1. Introduction
It is known that a projective translation plane Π can be represented in a projective space of even order, following the papers of André [2], Bruck and Bose [3]) and Vincenti [1].
A subplane of Π is affine and non-affine depending on whether it intersects the line at infinity in a subline or in one point.
An affine subplane of order
is represented by every transversal plane to the spread. All that holds also in case Π is the Desarguesian plane
when the spread is a regular spread (cf. [2]-[6] for
, [1] for
).
Denote
,
,
and
is a regular spread of
-subspaces.
There exist
affine subplanes of
of order
having the same subline at infinity and through one fixed affine point, while
affine subplanes having no affine point in common partition the affine points of Π (cf. Proposition 3.6, Theorem 3.7)
A variety
of Σ is a ruled variety of
with the minimum order directrix a rational curve of order
and a maximum order directrix a rational curve of order
, the two curves lying in two complementary spaces of dimension
and
, respectively (cf. [7], Capters 13, 8., 9.). The variety can be obtained by joining points of the two directrix curves corresponding via a projectivity.
In Propositions 4.3 - 4.6 and Theorem 4.7 some fundamental incidence properties of
are shown. Such properties allow to prove that
represents a non-affine subplane
of order
of
(cf. Theorem 4.8). The properties of
of being a plane, translate into further incidence properties of the affine points of
(cf. Corollary 4.9).
An example is then shown by choosing
and
such that
(cf. Paragraph 4.2).
In Theorem 5.2 a maximal bundle
of varieties
having in common only a curve of order
is constructed.
To conclude, linear codes are associated with the projective systems related both to a variety
and to the bundle
, then their basic parameters are calculated (cf. Proposition 5.1, Theorems 5.3 - 5.5).
Note that a part of Section 3 is necessarily common with previous articles, this representing a generalization as announced in the abstract.
2. Preliminary Notes and Results
Referring to the Section 2 of [1], denote
a finite field,
,
an odd prime,
the algebraic closure of the field
,
the
-dimensional vector space over
,
the n-dimensional
projective space contraction of
over
. It is considered a sub-geometry of
, the projective geometry over
. A subspace of
of dimension
is denoted h-space.
For the Definition of a variety
of dimension
and order
of
see [1], Definition 2.1.
From [7], p. 290, 7., follows the definition of a ruled variety
of
(cf. Lemma 2.2 of [1]).
Let Σ be the projective space
,
a hyperplane of Σ,
a spread of
-spaces of
(for the definition of spread, regulus and regular spread cf. [3] and [1], Definition 2.3 and the representation).
A transversal line
to
is a line of
such that
for every
. As
is regular, then the line
meets
subspaces of
consisting of a regulus (cf. [1], Definition 2.3).
For the following definitions and results, see [8] and [9].
Definition 2.1 A linear
-code
of length
is a k-dimensional subspace of the vector space
. The dual code of
is the
-dimensional subspace
of
and it is an
-code.
For
the t-th higher weight of
is defined by
where
is the number of indices
such that there exists
with
.
Note that
is the classical minimum distance of
, the Hamming distance.
An
-code
of minimum distance
is also denoted
-code.
Definition 2.2 An
-projective system
of the projective space
is a collection of
not necessarily distinct points. It is called non-degenerate if these
points are not contained in any hyperplane.
Assume that
consists of
distinct points having rank
.
For each point of
choose a generating vector. Denote by
the matrix having as rows such
vectors and let
be the linear code having
as a generator matrix. The code
is the k-dimensional subspace of
which is the image of the mapping from the dual k-dimensional space
onto
that calculates every linear form over the points of
.
Hence the length
of codeword of
is the cardinality of
, the dimension of
being just
.
There exists a natural [1-1] correspondence between the equivalence classes of a non-degenerate
-projective system
and a non-degenerate
-code
such that if
is an
-projective system and
is the corresponding code, then the non-zero codewords of
correspond to hyperplanes of
, up to a non-zero factor, the correspondence preserving the parameters
.
