is y2, so the tangent cone is the double line V(y) Plane projective curves and their components, Multiplicity of a plane curve at a point, Tangent cone and tangent lines at a point.

[F2]

The local intersection multiplicity is the length of O/(f,g) for a local equation g of the second curve, and it is computed by Ip(C,D)=ℓO(O/(f,g)) Local intersection multiplicity of two plane curves. Simplicity: O/(y,x3) has k-basis the classes of 1,x,x2, and O/(x,y2) has k-basis the classes of 1,y Each quotient is respectively k[x](x)/(x3) or k[y](y)/(y2); the descending-power flag has simple residue-k factors, hence lengths three and two Composition series and length of a module, Finite local length exactly when no common local branch.

[F3]

The point is a double point, so the product bound gives Ip(C,L)≥2 for every line L through p, with equality exactly when the tangent cones are separated; the tangent line V(y) shares its (double) tangent direction with the cusp, so there the value is at least 3 Intersection multiplicity dominates the product of multiplicities, with equality for separated tangent cones.

Verification

1.1F1F2given

The tangent line T=V(y): the ideal (y2−x3, y) equals (y,x3) in O, so Ip(C,T)=ℓO(O/(y,x3))=3, the number of basis elements 1,x,x2.

1.2F1F2given

The transverse line V(x): the ideal (y2−x3, x) equals (x,y2), so Ip(C,V(x))=ℓO(O/(x,y2))=2, the number of basis elements 1,y.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2F1F3∎

The values 3 and 2 are compatible with the product bound: both are at least mp(C)⋅mp(line)=2, and the tangent line carries the strict inequality because the two tangent cones share the line V(y), while the line V(x) is transverse to the cusp and realises equality.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Lines through a node and its two branches

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice, inherited from the cited local-length, smoothness or Bezout suppliers.

Let C=V(y2z−x2(x+z))⊆P2 be the nodal cubic over an algebraically closed field of characteristic not two, with node p=[0:0:1]. The tangent cone is y2−x2, so there are two distinct tangent lines y=±x. A line through p equal to one of the two tangent lines meets C with multiplicity three at p; a line through p distinct from both tangents, for instance V(y), has Ip(C,L)=2; a line not through p and not contained in C meets C in three points counted with multiplicity.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC The Axiom of Choice, an algebraically closed field k of characteristic not two, the curve C=V(y2z−x2(x+z)), the chart z=1 with affine equation f=y2−x2(x+1)=y2−x2−x3, the node p=(0,0), and O=k[x,y](x,y).

[F1]

The homogeneous equation (y2−x2)z−x3 is primitive and linear in z over k[x,y], since y2−x2 and x3 are coprime. It is therefore irreducible by Gauss lemma over a UFD, Every finite-variable polynomial ring over a field is a UFD, with prime irreducibles and principal height-one primes, and f is square-free, so C is a plane projective curve of degree three; at p the lowest part is y2−x2=(y−x)(y+x), so mp(C)=2 and the tangent lines are V(y−x) and V(y+x) Plane projective curves and their components, Multiplicity of a plane curve at a point, Tangent cone and tangent lines at a point.

[F2]

Local intersection multiplicities are lengths of local quotients, Ip(C,L)=ℓO(O/(f,ℓ)) Local intersection multiplicity of two plane curves, Finite local length exactly when no common local branch, and the product bound gives Ip≥2 on every line through p, with equality exactly for separated tangent cones Intersection multiplicity dominates the product of multiplicities, with equality for separated tangent cones.

[F3]

O/(y−x,x3) has k-basis 1,x,x2, and O/(y,x2+x3)=O/(y,x2(1+x)) has k-basis 1,x because 1+x is a unit of O; The descending-power flags in the quotients k[x](x)/(x3) and k[x](x)/(x2) have simple residue-k factors, so lengths equal the number of these basis monomials Composition series and length of a module.

