# Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 5

Size: px
Start display at page:

Transcription

1 Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 5 5. Quasi-affine, quasi-projective, proper and projective morphisms 5.1. Quasi-affine morphisms. Definition (5.1.1). A scheme is quasi-affine if it is isomorphic to a quasi-compact open subscheme of an affine scheme. A morphism f : X Y is quasi-affine if there exists a covering of Y by open affines U α such that f 1 (U α ) is quasi-affine. Every quasi-affine morphism is separated and quasi-compact. An affine morphism is quasiaffine. Recall that for any prescheme X, putting A = Γ(X, OX), there is a canonical morphism X Spec(A). Proposition (5.1.2). Let X be quasi-compact or topologically Noetherian [or more generally, quasi-compact and quasi-separated (IV, )], A = Γ(X, O X ). The following are equivalent: (a) X is quasi-affine. (b) The canonical morphism u: X Spec(A) is an open immersion. (b ) The canonical morphism u is a homeomorphism of X onto its image in Spec(A). (c) O X is very ample for u. (c ) O X is ample. (d) The X f for f A form a base of the topology on X. (d ) Those X f which are affine cover X. (e) Every quasi-coherent O X -module is generated by its global sections. (e ) Every quasi-coherent ideal sheaf of finite type in O X is generated by its global sections. Observe that when these conditions hold, the affines X f form a base of the topology, and u is dominant. Corollary (5.1.3). If X is quasi-compact, and v : X Y is a morphism to an affine scheme Y, which is a homeomorphism of X onto an open subspace of Y, then X is quasiaffine. Corollary (5.1.4). If X is quasi-affine, every invertible sheaf is very ample (relative to the canonical morphism), and hence ample. Corollary (5.1.5). Let X be a quasi-compact prescheme. If there is an invertible sheaf L on X such that L and L 1 are both ample, then X is quasi-affine. Proposition (5.1.6). Let f : X Y be a quasi-compact morphism. The following are equivalent: (a) f is quasi-affine. (b) A = f (O X ) is quasi-coherent, and the canonical Y -morphism u: X Spec(A) is an open immersion. (b ) Like (b), but only assuming u is a homeomorphism onto its image. (c) O X is very ample relative to f. 1

2 2 (c ) O X is ample relative to f. (d) f is separated, and for every quasi-coherent O X -module F, σ : f (f (F)) F is surjective. Moreover, if f is quasi-affine, then every invertible sheaf on X is very ample relative to f. Corollary (5.1.7). Let f : X Y be quasi-affine. For every open U Y, the restriction f 1 (U) U of f is quasi-affine. Corollary (5.1.8). Let f : X Y be quasi-compact, Y affine. Then f is quasi-affine iff X is a quasi-affine scheme. Corollary (5.1.9). Let Y be a quasi-compact scheme, or a topologically Noetherian prescheme [or more generally, a quasi-compact and quasi-separated prescheme], f : X Y a morphism of finite type. If f is quasi-affine, there is a quasi-coherent sub-o Y -algebra B A(X) = f (O X ) of finite type such that the morphism X Spec(B) corresponding to B A(X) (1.2.7) is an immersion. Moreover, every quasi-coherent subalgebra B A(X) containing B has the same property. [By (3.1.7), this is special case of (3.8.4).] Proposition (5.1.10). (i) Any quasi-compact morphism X Y which is a homeomorphism onto its image in particluar, any closed immersion is quasi-affine. (ii) The composite of of two quasi-affine morphisms is quasi-affine. (iii) If f : X Y is a quasi-affine S-morphism, any base extension f (S ) is quasi-affine. (iv) If f and g are quasi-affine S-morphisms, so is f S g. (v) If g f is quasi-affine, and if g is separated or if X is topologically locally Noetherian, then f is quasi-affine. (vi) If f is quasi-affine, then so is f red. Remark (5.1.11). Given f : X Y, g : Y Z, (v) also holds under the alternative assumption that X Z Y is locally Noetherian. Proposition (5.1.12). Let f : X Y be quasi-compact, g : X X quasi-affine. If L is ample for f, then g (L) is ample for f g Serre s criterion. Theorem (5.2.1). (Serre s criterion) Let X be a quasi-compact scheme or a topologically Noetherian prescheme. The following are equivalent: (a) X is affine. (b) There exist elements f α A = Γ(X, O X ) such that the X fα are affine and the f α generate the unit ideal in A. (c) Γ(X, ) is an exact functor on the category of quasi-coherent O X -modules. (c ) Γ(X, ) is exact on sequences 0 F F F 0 such that F is a sub-o X - module of a finite-rank free sheaf O n X. (d) H 1 (X, F) = 0 for every quasi-coherent O X -module F.