Generally, subcodes
of
of dimension
correspond to (projective) subspaces of codimension
of
, therefore
.
If
is the minimum weight of a linear code
then
is an s-error-correcting code for all
. We call
the error-correcting capability of
.
3. Affine Subplanes of Order
of
From now on denote
the 2r-dimensional geometry over the field
,
a hyperplane of Σ,
a regular spread of
-spaces of
. Clearly
.
Let
be the Desarguesian plane over the field
. Denote
the line at infinity of Π. Represent Π in
by the spread
.
Define the following incidence structure (points, lines, incidence, respectively) where
,
,
is defined as follows
If
then
, no point of
is incident
,
for all
,
where
.
Lemma 3.1
.
Proof. See [3].
From [1] and [3], Definitions 2.7, 2.8, Propositions 2.9, referred to the current dimension, follows that the affine points of Π are represented by the
affine points of
, the points at infinity by the
subspaces of
. The affine lines of Π are represented by the r-spaces
of
such that the subspaces
belong to
, the line at infinity
by the spread
.
Definition 3.2 A subplane
of a plane
is a subgeometry of
, that is, an incidence substructure for which
, for each line
there exists a line
such that
and
.
Definition 3.3 A subplane of
of order
is affine if it meets the line
of Π in a subline consisting of
points, it is non-affine if it meets the line
in one point.
Let
be any transversal line to
, that is a line meeting
-spaces of
. As
is regular, these
elements form a regulus
(cf. [3], Lemma 12.2). Choose and fix a plane
through the line
, that is, a transversal plane.
As in Proposition 2.9 of [1], one can easily prove
Proposition 3.4 The plane
is isomorphic to a subplane
of Π whose points at infinity are represented by the
-spaces of
, the lines of
being represented by the sublines intersections of
with the r-spaces of
through the
-spaces of
. As the line at infinity of
is a subline of the infinity line of Π, then
is an affine subplane.
For the construction of transversal lines to
in
the procedure is similar to the one used for the dimension 5 (cf. [1], Proposition 2.10).
Proposition 3.5 The set of the transversal lines to
has cardinality
, that is, they are as many as the points of an
-subspace of
.
Proof. Denote
three
-subspaces of the regulus
. Fix a point
and denote
the r-space of
direct sum of
and
and
the r-space of
direct sum of
and
. Lying in a
-dimensional subspace, then
is a line. As a line of
,
meets
in a point, as a line of
,
meets
in a point. Therefore
is a transversal line to the subspaces
. As
belong to the regulus
, the line
meets each of the
elements of
. In such a way one can construct a transversal line for every point
chosen in
, that is,
.
Proposition 3.6 The cardinality of the affine subplanes of Π isomorphic to
having the same subline of
points at infinity and containing one affine point is
.
Proof. Let
be a transversal line to
,
a transversal plane,
an affine point of
. Denote
the transversal lines to the regulus
. Each of the
planes
represents an affine subplane
of Π,
(cf. Proposition 3.4).
Choose and fix a transversal line
. Consider the bundle
of the planes of
having the line
as axis. Each plane
is isomorphic to
(cf. Proposition 3.4) and it is an affine subplane of Π having a same subline of
points on the line at infinity.
Theorem 3.7 The planes of
are
and partition the
affine points of Π.
Proof. The planes of
are parallel to each other, therefore they have no affine point in common otherwise they would coincide. Each such a plane contains
affine points.
Let
. As a line and an independent point define a plane, fixed the line
, there are
choices for a point in
to get the plane
, this number to be divided by
, which equals the choices of an affine point on a same plane, hence
.
4. A Ruled Variety
of
In
consider two normal rational curves
and
of order
and
, respectively in two complementary subspaces
and
of Σ. Each of them consists of
points (cf. [10], Theorem 21.1.1). They are projectively equivalent. From Lemma 1 follows that a ruled rational surface
of order
of
is generated by connecting corresponding points of the two directrices
and
of
, (cf. [7], p. 290, 7.). The variety consists of
skew lines and
points.
