Abstract
Given a cubic K in the real projective plane. Then for each point P there is a conic \(C_{{P}}\) associated to P. The conic \(C_{{P}}\) is called the polar conic of K with respect to the pole P. We investigate the situation when three conics \(C_1\), \(C_2\), and \(C_3\) are polar conics of K with respect to the poles \(P_1\), \(P_2\), and \(P_3\), respectively. In particular, we give an elementary proof—without using any results from algebraic geometry—that any three conics \(C_1\), \(C_2\), \(C_3\) in general position, satisfying only a non-degeneracy condition, determine a unique cubic K and three points \(P_1\), \(P_2\), \(P_3\), such that \(C_1\), \(C_2\), \(C_3\) are polar conics of K with respect to the three poles \(P_1\), \(P_2\), \(P_3\). This can be seen as a higher degree variant of von Staudt’s Theorem.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
This work proceeds the article [3], in which it is shown that two given conics \(C_0\) and \(C_1\) can always be considered as polar conics of a cubic K curve with respect to corresponding poles \(P_0\) and \(P_1\). However, even though \(P_1\) is determined by \(P_0\), neither the cubic nor the point \(P_0\) is determined by the two conics \(C_0\) and \(C_1\). This changes if we start with three conics \(C_1\), \(C_2\), \(C_3\) in general position. In this situation, there is a unique cubic K and uniquely determined points \(P_1\), \(P_2\), \(P_3\) such that \(C_1\), \(C_2\), \(C_3\) are the polar conics of K with respect to the three poles \(P_1\), \(P_2\), \(P_3\). Instead of formulating the result in the abstract language of algebraic geometry, we propose an elementary and explicit approach that shows a concrete method to calculate the resulting cubic curve K and the poles \(P_1\), \(P_2\), \(P_3\), starting from the three given conic sections \(C_1\), \(C_2\), \(C_3\). In particular, the condition for uniqueness and existence becomes visible in this way.
Our result can be seen as a higher degree variant of von Staudt’s Theorem which says that given three lines \(\ell _1\), \(\ell _2\), \(\ell _3\) and three points \(P_1\), \(P_2\), \(P_3\) in perspective position determine a unique conic C such that the points \(P_i\) are the poles of the lines \(\ell _i\) with respect to C (see [7, p. 135, Sect. 241]).
The setting in which we work is the same as in [3], but for the sake of completeness we recall the notation and terminology. We will work in the real projective plane \(\mathbb {R}\mathbb {P}^2= \mathbb {R}^3 {\setminus } \{0\}/\sim \), where \(X\sim Y\in \mathbb {R}^3 {\setminus } \{0\}\) are equivalent, if \(X=\lambda Y\) for some \(\lambda \in \mathbb {R}\). Points \(X=(x_1,x_2,x_3)^T\in \mathbb {R}^3 \setminus \{0\}\) will be denoted by capital letters, the components with the corresponding small letter, and the equivalence class by [X]. However, since we mostly work with representatives, we often omit the square brackets in the notation. A non-degenerate conic in this setting is then given by an equation of the form \(\langle X,AX\rangle =0\), where A is a regular, real, symmetric \(3\times 3\)-matrix with mixed signature, i.e., A has eigenvalues of both signs, and \(\langle \cdot ,\cdot \rangle \) denotes the standard inner product of \(\mathbb {R}^3\).
Let f be a non-constant homogeneous polynomial in the variables \(x_1,x_2,x_3\) of degree n. Then f defines a projective algebraic curve
of degree n. For a point \(P\in \mathbb {R}\mathbb {P}^2\),
is also a homogeneous polynomial in the variables \(x_1,x_2,x_3\). If the homogeneous polynomial f is of degree n, then \(C_{Pf}\) is an algebraic curve of degree \(n-1\). The curve \(C_{Pf}\) is called the polar curve of \(C_{{f}}\) with respect to the pole P; sometimes we call it the polar curve of P with respect to \(C_{{f}}\). In particular, when \(C_{{f}}\) is a cubic curve (i.e., f is a homogeneous polynomial of degree 3), then \(C_{Pf}\) is a conic, which we call the polar conic of \(C_{{f}}\) with respect to the pole P, and when \(C_{{f}}\) is a conic, then \(C_{Pf}\) is a line, which we call the polar line of \(C_{{f}}\) with respect to the pole P (see, for example, the classical book of Wieleitner [8] or Dolgachev [2, Chap. 3] for a modern view). Note that \(C_{Pf}\) is defined and can be a regular curve even if \(C_{{f}}\) is singular or reducible. For some historical background, for the geometric interpretation of poles and polar lines, for the iterated construction of polar curves, as well as for the analytical method used today, see Monge [5, Sect. 3], Bobillier [1], and Joachimsthal [4, p. 373], or [3].
