monomialization of strongly prepared morphisms from nonsingular n-folds to surfaces

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "monomialization of strongly prepared morphisms from nonsingular n-folds to surfaces"

Transcription

1 monomialization of strongly prepared morphisms from nonsingular n-folds to surfaces Steven D Cutosy and Olga Kashcheyeva Introduction Monomialization of morphisms is the problem of transforming a mapping into a monomial mapping by blowing up a chain of nonsingular subvarieties in its domain and image. Consider the following basic example. Let Φ : A n Am of affine spaces over field. Then Φ is given by a collection of polynomials f,..., f m in n variables: y = f (x,..., x n ). y m = f m (x,..., x n ). be a morphism The simplest structure of Φ is obtained when f,..., f m are monomials and y = x a x a n n. y m = x a m x am n n. If, moreover, Φ is a dominant morphism the matrix ( j ) is forced to satisfy the nondegeneracy condition ran( j ) = m. In case of a general dominant morphism Φ : X Y between two - varieties X and Y we would lie to get such a nice description locally. The first author was partially supported by NSF

2 Definition.. Suppose that Φ : X Y is a dominant morphism of nonsingular varieties. Φ is called monomial if for all points p X there exist an étale neighborhood U of p, uniformizing parameters (x,..., x n ) on U, regular parameters y,..., y m in O Y, Φ(p) and a matrix (j ) of nonnegative integers with ran m such that y = x a x a n n. y m = x a m x amn n. The natural question arises. Question. Suppose that Φ : X Y is a dominant morphism of - varieties. Does there exist a monomialization of Φ? Or, more precisely, given a dominant morphism Φ : X Y does there exist a monomial morphism Φ : X Y such that the following diagram commutes X Φ X Y Φ Y and all vertical maps are products of blowups of nonsingular subvarieties in X and Y? The answer is yes over a characteristic zero field when Y is a curve or when Y is a surface and dim(x) 3. Suppose that is algebraically closed field of characteristic zero. If Φ : X C is a dominant morphism from a -variety to a curve the existence of monomialization follows from resolution of singularities. If Φ : P S is a dominant morphism of surfaces one proof of monomialization (over C) is given by Abulut and King [3]. And the last nown case, when Φ : X S is a dominant morphism from a 3-fold to a surface, is done by the first author in [4]. This proof of monomialization breas down into two ey steps: ) obtain a diagram X Φ X Y Φ Y 2

3 where Φ is a strongly prepared morphism and the vertical maps are the products of blowups of nonsingular subvarieties; 2) monomialize the strongly prepared morphism Φ : X Y. The natural next case to consider is monomialization of morphisms from n-folds to surfaces. A proof would follow from the two steps above when X is an n-fold and Y is a surface. In this paper we complete step 2). Our main result is Theorem.2. Suppose that Φ : X S is a strongly prepared morphism from a nonsingular n-fold X to a nonsingular surface S. Then there exists a finite sequence of quadratic transforms π : S S and monoidal transforms centered at nonsingular varieties of codimension 2 π 2 : X X such that the induced morphism Φ : X S is monomial. From here we deduce that it is possible to toroidalize a strongly prepared morphism. Theorem.3. Suppose that Φ : X S is a strongly prepared morphism from a nonsingular n-fold X to a nonsingular surface S. Then there exists a finite sequence of quadratic transforms π : S S and monoidal transforms centered at nonsingular varieties of codimension 2 π 2 : X X such that the induced morphism Φ : X S is toroidal. The definition of a strongly prepared morphism is given in Section 3, definition 3.2. The class of strongly prepared morphisms is rather restrictive. However, a natural example of such a morphism can be obtained as follows. Let Φ : X S be a monomial mapping from an n-fold to a surface and π : X X be a finite sequence of blowups of points. Then the composition map Φ π : X S is strongly prepared, but not necessarily monomial. 2 Notations We will suppose that is an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero. By a variety we will mean a separated, integral finite type -scheme. A point of a variety will mean a closed point. By a generic point on a variety we will mean a point which satisfies a good condition which holds on an open set of points. Suppose that Z is a variety and p Z is a point. Then m p will denote the maximal ideal of O Z, p. 3

4 Suppose that P (x) = i=0 c ix i [[x]] is a series. Given e N, P e (x) will denote the polynomial P e (x) = e i=0 c ix i. Given a series f(x,..., x n ) [[x,..., x n ]], ord f will denote the order of f (with ord 0 = ). If x Q, [x] will denote the greatest integer n N such that n x. The greatest common divisor of a,..., a n N will be denoted by (a,..., a n ). Definition 2.. A reduced divisor D on a nonsingular variety X of dimension n is called a simple normal crossing divisor (SNC divisor) if all components of D are nonsingular and the following condition holds. Suppose that p X is a point and D,..., D s are the components of D containing p. Then s n and there exist regular parameters (x,..., x n ) in O X, p such that D,..., D s have at p local equations x = 0,..., x s = 0, respectively. Definition 2.2. A codimension 2 subvarieties C,..., C m of a nonsingular dimension n variety X mae simple normal crossings (SNCs) if C i is nonsingular for all i =,..., m and the following condition holds. Suppose that p X is a ( point ) and C,..., C s are the subvarieties n containing p. Then s and there exist regular parameters 2 (x,..., x n ) in O X, p such that for all i =,..., s x li = x i = 0 are local equations of C i at p and l i < i n. Definition 2.3. Suppose that Φ : X Y is a dominant morphism of nonsingular varieties. Φ is called monomial if for all points p X there exist an étale neighborhood U of p, uniformizing parameters (x,..., x n ) on U, regular parameters y,..., y m in O Y, Φ(p) and a matrix (j ) of nonnegative integers with ran m such that 3 Monomialization y = x a x a n n. y m = x a m x amn n. Definition 3.. Suppose that Φ : X S is a dominant morphism from a nonsingular variety X to a nonsingular variety S with reduced SNC divisors 4

5 D S on S and E X on X such that Φ (D S ) red = E X. Let sing(φ) be the locus of singular points of Φ. We will say that Φ is quasi prepared (with respect to D S ) if sing(φ) E X. Suppose that Φ : X S is a quasi prepared morphism from a nonsingular n-fold X to a nonsingular surface S. If p E X we will say that p is a, 2,..., n point depending on if p is contained in, 2,..., n components of E X. q D S will be called a or 2 point depending on if q is contained in or 2 components of D S. Regular parameters (u, v) O S, q for q D S are permissible if: ) q is a point and u = 0 is a local equation of D S or 2) q is a 2 point and uv = 0 is a local equation of D S. Definition 3.2. Suppose that Φ : X S is a quasi prepared morphism from a nonsingular n-fold X to a nonsingular surface S. We will say that Φ is strongly prepared at p X (with respect to D S ) if there exist permissible parameters (u, v) at Φ(p) and regular parameters (x,..., x n ) in ÔX, p such that one of the following forms holds: () n p is a point, u = 0 is a local equation of E X and x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b x + where m > 0, a,..., a > 0 with (a,..., a ) =, b,..., b 0 and P is a series; (2) 2 n p is a point, u = 0 is a local equation of E X and x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b where( m > 0, a ),..., a > 0 with (a,..., a ) =, b,..., b 0, a... a ran = 2 and P is a series; b... b 5

