Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2008
The formulae considered in this paper deal with the multiple tangent lines and planes to surfaces in three dimensions; the functional method employed is that of a previous paper, in which a more restricted discussion was given for surfaces in higher space.
* Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 25 (1929), 390–406; this is referred to as F.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
† See Salmon-Rogers, , Analytic Geometry of Three Dimensions, II (1915); this is referred to later as Salmon.Google Scholar
‡ Schubert, , Math Ann. 10 (1876), 98;Google Scholaribid. 11 (1877), 347; 12 (1877), 180. See also Kalkül der Abzählenden Geometrie (1879).
§ James, , Trans. Camb. Phil. Soc. 23 (1925), 201; this is referred to as J.Google Scholar
∥ Cayley, , Coll. Papers, vi, 359;Google Scholar Schubert, op. cit.; Basset, Geometry of Surfaces, Ch. ix (referred to as Basset).
¶ Cayley, , Coll. Papers, vi, 582, xi, 225;Google ScholarZeuthen, , Math. Ann. 10 (1876), 446 (this paper is referred to as Zeuthen).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
* Basset, , Quart. Journal, 42 (1911), 225.Google Scholar
† Cayley, , Coll. Papers, vi, 347.Google Scholar
* See Zeuthen, p. 450; Salmon, p. 314.
† See F. §§ 1, 13; the surface F 7, which is described in § 1, has one improper node, not two, as stated.
* Basset, p. 31.
′ It does not vanish for F 4′ on account of the nodal lines through the triple point.
* Salmon, p. 287; the coefficient −12 should be +12.
† This method, which is used by James, seems to have originated with Voss, , Math. Annalen 9 (1876), 483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
‡ In this argument, all ε-considerations have been omitted in order to save unnecessary complexity.
* Basset, p. 40.
* For a scroll the multiplicity is only double and the curve counts eight times.
* Schaake, , Proc. Roy. Soc. Amsterdam, 27 (1924), 362–370.Google Scholar
* Its tangent planes along Γ are the tangent planes to F.
† The correspondence given by James (J. p. 223) is misprinted; the coefficient of Z should be 2.
* Salmon, p. 162.
* Salmon, p. 302.
† Basset, p. 39.
‡ Zeuthen, p. 469.
* Basset, p. 196.
* The dual method is due to James (J. p. 216); the coefficient of n4 should be unity in his result.
† Basset, p. 196.
* Basset, p. 283; the coefficient − 11 should be − 12.
* Basset, p. 273.