3 (d ) Property (d) holds for every quasi-coherent ideal sheaf F. (a) (b) follows from (4.5.2). (a) (c) (c ) by (I, ). Given (c ), one shows first that sets X f form a neighborhood base at each closed point x X, by letting x U be a neighborhood, I the ideal of X \ U, I the ideal of {x} (X \ U), and applying (c ) to 0 I I I/I 0. Using quasi-compactness and (0, 2.1.3), we get a covering of X by affines X fi. Applying (c ) to the surjection O n X O defined by the f i s shows that they generate the unit ideal, giving (b). (a) (d) (d ) by the cohomology vanishing theorem for affine schemes, and (d ) (c ) by some applications of the long exact sequence of cohomology. Corollary (5.2.2). Let f : X Y be a quasi-compact morphism, and assume X is separated or topologically locally Noetherian [or assume f quasi-separated (IV, )]. The following are equivalent: (a) f is an affine morphism. (b) f is exact on quasi-coherent O X -modules (c) R 1 f (F) = 0 for every quasi-coherent O X -module F. (c ) Property (c) holds for quasi-coherent ideal sheaves F. Corollary (5.2.3). If f : X Y is an affine morphism, then for all quasi-coherent F on X, we have H i (Y, f (F)) = H i (X, F). [Stated in EGA for i = 1, but it holds for all i because Rf = f and RΓ(X, ) = RΓ(Y, ) Rf.] Quasi-projective morphisms. Definition (5.3.1). A morphism f : X Y is quasi-projective (or X is a quasi-projective scheme over Y ) if f is of finite type and there exists an invertible O X -module ample relative to f. Warning: this condition is not local on Y, even if X and Y are algebraic schemes over an algebraicallly closed field. A quasi-projective morphism is necessarily separated. If Y is quasi-compact, one can replace ample with very ample (4.6.2 and ). Proposition (5.3.2). Let Y be a quasi-compact scheme or a topologically Noetherian prescheme [or more generallly, a quasi-compact and quasi-separated prescheme]. The following are equivalent: (a) X is a quasi-projective Y -scheme. (b) X is of finite type over Y, and there exists a quasi-coherent O Y -module E of finite type such that X is Y -isomorphic to a sub-prescheme of P(E). (c) X is of finite type over Y, and there is a graded quasi-coherent O Y -algebra S such that S 1 is of finite type and generates S, and X is Y -isomorphic to a dense open subscheme of Proj(S).

4 4 Corollary (5.3.3). Let Y be a quasi-compact scheme with an ample invertible sheaf L. A Y -scheme X to is quasi-projective iff X is of finite type over Y and Y -isomorphic to a sub-y -scheme of some P r Y. Proposition (5.3.4). (i) Every quasi-affine morphism of finite type in particular, every quasi-compact immersion is quasi-projective. (ii) The composite of two quasi-projective morphisms is quasi-projective. (iii) Every base extension of a quasi-projective morphism is quasi-projective. (iv) The product of two quasi-projectivce S-morphisms is quasi-projective. (v) If g f is quasi-projective, and g is separated or X is locally Noetherian, then f is quasi-projective. (vi) If f is quasi-projective, so is f red. Remark (5.3.5). It is possible for f red but not f to be quasi-projective. Corollary (5.3.6). If X and X are quasi-projective Y -schemes, then so is X X Proper and universally closed morphisms. Definition (5.4.1). A morphism f : X Y is proper if it satisfies the two conditions: (a) f is separated and of finite type. (b) For every Y Y, the base extension f (Y ) : X Y Y Y is closed (I, 2.2.6). We also say that X is a proper Y -scheme. Properness is a local condition on Y. Clearly, a proper morphism is closed. Proposition (5.4.2). (i) Every closed immersion is proper. (ii) The composite of two proper morphisms is proper. (iii) Every base extension of a proper morphism is proper. (iv) The product of two proper S-morphisms is proper. Corollary (5.4.3). Given f : X Y, g : Y Z, suppose g f is proper. (i) If g is separated, then f is proper. (ii) If g is separated and of finite type, and f is surjective, then g is proper. Corollary (5.4.4). If X is proper over Y, and S is a graded quasi-coherent O Y -algebra, then every Y -morphism X Proj(S) is proper, hence closed. Corollary (5.4.5). Let f : X Y be a separated morphism of finite type. Let X i (resp. Y i ), i = 1,..., n be closed subschemes of X (resp. Y ), j i : X i X, h i : Y i Y the inclusions. Suppose the underlying space of X is the union of the X i s and that for each i there is a morphism f i : X i Y i such that h i f i = fj i. Then f is proper if and only if each f i is proper. Corollary (5.4.6). Let f be a separated morphism of finite type. Then f is proper if and only if f red is proper. (5.4.7). If f : X Y is a separated morphism of finite type between Noetherian preschemes, we can take X i in (5.4.5) to be the induced reduced subschemes of the irreducible components