6 (3) 2 n p is a point, uv = 0 is a local equation of E X and u = x a x a v = x b 2 2 x b where a 2,..., a, b 2,..., b 0, a, b > 0 and + b i > 0 for all i = 2,...,. In this case the regular parameters (x,..., x n ) in ÔX, p are called - permissible parameters at p for (u, v) and the permissible parameters (u, v) are called prepared. Φ : X S is strongly prepared if it is strongly prepared at every point p X. We will now assume that Φ : X S is a strongly prepared morphism from a nonsingular n-fold X to a nonsingular surface S. Lemma 3.3. Suppose that O X, p R is finite étale and there exist x,..., x n R such that (x,..., x n ) are regular parameters in R q for all primes q R such that q O X, p = m p. Then there exists an étale neighborhood U of p such that (x,..., x n ) are uniformizing parameters on U. Proof. There exists an affine neighborhood V = Spec (A) of p X and a finite étale extension B of A such that B A A mp = R. Set U = Spec (B). Let π : U V be the natural map. There exists an open neighborhood U 2 of π (p) such that (x,..., x n ) are uniformizing parameters on U 2. Let Z = U U 2 and W = π(z). Set U = U π (W ), then U V = V W is finite étale. Thus there exists an étale neighborhood U of p where (x,..., x n ) are uniformizing parameters. Lemma 3.4. Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared at p E X. Then there exist prepared parameters (u, v) for Φ(p) and -permissible parameters (x,..., x n ) for (u, v) at p such that (x,..., x n ) are uniformizing parameters on an étale neighborhood of p and one of the following forms holds: () n p is a point, u = 0 is a local equation of E X and x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b x + 6 (I)

7 where m > 0, a,..., a > 0 with (a,..., a ) =, b,..., b 0 and either P 0 or P is a polynomial of order max i { b i } such that if Φ(p) is a point then m ordp ; (2) 2 n p is a point, u = 0 is a local equation of E X and x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b where( m > 0, a ),..., a > 0 with (a,..., a ) =, b,..., b 0, a... a ran = 2 and either P 0 or P is a polynomial of b... b order max i { b i } such that if Φ(p) is a point then m ordp ; (3) 2 n p is a point, uv = 0 is a local equation of E X and u = x a x a v = x b 2 2 x b (II) (III) where a 2,..., a, b 2,..., b 0, a, b > 0 and + b i > 0 for all i = 2,...,. Proof. Let (u, v) be prepared parameters for Φ(p). Suppose first that there exist regular parameters (x,..., x n ) ÔX, p such that x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b x +. Then there exist y,..., y O X, p and units α,..., α ÔX, p such that x i = α i y i for all i =. Set γ = (α a α a ) a and R = O X, p [γ]. R is finite étale over O X, p. Let L be the quotient field of R. Set e = max i {[ b i ]} and y + = α b α b x + + P (αa α a ya y a ) P e(α a α a ya y a y b y b 7 ).

8 Then y + = v Pe(αa αa ya ya ) y b y b of R. Thus y + R q = R. Set ȳ = γy and ȳ + = γ b y +, so that ˆR q L = R q for all maximal ideals q u = (ȳ a y a 2 2 y a )m v = P e (ȳ a y a 2 2 y a ) + ȳb y b 2 2 y b ȳ+. For i = +2 n choose y i O X, p such that y i x i mod m 2 pôx, p. Then ȳ, y 2,..., y, ȳ +, y +2,..., y n R are regular parameters at all maximal ideals of R. Since R is finite étale over O X, p, by Lemma 3.3 there exists an étale neighborhood U of p such that (ȳ, y 2,..., y, ȳ +, y +2,..., y n ) are uniformizing on U. To finish the analysis of this case when Φ(p) is a point and ordp e < we only need to ensure that m ordp in the formula for v. Suppose that P e (t) = i=e i= λ i(x a x a )i. Set and v = v i=[ e m ] i= λ im u i P = P e i=[ e m ] i= λ im (x a x a )im so that regular parameters (u, v) at Φ(p) and regular parameters (ȳ, y 2,..., y, ȳ +, y +2,..., y n ) at p satisfy the conditions of the lemma. Suppose now that there exist regular parameters (x,..., x n ) in ÔX, p such that x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b, where by permuting x,..., x we can assume that f = a b 2 a 2 b > 0. Then there exist y,..., y O X, p and units α,..., α ÔX, p such that x i = α i y i for all i =,...,. Set γ = (α a α a ) f and R = OX, p [γ]. R is finite étale over O X, p. Let L be the quotient field of R. 8

9 Set e = max i {[ b i ]} and ω = α b α b + P (αa α a ya y a ) P e(α a α a ya y a y b y b Then ω is a unit and ω = v Pe(αa αa ya ya ) y b y b ) ˆR q L = R q for all maximal ideals q of R. Thus ω R q = R. Let R = R[w f ]. R is finite étale over R and, therefore, it is finite étale over O X, p. Set ȳ = γ b 2 ω a 2 f y and ȳ 2 = γ b ω a f y2, so that u = (ȳ a ȳ a 2 2 y a 3 3 y a )m v = P e (ȳ a ȳ a 2 2 y a 3 3 y a ) + ȳb ȳ b 2 2 y b 3 3 y b. For i = +,..., n choose y i O X, p such that y i x i mod m 2 pôx, p. Then ȳ, ȳ 2, y 3,..., y n R are regular parameters at all maximal ideals of R. Since R is finite étale over O X, p, by Lemma 3.3 there exists an étale neighborhood U of p such that (ȳ, ȳ 2, y 3 y n ) are uniformizing on U. To finish the analysis of this case if Φ(p) is a point we change v to v and P e to P in the same way as we did above, so that regular parameters (u, v) at Φ(p) and regular parameters (ȳ, ȳ 2, y 3,..., y n ) at p satisfy the conditions of the lemma. Finally suppose that there exist regular parameters (x,..., x n ) in ÔX, p such that u = x a x a v = x b 2 2 x b. Then there exist y,..., y O X, p and units α,..., α ÔX, p such that x i = α i y i for all i =,...,. Set γ = (α a α a ) a, ω = (α b 2 2 α b ) b finite étale over O X, p. Set ȳ = γy and ȳ = ωy, so that u = ȳ a y a 2 2 y a v = y b 2 2 y b ȳb. 9 and R = O X, p [γ, ω]. R is.