2 Algebraic Curves and Multilinear Forms
Let \(C_{{f}}\) be a conic given by the non-constant homogeneous polynomial
Then, the symmetric matrix
has the property that a point X belongs to \(C_{{f}}\) (i.e., \(f(X)=0\)), if and only if \(\langle X,T(X)\rangle =0\). Thus, the conic \(C_{{f}}\) is represented by the matrix T. Since the expression \(\langle X,T(Y)\rangle \) defines a bilinear form \(\mathbb {R}^3\times \mathbb {R}^3\rightarrow \mathbb {R}\), \((X,Y)\mapsto \langle X,T(Y)\rangle \), we can consider the matrix T also as a purely covariant tensor of rank 2 (i.e., a tensor whose rank of covariance is 2 and whose rank of contravariance is 0). More precisely, if we consider the matrix T as a (0, 2)-tensor, where for \(X=(x_1,x_2,x_3)\) and \(Y=(y_1,y_2,y_3)\) we define
then the expression \(\langle X,T(X)\rangle =0\) is equivalent to \(T(X,X)=0\). In order to obtain the coefficients of the (0, 2)-tensor \(T=(a_{ij})_{1\le i,j\le 3}\) from a conic \(C_{{f}}\) defined by a non-constant homogeneous polynomial f, we just set
The next result shows that this relation between a conic \(C_{{f}}\) and the corresponding (0, 2)-tensor \(T_{{f}}=(a_{ij})_{1\le i,j\le 3}\) can be generalised to algebraic curves of arbitrary degree.
Lemma 2.1
Let \(\Gamma _{{f}}\) be an algebraic curve of degree d given by the non-constant homogeneous polynomial
and let \(T_{{f}}=(a_{i_1\ldots i_d})_{1\le i_1,\ldots , i_d\le 3}\), where
Then \(T_{{f}}\) is a symmetric (0, d)-tensor and a point X is on the curve \(\Gamma _{{f}}\) if and only if
Proof
Since for every rearrangement \(\pi \) of the sequence \(\langle i_1,\ldots ,i_d\rangle \) we have
we get that the tensor \(T_{{f}}\) is symmetric. Furthermore, assume that the monomial \(c_{n_1\hspace{.5pt}n_2\hspace{.5pt}n_3} \cdot x_1^{n_1}\cdot x_2^{n_2}\cdot x_3^{n_3}\) appears in f. Then \(n_1+n_2+n_3=d\) and
Now, it is easy to see that the number of coefficients \(a_{i_1\ldots i_d}\) such that for \(1\le i\le 3\) the number i appears \(n_i\)-times in the sequence \(\langle i_1,\ldots ,i_d\rangle \) is given by the trinomial coefficient
This shows that for any point X we have \(T_{{f}}(X,\ldots ,X)=0\) if and only if \(f(X)=0\), or in other words, X is on the curve \(\Gamma \). \(\square \)
Let us turn our attention now to polar curves. For this, we consider first polar curves of conics \(C_{{f}}\) with corresponding (0, 2)-tensor \(T_{{f}}=(a_{ij})_{1\le i,j\le 3}\). Above we have seen that for a given point \(P\in \mathbb {R}\mathbb {P}^2\), a point X is on the polar curve \(C_{Pf(X)}\) of \(C_{{f}}\) with respect to the pole P if and only if
Now, for \(P,X\in \mathbb {R}\mathbb {P}^2\), a short calculation shows that \(Pf(X)=2\cdot T_{{f}}(P,X)\), and hence, we get
Since \(T_{{f}}\) is symmetric, we have \(T_{{f}}(P,X)=T_{{f}}(X,P)\), which shows that if X is a point on the polar curve of \(C_{{f}}\) with respect to the pole P, then P is a point on the polar curve of \(C_{{f}}\) with respect to the pole X. The next result shows that also this result can be generalised to algebraic curves of arbitrary degree.