5 of X, and Y i the closures of their images. Then the verification that f is proper reduces to that for each f i, which is a dominant morphism of integral preschemes. Corollary (5.4.8). Let f : X Y be an S-morphism of S-schemes of finite type. Then f is proper if and only if f (S ) is closed for every S-scheme S. Remark (5.4.9). A morphism satifying (5.4.1 (b)) is called universally closed. In (5.4.2) through (5.4.8) one can replace proper with universally closed and omit the finiteness hypotheses. (5.4.10). Let f : X Y be a morphism of finite type. A closed subset Z X is proper over Y, or proper for f, if the restriction of f to a closed subscheme of X with underlying space Z is proper. This doesn t depend on the choice of closed subscheme, by (5.4.6). If g : X X is proper, then g 1 (Z) is proper. If u: X X is any Y -morphism, where X is a Y -scheme of finite type, then u(z) is proper. In particular, if Z is a Y -proper subset of X, then Z X is a Y -proper subset of X, for any closed subscheme X X; and if X is a sub-prescheme of a Y -scheme X of finite type, then Z is a Y -proper subset of X (hence closed) Projective morphisms. Proposition (5.5.1). Let X be a Y -prescheme. The following are equivalent: (a) X is Y -isomorphic to a closed subscheme of P(E), where E is a quasi-coherent O Y - module of finite type. (b) X is Y -isomorphic to Proj(S), where S is a graded quasi-coherent O Y -algebra such that S 1 is of finite type and generates S. Definition (5.5.2). If the conditions in (5.5.1) hold, X is projective over Y. A morphism f : X Y is projective if it makes X a projective Y -scheme. Clearly if f : X Y is projective, there exists an O X -module very ample for f. Theorem (5.5.3). (i) Every projective morphism is quasi-projective and proper. (ii) Conversely, if Y is a quasi-compact scheme, or a topologically Noetherian prescheme [or more generally, if Y is quasi-compact and quasi-separated (IV, )], then every proper quasi-projective morphism is projective. (ii) follows from (5.3.2) and (5.4.4). Projective morphisms are preserved by base extension, so for (i) we must show that projective morphisms are closed. This reduces to the case Y = Spec(A), X = Proj(S), where S is a graded A-algebra generated by finitely many elements of S 1. Using f 1 (y) = Proj(S A k(y)) and Nakayama s lemma, one proves that f(x) = n Supp(S n), which is closed. Since any closed X X is again projective over Y, this shows that f is a closed morphism. Remarks (5.5.4). (i) Suppose 1 o f : X Y is proper, 2 o there exists an O X -module L very ample for f, and 3 o the quasi-coherent O Y -module E = f (L) is of finite type. Then f is projective, by (4.4.4) and (5.4.4). In volume III, 3, we shall see that if Y is locally Noetherian, then 1 o and 2 o imply 3 o, hence they characterize projective morphisms. If Y

6 6 is quasi-compact, one can replace 2 o by the existence of an O X -module ample relative to f (4.6.11). (ii) Let Y be a quasi-compact scheme possessing an ample O Y -module. Then a Y -scheme X is projective iff it is Y -isomorphic to a closed subscheme of P r Y for some r, by (5.3.3), (5.4.4) and (5.5.3). (iii) The proof of (5.5.3) shows that P r Y Y is always surjective. (iv) There exist proper morphisms which are not quasi-projective. [The earliest counterexamples are due to Nagata. A simple class of more recent counterexamples is given by toric varieties associated to non-polyhedral fans.] Proposition (5.5.5). (i) Every closed immersion is projective. (ii) If f : X Y and g : Y Z are projective, and Z is a quasi-compact scheme or a topologically Noetherian prescheme [or Z is quasi-compact and quasi-separated], then g f is projective. (iii) Every base extension of a projective morphism is projective. (iv) The product of two projectivce S-morphisms is projective. (v) If g f is projective and g is separated, then f is projective. (vi) If f is projective, so is f red. Proposition (5.5.6). If X, X are projective Y -schemes, then so is X X. Proposition (5.5.7). Let X be a projective Y -scheme, L a Y -ample O X -module. For every global section f of L, X f is affine over Y. Corollary (5.5.8). Let X be a prescheme, L an invertible O X -module. For every global section f of L, X f is affine over X (in particular, X f is affine if X is affine). This can also be shown directly, without using (5.5.7) Chow s Lemma. Theorem (5.6.1). (Chow s lemma) Let X be an S-scheme of finite type. Suppose that either (a) S is Noetherian; or (b) S is a quasi-compact scheme, and X has finitely many irreducible components. Then: (i) There exists a projective and surjective S-morphism f : X X, where X is a quasiprojective S-scheme. (ii) X and f can be chosen so that there is an open U X such that U = f 1 (U) is dense in X, and f restricts to an isomorphism U U. (iii) If X is reduced (resp. irreducible, integral), one can take X to have the same property. Corollary (5.6.2). Under the hypotheses (a) or (b) of (5.6.1), for X to be proper over S it is necessary and sufficient that there exist a projective S-scheme X and a surjective S- morphism f : X X (which is then projective by (5.5.5, (v))). Moreover, f can be chosen such that some dense open U X is the isomorphic image of U = f 1 (U), with U dense

7 in X. If X is irreducible (resp. reduced), then X can be chosen to have the same property; thus if X and X are irreducible, f is a birational morphism. Corollary (5.6.3). Let f : X S make X a scheme of finite type over a locally Noetherian prescheme S. Then X is proper over S if and only if for every morphism of finite type S S, the base extension f (S ) is closed. It even suffices that this hold for S = A n S = S Z Z[t 1,..., t n ], for all n. 7

### Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 4. Proposition (4.1.6). The canonical homomorphism ( ) is surjective [(3.2.4)].

Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 4 4.1. Definition of projective bundles. 4. Projective bundles. Ample sheaves Definition (4.1.1). Let S(E) be the symmetric algebra of a quasi-coherent O Y -module.

### Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 3

Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 3 3. Homogeneous spectrum of a sheaf of graded algebras 3.1. Homogeneous spectrum of a graded quasi-coherent O Y algebra. (3.1.1). Let Y be a prescheme. A sheaf

### MATH 8253 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY WEEK 12

MATH 8253 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY WEEK 2 CİHAN BAHRAN 3.2.. Let Y be a Noetherian scheme. Show that any Y -scheme X of finite type is Noetherian. Moreover, if Y is of finite dimension, then so is X. Write f

### Concentrated Schemes

Concentrated Schemes Daniel Murfet July 9, 2006 The original reference for quasi-compact and quasi-separated morphisms is EGA IV.1. Definition 1. A morphism of schemes f : X Y is quasi-compact if there

### Preliminary Exam Topics Sarah Mayes

Preliminary Exam Topics Sarah Mayes 1. Sheaves Definition of a sheaf Definition of stalks of a sheaf Definition and universal property of sheaf associated to a presheaf [Hartshorne, II.1.2] Definition

### Lecture 3: Flat Morphisms

Lecture 3: Flat Morphisms September 29, 2014 1 A crash course on Properties of Schemes For more details on these properties, see [Hartshorne, II, 1-5]. 1.1 Open and Closed Subschemes If (X, O X ) is a

### SCHEMES. David Harari. Tsinghua, February-March 2005

SCHEMES David Harari Tsinghua, February-March 2005 Contents 1. Basic notions on schemes 2 1.1. First definitions and examples.................. 2 1.2. Morphisms of schemes : first properties.............

### Math 248B. Applications of base change for coherent cohomology

Math 248B. Applications of base change for coherent cohomology 1. Motivation Recall the following fundamental general theorem, the so-called cohomology and base change theorem: Theorem 1.1 (Grothendieck).

### CHEVALLEY S THEOREM AND COMPLETE VARIETIES

CHEVALLEY S THEOREM AND COMPLETE VARIETIES BRIAN OSSERMAN In this note, we introduce the concept which plays the role of compactness for varieties completeness. We prove that completeness can be characterized

### Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009

MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry

### 12. Linear systems Theorem Let X be a scheme over a ring A. (1) If φ: X P n A is an A-morphism then L = φ O P n

12. Linear systems Theorem 12.1. Let X be a scheme over a ring A. (1) If φ: X P n A is an A-morphism then L = φ O P n A (1) is an invertible sheaf on X, which is generated by the global sections s 0, s

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASSES 47 AND 48

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASSES 47 AND 48 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. The local criterion for flatness 1 2. Base-point-free, ample, very ample 2 3. Every ample on a proper has a tensor power that

### Algebraic varieties and schemes over any scheme. Non singular varieties

Algebraic varieties and schemes over any scheme. Non singular varieties Trang June 16, 2010 1 Lecture 1 Let k be a field and k[x 1,..., x n ] the polynomial ring with coefficients in k. Then we have two

### Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009

MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry

### Smooth morphisms. Peter Bruin 21 February 2007

Smooth morphisms Peter Bruin 21 February 2007 Introduction The goal of this talk is to define smooth morphisms of schemes, which are one of the main ingredients in Néron s fundamental theorem [BLR, 1.3,

### We can choose generators of this k-algebra: s i H 0 (X, L r i. H 0 (X, L mr )

MODULI PROBLEMS AND GEOMETRIC INVARIANT THEORY 43 5.3. Linearisations. An abstract projective scheme X does not come with a pre-specified embedding in a projective space. However, an ample line bundle

### Modules over a Scheme

Modules over a Scheme Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 In these notes we collect various facts about quasi-coherent sheaves on a scheme. Nearly all of the material is trivial or can be found in [Gro60]. These

### Introduction and preliminaries Wouter Zomervrucht, Februari 26, 2014

Introduction and preliminaries Wouter Zomervrucht, Februari 26, 204. Introduction Theorem. Serre duality). Let k be a field, X a smooth projective scheme over k of relative dimension n, and F a locally

### The Proj Construction

The Proj Construction Daniel Murfet May 16, 2006 Contents 1 Basic Properties 1 2 Functorial Properties 2 3 Products 6 4 Linear Morphisms 9 5 Projective Morphisms 9 6 Dimensions of Schemes 11 7 Points of

### Relative Affine Schemes

Relative Affine Schemes Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 The fundamental Spec( ) construction associates an affine scheme to any ring. In this note we study the relative version of this construction, which

### Exercises of the Algebraic Geometry course held by Prof. Ugo Bruzzo. Alex Massarenti

Exercises of the Algebraic Geometry course held by Prof. Ugo Bruzzo Alex Massarenti SISSA, VIA BONOMEA 265, 34136 TRIESTE, ITALY E-mail address: alex.massarenti@sissa.it These notes collect a series of

### Zariski s Main Theorem and some applications

Zariski s Main Theorem and some applications Akhil Mathew January 18, 2011 Abstract We give an exposition of the various forms of Zariski s Main Theorem, following EGA. Most of the basic machinery (e.g.