10 For i = +,..., n choose y i O X, p such that y i x i mod m 2 pôx, p. Then ȳ, y 2,..., y, ȳ, y +,..., y n R are regular parameters at all maximal ideals of R. Since R is finite étale over O X, p, by Lemma 3.3 there exists an étale neighborhood U of p such that (ȳ, y 2,..., y, ȳ, y +,..., y n ) are uniformizing on U. This completes the proof. Suppose that p E X and (u, v) are permissible parameters for Φ(p). (u, v) will be called strongly prepared at Φ(p) and -permissible parameters (x,..., x n ) for (u, v) at p will be called strongly permissible if they satisfy the conditions of Lemma 3.4 Definition 3.5. Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared with respect to D S. Suppose that p E X. We will say that p is a good point for Φ if there exist permissible parameters (u, v) at Φ(p) and -permissible parameters (x,..., x n ) at p for (u, v) such that one of the following forms holds: (a) n p is a point, u = 0 is a local equation of E X and x a )m v = α(x a x a )t + (x a x a )t x + where m > 0, t 0, a,..., a > 0 with (a,..., a ) = and α ; (b) 2 n p is a point, u = 0 is a local equation of E X and (G.Ia) u = x a x a (G.Ib) v = x b x b x + ( ) a... a where a,..., a > 0, b,..., b 0 and ran = 2; b... b (2) 2 n p is a point, u = 0 is a local equation of E X and u = x a x a v = x b x b (G.II) 0

11 ( ) a... a where a,..., a > 0, b,..., b 0 and ran = 2; b... b (3) 2 n p is a point, uv = 0 is a local equation of E X and u = x a x a v = x b 2 2 x b (G.III) where a 2,..., a, b 2,..., b 0, a, b > 0 and + b i > 0 for all i = 2,...,. p will be called a bad point if p is not a good point. Remar 3.6. If p E X is a good point then following the proof of Lemma 3.4 we can always find strongly prepared parameters (u, v) at Φ(p) and strongly permissible parameters (x,..., x n ) at p for (u, v) such that one of the forms (G.Ia), (G.Ib), (G.II) or (G.III) holds. Lemma 3.7. Suppose that p X is a point and (u,v) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(p), (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for (u, v) such that (I) holds and u = x a v = P (x ) + x c x 2, ordp = d. Suppose that (ū, v) are also strongly prepared parameters at Φ(p) and (y,..., y n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for (ū, v) such that (I) holds and ū = y a 2 v = Q(y ) + y c 2 y 2, ordq = d 2. If Φ(p) is a point then a = a 2, c = c 2 and d = d 2. If Φ(p) is a 2 point then d, d 2 < and c d = c 2 d 2, a +d = a 2 +d 2. Proof. This follows from the discussion before Definition 8.7 in [4].

12 Suppose that E is a component of E X, p E, f ÔX, p and x = 0 is a local equation of E at p. Then we define ν E (f) = max{n such that x n f}. Suppose that p X is a point and E is the component of E X containing p. Suppose that (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(p) such that u = 0 is a local equation of E at p and (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at p with u = x a v = P (x ) + x c x 2, ordp = d. Then ν E (v) = d if d < and ν E (v) = c if d =. Thus, in view of Lemma 3.7, c ν E (v) and a + ν E (v) are independent of the choice of strongly prepared parameters (u, v) at Φ(p) and they are also independent of the choice of strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at p. Definition 3.8. Let p X, E E X, regular parameters (u, v) in O S, Φ(p) and regular parameters (x,..., x n ) in ÔX, p be as above with u = x a v = P (x ) + x c x 2. Define A(Φ, p) = c ν E (v). If A(Φ, p) > 0 define C(Φ, p) = (c ν E (v), a + ν E (v)). Notice that if p X is a point then p is a good point if and only if A(Φ, p) = 0 or, equivalently, ordp = d c. Lemma 3.9. Suppose that p X is a point and E is the component of E X containing p. Then there exists an open neighborhood U of p such that A(Φ, p ) = A(Φ, p) for all p E U and if A(Φ, p) > 0 then C(Φ, p ) = C(Φ, p) for all p E U. Proof. There exist strongly prepared parameters (u, v) at Φ(p) and strongly permissible parameters (x,..., x n ) at p for (u, v) such that u = x a v = P (x ) + x c x 2 and ordp = d. 2

13 If U is an étale neighborhood of p where (x,..., x n ) are uniformizing parameters then for any p U E there exist α 2,..., α n such that (x, x 2 = x 2 + α 2,..., x n = x n + α n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for strongly prepared parameters (u, v) at Φ(p ) and v = v if Φ(p ) is a 2 point or a c, v = v + α 2 u c f Φ(p ) is a point and a c. Suppose that the first assumption holds and v = v then at p u = x a v = P (x ) α 2 x c + x c (x 2 + α 2 ) = P (x ) + x c x 2. Thus if d < c then ordp = d and A(Φ, p ) = c d = A(Φ, p) > 0, C(Φ, p ) = (c d, a + d) = C(Φ, p). If d c then ordp c and A(Φ, p ) = 0 = A(Φ, p). Suppose that the second assumption holds and v = v + α 2 u c a then at p u = x a v = P (x ) + x c (x 2 + α 2 ) = P (x ) + x c x 2. Thus A(Φ, p ) = A(Φ, p) and C(Φ, p ) = C(Φ, p) if A(Φ, p) > 0. Now we can define A(Φ, E) = A(Φ, p) for p E a point. If A(Φ, E) > 0 define C(Φ, E) = C(Φ, p). We will call E E X a good component of E X if A(Φ, E) = 0. E will be called a bad component if it is not a good component or, equivalently, if A(Φ, E) > 0. Lemma 3.0. Suppose 2 n. Suppose that p X is a point and E,..., E are the components of E X containing p. Suppose that (u, v) are strongly prepared at Φ(p) and (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at p with x i = 0 being a local equation of E i for i =,...,. If or x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b x + x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b (I) (II) 3

14 then A(Φ, E i ) = b i ν Ei (v) for i =,..., and if A(Φ, E i ) > 0 C(Φ, E i ) = (b i ν Ei (v), m + ν Ei (v)). If u = x a x a v = x b 2 2 x b then A(Φ, E i ) = 0 for all i =,...,. (III) Proof. Suppose that p X is a point satisfying (I), (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(p) and (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at p such that x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b x + and ordp = d. After possibly permuting x,..., x we can assume that i = and prove only that A(Φ, E ) = b ν E (v) and C(Φ, E ) = (b ν E (v), a m + ν E (v)) if A(Φ, E ) > 0. Suppose that U is an étale neighborhood of p where (x,..., x n ) are uniformizing parameters and p U E is a point. Then there exist α 2,..., α {0} and α +,..., α n such that (x, x 2 = x 2 α 2,..., x n = x n α n ) are regular parameters at p. Set γ = (( x 2 + α 2 ) a2 ( x + α ) a ) a, for i = 2 set f i = a b i b and ω = (( x 2 + α 2 ) f2 ( x + α ) f ) a. Notice that γ a, ω a O U, p are units in O U, p and therefore O U, p [γ, ω] is finite étale over O U, p. Set x = γx and x + = x + ω + α + ω α + (α f 2 2 α f ) a then u = x a m v = P ( x a ) + x b x + + α x b, where α = α + (α f 2 2 α f ) a. Assume first that Φ(p) is a 2 point or a m b, then (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(p ). If a d b then ( x,..., x, x +, x +2,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for (u, v) and u = x a m v = P ( x ) + x b x + 4