Lemma 2.2
Let \(\Gamma _{{f}}\) be an algebraic curve of degree d given by the non-constant homogeneous polynomial f, let \(T_{{f}}\) be the corresponding symmetric (0, d)-tensor, and let \(P\in \mathbb {R}\mathbb {P}^2\) be a point. Then
In particular, a point \(X\in \mathbb {R}\mathbb {P}^2\) is on the polar curve of \(\Gamma _{{f}}\) with respect to the pole P if and only if \(T_{{f}}(P,X,\ldots ,X)=0\).
Proof
Notice first that for \(P=(p_1,p_2,p_3)\) and \(X=(x_1,x_2,x_3)\) we have:
Now, assume again that the monomial \(c_{n_1\hspace{.5pt}n_2\hspace{.5pt}n_3} \cdot x_1^{n_1}\cdot x_2^{n_2}\cdot x_3^{n_3}\) appears in f. Then, for each \(1\le j\le 3\) we have
where \(n_j'=n_j-1\) and \(n_i'=n_i\) for \(i\ne j\). Without loss of generality we assume that \(j=1\) and \(n_1\ge 1\). Now, it is easy to see that the number of coefficients \(a_{1\hspace{1pt}i_2\ldots i_d}\) such that for \(1\le i\le 3\), the number i appears \(n_i\)-times in the sequence \(\langle 1,\ldots ,i_d\rangle \) is given by the trinomial coefficient
This shows that for any points \(P,X\in \mathbb {R}\mathbb {P}^2\) we have
in particular, we get
\(\square \)
It is obvious how the iterated construction of polar curves is carried out: If, for example, \(P,Q,R\in \mathbb {R}\mathbb {P}^2\) are given and \(\Gamma _{{f}}\) is an algebraic curve of degree \(d\ge 3\), then the polar curve of the polar curve of the polar curve of \(\Gamma _{{f}}\) with respect to the points P, Q, R, respectively, is given by the zeros of the \((0,d-3)\)-tensor \(T_f(P,Q,R,X,\ldots ,X)\). Notice that since \(T_f\) is symmetric, the order of P, Q, R is irrelevant. As a consequence, we obtain the following
Fact 2.3
Let K be a cubic curve, let \(P_1,P_2,P_3\in \mathbb {R}\mathbb {P}^2\), and for \(1\le j\le 3\) let \(T_j\) be the (0, 2)-tensor of the polar conic of K with respect to the point \(P_j\). Then for \(1\le j_1,j_2\le 3\) we have
in particular, if we consider the tensors \(T_j\) as \(3\times 3\)-matrices, we obtain that
The question that we want to treat below, is embedded in a more general problem, namely the study of the relation of a hypersurface and its Hessian variety. In a recent work Sendra-Arranz [6] investigated the Hessian correspondence for the cases of hypersurfaces of degree 3 and 4 in an n-dimensional projective space. In particular, he showed that for degree 3 and dimension \(n = 1\), the Hessian correspondence is two to one, and that for degree 3 and \(n \ge 2\), and for degree 4, it is birational (see [6, Sects. 2.3, 2.4]). In particular, by introducing the variety of k-gradients as the variety of k-planes containing all the first order derivatives of a polynomial, he obtains algorithms which allow to reconstruct a hypersurface of degree 3 from its Hessian variety in the cases \(n\ge 1\), and for degree 4 if n is even. More specifically, Sendra-Arranz proves in his Proposition 2.18 that for \(n \ge 2\) a cubic can be recovered by the pencil spanned by its polars. Our main result in Theorem 2.4 is less general, but provides more specific information about the special case of degree 3 in 2 dimensions. Namely, what we show is that three conics in general position (i.e., three points of the Hessian variety) determine a unique cubic. More precisely, given three different conics \(C_1,C_2,C_3\) which satisfy a non-degeneracy condition, we show how to construct the unique cubic K such that for three points \(P_1,P_2,P_3\in \mathbb {R}\mathbb {P}^2\) determined by the three conics, the conic \(C_j\) (for \(1\le j\le 3\)) is the polar conic of K with respect to the pole \(P_j\). The construction we provide in the next section proves our main result, Theorem 2.4.
Theorem 2.4
Let \(C_1,C_2,C_3\) be three non-degenerate conics and let \(T_1,T_2,T_3\) be the corresponding (0, 2)-tensors given by \(3\times 3\)-matrices. Assume that the matrices \(T_1,T_2,T_3\) satisfy the following condition:
(C) For all \(P\in \ker \bigl (T_3\,T_1^{-1}\,T_2- T_2\,T_1^{-1}\,T_3\bigr )\), we have \(\det \bigl (T_1 P,\;T_2 P,\;T_3 P\bigr )\ne 0\).