### Section Blowing Up

Section 2.7.1 - Blowing Up Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 Now we come to the generalised notion of blowing up. In (I, 4) we defined the blowing up of a variety with respect to a point. Now we will define

### HYPERSURFACES IN PROJECTIVE SCHEMES AND A MOVING LEMMA

HYPERSURFACES IN PROJECTIVE SCHEMES AND A MOVING LEMMA OFER GABBER, QING LIU, AND DINO LORENZINI Abstract. Let X/S be a quasi-projective morphism over an affine base. We develop in this article a technique

### Algebraic v.s. Analytic Point of View

Algebraic v.s. Analytic Point of View Ziwen Zhu September 19, 2015 In this talk, we will compare 3 different yet similar objects of interest in algebraic and complex geometry, namely algebraic variety,

### 18.727, Topics in Algebraic Geometry (rigid analytic geometry) Kiran S. Kedlaya, fall 2004 Kiehl s finiteness theorems

18.727, Topics in Algebraic Geometry (rigid analytic geometry) Kiran S. Kedlaya, fall 2004 Kiehl s finiteness theorems References: [FvdP, Chapter 4]. Again, Kiehl s original papers (in German) are: Der

### 0.1 Spec of a monoid

These notes were prepared to accompany the first lecture in a seminar on logarithmic geometry. As we shall see in later lectures, logarithmic geometry offers a natural approach to study semistable schemes.

### COMPLEX VARIETIES AND THE ANALYTIC TOPOLOGY

COMPLEX VARIETIES AND THE ANALYTIC TOPOLOGY BRIAN OSSERMAN Classical algebraic geometers studied algebraic varieties over the complex numbers. In this setting, they didn t have to worry about the Zariski

### Section Higher Direct Images of Sheaves

Section 3.8 - Higher Direct Images of Sheaves Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 In this note we study the higher direct image functors R i f ( ) and the higher coinverse image functors R i f! ( ) which will

### Section Projective Morphisms

Section 2.7 - Projective Morphisms Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 In this section we gather together several topics concerned with morphisms of a given scheme to projective space. We will show how a morphism

### ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY: GLOSSARY AND EXAMPLES

ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY: GLOSSARY AND EXAMPLES HONGHAO GAO FEBRUARY 7, 2014 Quasi-coherent and coherent sheaves Let X Spec k be a scheme. A presheaf over X is a contravariant functor from the category of open

### PROBLEMS, MATH 214A. Affine and quasi-affine varieties

PROBLEMS, MATH 214A k is an algebraically closed field Basic notions Affine and quasi-affine varieties 1. Let X A 2 be defined by x 2 + y 2 = 1 and x = 1. Find the ideal I(X). 2. Prove that the subset

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 25

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 25 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Quasicoherent sheaves 1 2. Quasicoherent sheaves form an abelian category 5 We began by recalling the distinguished affine base. Definition.

### (1) is an invertible sheaf on X, which is generated by the global sections

7. Linear systems First a word about the base scheme. We would lie to wor in enough generality to cover the general case. On the other hand, it taes some wor to state properly the general results if one

### THE SMOOTH BASE CHANGE THEOREM

THE SMOOTH BASE CHANGE THEOREM AARON LANDESMAN CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2 1.1. Statement of the smooth base change theorem 2 1.2. Topological smooth base change 4 1.3. A useful case of smooth base change

### MATH 233B, FLATNESS AND SMOOTHNESS.

MATH 233B, FLATNESS AND SMOOTHNESS. The discussion of smooth morphisms is one place were Hartshorne doesn t do a very good job. Here s a summary of this week s material. I ll also insert some (optional)

### 1. Algebraic vector bundles. Affine Varieties

0. Brief overview Cycles and bundles are intrinsic invariants of algebraic varieties Close connections going back to Grothendieck Work with quasi-projective varieties over a field k Affine Varieties 1.

### CHOW S LEMMA. Matthew Emerton

CHOW LEMMA Matthew Emerton The aim o this note is to prove the ollowing orm o Chow s Lemma: uppose that : is a separated inite type morphism o Noetherian schemes. Then (or some suiciently large n) there

### Reid 5.2. Describe the irreducible components of V (J) for J = (y 2 x 4, x 2 2x 3 x 2 y + 2xy + y 2 y) in k[x, y, z]. Here k is algebraically closed.