Choose and fix
so that
.
For our purpose to choose appropriately a directrix
in an r-dimensional subspace of Σ, some considerations have to be made.
It is well known that a rational normal curve
of order
of an r-dimensional geometry
can be defined by
independent binary forms of order
,
,
, or by
functions
where at least one of
has degree
. Moreover it must be
(cf. [10], p. 229).
A hyperplane of the geometry
meets
in at most
points, corresponding to the solutions of an equation of degree
over
.
The orbits of the hyperplanes under the action of the group of the projectivities of
fixing
, correspond just to such possibilities (for
cf. [10], pp. 229-230, and p. 234, Corollary 4,
).
For our construction, we need an r-curve having no point in the hyperplane of
chosen as hyperplane at infinity. Therefore it needs to find irreducible polynomials over
of degree
. Two ways are indicated in [11] and in [12].
However we show an example of what is written above.
Let us introduce coordinates
in
so that a curve
of order
can be expressed as follows
, where
is an irreducible polynomial of degree
(for the symbology see [10], p. 229).
Example 4.1 The curve
and the hyperplane
have no point in common.
Another way to find irreducible polynomials of a given degree, is obtained by considering the problem of searching in
the elements that are not r-th powers.
Given
,
a prime, a field
and a positive integer
, denote
, the great common divisor.
Lemma 4.2 The subset
of the non-r-th powers has cardinality
, so that if
each polynomial
with
is irreducible over
.
Proof. Denote
the mapping
. Set
, the subset of the r-th roots of unity. Then
. Hence
so that in
there are
elements that are r-th powers. If
, then the complementary set
of the elements that are not r-th powers has cardinality
, hence every polynomial
with
is irreducible over
.
NOTE 1—A rational normal curve
of an r-space consists of
points (
) no
of which in a hyperplane
(that is, a hyperplane meets
in at most
points, cf. [10], p. 229, Theorem 21.1.1, (iv)). Hence
points lie in no
,
points in no
.
Choose and fix an
-space
and a rational normal curve
of order
. Let
be an r-dimensional subspace of
such that
and
a rational normal curve of it of order
with
.
Let
be a projectivity. Represent
,
. Denote
the variety arising by connecting corresponding points of
and
via Λ (cf. [7], p. 291). The curves
and
are directrix curves of
, the set
is the set of the generatrix lines of
. The set
partitions the variety.
Let
be any hyperplane. In a suitable complexification of Σ,
is a curve of order
(cf. [7], p. 288, 5.).
Proposition 4.3 The variety
consists of
mutually skew affine generatrix lines and of
affine points.
a) A directrix curve
cut by a hyperplane on
cannot lie in an
-space. The curve
is the unique minimum order
directrix.
If a space
contains
points of
, then
.
Moreover
generatrix lines are independent and belong to a
-space.
b) An r-space containing
contains at most one generatrix line.
c) The r-space joining one generatrix line and the
-space
meets no other generatrix in an affine point.
d)
generatrices
are joint by a hyperplane
that contains the
-space
, so that
.
e) A hyperplane contains neither a fixed directrix, nor a fixed generatrix.
Proof. The proof of the first statement is analogous to that of Proposition 3.1 of [1].
a) Assume a hyperplane
meets
in a directrix curve
lying in a
-space
. Then
is contained at most in the
-space generated by
and
and the variety generated by the two curves would have order at most
, a contradiction. Hence the curve
is the unique minimum order
directrix.
