On cubic hypersurfaces with vanishing hessian

Abstract

If X = V(f) ⊂ PN is a reduced complex hypersurface, the hessian of f (or by abusing the terminology the hessian of X) is the determinant of the matrix of the second derivatives of the form f, that is the determinant of the hessian matrix of f. Hypersurfaces with vanishing hessian were studied systematically for the first time in the fundamental paper [GN], where Gordan and M. Noether analyze Hesse's claims in [Hesse1, Hesse2] according to which these hypersurfaces are necessarily cones. Of course cones have vanishing hessian. Clearly the claim is true if deg(X)=2 so that the first relevant case for the problem is that of cubic hypersurfaces. One immediately sees that V(x0x32 + x1x3x4 + x2x42)⊂ P4 is a cubic hypersurface with vanishing hessian but not a cone (for example one could check that the first partial derivatives of the equation are linearly independent). As firstly pointed out in [GN], the claim is true for N≤ 3 and in general false for every N≥ 4. Here we prove that for N≤ 6 an irreducible cubic hypersurface with vanishing hessian in PN is either a cone or a scroll in linear spaces tangent to the dual of the image of the polar map of the hypersurface. We also provide canonical forms and a projective characterization of Special Perazzo Cubic Hypersurfaces, which, a posteriori, exhaust the class of cubic hypersurfaces with vanishing hessian, not cones, for N≤ 6. Finally we show by pertinent examples the technical difficulties arising for N≥ 7.

0

Turn this paper into a lesson

ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…