Then there are exactly three points \(P_1,P_2,P_3\), determined by the conics \(C_1,C_2,C_3\), and a unique cubic curve K, such that for \(1\le j\le 3\), \(C_j\) is the polar conic of K with respect to the pole \(P_j\). The cubic K only depends on the two-dimensional pencil
generated by \(C_1,C_2,C_3\): If \(C_1,C_2,C_3\) are replaced by any other conics \({\tilde{C}}_1,{\tilde{C}}_2,{\tilde{C}}_3\) in \({\mathcal {P}}\) satisfying condition (C), then the same cubic K results.
Remark 1
With respect to condition (C), we would like to mention a few facts.
-
(a)
First, condition (C) is symmetric in the three indices: To see this, notice that \(P\in \ker \bigl (T_3\,T_1^{-1}\,T_2- T_2\,T_1^{-1}\,T_3\bigr )\) is equivalent to
$$\begin{aligned} Q=T_1^{-1}\,T_2P\in \ker \bigl (T_1\,T_2^{-1}\,T_3- T_3\,T_2^{-1}\,T_1\bigr ). \end{aligned}$$Replacing P in the determinant by the expression \(T_2^{-1}\,T_1Q\) yields
$$\begin{aligned} 0\ne \det (T_1P, \,T_2P, \, T_3P)= & {} \det (T_1\,T_2^{-1}T_1 Q, \, T_1 Q, \,T_3\,T_2^{-1}\,T_1 Q) \\ {}= & {} \det (T_1\,T_2^{-1}T_1 Q, \,T_1 Q, \,T_1\,T_2^{-1}\,T_3 Q)\\ {}= & {} \det (T_1\, T_2^{-1})\det (T_1Q, \,T_2Q, \,T_3Q). \end{aligned}$$ -
(b)
Observe also that (C) implies that \(T_3T_1^{-1}T_2\ne T_2T_1^{-1}T_3\): Indeed, assume that \(T_3T_1^{-1}T_2-T_2T_1^{-1}T_3=0\). Then the kernel of \(T_3T_1^{-1}T_2-T_2T_1^{-1}T_3\) is \(\mathbb {R}^3\). However, for \(P=(x_1,x_2,x_3)\), \(\det (T_1P, \,T_2P, \, T_3P)=0\) is a homogeneous cubic polynomial in the three variables \(x_1,x_2,x_3\), which always has non-trivial solutions.
-
(c)
Consider the following example:
$$\begin{aligned} T_1=\begin{pmatrix} 1&{}0&{}3\\ 0&{}2&{}0\\ 3&{}0&{}- 1 \end{pmatrix}\qquad T_2=\begin{pmatrix} 1&{}0&{}0\\ 0&{}1&{}0\\ 0&{}0&{}- 1 \end{pmatrix}\qquad T_3=\begin{pmatrix} 1&{}0&{}1\\ 0&{}1&{}0\\ 1&{}0&{}- 1 \end{pmatrix}. \end{aligned}$$Notice that \(T_1\) does not belong to the pencil spanned by \(T_2\) and \(T_3\). Here, we have that \(T_3T_1^{-1}T_2-T_2T_1^{-1}T_3=0\) and hence the kernel of \(T_3T_1^{-1}T_2-T_2T_1^{-1}T_3 \) is \(\mathbb {R}^3\). But \(\det (T_1P, \,T_2P, \, T_3P)=0\) whenever the second coordinate of P is 0. So, the example shows that condition (C) can be violated even in the case when the pencil of \(T_1,T_2,T_3\) is two-dimensional. On the other hand, it is easy to see that condition (C) implies that the pencil of \(T_1,T_2,T_3\) is two-dimensional.
3 Constructing a Cubic from Three Conics
Let \(C_1,C_2,C_3\) be three non-degenerate conics and let \(T_1,T_2,T_3\) be the corresponding (0, 2)-tensors given by \(3 \times 3\)-matrices matrices \(T_1,T_2,T_3\) which satisfy condition (C) of Theorem 2.4.
Example
Let \(C_1,C_2,C_3\) be given by the following three non-constant homogeneous polynomials \(f_1,f_2,f_3\), respectively:
Figure 1 shows these three conics. Notice that all three conics meet in the origin, which is not excluded by the condition (C), as we will see below. Notice also that one of the conics is a circle, which is not a restriction since we can transform any conic by a projective transformation into a circle.