[F4]

For a line L with L⊈C, Bezout applied to the cubic C and the line of degree one gives ∑q∈L∩CIq(C,L)=3 Bezout's theorem for plane projective curves.

[F5]

The two branches here are formal graph branches. In k⟦x⟧ Formal power series over a commutative ring and the coefficient-extraction functional [xn] the coefficient operations form a ring Cauchy multiplication makes R⟦x⟧ a commutative ring containing R[x] as the finitely supported subring, which is a domain For a field K, K⟦x⟧ is a domain and its nonunits form the unique maximal ideal xK⟦x⟧. Construct s(x)=1+∑r≥1srxr with s(x)2=1+x: the coefficient of degree r is 2sr+∑i=1r−1sisr−i, so it uniquely determines sr because 2 is invertible. Then f=(y−xs(x))(y+xs(x)) in k⟦x⟧[y]. Substitution gives the two graph branches y=±xs(x), with distinct linear terms ±x; each factor gives the domain k⟦x⟧ as quotient, and no other factor remains. This is a formal splitting, not a factorisation of the irreducible curve in the algebraic local ring.

Verification

1.1F1F2F3algebra

Tangent line V(y−x): substituting y=x into f gives x2−x2−x3=−x3, so (f,y−x)=(y−x,x3) up to a unit and Ip(C,V(y−x))=ℓO(O/(y−x,x3))=3. The other tangent line gives the same value by symmetry y↦−y.

1.2F1F2F3algebra

Non-tangent line V(y) through p: substituting y=0 gives −x2(1+x), and since 1+x is a unit at p this is a unit multiple of x2, so Ip(C,V(y))=ℓO(O/(y,x2))=2, the value predicted by equality in the product bound.

1.3F1F4given

A line L with p∉L and L⊈C: [F4] gives ∑q∈L∩CIq(C,L)=3, so the contact points of the line with the cubic, counted with multiplicity, exhaust three.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3F1F2F5∎

The computations exhibit the two distinct tangent directions at the node, the contact of order three of each tangent line with the curve at the node, and the transverse value two for other lines through the node, with the global line total three for lines avoiding p.

CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Bezout fails on the affine plane because points at infinity are missing

Statement refuted

False claim: for two plane curves of degrees d,e, the number of affine intersection points counted with multiplicity equals de.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC The Axiom of Choice, affine coordinates (x,y) on A2⊂P2 with x=x1/x0, y=x2/x0, the affine lines V(x) and V(x−1), and their projective closures C1=V(x1), C2=V(x1−x0) in P2.

[F1]

x1 and x1−x0 are square-free linear forms, so C1 and C2 are plane projective curves of degree one, with no common component; each is a line Plane projective curves and their components.

[F2]

The affine parts of C1 and C2 are the parallel lines x=0 and x=1, which are disjoint in A2; hence the count of affine intersection points counted with multiplicity is 0: x=0 and x=1 cannot hold simultaneously since 0≠1.

[F3]

The projective closures meet in the point [0:0:1]: solving x1=0 and x1−x0=0 gives x0=x1=0 with x2≠0, i.e. [0:0:1], a point at infinity of the affine chart x0=1; in the chart x2=1 the local ideal is (x1,x1−x0)=(x0,x1), so its quotient is the residue field k, of length one projective space points, Local intersection multiplicity of two plane curves.

[F4]

Bezout for the two projective lines gives ∑pIp(C1,C2)=1⋅1=1, realised at the single point at infinity Bezout's theorem for plane projective curves.

Counterexample

1.1F2given

The affine zero sets V(x) and V(x−1) are disjoint, so the affine intersection count is 0.

1.2F1F3F4given

The projective closures meet at [0:0:1] with multiplicity one, and their total projective intersection, counted with multiplicity, is de=1 by Bezout.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2F3given∎

Hence the affine count 0 is strictly smaller than de=1; the missing contribution is exactly the point at infinity, so Bezout cannot be formulated on the affine plane without adding the points at infinity.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

A line and a conic meet in two points counted with multiplicity

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice, inherited from the cited local-length, smoothness or Bezout suppliers.