15 with ordp = a d if a d < b and ordp b if a d = b. Thus A(Φ, E ) = A(Φ, p ) = b ν E (v) in this case and if A(Φ, p ) > 0 or, equivalently, if a d < b then C(Φ, E ) = C(Φ, p ) = (b a d, a m + a d) = (b ν E (v), a m + ν E (v)). If a d > b then set x + = x + + P ( xa ) to get strongly permissible x b parameters ( x,..., x n ) for (u, v) at p, so that u = x a m v = x b x + + α x b and A(Φ, E ) = A(Φ, p ) = 0 = b ν E (v). Assume now that Φ(p) is a point and a m b, then (u, v = v αu b a m ) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(p ). If a d b then ( x,..., x, x +, x +2,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for (u, v) and u = x a m v = P ( x a ) + x b x + = P ( x ) + x b x +. Thus A(Φ, E ) = A(Φ, p ) = b a d = b ν E (v) in this case and if A(Φ, p ) > 0 then C(Φ, E ) = C(Φ, p ) = (b a d, a m + a d) = (b ν E (v), a m + ν E (v)). If a d > b then set x + = x + + P ( xa ) to get strongly permissible x b parameters ( x,..., x n ) for (u, v) at p so that u = x a m v = x b x + and A(Φ, E ) = A(Φ, p ) = 0 = b ν E (v). Suppose that p X is a point satisfying (II), (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(p) and (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at p such that x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b and ordp = d. 5

16 After possibly permuting x,..., x we can assume that i = and prove only that A(Φ, E ) = b ν E (v) and C(Φ, E ) = (b ν E (v), a + ν E (v)) if A(Φ, E ) > 0. Suppose that U is an étale neighborhood of p where (x,..., x n ) are uniformizing parameters and p U E is a point. Then there exist α 2,..., α {0} and α +,..., α n such that (x, x 2 = x 2 α 2,..., x n = x n α n ) are ( regular parameters ) at p. a... a Notice that since ran = 2 there exists j {2,..., } such b... b that a b j a j b 0. So, after possibly permuting x 2,..., x we can assume that j = 2, that is a b 2 a 2 b 0. Set γ = (( x 2 + α 2 ) a2 ( x + α ) a ) a, for i = 2,..., set f i = a b i b, ω = (( x 3 + α 3 ) f3 ( x + α ) f ) a and δ = ( x 2 + α 2 ) f 2 a. Notice that γ a, ω a, δ a O U, p are units in O U, p and therefore O U, p [γ, ωδ] is finite étale over O U, p. Set x = γx and x 2 = δω (α f 2 2 α f ) a then u = x a m v = P ( x a ) + x b x 2 + α x b, where α = (α f 2 2 α f ) a {0}. Now the same analysis as above with x 2 playing the role of x + above shows that A(Φ, E ) = b ν E (v) and C(Φ, E ) = (b ν E (v), a m+ν E (v)) if A(Φ, E ) > 0. Suppose that p X is a point satisfying (III), (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(p) and (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at p such that u = x a x a v = x a 2 2 x b. Since a, b > 0 and a j + b j > 0 for all j = 2,...,, after possibly permuting x,..., x and u, v we can assume that i = and u = x a x a v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b, where a, b > 0 and P (t) 0. In this notations the proof of the required statement repeats the proof for case (II). 6

17 Theorem 3.. Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared. Then the locus of bad points in X is a Zarisi closed set of pure codimension, consisting of the union of all bad components of E X. Proof. Let Z be the union of all bad components of E X and let p be a good point on E X, q be a bad point on E X. Then it suffices to show that q Z while p E X Z. Suppose that p is a good point, (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(p), (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at p such that one of the following forms holds (a) (b) (2) (3) x a )m v = α(x a x a )t + (x a x a )t x + ; u = x a x a v = x b x b x + ; u = x a x a v = x b x b ; u = x a x a v = x b 2 2 x b. In all these cases x = 0,..., x = 0 are local equations of the components of E X containing p. So we can assume that for all i =,..., x i = 0 is a local equation of E i E, a component of E X. By Lemma 3.0 we compute A(Φ, E i ) as follows (a) A(Φ, E i ) = t ν Ei (v) = t t = 0 (b) A(Φ, E i ) = b i ν Ei (v) = b i b i = 0 7

18 (2) A(Φ, E i ) = b i ν Ei (v) = b i b i = 0 (3) A(Φ, E i ) = 0. Thus all components of E X containing p are good, so p does not lie in Z. Suppose that q is a bad point, (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(q), (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at q and (I) holds, that is x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b x +, where P (t) 0. Let x = 0,..., x = 0 be local equations of the components E,..., E E X containing q. By Lemma 3.0 we can { compute A(Φ, E i ) for all i =,..., as follows b i ordp > 0, if ordp < b i ; A(Φ, E i ) = b i ν Ei (v) = 0, otherwise. To prove the statement of the theorem we need to find such j {,..., } that E j is a bad component or, equivalently, A(Φ, E j ) > 0. Assume the contrary. Let ordp b i for all i =,..., then v = x b x b (x + + P (xa If ord P (xa xa ) xa ) x b x b ) and P (x a xa ) x b x b ÔX, q. a xa ) x b x b then set x x b x b + = x + + P (x so that (x,..., x, x +, x +2,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at q and x a )m v = x b x b x +. Thus one of the forms (G.Ia) or (G.Ib) holds for q and, therefore, q is a good point while q was originally chosen to be a bad point. If ord P (xa xa ) = 0 then there exist α {0} and y m q Ô X, q such x b x b that P (xa xa ) = y+α. Set x x b x b + = x + +y so that (x,..., x, x +, x +2,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at q and x a )m v = x b x b ( x + + α). 8

19 ( ) a... a Now if ran < 2 then (G.Ia) holds and, therefore, q is a b... b good point. ( This contradicts ) the choice of q. a... a If ran = 2 then after possibly permuting x b... b,..., x we can assume that f = a b 2 a 2 b 0. Set x = x ( x + + α) a 2 f x 2 = x 2 ( x + + α) a f then ( x, x 2, x 3,..., x, x +, x +2,..., x n ) are -permissible parameters for (u, v) at q and u = ( x a x a 2 2 x a 3 3 x a )m v = x b x b 2 2 x b 3 3 x b. Thus (G.II) holds for q and, therefore, q is a good point while q was originally chosen to be a bad point. This shows that if q is a bad point on E X and (I) holds at q then there exists such a component E of E X containing q that A(Φ, E) > 0. So E Z and, therefore, q Z. Suppose that q is a bad point, (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(q), (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at q and (II) holds, that is x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b, where P (t) 0. Let x = 0,..., x = 0 be local equations of the components E,..., E E X containing q. By Lemma 3.0 we can { compute A(Φ, E i ) for all i =,..., as follows b i ordp > 0, if ordp < b i ; A(Φ, E i ) = b i ν Ei (v) = 0, otherwise. To prove the statement of the theorem we need to find such j {,..., } that E j is a bad component or, equivalently, A(Φ, E j ) > 0. Assume the contrary. Let ordp b i for ( all i =,..)., then v = x b x b ( + P (xa xa ) a... a ). Since ran = 2 there exists x b x b b... b l {,..., } such that a l ordp > b l, so P (xa xa ) 9 x b x b m q Ô X, q.