For the proof of the last two statements see [7], 5., 6., pp. 288-289.
b) Assume
is an r-space containing
and two generatrix lines
. Denote
,
then the line
belongs to both
and
so that the point
is a common point of
and
, a contradiction.
c) Denote
with
, an r-space. Assume that for
with
is
. Then
, so that
contains two generatrix lines and the
-space
, a contradiction to b).
d) Assume
generatrices
are joint by a
-space
. As
contains the
independent points
,
,
, then
and
. As
cannot contain
, a hyperplane
and through a further point
should contain also the generatrix
through
. Hence
would meet
in
generatrix lines and in a curve of order
, that is, in a curve of order
, a contradiction (cf. [7], p. 288, 5.). Hence
, that is, a curve of order
(and
contains no further point of
).
e) Let
be a subset of
generatrices of
. Denote
the subspace containing
(cf. [7], 6., p. 289). Let
be a hyperplane with
and assume
contains a residual and fix directrix curve
of order
. Let
be a point of
,
. Denote
. Then every hyperplane containing
and
itself, would contain the generatrix
through
, so that
, a contradiction to d).
An analogous contradiction is reached if we assumed a generic hyperplane
with
contained a fix generatrix (cf. [7], 6., pp. 289-290).
From [7], pp. 287-290 follows
Proposition 4.4 A hyperplane
containing
generatrices contains a residual curve
of order
of an r-space
. Moreover
is skew to
,
is irreducible and is a directrix.
Proof. A hyperplane
meets
in a rational normal curve of order
or in a curve of order
met by all generatrices and in
generatrices. In the current case
or
can happen.
If a hyperplane meets
in
, the unique directrix curve of order
(see a), Proposition 4.3), then it contains
generatrix lines and viceversa (see d), Proposition 4.3). If a hyperplane contains
generatrices, then it meets
in a residual curve
of order
.
Assume
irreducible and contained in an
-space
, with
. Let
be the hyperplane containing
and
points
of
and then also the
generatrix lines
. In such a case
would meet
in a curve of order
, a contradiction. Hence each curve
irreducible of order
, lives in an r-space
and it is a directrix curve, that is, meets each generatrix in one point (cf. [7], 3. p. 287). If such an r-space
met
, then a hyperplane
would contain
, a contradiction. Hence
.
Assume
is reducible. The unique possibility is that it consists of
generatrix lines. Let
and
be two hyperplanes. Assume
has in common with
generatrices and
has in common with
other
generatrices. Denote
. By varying the hyperplanes in the bundle
of hyperplanes, both each hyperplane and the space
itself would have in common with
the locus of all these points. Such a locus would be a directrix contained in all the hyperplanes of the bundle. Therefore such a directrix curve should exist in all the hyperplanes of the bundle, a contradiction to Proposition 4.3, e) (cf. [7], 6. p. 290).
Proposition 4.5 a) Each directrix curve of order
is obtained by cutting
with the hyperplanes through any
generatrices.
b) The cardinalities of the intersections of hyperplanes
with
are
. It is
.
c) The cardinalities of the intersections of hyperplanes
with
are
. It is
.
Proof. a) An irreducible curve
of order
is a rational normal curve, that is, it lies in an
-space (cf. Proposition 4.4).
Let
be a directrix curve of order
and
a hyperplane. As
cannot contain
otherwise
, then
must contain
generatrix lines.
b) Let
be a hyperplane. If
is an irreducible curve of order
, then
.
If
,
(cf. a)), then
.
If
,
(cf. d), Proposition 4.3), then
.
That is we get the following possibilities:
.
It is easy to prove that
.
c) Let
be a hyperplane. If
is an irreducible curve of order
, then
, depending on whether it has or does have not points on
.
If
,
(cf. a)), then
.
If
,
(cf. d), Proposition 4.3), then
.
That is, we get the following possibilities:
.
It is easy to prove that
.
Proposition 4.6 a) No two directrix curves
and
of order
belong to a same r-space.
b) Two directrix curves of order
meet in one point.
Proof. a) Assume
and
belong to a same r-space
. Then a hyperplane
would meet
in a curve of order at least
, a contradiction.
b) Let
and
contained in two different r-spaces,
and
, respectively. Assume
contains two different points,
and
. Then
so that the hyperplane
meets
in a curve of order
, a contradiction. If
, then by connecting corresponding points,
would contain a variety of order
, a contradiction.