Reid 5.2. Describe the irreducible components of V (J) for J = (y 2 x 4, x 2 2x 3 x 2 y + 2xy + y 2 y) in k[x, y, z]. Here k is algebraically closed. Answer: Note that the first generator factors as (y

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 27

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 27 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Proper morphisms 1 2. Scheme-theoretic closure, and scheme-theoretic image 2 3. Rational maps 3 4. Examples of rational maps 5 Last day:

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 43

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 43 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Facts we ll soon know about curves 1 1. FACTS WE LL SOON KNOW ABOUT CURVES We almost know enough to say a lot of interesting things about

### CHEAT SHEET: PROPERTIES OF MORPHISMS OF SCHEMES

CHEAT SHEET: PROPERTIES OF MORPHISMS OF SCHEMES BRIAN OSSERMAN The purpose of this cheat sheet is to provide an easy reference for definitions of various properties of morphisms of schemes, and basic results

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 24

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETR CLASS 24 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Normalization, continued 1 2. Sheaf Spec 3 3. Sheaf Proj 4 Last day: Fibers of morphisms. Properties preserved by base change: open immersions,

### MATH 8254 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY HOMEWORK 1

MATH 8254 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY HOMEWORK 1 CİHAN BAHRAN I discussed several of the problems here with Cheuk Yu Mak and Chen Wan. 4.1.12. Let X be a normal and proper algebraic variety over a field k. Show

### Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009

MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry

### NOTES ON ABELIAN VARIETIES

NOTES ON ABELIAN VARIETIES YICHAO TIAN AND WEIZHE ZHENG We fix a field k and an algebraic closure k of k. A variety over k is a geometrically integral and separated scheme of finite type over k. If X and

### CHAPTER 0 PRELIMINARY MATERIAL. Paul Vojta. University of California, Berkeley. 18 February 1998

CHAPTER 0 PRELIMINARY MATERIAL Paul Vojta University of California, Berkeley 18 February 1998 This chapter gives some preliminary material on number theory and algebraic geometry. Section 1 gives basic

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 27

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 27 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Quasicoherent sheaves of ideals, and closed subschemes 1 2. Invertible sheaves (line bundles) and divisors 2 3. Some line bundles on projective

### INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 12

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 12 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Rational equivalence on bundles 1 1.1. Intersecting with the zero-section of a vector bundle 2 2. Cones and Segre classes of subvarieties 3 2.1. Introduction

### Cohomology and Base Change

Cohomology and Base Change Let A and B be abelian categories and T : A B and additive functor. We say T is half-exact if whenever 0 M M M 0 is an exact sequence of A-modules, the sequence T (M ) T (M)

### HARTSHORNE EXERCISES

HARTSHORNE EXERCISES J. WARNER Hartshorne, Exercise I.5.6. Blowing Up Curve Singularities (a) Let Y be the cusp x 3 = y 2 + x 4 + y 4 or the node xy = x 6 + y 6. Show that the curve Ỹ obtained by blowing

### arxiv:math/ v3 [math.ag] 10 Nov 2006

Construction of G-Hilbert schemes Mark Blume arxiv:math/0607577v3 [math.ag] 10 Nov 2006 Abstract One objective of this paper is to provide a reference for certain fundamental constructions in the theory

### Basic results on Grothendieck Duality

Basic results on Grothendieck Duality Joseph Lipman 1 Purdue University Department of Mathematics lipman@math.purdue.edu http://www.math.purdue.edu/ lipman November 2007 1 Supported in part by NSA Grant

### 14 Lecture 14: Basic generallities on adic spaces

14 Lecture 14: Basic generallities on adic spaces 14.1 Introduction The aim of this lecture and the next two is to address general adic spaces and their connection to rigid geometry. 14.2 Two open questions

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 26

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 26 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Proper morphisms 1 Last day: separatedness, definition of variety. Today: proper morphisms. I said a little more about separatedness of

### AFFINE PUSHFORWARD AND SMOOTH PULLBACK FOR PERVERSE SHEAVES

AFFINE PUSHFORWARD AND SMOOTH PULLBACK FOR PERVERSE SHEAVES YEHAO ZHOU Conventions In this lecture note, a variety means a separated algebraic variety over complex numbers, and sheaves are C-linear. 1.

### A course in. Algebraic Geometry. Taught by C. Birkar. Michaelmas 2012

A course in Algebraic Geometry Taught by C. Birkar Michaelmas 2012 Last updated: May 30, 2013 1 Disclaimer These are my notes from Caucher Birkar s Part III course on algebraic geometry, given at Cambridge

### Tunisian Journal of Mathematics an international publication organized by the Tunisian Mathematical Society

unisian Journal of Mathematics an international publication organized by the unisian Mathematical Society Ramification groups of coverings and valuations akeshi Saito 2019 vol. 1 no. 3 msp msp UNISIAN

### NONSINGULAR CURVES BRIAN OSSERMAN

NONSINGULAR CURVES BRIAN OSSERMAN The primary goal of this note is to prove that every abstract nonsingular curve can be realized as an open subset of a (unique) nonsingular projective curve. Note that

### Construction of M B, M Dol, M DR

Construction of M B, M Dol, M DR Hendrik Orem Talbot Workshop, Spring 2011 Contents 1 Some Moduli Space Theory 1 1.1 Moduli of Sheaves: Semistability and Boundedness.............. 1 1.2 Geometric Invariant