20 After possibly permuting x,..., x we can assume that f = a b 2 a 2 b 0. Set x = x ( + P (xa x a x b x b x 2 = x 2 ( + P (xa x a x b x b ) ) ) a2 f so that ( x, x 2, x 3,..., x n ) are -permissible parameters for (u, v) at q and ) a f u = ( x a x a 2 2 x a 3 3 x a )m v = x b x a 2 2 x a 3 3 x b. Thus (G.II) holds for q and, therefore, q is a good point while q was originally chosen to be a bad point. This shows that if q is a bad point on E X and (II) holds at q then there exists such a component E of E X containing q that A(Φ, E) > 0. So E Z and, therefore, q Z. Lemma 3.2. Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared, q D S and p Φ (q) is a point on X such that one of the forms (I), (II) or (III) holds at p. Then m q O X, p is not invertible if and only if one of the following holds: (a) n x a )m v = (x a x a )t x + (N.Ia) where m > 0, a,..., a > 0 with (a,..., a ) = and 0 t < m; (b) 2 n x a )m v = (x b x b )x + (N.Ib) where( a,..., a > ) 0 with (a,..., a ) =, b,..., b 0, a... a ran = 2 and min b... b i { b i a i } < m; 20

21 (c) 2 n x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b x + (N.Ic) where( a,..., a > ) 0 with (a,..., a ) =, b,..., b 0, a... a ran = 2 and min b... b i { b i a i } < ordp < max i { b i }, min i { b i } < m; (2a) 2 n x a )m v = (x b x b ) (N.IIa) where( a,..., a > ) 0 with (a,..., a ) =, b,..., b 0, a... a ran = 2 and min b... b i { b i a i } < m < max i { b i }; (2b) 2 n x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b (N.IIb) where( a,..., a > ) 0 with (a,..., a ) =, b,..., b 0, a... a ran = 2 and min b... b i { b i a i } < ordp < max i { b i }, min i { b i } < m; (3) 2 n u = x a x a v = x b 2 2 x b (N.III) where a 2,..., a, b 2,..., b 0, a, b > 0 and + b i > 0 for all i = 2,...,. 2

22 Proof. ( Suppose that ) (I) holds at p. First consider the case when a... a ran < 2. Then there exist t 0 such that b... b x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + (xa x a )t x +. If d = ordp t then v = (x a x a )d γ, where γ ÔX, p is a unit. So either u is a multiple of v if d m or v is a multiple of u if m d. Thus we may assume that ordp > t. Set x + = x + + P (xa x a ) (x a x a )t O ˆX, p to get strongly permissible parameters (x,..., x, x +, x +2,..., x n ) for (u, v) at p such that x a )m v = (x a x a )t x +. So (u, v)o X, p is not invertible if and only if t < m and we get case (N.Ia) of the lemma. ( ) a... a Suppose now that ran = 2. If P (t) 0 in the formula b... b for v then x a )m v = x b x b x + and v is not a multiple of u if and only if m > b i for some i {,..., }, that is if m > min i { b i }. Thus we meet case (N.Ib) of the lemma. Suppose that P (t) 0 then d = ordp max i { b i }. If d = max i { b i then v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b x + = (x b x b )( P (xa x a + x x b x b + ) ) } where the smallest degree term of x a d b x a d b P (x a xa ) m p Ô X, p since d b i x b x b is x a d b x a d b. for all i =,..., and d b j a j for 22

23 ( ) a... a at least one j {,..., } due to maximality of the ran. So b... b by setting x + = x + + P (xa xa ) we return to the situation when P (t) 0 x b x b in the formula for v. Therefore, we may restrict our considerations to d = ordp < max i { b i }. If d min i { b i } then v = (x a x a )d γ, where γ = P (xa x a ) (x a x a )d + xb a d x b a d x + ÔX, p is a unit. So either v is a multiple of u if m d or u is a multiple of v if d m. On the other hand if ordp > min i { b i } we denote by c i the minimum of d and b i to present v as follows v = x c x c ( P (xa x a x c x c + x b c x b c x + ) = x c x c γ, ) where γ m p O X, p and x i γ for all i =,...,. Then u cannot be a multiple of v and v is a multiple of u if and only if m min { c i } = min i a min{d, b i } = min i i a { b i }. i i Thus, with the assumption m > min i { b i and this is case (N.Ic) of the lemma. } (u, v)o X, p is not invertible Suppose that (II) holds at p. Assume first that P (t) 0 in the formula for v so that x a )m v = x b x b Then v is not a multiple of u if and only if there exist i {, } such that m > b i, that is if m > min i { b i }. The symmetric condition for u not being a multiple of v gives the restriction m < max i { b i }. Thus we meet case (N.IIa) of the lemma. Let P (t) 0 then d = ordp max i { b i }. If d = max i { b i } then v = P (x a x a )+xb x b = (x b x b )( P (xa x a 23 x b x b ) +) = x b x b γ

24 P (x a xa ) where the smallest degree term of is x a d b x b x b x a d b. So γ ÔX, p is a unit since d b i for all i =,..., and d b j a j for at least one ( ) a... a j {,..., } due to maximality of the ran. b... b After possibly permuting regular coordinates x,..., x n we can assume that f = a b 2 a 2 b 0. Then by setting x = x γ a 2 f x 2 = x 2 γ a f we get strongly permissible parameters ( x, x 2, x 3,..., x n ) for (u, v) at p such that u = ( x a x a 2 2 x a 3 3 x a )m v = x b x b 2 2 x b 3 3 x b. Thus we may assume that ordp < max i { b i }. If d min i { b i } then v = (x a x a )d γ, where γ = P (xa x a ) (x a x a + xb a d x b a d ÔX, p )d is a unit. So either v is a multiple of u if m d or u is a multiple of v if d m. On the other hand if ordp > min i { b i } we denote by c i the minimum of d and b i to present v as follows v = x c x c ( P (xa x a x c x c + x b c x b c ) = x c x c γ, ) where γ m p O X, p and x i γ for all i =,...,. Then u cannot be a multiple of v and v is a multiple of u if and only if m min { c i } = min i a min{d, b i } = min i i a { b i }. i i Thus, with the assumption m > min i { b i and this is case (N.IIb) of the lemma. } (u, v)o X, p is not invertible 24