4.1. Bundles of Curves of Order
on
and a Non-Affine
Subplane
Choose two
-spaces
and an r-space
of
through
.
Fix the minimum order directrix
in
and in
the curve
as an r-directrix so that
.
Represent
,
. The two curves are referred through the projectivity
such that
,
.
The variety
arises by connecting the points of
and
that correspond through Λ (cf. [7], p. 291). Denote
the generatrix line
where
,
.
The set
of the generatrix lines of
partitions the variety.
In a suitable complexification of Σ, each hyperplane
meets
in a curve of order
(cf. [7], p. 288, 5.).
Choose a generatrix
and a point
,
.
Set
. Denote
the
-space of the spread
to which
belongs. For the choices we made follows
so that if
, then
. If we project from
the line
by constructing the
lines
, we get the plane
such that
is a transversal to the three subspaces
.
Therefore the line
is a transversal line to the whole regulus
defined by
.
By varying the point
a set of
r-spaces
through the point
are generated in addition to
. Represent such a bundle
.
Moreover, for each
, we can repeat the same procedure to obtain a bundle
.
Generality is not loss if we start by choosing two generatrix lines
.
Theorem 4.7 a) Through each point
there exists a bundle
of
curves of order
on
having the point
in common, each curve of
lying in one r-space intersecting an
-space of
. Each bundle covers the
points of
.
b) The cardinality of the set
is
.
c)
is the whole set of the directrix curves of order
of
.
Proof. a) For each r-space
, denote
the hyperplane containing
and a set
of
generatrix lines with
. From Propositions 4.4 and 4.5 follows that
must contain a directrix curve
of order
.
For construction each curve
has no points in
. Denote
the bundle of all
. From Proposition 4.6, a) follows that such
pairwise curves have only the point
in common.
The bundle
consists of
curves, each curve collecting
points of
hence
covers
points of
.
In a completely similar way for each
we get the same result for
.
b) The cardinality of
is
as for each point
it is
and the points of
are
.
c) Let
be a directrix curve of order
. As
meets each generatrix line, if
then
.
Denote
the set of the affine points of
. Represent
as in Section 3, Lemma 3.1.
Let be the incidence substructure of Π defined as follows:
,
,
is defined as follows
restricted to the affine points and lines,
for all
.
Theorem 4.8
is a non-affine subplane of Π of order
.
Proof. It is known (cf. [13] [14] pp. 160-161 and [5] pp. 40-41) that if in an incidence structure the following four properties hold
where
1—the number of the points is
,
2—the number of the lines is
,
3—each line contains
points,
62—two lines meet in at most one point,
then the structure is a projective plane of order
.
From Proposition 4.3 follows that the cardinality of the affine points of
is
to which the point at infinity
has to be added. Hence , that is, 1 - holds.
From Theorem 4.7 follows
is
. As
then
, that is, 2 - holds.
Each curve of has as many points as
has, that is
. Each generatrix line
has
affine points and the point ad infinity
, hence 3 - holds.
From Proposition 4.6 follows that two curves of order
meet in one point. Each such a curve is a directrix so that meets each generatrix line in one point. Two generatrix lines meet only in the point
. Hence 62, really 6 holds.
To verify that
is a subgeometry of Π (cf. Definition 3.2), note first that its set of points is clearly a subset of the points of Π. Moreover, every line
is contained in a unique 3-space
which meets no other generatrix (cf. Proposition 4.3, (c)) and every cubic of
lies in a unique r-space (cf. Proposition 4.6, (a)) meeting
in an
-space of
(cf. Theorem 4.7, (a)).
The properties of
of being a plane can be translated into further incidence properties of .
Corollary 4.9 Let
be two points of
. If
and
then the line
of
is the generatrix
, if
then
belong to one directrix curve of order
of an r-space
with
.
4.2. An Example
Denote
,
. Let
be a hyperplane of Σ,
a regular spread of
.
Let
in Σ be a coordinate system so that
represents
,
are internal coordinates for
and for a point
,
,
.