### Factorization of birational maps on steroids

Factorization of birational maps on steroids IAS, April 14, 2015 Dan Abramovich Brown University April 14, 2015 This is work with Michael Temkin (Jerusalem) Abramovich (Brown) Factorization of birational

### Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009

MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry

### Remarks on the existence of Cartier divisors

arxiv:math/0001104v1 [math.ag] 19 Jan 2000 Remarks on the existence of Cartier divisors Stefan Schröer October 22, 2018 Abstract We characterize those invertible sheaves on a noetherian scheme which are

### Rigid Geometry and Applications II. Kazuhiro Fujiwara & Fumiharu Kato

Rigid Geometry and Applications II Kazuhiro Fujiwara & Fumiharu Kato Birational Geometry from Zariski s viewpoint S U D S : coherent (= quasi-compact and quasi-separated) (analog. compact Hausdorff) U

### Curves on P 1 P 1. Peter Bruin 16 November 2005

Curves on P 1 P 1 Peter Bruin 16 November 2005 1. Introduction One of the exercises in last semester s Algebraic Geometry course went as follows: Exercise. Let be a field and Z = P 1 P 1. Show that the

### MINIMAL MODELS FOR ELLIPTIC CURVES

MINIMAL MODELS FOR ELLIPTIC CURVES BRIAN CONRAD 1. Introduction In the 1960 s, the efforts of many mathematicians (Kodaira, Néron, Raynaud, Tate, Lichtenbaum, Shafarevich, Lipman, and Deligne-Mumford)

### CHAPTER 1. AFFINE ALGEBRAIC VARIETIES

CHAPTER 1. AFFINE ALGEBRAIC VARIETIES During this first part of the course, we will establish a correspondence between various geometric notions and algebraic ones. Some references for this part of the

### AN INTRODUCTION TO AFFINE SCHEMES

AN INTRODUCTION TO AFFINE SCHEMES BROOKE ULLERY Abstract. This paper gives a basic introduction to modern algebraic geometry. The goal of this paper is to present the basic concepts of algebraic geometry,

### Factorization of birational maps for qe schemes in characteristic 0

Factorization of birational maps for qe schemes in characteristic 0 AMS special session on Algebraic Geometry joint work with M. Temkin (Hebrew University) Dan Abramovich Brown University October 24, 2014

### Arithmetic Algebraic Geometry

Arithmetic Algebraic Geometry 2 Arithmetic Algebraic Geometry Travis Dirle December 4, 2016 2 Contents 1 Preliminaries 1 1.1 Affine Varieties.......................... 1 1.2 Projective Varieties........................

### MOISHEZON SPACES IN RIGID GEOMETRY

MOISHEZON SPACES IN RIGID GEOMETRY BRIAN CONRAD Abstract. We prove that all proper rigid-analytic spaces with enough algebraically independent meromorphic functions are algebraic (in the sense of proper

### DERIVED CATEGORIES OF COHERENT SHEAVES

DERIVED CATEGORIES OF COHERENT SHEAVES OLIVER E. ANDERSON Abstract. We give an overview of derived categories of coherent sheaves. [Huy06]. Our main reference is 1. For the participants without bacground

### Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009

MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry

### GOOD MODULI SPACES FOR ARTIN STACKS. Contents

GOOD MODULI SPACES FOR ARTIN STACKS JAROD ALPER Abstract. We develop the theory of associating moduli spaces with nice geometric properties to arbitrary Artin stacks generalizing Mumford s geometric invariant

### COHOMOLOGY AND DIFFERENTIAL SCHEMES. 1. Schemes

COHOMOLOG AND DIFFERENTIAL SCHEMES RAMOND HOOBLER Dedicated to the memory of Jerrold Kovacic Abstract. Replace this text with your own abstract. 1. Schemes This section assembles basic results on schemes

### DERIVED CATEGORIES OF STACKS. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Conventions, notation, and abuse of language The lisse-étale and the flat-fppf sites

DERIVED CATEGORIES OF STACKS Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Conventions, notation, and abuse of language 1 3. The lisse-étale and the flat-fppf sites 1 4. Derived categories of quasi-coherent modules 5

### NOTES ON FLAT MORPHISMS AND THE FPQC TOPOLOGY

NOTES ON FLAT MORPHISMS AND THE FPQC TOPOLOGY RUNE HAUGSENG The aim of these notes is to define flat and faithfully flat morphisms and review some of their important properties, and to define the fpqc

### NAGATA COMPACTIFICATION FOR ALGEBRAIC SPACES. To the memory of Masayoshi Nagata

NAGATA COMPACTIFICATION FOR ALGEBRAIC SPACES BRIAN CONRAD, MAX LIEBLICH, AND MARTIN OLSSON Abstract. We prove the Nagata compactification theorem for any separated map of finite type between quasi-compact

### Odds and ends on equivariant cohomology and traces

Odds and ends on equivariant cohomology and traces Weizhe Zheng Columbia University International Congress of Chinese Mathematicians Tsinghua University, Beijing December 18, 2010 Joint work with Luc Illusie.