25 Suppose that (III) holds at p. Then u = x a x a v = x b 2 x b, with a, b > 0. So m q O X, p is not invertible and this describes case (N.III) of the lemma. Lemma 3.3. Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared. Let π : S S be the blow up of S at a point q D S. Let U be the largest open set of X such that the rational map X S is a morphism Φ : U S on U. Then Φ is strongly prepared with respect to π (D S ), and if all points of U are good for Φ then all points of U are good for Φ also. Proof. This follows from the analysis of the proof of Lemma 3.2. In fact, the conclusions of the Lemma are clear if u v in O X,p. If v u and () or (2) holds in Definition 3.2, we can mae a change of variables in the x i, replacing x i with γ i x i, where γ i is a unit series for i, and maing an appropriate change of x + to get an expression of the form () or (2) of Definition 3.2, with u and v interchanged. If p is a good point, the new expressions of v and u will have the good expressions of (a) or (2) of Definition 3.5. Theorem 3.4. Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared, p X is a point and the rational map Φ from X to the blow up S of q = Φ(p) is a morphism in a neighborhood of p. Then A(Φ, p) A(Φ, p) and if A(Φ, p) = A(Φ, p) > 0 then C(Φ, p) < C(Φ, p). Proof. Let (x,..., x n ) be strongly permissible parameters at p for strongly prepared parameters (u, v) at Φ(p), then u = x a v = P (x ) + x b x 2 with ordp = d. Suppose first that P (x) 0. Then b a since (u, v)o X, p is principal and there exist strongly prepared parameters (u, v ) at Φ (p) such that u = u, v = u v. 25

26 Thus u = x a v = x b a x 2 and A(Φ, p) = 0 = A(Φ, p). Now suppose that P (x) 0, so d b. If d a then there exist α and strongly prepared parameters (u, v ) at Φ (p) such that Thus u = u, u = x a v = P (x ) x a, v = u (v + α). α + x b a x 2 and A(Φ, p) (b a) (d a) = b d = A(Φ, p), where the equality holds if and only if d > a. In this case C(Φ, p) = (b d, d a + a) = (b d, d) < (b d, d + a) = C(Φ, p). If d < a then there exist strongly prepared parameters (u, v ) at Φ (p) and strongly permissible parameters ( x, x 2, x 3,..., x n ) at p such that and u = x d v = P ( x ) x d u = u v, v = u + x b+a 2d x 2, with ord P = a. Thus A(Φ, p) = (b + a 2d) (a d) = b d = A(Φ, p) and C(Φ, p) = (b d, a d + d) = (b d, a) < (b d, d + a) = C(Φ, p). Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared. We will denote by Z(Φ) the locus of bad points in X. If q D S denote by N q (Φ) the locus of points in X where Φ does not factor through the blowup of q. Then N(Φ) will denote the union of N q (Φ) for all q D S. We will denote by B 2 (X) the set of all 2 points in X. Let B 2 (X) be the Zarisi closure of B 2 (X). We will also say that a codimension 2 subvariety C X is a 2-variety if C = E E 2 for some components E and E 2 of E X. 26

27 Remar 3.5. B2 (X) is the union of all 2-varieties on X. Lemma 3.6. Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared and q D S is such that Z(Φ) N q (Φ). Then Z(Φ) N q (Φ) is a Zarisi closed set of pure codimension 2, consisting of the union of all 2-varieties in Φ (q) with a generic point in the form of (N.IIb). Suppose that C is a component of Z(Φ) N q (Φ) and π : X X is the blowup of C with exceptional variety E = π (C) red. Then Φ = Φ π is strongly prepared and A(Φ, E) < A(Φ). Proof. Z(Φ) and N q (Φ) are both closed, so to prove the first statement of the theorem it suffices to show that any bad point p N q (Φ) lies on a 2-variety C such that a generic point p C is in the form of (N.IIb) and p Φ (q). Notice also that if p Z(Φ) N q (Φ) then either (N.Ic) or (N.IIb) holds at p. Suppose that p N q (Φ) is a point and (N.Ic) holds at p, (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at q and (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for (u, v), then x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b x +. After possibly permuting x,..., x we can assume that b a < ordp < b 2 a 2 and b a < m. Suppose that E,..., E are the components of E X containing p with local equations x = 0,..., x = 0 respectively. Let U be an étale neighborhood of p where (x,..., x n ) are uniformizing parameters. Set C = E E 2 and fix a 2 point p U C away from the vanishing locus of x +. Then there exist α 3,..., α + {0} and α +2,..., α n such that (x, x 2, x 3 = x 3 α 3, x 4 = x 4 α 4,..., x n = x n α n ) are regular parameters at p. Since f = a b 2 a 2 b 0 we can set γ = (( x 3 + α 3 ) a3 ( x + α ) a ) f and ω = (( x 3 + α 3 ) b3 ( x + α ) b ( x+ + α + )) f. Then γ f, ω f O U, p are units in O U, p and, therefore, O U, p [γ, ω] is finite étale over O U, p. Set x = γ b 2 ω a 2 x and x 2 = γ b ω a x 2 so that ( x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for strongly prepared parameters (u, v) at q and u = ( x a x a 2 2 ) m v = P ( x a x a 2 2 ) + x b x b

28 Thus (N.IIb) holds at a generic point p of C and Φ(p ) = q. If π : X X is the blow up of C then Φ = Φ π is strongly prepared above p. If p lies in the intersection of more than 2 components E,..., E of E X then π (p) does not contain any point. Assume that p is a 2 point. If s π (p) is a point then (x, x 2, x 3,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at s where x 2 is defined by x 2 = x ( x 2 + α) for some nonzero α. After setting x = x ( x 2 + α) a 2 f a +a 2 a and x 3 = x 3 ( x 2 + α) +a 2 the following equalities hold x a 2 2 ) m = x (a +a 2 )m v = P (x a x a 2 2 ) + x b x b 2 2 x 3 = P ( x a +a 2 ) + x b +b 2 x 3. If (a +a 2 )ordp (b +b 2 ) then s is a good point, A(Φ, E) = A(Φ, s) = 0 and A(Φ) > 0 since the locus of bad points Z(Φ) is not empty. So, assume that (a + a 2 )ordp < (b + b 2 ). Since b a ordp < 0 A(Φ, E) = A(Φ, s) = b + b 2 (a + a 2 )ordp < b 2 a 2 ordp = = A(Φ, E 2 ) A(Φ). Suppose that p N q (Φ) is a point and (N.IIb) holds at p, (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at q and (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for (u, v), then x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b. After possibly permuting x,..., x we can assume that b a < ordp < b 2 a 2 and b a < m. Suppose that E,..., E are the components of E X containing p with local equations x = 0,..., x = 0 respectively. Let U be an étale neighborhood of p where (x,..., x n ) are uniformizing parameters. Set C = E E 2 and fix a 2 point p U C. Then there exist α 3,..., α {0} and α +,..., α n such that (x, x 2, x 3 = x 3 α 3, x 4 = x 4 α 4,..., x n = x n α n ) are regular parameters at p. Since f = a b 2 a 2 b 0 we can set γ = (( x 3 + α 3 ) a3 ( x + α ) a ) f and ω = (( x 3 + α 3 ) b3 ( x + α ) b ) f. Then γ f, ω f O U, p are units in O U, p and, therefore, O U, p [γ, ω] is finite étale over O U, p. 28