Let C=V(x02−x1x2)⊆P2 over an algebraically closed field of characteristic not two and let L=V(x1−x2). Then L⊈C and L∩C={[1:1:1],[−1:1:1]}; both intersections are transversal, so Ip(C,L)=1 at each point and the total is 2=deg⁡C⋅deg⁡L.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC The Axiom of Choice, an algebraically closed field k of characteristic not two, the conic C=V(x02−x1x2), the line L=V(x1−x2), and the parametrisation (s:t)↦[s:t:t] of L.

[F1]

Viewed in k[x0,x1][x2], the polynomial x02−x1x2 is primitive (its two nonzero coefficients are coprime) and linear, hence irreducible over k(x0,x1) and over k[x0,x1] by Gauss lemma over a UFD, Every finite-variable polynomial ring over a field is a UFD, with prime irreducibles and principal height-one primes. Thus it is a square-free quadratic form, so C is a plane projective curve of degree two with no linear component; L is a line and L⊈C Plane projective curves and their components.

[F2]

Substituting the parametrisation into the defining form gives the binary quadratic s2−t2=(s−t)(s+t); its roots are [s:t]=[1:1] and [−1:1], corresponding to [1:1:1] and [−1:1:1], and both roots are simple Intersection with a line is the order of vanishing of the restricted equation.

[F3]

At each of the two points the gradients of x02−x1x2 and of x1−x2 are nonzero with distinct tangent directions, so the curves meet transversally and Ip(C,L)=1; the line-intersection count confirms the total 2 Transversal smooth curves meet with multiplicity one, A line meets a degree-d curve in d points counted with multiplicity, Local intersection multiplicity of two plane curves.

Verification

1.1F1F2given

The restrictions: substituting (s:t)↦[s:t:t] gives x02−x1x2↦s2−t2, so the intersection points of L with C are exactly [1:1:1] and [−1:1:1].

1.2F3algebra

At [1:1:1] the gradient of the conic is (2x0,−x2,−x1)=(2,−1,−1) and at [−1:1:1] it is (−2,−1,−1), both nonzero, while L is a line with constant gradient (0,1,−1); the tangent lines are distinct at both points, so each local multiplicity is 1.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2F2F3∎

The two simple roots account for the full degree total 2⋅1=2=de, in agreement with the line-intersection count; there are exactly two distinct intersection points and both are transversal.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Two transverse cubics meet in nine points

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice, inherited from the cited local-length, smoothness or Bezout suppliers.

Let k be algebraically closed of characteristic not three and let C=V(x03+x13+x23) and D=V(x0x1x2). Then C∩D consists exactly of the nine points with one coordinate zero and the other two coordinates a,b satisfying a3+b3=0; at each of them C and D are smooth with distinct tangent lines, so every local multiplicity is one and ∑pIp=9=3⋅3, as Bezout requires. The cusp and node computations on this page illustrate higher local multiplicities at singular contacts; this configuration has nine distinct contacts of multiplicity one.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC The Axiom of Choice, an algebraically closed field k of characteristic not three, the Fermat cubic C=V(x03+x13+x23) and the triangle D=V(x0x1x2).

[F1]

A repeated irreducible factor of the Fermat form would divide all three derivatives 3x02,3x12,3x22, which have no common nonconstant factor because 3≠0. Thus it is square-free; the triangle is a product of three distinct prime linear factors. None of those factors divides the Fermat form (setting each coordinate to zero leaves a nonzero binary cubic), so the two degree-three forms have no common factor, so C,D are plane projective curves of degree three with no common component Plane projective curves and their components. In particular their intersection is nonempty and finite Two plane projective curves meet, Curves without a common component meet finitely often, and Bezout gives ∑pIp=9 Bezout's theorem for plane projective curves.