Then the corresponding matrices are:
It is easy to verify that the matrices \(T_1,T_2,T_3\) satisfy condition (C): Observe that \(\ker \bigl (T_3\,T_1^{-1}\,T_2- T_2\,T_1^{-1}\,T_3\bigr )=[P]\) for \(P=\big (\tfrac{6}{5}, -\tfrac{24}{5}, 1\big )\).
Let us turn back to our general construction and construct the three points \(P_1,P_2,P_3\): By Fact 2.3, the points \(P_1,P_2,P_3\) satisfy the following three necessary conditions
which is equivalent to
and implies that \(P_1\) satisfies
Since the matrices \(T_j\) are symmetric, for \(M:=T_3\,T_1^{-1}\,T_2\) we have \(M^T=T_2\,T_1^{-1}\,T_3\). Therefore, Eq. (1) is equivalent to \(MP_1=M^TP_1\), which is equivalent to \((M-M^T)P_1=0\). Now, condition (C) ensures that \(M\ne M^T\) (see Remark 1(b)). Since \((M-M^T)\) is a non-zero, real, anti-symmetric \(3\times 3\)-matrix, it has exactly one eigenvalue equal to zero. In fact, if
is an anti-symmetric matrix, then the eigenvalues of A are 0 and \(\pm i\sqrt{a^2+b^2+c^2}\) and an eigenvector to the eigenvalue 0 is \((c,-b,a)^T\).
Hence, the pole \(P_1\) is uniquely determined by Eq. (1), and we obtain \(P_2=(T_1^{-1}\,T_2)P_1\) and \(P_3=(T_1^{-1}\,T_3)P_1\). Before we proceed, let us compute the points \(P_1,P_2,P_3\) in our example.
Example
With respect to \(T_1,T_2,T_3\) we get \(P_1=\bigg (\tfrac{6}{5}, -\tfrac{24}{5}, 1\bigg )\), \(P_2=\bigg (-\tfrac{27}{5}, -\tfrac{27}{5}, 3\bigg )\), and \(P_3=(\tfrac{39}{5}, -\tfrac{21}{5}, -10)\), which correspond to the affine points \({\bar{P}}_1=\bigg (\tfrac{6}{5}, -\tfrac{24}{5}\bigg )\), \(\bar{P}_2=\bigg (-\tfrac{27}{15}, -\tfrac{27}{15}\bigg )\), and \(\bar{P}_3=\bigg (-\tfrac{39}{50}, \tfrac{21}{50}\bigg )\), respectively. Figure 2 shows the conics with their poles.
The goal of our construction is to find a (0, 3)-tensor \(T_K\) of a cubic K, such that we have
Since by condition (C), the points \(P_1,P_2,P_3\) are not incident with a projective line, we may choose \(\{P_1,P_2,P_3\}\) as a new basis. In other words, for \(\tilde{P}_1=(1,0,0)\), \(\tilde{P}_2=(0,1,0)\), and \(\tilde{P}_3=(0,0,1)\), we map \(P_i\mapsto \tilde{P}_i\) (for \(1\le i\le 3\)). For \(1\le i\le 3\), let \(T_i=(a_{jk}^i)_{1\le j,k\le 3}\) and let \(\tilde{T}_i\) be the (0, 2)-tensors (i.e., the conics \(\tilde{C}_i\)) in this new basis. Since for any \(1\le i,j,k\le 3\) we have \(T_i(P_j,P_k)=T_i(P_k,P_j)=T_j(P_k,P_i)\), we also have
Now, let \(T_{{\tilde{K}}}=(\tilde{a}_{ijk})_{1\le i,j,k\le 3}\) be a (0, 3)-tensor defined by stipulating
Then, by Eq. (2), the tensor \(T_{{\tilde{K}}}\) is symmetric and has the property that for \(1\le i\le 3\),
For the corresponding cubic \(\tilde{K}\) we therefore have that \(\tilde{C}_i\) is the polar conic of \(\tilde{K}\) with respect to the pole \(\tilde{P}_i\).
Since every point \(\tilde{Q}=(q_1,q_2,q_3)\in \mathbb {R}\mathbb {P}^2\) can be written as \({\tilde{Q}}=q_1P_1+q_2P_2+q_3P_3\), we have
which shows that the polar conic of \({\tilde{K}}\) with respect to the point \({\tilde{Q}}\) belongs to the pencil spanned by the conics \(\tilde{T}_1,\tilde{T}_2\) and \(\tilde{T}_3\).