Represent the spread
as follows
where
is the multiplication in the field
,
with
a
matrix over
. The set
is a field isomorphic to
, strictly transitive over
.
Denote
the regulus of
represented by the scalar matrices
.
Let
be an irreducible polynomial of degree
(cf. [11] [12]). For instance, more explicitly, choose
and
such that
. From Lemma 4.1 follows that in
there is a
subset
of
non-r-th powers elements so that the polynomials
are irreducible whenever
.
Choose and fix the irreducible curve
of order
in the space
and the irreducible curve
of order
in the r-space
of
through
so that
,
and
represented as follows
,
where
is an irreducible polynomial of degree
.
The two curves are referred through a projectivity
represented by having inserted the same parameter
for which it is agreed that the points are considered corresponding to each other, plus
.
If
then
. The variety
arises by connecting the corresponding points of
and
(cf. [7], p. 291). The curves
and
are directrix curves of
, the set
of the generatrix lines of
partitions the variety.
Consider the following
matrix in
blocks
Denote
the affinity of
represented by
The extended projectivity
is represented by the
matrix
obtained from
by adding the vector
as the
th column and the
th row.
Theorem 4.10 a) Through each point
there exists a bundle
of
curves of order
on
having the point
in common, each curve lying in one r-space intersecting an
-space of
. Each bundle cover the
points of
.
b) The cardinality of the set
is
.
c)
is the whole set of the directrix curves of order
of
.
Proof. a) For each point
it is
, that is,
is pointwise fixed. For each point
it is
, that is,
, and
. Hence
is an r-space
through
with
. The curve
of order
is mapped onto an r-curve
with
and
. Therefore there exists a bundle
of
curves of order
through
collecting the
points of
.
Let
be a point of
and denote
the associated translation. Therefore
and
.
b) The cardinality of
is
as for each point
it is
and the points of
are
.
c) For the proof see (c), Theorem 4.7.
Corollary 4.11 Chosen and fixed
, the variety
selects in the spread
a regulus to which
and
belong.
Let
be the projective plane over
. Represent Π in Σ, as in Lemma 3.1.
Let
be the set of the
affine points of
. Define as in the previous Section 4.1.
It is immediate to prove the following results, analogous to Theorem 4.8 and Corollary 4.9, respectively.
RESULT 1—
is a non-affine subplane of Π of order
.
RESULT 2—Let
be two points of
. If
and
then the line
of
is the generatrix
, if
then
belong to one directrix curve of order
of an r-space
with
.
5. Codes Related to
To construct linear codes starting from
and bundles of them, first we must associate projective systems and calculate their number of points. Then it needs to calculate the cardinalities of intersection with the hyperplanes to find the distance and the error-correcting capability.
Let
,
be projective systems defined by
. It is
and
. Denote
and
the codes associated to them.
From Definitions 2.3, 2.4 and Proposition 4.5 follows
Proposition 5.1
is an
-code with
,
,
.
is an
-code with
,
,
.
Proof.
The distance of a code related to a projective system equals the number of the points of the system minus its max intersection with hyperplanes. Hence, from Proposition 4.5 follows that the minimum distance for
equals
, for
equals
. Then both codes have same dimension and minimum distance which is the better the smaller
is. In any case the code
seems to be better than
because
.
In Section 4.1 is shown that the variety
selects the regulus
to which both
belong. Denote
,
,
. Fix the directrix curve
of order
in
.
Theorem 5.2 There exists a bundle
of varieties
with the curve
as directrix,
, any two varieties having in common no element of the spread
.
Proof. It involves choosing step by step an
-space of the spread
outside the regulus identified by the variety of the previous step, and, in this, a directrix curve of order
.
Step 1—Construct the variety
starting from the curve
and the curve
. In
there are
possible choices for the next step.
Step 2—Choose an
-space
. Fix a curve
in it and construct the variety
starting from
and the curve
. Let
be the regulus of
to which
and
belong. In
there are
possible choices for the next step.