[F2]

A point lies on D exactly when one of its coordinates vanishes. If, say, x0=0, then the cubic equation reads x13+x23=0 with x1x2≠0, so [0:a:b] with a3+b3=0; over the algebraically closed field and in characteristic not three the ratio b/a solves 1+t3=0, which splits over k A field is algebraically closed exactly when every nonconstant polynomial splits, equivalently when it has no nontrivial finite extension. No root is repeated: a repeated root would annul the derivative 3t2, whereas every root is nonzero and 3≠0. Thus the ratio takes three distinct values, so this coordinate line contributes three points, and the same holds for the other two coordinate lines; their intersection subsets with C are disjoint, because the pairwise intersections of the coordinate lines are the coordinate vertices and no such vertex satisfies the cubic equation, giving exactly nine points Evaluation and roots of a polynomial in a commutative target ring.

[F3]

At each intersection point C is smooth: not all of 3x02,3x12,3x22 vanish for a nonzero point, and the characteristic is not three. At a point with exactly one vanishing coordinate D is also smooth, with tangent line the corresponding coordinate line, and the tangent line of C there is not that coordinate line. Hence the two curves meet transversally at each of the nine points and every local multiplicity equals one Transversal smooth curves meet with multiplicity one, Local intersection multiplicity of two plane curves.

Verification

1.1F1F2given

The intersection set: as computed in [F2], each of the three coordinate lines contains exactly three points of C, and there are no other points of D; hence C∩D has exactly nine points.

1.2F3given

At each of these nine points both curves are smooth with distinct tangent lines by [F3], so the local multiplicity is one at every intersection point.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2F1F3∎

Summing the nine unit multiplicities gives ∑pIp=9=3⋅3, in agreement with the Bezout count of [F1]; since the total equals the number of distinct points, all multiplicities are one, as asserted.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

A tangent line meets a conic with multiplicity two at one point

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice, inherited from the cited local-length, smoothness or Bezout suppliers.

Over an algebraically closed field k of characteristic not two, let C=V(x02−x1x2) and let L=V(x1) be the tangent line to C at p=[0:0:1]. Then L∩C={p} as a set, and substituting x1=0 leaves the restriction x02 with a double root at p, so Ip(C,L)=2 and the single point accounts for the full degree-two total.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC The Axiom of Choice, an algebraically closed field k of characteristic not two, the conic C=V(x02−x1x2), the line L=V(x1), and the point p=[0:0:1].

[F1]

The quadratic is primitive and linear in x2 over k[x0,x1], so Gauss lemma makes it irreducible and square-free Gauss lemma over a UFD, Every finite-variable polynomial ring over a field is a UFD, with prime irreducibles and principal height-one primes. Therefore C is a plane projective curve of degree two and L a line with L⊈C; p∈L∩C because x1(p)=0 and x0(p)2−x1(p)x2(p)=0 Plane projective curves and their components.

[F2]

The gradient of x02−x1x2 at p is (2x0,−x2,−x1)=(0,−1,0), nonzero, and the tangent line it defines is x1=0, i.e. TpC=L; so L is the tangent line of the conic at p Multiplicity one characterises smooth points with a unique tangent, Tangent cone and tangent lines at a point.

[F3]

Restricting the defining form to L: every point of L has x1=0, and the restriction is the binary form x02 in the coordinates (x0,x2), with a double root at [x0:x2]=[0:1], the point p. By the order-of-vanishing formula Ip(C,L) equals that root multiplicity Intersection with a line is the order of vanishing of the restricted equation, Local intersection multiplicity of two plane curves.

[F4]

The line-intersection count for the degree-two conic and the degree-one line gives ∑q∈L∩CIq(C,L)=2 A line meets a degree-d curve in d points counted with multiplicity.

Verification

1.1F1algebra

The set L∩C is exactly {p}: on L the equation becomes x02=0, so x0=0 and the point is [0:0:1].