Now, the re-transformed cubic K has the property that the conics \(C_1,C_2,C_3\) are the polar conics of K with respect to the poles \(P_1,P_2,P_3\), respectively. Furthermore, by the observation above, if, for example, the conic \(C_3\) is replaced by a conic \({\tilde{C}}_3\) in the two-dimensional pencil of \(C_1,C_2,C_3\) such that \(C_1,C_2,{\tilde{C}}_3\) satisfy condition (C), then the conics \(C_1,C_2\) and \({\tilde{C}}_3\) are the polar conics of K with respect to the poles \(P_1,P_2\) and some point Q, where the three points \(P_1,P_2,Q\) are not collinear.
Example
In our example, \(\tilde{K}\) in the affine plane is given by
and finally, the sought cubic K is
Figure 3 shows the cubic K together with the three polar conics \(C_i\) with respect to their three poles \(P_i\). Recall that the lines connecting \(P_i\) and the points of intersection of K with the polar curve \(C_i\) are tangent to K.
Remark 2
We close this discussion by considering the situation when condition (C) is violated for three given conics \(C_1\), \(C_2\), \(C_3\). Suppose that K is a cubic such that \(C_j\) is the polar conic with respect to some pole \(P_j\) for \(j=1,2,3\). Then, \(\det (T_1 P_1,\, T_2P_1,\, T_3P_1) = 0\) in condition (C) for \(P_1\in \ker (T_3\,T_1^{-1}\,T_2- T_2\,T_1^{-1}\,T_3)\) means that the polar lines \(g_1=T_1P_1\), \(g_2=T_2P_1=T_1P_2\), \(g_3=T_3P_1=T_1P_3\) of the conics \(C_1\), \(C_2\), \(C_3\) with respect to the poles \(P_1\), \(P_2\), \(P_3\) are concurrent, which in turn means that \(P_1\), \(P_2\), \(P_3\) are collinear. Hence, \(C_1\), \(C_2\), \(C_3\) are identical or span only a one-dimensional pencil. This shows that for the three conics in Remark 1(c), there is no cubic K with the property that \(C_1\), \(C_2\), \(C_3\) are conic sections with respect to three poles. This means that (C) is a necessary condition in Theorem 2.4. On the other hand, if condition (C) is violated and \(C_1\), \(C_2\), \(C_3\) span only a one-dimensional pencil, then a cubic K with the required properties exists, but this cubic is no longer unique: Just take an arbitrary conic \({\tilde{C}}_3\) such that \(C_1\), \(C_2\), \({\tilde{C}}_3\) satisfy condition (C) and apply Theorem 2.4 in order to obtain a cubic \({\tilde{K}}\) with respect to \(C_1\), \(C_2\) and \(\tilde{C}_3\). Then there is a point \(P_3\) on the line through \(P_1,P_2\) and such that the polar conic of \({\tilde{K}}\) with respect to \(P_3\) is \(C_3\).
Data Availability
No data was generated or used in this publication.
References
Bobillier, E.: Géométrie de situation Théorèmes sur les polaires successives. Ann. Math. Pures Appl. 19, 302–307 (1828)
Dolgachev, I.V.: Classical Algebraic Geometry: A Modern View. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2012)
Halbeisen, L., Hungerbühler, N.: Generalized pencils of conics derived from cubics. Beitr. Algebra Geom. 61(4), 681–693 (2020)
Joachimsthal, F.: Remarques sur la condition de l’egalité de deux racines d’une équation algébrique; et sur quelques théorèmes de Géometrie, qui en suivent. J. Reine Angew. Math. 33, 371–376 (1846)
Monge, G.: Application de l’analyse à la géométrie. Mad. Ve. Bernard, Libraire de l’Ecole Impériale Polytechnique, quatrième edition, Paris (1809)
Sendra-Arranz, J: The Hessian correspondence of hypersurfaces of degree 3 and 4. http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.10415 (2023)
von Staudt, K.G.C.: Geometrie der Lage. Bauer und Raspe (1847)
Wieleitner, H.: Algebraische Kurven. II. Allgemeine Eigenschaften. Sammlung Göschen, vol. 436. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin (1939)
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the referees for their comments and suggestions, which helped to improve the quality of the article.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Halbeisen, L., Hungerbühler, N. & Stalder, V. Three Conics Determine a Cubic. La Matematica 3, 561–572 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44007-024-00094-1
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44007-024-00094-1