### where m is the maximal ideal of O X,p. Note that m/m 2 is a vector space. Suppose that we are given a morphism

8. Smoothness and the Zariski tangent space We want to give an algebraic notion of the tangent space. In differential geometry, tangent vectors are equivalence classes of maps of intervals in R into the

### arxiv: v1 [math.ra] 5 Feb 2015

Noncommutative ampleness from finite endomorphisms D. S. Keeler Dept. of Mathematics, Miami University, Oxford, OH 45056 arxiv:1502.01668v1 [math.ra] 5 Feb 2015 Abstract K. Retert Dept. of Mathematics,

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 37

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 37 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Application of cohomology: Hilbert polynomials and functions, Riemann- Roch, degrees, and arithmetic genus 1 1. APPLICATION OF COHOMOLOGY:

### VALUATIVE CRITERIA FOR SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS

VALUATIVE CRITERIA FOR SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS BRIAN OSSERMAN Recall that or prevarieties, we had criteria or being a variety or or being complete in terms o existence and uniqueness o limits, where

### 1 Existence of the Néron model

Néron models Setting: S a Dedekind domain, K its field of fractions, A/K an abelian variety. A model of A/S is a flat, separable S-scheme of finite type X with X K = A. The nicest possible model over S

### APPENDIX 3: AN OVERVIEW OF CHOW GROUPS

APPENDIX 3: AN OVERVIEW OF CHOW GROUPS We review in this appendix some basic definitions and results that we need about Chow groups. For details and proofs we refer to [Ful98]. In particular, we discuss

### where Σ is a finite discrete Gal(K sep /K)-set unramified along U and F s is a finite Gal(k(s) sep /k(s))-subset

Classification of quasi-finite étale separated schemes As we saw in lecture, Zariski s Main Theorem provides a very visual picture of quasi-finite étale separated schemes X over a henselian local ring

### Here is another way to understand what a scheme is 1.GivenaschemeX, and a commutative ring R, the set of R-valued points

Chapter 7 Schemes III 7.1 Functor of points Here is another way to understand what a scheme is 1.GivenaschemeX, and a commutative ring R, the set of R-valued points X(R) =Hom Schemes (Spec R, X) This is

### PART II.2. THE!-PULLBACK AND BASE CHANGE

PART II.2. THE!-PULLBACK AND BASE CHANGE Contents Introduction 1 1. Factorizations of morphisms of DG schemes 2 1.1. Colimits of closed embeddings 2 1.2. The closure 4 1.3. Transitivity of closure 5 2.

### ALGEBRAIC GROUPS. Disclaimer: There are millions of errors in these notes!

ALGEBRAIC GROUPS Disclaimer: There are millions of errors in these notes! 1. Some algebraic geometry The subject of algebraic groups depends on the interaction between algebraic geometry and group theory.

### MATH 221 NOTES BRENT HO. Date: January 3, 2009.

MATH 22 NOTES BRENT HO Date: January 3, 2009. 0 Table of Contents. Localizations......................................................................... 2 2. Zariski Topology......................................................................

### 1 Replete topoi. X = Shv proét (X) X is locally weakly contractible (next lecture) X is replete. D(X ) is left complete. K D(X ) we have R lim

Reference: [BS] Bhatt, Scholze, The pro-étale topology for schemes In this lecture we consider replete topoi This is a nice class of topoi that include the pro-étale topos, and whose derived categories

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASSES 51 AND 52

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASSES 51 AND 52 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Smooth, étale, unramified 1 2. Harder facts 5 3. Generic smoothness in characteristic 0 7 4. Formal interpretations 11 1. SMOOTH,

### THE KEEL MORI THEOREM VIA STACKS

THE KEEL MORI THEOREM VIA STACKS BRIAN CONRAD 1. Introduction Let X be an Artin stack (always assumed to have quasi-compact and separated diagonal over Spec Z; cf. [2, 1.3]). A coarse moduli space for

### ON WITT VECTOR COHOMOLOGY FOR SINGULAR VARIETIES

ON WITT VECTOR COHOMOLOGY FOR SINGULAR VARIETIES PIERRE BERTHELOT, SPENCER BLOCH, AND HÉLÈNE ESNAULT Abstract. Over a perfect field k of characteristic p > 0, we construct a Witt vector cohomology with

### (dim Z j dim Z j 1 ) 1 j i

Math 210B. Codimension 1. Main result and some interesting examples Let k be a field, and A a domain finitely generated k-algebra. In class we have seen that the dimension theory of A is linked to the

### SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS

SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS BRIAN OSSERMAN Last quarter, we introduced the closed diagonal condition or a prevariety to be a prevariety, and the universally closed condition or a variety to be complete.

### An Atlas For Bun r (X)

An Atlas For Bun r (X) As told by Dennis Gaitsgory to Nir Avni October 28, 2009 1 Bun r (X) Is Not Of Finite Type The goal of this lecture is to find a smooth atlas locally of finite type for the stack

### VALUATIVE CRITERIA BRIAN OSSERMAN

VALUATIVE CRITERIA BRIAN OSSERMAN Intuitively, one can think o separatedness as (a relative version o) uniqueness o limits, and properness as (a relative version o) existence o (unique) limits. It is not