Step 3—Choose an
-space
. Fix a curve
in it of order
and construct the variety
starting from
and the curve
. Let
be the regulus of
to which
and
belong. In
there are
possible choices for the next step. And so on.
The procedure ends evidently at the
-th step. Therefore
and
.
Each variety of
represents a non-affine subplane of
and by construction follows that two such subplanes have in common the subline represented by
and no infinite point.
Denote
,
and
,
.
Theorem 5.3 Any two varieties of
have in common only
.
The set
has cardinality
.
The set
has cardinality
.
Proof.
Assume two varieties
, have in common, in addition to
, a point
. Among the
lines
there are the two generatrix lines,
,
,
,
,
defining the
-space
and
the
-space
of the spread
.
Choose a point
. From Corollary 4.9 follows that through the points
and
is defined one directrix curve of order
of an r-space
of the variety
with
and one directrix curve of order
of an r-space
of the variety
with
.
On the other hand, by considering the points
as points of Π, the line
selects in
an
-space
so that the r-space
represents the line of Π through
and
. This implies that
, that is, the subplanes represented by
and
would have in common the infinite point represented by
, a contradiction to Theorem 5.2.
For each variety
,
consists of
points so that
.
For each variety
,
so that
consists of
points and
.
Theorem 5.4 The cardinalities of the intersections of hyperplanes with
are:
,
,
,
and
.
The cardinalities of the intersections of hyperplanes with
are:
,
,
and
.
Proof.
a) Assume
. By construction,
contains the
subspaces
, each of them containing the directrix curve
, one for each of the
varieties of
. Then
.
b) Let
be a hyperplane
.
Assume
contains an
-space
for some
so that it contains
. Of course
cannot contain any other
-space of the spread being
. From Proposition 4.3, d), follows that
contains also a set of
generatrix lines meeting
in a subset
of
points.
Hence
contains at most these
points.
As
, then
meets each of the
subspaces
(with directrix curves
of
for every
) in an
. Such a space can meet each curve
,
, in at most
points (cf. NOTE 1), that is, in total
points. The hyperplane
could contain
generatrix lines through those points for each of the
varieties
, cutting the directrix
in subsets of
otherwise
would contain the whole variety
. That is we must add at most further
points. Then
contains at most
points.
Summarizing, as
, then we get
.
Assume
contains no
-space
for every
. As
is a subspace
, then
for every
is an
-space
which meets
in at most
points (cf. NOTE 1). These points are at most
.
Apart of the points on
, for each
the
generatrix lines contain
points, that is, in total
. To this number at most
points of
have to be added.
Summarizing, as
, then
.
Assume
contains
and therefore
, that is
points of
. In such a case
contains
generatrices for every variety
, that is
. Summarizing we get
.
It is easy to prove the following inequalities hold:
as
(cf. NOTE 1), moreover
, that is,
.
To calculate the intersections of hyperplanes with
, all those relating to
must be subtracted from the cardinalities calculated for
.
Let
be a hyperplane
.
From
we get
.
From
we get
.
In
the hyperplane
contains
generatrix lines for each variety
, in this case equivalent to
points. So that by adding the points of
we get
.
By comparing the three inequalities: 1)
, 2)
, 3)
we get 1) > 2), 1) < 3), 3) > 2) we can say
.
Let
,
be the projective systems defined by
and
, respectively. It is
and
. Denote
and
the codes associated to them.
From Theorem 5.3 and 5.4 follows
Theorem 5.5
is an
-code with
,
,
.
is an
-code with
,
,
.
Proof. The distance of a code related to a projective system equals the number of the points of the system minus its max intersection with hyperplanes, so that
we get
and
.
Given the same dimension
, the code
has both greater length of codeword and greater distance than the code
, hence
is better than
, despite
has a precise distance.
Example 5.6 For minimum
, the code
is an
-code with
,
,
.
The code
is an
-code with
,
,
.
By comparing these two codes with those of Proposition 5.1 for
it is clear that the codes of Theorem 5.5 are better.