This image by Greg Egan shows the set of points for which the quintic has repeated roots. The plane has been removed.
The fascinating thing about this surface is that it appears to be diffeomorphic to two other surfaces, defined in completely different ways, which we discussed here:
• Involutes of a cubical parabola.
• Discriminant of the icosahedral group.
The icosahedral group is also called . In his book The Theory of Singularities and its Applications, V. I. Arnol’d writes:
The discriminant of the group is shown in Fig. 18. Its singularities were studied by O. V. Lyashko (1982) with the help of a computer. This surface has two smooth cusped edges, one of order 3/2 and the other of order 5/2. Both are cubically tangent at the origin. Lyashko has also proved that this surface is diffeomorphic to the set of polynomials having a multiple root.
Figure 18 of Arnold’s book is a hand-drawn version of the surface below:
Arnol’d’s claim that the discriminant of is diffeomorphic to the set of polynomials having a repeated root is not literally true, since all such polynomials with have a repeated root, and we need to remove this plane to obtain a surface that looks like the discriminant of . After this correction his claim seems right, but it still deserves proof.
Puzzle. Can you prove the corrected version of Arnol’d’s claim?
References
Arnol’d’s claim appear on page 29 here:
• Vladimir I. Arnol’d, The Theory of Singularities and its Applications, Cambridge U. Press, Cambridge, 1991.
The following papers are also relevant:
• Vladimir I. Arnol’d, Singularities of systems of rays, Uspekhi Mat. Nauk 38:2 (1983), 77-147. English translation in Russian Math. Surveys 38:2 (1983), 77–176.
• O. Y. Lyashko, Classification of critical points of functions on a manifold with singular boundary, Funktsional. Anal. i Prilozhen. 17:3 (1983), 28–36. English translation in Functional Analysis and its Applications 17:3 (1983), 187–193
• O. P. Shcherbak, Singularities of a family of evolvents in the neighbourhood of a point of inflection of a curve, and the group generated by reflections, Funktsional. Anal. i Prilozhen. 17:4 (1983), 70–72. English translation in Functional Analysis and its Applications 17:4 (1983), 301–303.
• O. P. Shcherbak, Wavefronts and reflection groups, Uspekhi Mat. Nauk 43:3 (1988), 125–160. English translation in Russian Mathematical Surveys 43:3 (1988), 1497–194.
All these sources discuss the discoveries of Arnol’d and his colleagues relating singularities and Coxeter–Dynkin diagrams, starting with the more familiar cases, then moving on to the non-simply-laced cases, and finally the non-crystallographic cases related to (the symmetry group of the pentagon), (the symmetry group of the icosahedron) and (the symmetry group of the 600-cell).
Can Klein’s method for solving the quintic be adapted to eliminate x2 & x2 terms instead of x4 & x3?
I don’t know. I have thought about how the special class of quintics discussed here (x5+ax4+bx2+c=0) is related to the special classes that show up when people try to solve the quintic, but I haven’t any good ideas yet! Klein’s ideas are especially tempting, because they involve the icosahedron. But still, I don’t see what’s going on.
An explicit diffeomorphism between the three-dimensional space of invariants of the icosahedral symmetry group (P,Q,R) and the coefficients (a,b,c) of the restricted quintics that maps the discriminant into the discriminant is given by:
(a,b,c)=(P,αQ+βP3,γR+δQP2+ϵP5)
where the constants α,β,γ,δ,ϵ depend on the precise choice of normalisation for the invariants P,Q,R. If we recall that those invariants (defined here) are homogeneous polynomials of degree 2, 6 and 10 in the coordinates x,y,z, this diffeomorphism is the simplest kind of map that is consistent with the fact that a,b,c are homogenous polynomials of degree 1, 3 and 5 in the roots of the quintic. It’s not hard to see that this map has a constant, non-zero Jacobian determinant, which proves that it is a diffeomorphism, and in fact it has a polynomial inverse of the same general form.
The five constants α,β,γ,δ,ϵ can be determined by identifying three curves that appear in both discriminant surfaces, the lines of cusps of type 5/2 and 3/2 and the line of double points, which all take the general parametric form (a,Aia3,Bib5) or (P,CiP3,DiP5), with four of the constants here equal to zero, in those cases where the curve in question is a straight line along a coordinate axis.
Excellent! So the Puzzle is solved!
Although the particular diffeomorphism depends on the choice of normalisation for the invariants P,Q,R of the icosahedral symmetry group, it’s possible to make the following identification that remains true regardless of that choice.
If e1 and e2 are two orthogonal unit vectors that pass through edge centres of the icosahedron, then the point on the mirror plane:
m=√12((1+1√5)a+√5α)e1+√12((1−1√5)a–√5α)e2
when mapped to the invariant space (P,Q,R) and then to the space of quintics (a,b,c) corresponds to the restricted quintic with a coefficient of a for the degree-4 term and a repeated root of α.