1.2F2F3F4algebra

Since the restriction x02 has a double root at p, the order of vanishing is two, so Ip(C,L)=2 by [F3]; the value is consistent with the total 2 of [F4], the line being tangent at its unique intersection point.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2F4∎

The single point p with multiplicity two accounts for the full degree total 2=2⋅1, so tangency is exactly the phenomenon that distinct-point counting misses.

CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Counting distinct points is not enough: tangent contact

Statement refuted

False claim: for two plane projective curves of degrees d,e over an algebraically closed field, the number of distinct intersection points equals de.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC The Axiom of Choice, the conic C=V(x02−x1x2) and its tangent line L=V(x1) at p=[0:0:1], both over an algebraically closed field of characteristic not two.

[F1]

L∩C={p} as a set, and Ip(C,L)=2: the restriction of the conic equation to L is x02, a double root at p A tangent line meets a conic with multiplicity two at one point.

[F2]

Bezout for deg⁡C=2, deg⁡L=1 gives ∑q∈C∩LIq(C,L)=2 over an algebraically closed field Bezout's theorem for plane projective curves, and every local multiplicity at a point of the intersection is a positive integer Local intersection multiplicity of two plane curves.

Counterexample

1.1F1given

The distinct intersection points number one, while the degree product is de=2⋅1=2.

1.2F1F2given

The multiplicity-weighted sum is Ip(C,L)=2, the value required by Bezout, concentrated at the unique point.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2F1F2∎

Therefore the distinct-point count 1 differs from de=2; the deficiency is repaired exactly by counting the tangent contact with multiplicity two, so the number of distinct points alone does not equal the degree product.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedOpen item page →

A flex of a cubic has contact order three

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice, inherited from the cited local-length, smoothness or Bezout suppliers.

For the Fermat cubic C=V(x03+x13+x23) over an algebraically closed field of characteristic not three, the point p=[1:−1:0] is a flex. Its tangent line is T=V(x0+x1): substituting x0=−x1 into the equation gives x23, so the restriction to T has a triple root at p and Ip(C,TpC)=3.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC The Axiom of Choice, an algebraically closed field k of characteristic not three, the Fermat cubic C=V(F) with F=x03+x13+x23, the point p=[1:−1:0], and the line T=V(x0+x1).

[F1]

If F had a repeated irreducible factor, it would divide all of 3x02,3x12,3x22, impossible since 3≠0 and these polynomials have no common nonconstant divisor. Thus F is square-free of degree three, and p∈C because 13+(−1)3+03=0; the gradient of F at p is (3x02,3x12,3x22)=(3,3,0), nonzero since the characteristic is not three, so p is a smooth point Plane projective curves and their components, Multiplicity one characterises smooth points with a unique tangent.

[F2]

The tangent line at the smooth point p is computed from the gradient: 3x0+3x1+0⋅x2=0, i.e. x0+x1=0, so T=TpC Tangent cone and tangent lines at a point, Multiplicity one characterises smooth points with a unique tangent.

[F3]

For a smooth point p whose tangent line T is not a component of C, Ip(C,T)=ord⁡p(F∣T), the order of vanishing of the nonzero restricted form, and p is a flex exactly when that order is at least three; an ordinary flex is the case of order exactly three Flexes are contacts of order at least three with the tangent line, Intersection with a smooth curve is a vanishing order.

Verification

1.1F1F2algebra

The restriction to T: parametrise T by (s:−s:t); then F restricts to s3−s3+t3=t3, a binary cubic in (s,t) whose only root is [s:t]=[1:0], the point p=[1:−1:0], with multiplicity three.

2.1step 1.1F3algebra

Since the restriction in step 1.1 is nonzero, T is not a component of C. By [F3] the vanishing order three of the restriction is exactly the intersection multiplicity Ip(C,TpC)=3, so p is a flex, and it is an ordinary flex.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1F1F2F3∎

The example exhibits a smooth cubic point where the tangent line meets the curve with contact order three; this realises the flex criterion Ip(C,TpC)=3 concretely in homogeneous coordinates.

Sources