29 Set x = γ b 2 ω a 2 x and x 2 = γ b ω a x 2 so that ( x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for strongly prepared parameters (u, v) at q and u = ( x a x a 2 2 ) m v = P ( x a x a 2 2 ) + x b x b 2 2. Thus (N.IIb) holds at a generic point p of C and Φ(p) = q. If π : X X is the blow up of C then Φ = Φ π is strongly prepared above p. If p lies in the intersection of more than 2 components E,..., E of E X then π (p) does not contain any point. Assume that p is a 2 point. If s π (p) is a point then (x, x 2, x 3,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at s where x 2 is defined by x 2 = x ( x 2 + α) for some nonzero α. After setting x = x ( x 2 + α) a 2 f a +a 2 a and x 2 = ( x 2 + α) +a 2 α f a +a 2 the following equalities hold x a 2 2 ) m = x (a +a 2 )m v = P (x a x a 2 2 ) + x b x b 2 2 = P ( x a +a 2 ) + x b +b 2 x 2 + α f a +a 2 x b +b 2. If (a + a 2 )ordp (b + b 2 ) then s is a good point and A(Φ, E) = A(Φ, s) = 0 < A(Φ). So, assume that (a + a 2 )ordp < (b + b 2 ). Since b a ordp < 0 A(Φ, E) = A(Φ, s) = b + b 2 (a + a 2 )ordp < b 2 a 2 ordp = = A(Φ, E 2 ) A(Φ). Theorem 3.7. Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared and Z(Φ) N(Φ). Then Z(Φ) N(Φ) is a Zarisi closed set of pure codimension 2, consisting of the union of all 2-varieties with a generic point in the form of (N.IIb). Suppose that C is a component of Z(Φ) N(Φ) and π : X X is the blowup of C with exceptional variety E = π (C) red. Then Φ = Φ π is strongly prepared and A(Φ, E) < A(Φ). Proof. This theorem follows from Lemma 3.6 due to finiteness of the number of 2-varieties in X. 29

30 Remar 3.8. With the notation of Lemma 3.6, Φ(Z(Φ) N q (Φ)) = {q} and each component of Z(Φ) N q (Φ) is the intersection of a good component E with a bad component E 2. Lemma 3.9. Suppose that p Z(Φ) N q (Φ) is a 2 point and (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at q, (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for (u, v) such that (N.IIb) holds and x a 2 2 ) m v = P (x a x a 2 2 ) + x b x b 2 2, where b a < ordp < b 2 a 2 and d = ordp. q is a -point. Suppose that (ū, v) are also strongly prepared parameters at q and (y,..., y n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for (ū, v) such that (N.IIb) holds and ū = (y a y a 2 2 ) m v = Q(y a y a 2 2 ) + y b y b 2 2, where b < ordq < b a 2 and d = ordq. a 2 Then a = a, a 2 = a 2, b = b, b 2 = b 2, d = d, m = m. Proof. In order to decide whether q is a or 2 point we will compare the varieties given by local equations u = 0 and uv = 0 on X. According to the assumption on d, uv can be presented as uv = x a m+b x a 2m+a 2 d 2 (αx a d b + x b 2 a 2 d P (x a x a 2 2 ) α(x a 2 + x x 2 x a d+ x a 2d+ 2 where 0 α, x a d b, x b 2 a 2 d 2 m p Ô X, p, P (x a xa 2 2 ) (xa xa 2 2 )d x a d+ x a 2 d+ 2 x a 2 2 ) d ), ÔX, p. Thus uv = 0 defines a variety with at least 3 irreducible components at the 2 point p. Therefore uv = 0 cannot be a local equation of D S. So q is a point. This implies that every permissible change of coordinates at q will translate u into αu for some unit series α ÔX, p. Thus (x a x a 2 2 ) m = α(y a y a 2 2 ) m, where α is a unit series. The powers of irreducible factors on the left hand side a m and a 2 m are equal to the powers of irreducible factors on the right hand side a m and 30

31 a 2m, possibly in reverse order. And since (a, a 2 ) = and (a, a 2) = we can claim that m = m and {a, a 2 } = {a, a 2}. Denote by E and E 2 the components of E X containing p with local equations x = 0 and x 2 = 0 respectively. Then by Lemma 3.0 A(Φ, E ) = 0 and A(Φ, E 2 ) = b 2 a 2 ordp > 0. So E is a good component while E 2 is a bad component. Since ū = 0 is a local equation of E X, y = 0 and y 2 = 0 are local equations of E and E 2, possibly in reverse order. Then by Lemma 3.0 the invariant A of the component of E X with local equation y = 0 is equal to 0. So y = 0 is a local equation of the good component E, while y 2 = 0 is a local equation of E 2. From here and equality of the sets {a, a 2 } and {a, a 2} it follows that a = a and a 2 = a 2. Suppose that U is an étale neighborhood of p where (x,..., x n ) and (y,..., y n ) are uniformizing parameters. Fix a point p U E 2. Following the proof of Lemma 3.0 we can find strongly permissible parameters ( x,..., x n ) and strongly permissible parameters (ȳ,..., ȳ n ) at p such that and u = x a 2m 2 v = P ( x 2 ) + x b 2 2 x, with ord P = a 2 d ū = ȳ a 2 m 2 v = Q(ȳ 2 ) + ȳ b 2 2 ȳ, with ord Q = a 2d. So by Lemma 3.7 b 2 = b 2, a 2 d = a 2d, and therefore, d = d. To show that b = b we fix a point p U E. Then following the proof of Lemma 3.0 we find strongly permissible parameters ( x,..., x n ) and strongly permissible parameters (ȳ,..., ȳ n ) at p such that and So by Lemma 3.7 b = b. u = x a m v = α x b + x b x 2, with α ū = ȳ a m v = α 2 ȳ b + ȳ b ȳ, with α 2. 3

32 If α, β are real numbers, define S(α, β) = max{(α, β), (β, α)} where the maximum is in the Lexicographic ordering. Definition Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared and p E X is a 2 point such that (II) holds at p. Define { S( b a ordp, b 2 a 2 ordp ), if p N(Φ) Z(Φ); σ(p) = 0, otherwise. If C is a 2-variety in E X containing a 2 point p in the form of (II), set σ(c) = σ(p). Set σ(c) = 0, otherwise. Finally, define σ(φ) = max{σ(c) C E X is a 2-variety}. Remar 3.2. In view of Lemmas 3.6 and 3.9, at every 2 point p N(Φ) Z(Φ), where (II) holds, b a ordp and b 2 a 2 ordp are independent of the choice of strongly prepared parameters (u, v) at Φ(p) and they are also independent of the choice of strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at p. So, σ(p) is well defined at every 2 point p E X in the form of (II). To justify the definition of σ(c) for a 2-variety C we will prove the following Lemma Suppose that p E X is a 2 point in the form of (N.IIb) and C is a 2-variety containing p. Then there exists an open neighborhood U of p such that σ(p) = σ(p ) for all p U C. Proof. There exist strongly prepared parameters (u, v) at Φ(p) and strongly permissible parameters (x,..., x n ) at p such that x a 2 2 ) m ( ) v = P (x a x a 2 2 ) + x b x b 2 2 and b a < d = ordp < b 2 a 2, b a < m. Let U be an étale neighborhood of p where (x,..., x n ) are uniformizing parameters. Since x = x 2 = 0 are local equations of C, for any p U C there exist α 3,..., α n such that (x, x 2, x 3 = x 3 + α 3,..., x n = x n + α n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for strongly prepared parameters (u, v) at Φ(p ). Then the same equations ( ) hold at p and, therefore, σ(p ) = S( b a ordp, b 2 a 2 ordp ) = σ(p). 32

33 Theorem Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared. Then there exists a sequence of blowups of 2-varieties X X such that the induced map Φ : X S is strongly prepared, A(Φ, E) < A(Φ ) = A(Φ) if E is an exceptional component of E X for X X and Z(Φ ) N(Φ ) =. Proof. Z(Φ) N(Φ) = if and only if σ(φ) = 0. Suppose that σ(φ) > 0 and C Z(Φ) N(Φ) is a 2-variety such that σ(c) = σ(φ). Let π : X X be the blowup of C. Then by Theorem 3.7 Φ = Φ π is strongly prepared and A(Φ, E) < A(Φ), so we will show that at every 2 point s π (C) in the form of (II) σ(s) < σ(φ). Suppose that p C is a point and (N.Ic) holds at p, (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(p) and (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for (u, v) such that x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b x + and x = x 2 = 0 are local equations of C. Then there will not be any 2 point in the form of (II) in π (p). Suppose that p C is a point and (N.IIb) holds at p, (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at Φ(p) and (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters at p for (u, v) such that x a )m v = P (x a x a ) + xb x b and x = x 2 = 0 are local equations of C. Then after possibly permuting x and x 2 we can assume that b a < ordp < b 2 a 2 and b a < m. Suppose that E,..., E are the components of E X containing p with local equations x = 0,..., x = 0 respectively. If p lies in the intersection of more than 3 components E,..., E of E X there will not be any 2 point in π (p). Assume first that p is a 2 point with x a 2 2 ) m v = P (x a x a 2 2 ) + x b x b 2 2 and d = ordp. Then σ(φ) = σ(c) = σ(p) = S(a d b, b 2 a 2 d). 33

34 Suppose that a 2 point s π (p) has -permissible parameters (x, x 2, x 3,..., x n ) such that x 2 = x x 2, then +a 2 x a 2 2 ) m v = P (x a +a 2 x a 2 2 ) + x b +b 2 x b 2 2. Since d < b 2 a 2, following the proof of Lemma 3.4 we can find strongly permissible parameters (y,..., y n ) at s such that u = (y a +a 2 y a 2 2 ) m v = P (y a +a 2 y a 2 2 ) + y b +b 2 y b 2 2. Then σ(s) > 0 if and only if (u, v)o X, s is not invertible and (N.IIb) holds at p. Let it be the case, then d > b +b 2 a +a 2 and (a + a 2 )d (b + b 2 ) < a d b since a 2 d b 2 < 0. Thus σ(s) = S((a + a 2 )d (b + b 2 ), b 2 a 2 d) < S(a d b, b 2 a 2 d) = σ(φ). Suppose that a 2 point s π (p) has -permissible parameters ( x, x 2, x 3,..., x n ) such that x = x x 2 then If d b +b 2 a +a 2 that u = ( x a x a +a 2 2 ) m v = P ( x a x a +a 2 2 ) + x b x b +b 2 2. there exist strongly permissible parameters (y,..., y n ) at s such u = (y a y a +a 2 2 ) m v = y b y b +b 2 2. Thus σ(s) = 0 in this case. Assume that d < b +b 2 a +a 2, then following the proof of Lemma 3.4 we can find strongly permissible parameters (y,..., y n ) at s such that u = (y a y a +a 2 2 ) m v = P (y a y a +a 2 2 ) + y b y b +b 2 2. Suppose that σ(s) > 0, that is (N.IIb) holds at s. Then since b a d < 0, (b + b 2 ) (a + a 2 )d < b 2 a 2 d and σ(s) = S(a d b, (b + b 2 ) (a + a 2 )d) < S(a d b, b 2 a 2 d) = σ(φ). 34

35 Assume now that p is a 3 point with x a 2 2 x a 3 3 ) m v = P (x a x a 2 2 x a 3 3 ) + x b x b 2 2 x b 3 3 and d = ordp. Suppose that s π (p) is a 2 point, then s has regular parameters (x, x 2, x 3,..., x n ) defined by x 2 = x ( x 2 + α) for some nonzero α and +a 2 ( x 2 + α) a 2 x a 3 3 ) m v = P (x a +a 2 ( x 2 + α) a 2 x a 3 3 ) + x b +b 2 ( x 2 + α) b 2 x b 3 3. ( ) a + a If ran 2 a 3 < 2 then σ(s) = 0 since (II) cannot hold at s. So, b + b 2 b 3 ( ) a + a consider the case when ran 2 a 3 = 2. b + b 2 b 3 Set h = (a + a 2 )b 3 a 3 (b + b 2 ) and x = x ( x 2 + α) a 2 b 3 a 3 b 2 h x 3 = x 3 ( x 2 + α) a b 2 a 2 b h to get -permissible parameters ( x, x 2, x 3, x 4,..., x n ) at s with If d max{ b +b 2 at s such that a +a 2, b 3 u = ( x a +a 2 x a 3 3 ) m v = P ( x a +a 2 x a 3 3 ) + x b +b 2 x b 3 3. a 3 } there exist strongly permissible parameters (y,..., y n ) u = (y a +a 2 y a 3 3 ) m v = y b +b 2 y b 3 3. Thus σ(s) = 0 in this case. Assume that d < max{ b +b 2 a +a 2, b 3 a 3 }, then following the proof of Lemma 3.4 we can find strongly permissible parameters (y,..., y n ) at s such that u = (y a +a 2 y a 3 3 ) m v = P (y a +a 2 y a 3 3 ) + y b +b 2 y b

36 Suppose that σ(s) > 0, so (N.IIb) holds at s and min{ b +b 2 a +a 2, b 3 a 3 } < d < max{ b +b 2 a +a 2, b 3 a 3 }. If b +b 2 a +a 2 < d < b 3 a 3 then according to the proof of Lemma 3.6 the 2-variety E E 3 lies in Z(Φ) N(Φ) and σ(e E 3 ) = S(a d b, b 3 a 3 d). Thus since a 2 d b 2 < 0, (a + a 2 )d (b + b 2 ) < a d b and σ(s) = S((a + a 2 )d (b + b 2 ), b 3 a 3 d) < S(a d b, b 3 a 3 d) = = σ(e E 3 ) σ(φ). If b 3 a 3 < d < b +b 2 a +a 2 then notice that σ(s) > 0 implies that b 3 a 3 < m. So according to the proof of Lemma 3.6 the 2-variety E 2 E 3 lies in Z(Φ) N(Φ) and σ(e 2 E 3 ) = S(a 3 d b 3, b 2 a 2 d). Thus since b a d < 0, (b + b 2 ) (a + a 2 )d < b 2 a 2 d and σ(s) = S(a 3 d b 3, (b + b 2 ) (a + a 2 )d) < S(a 3 d b 3, b 2 a 2 d) = = σ(e 2 E 3 ) σ(φ). By Theorem 3.7, induction on the number of 2-varieties C X with σ(c) = σ(φ) and induction on σ(φ) we achieve the conclusions of the theorem. Theorem Suppose that Φ : X S is strongly prepared and q S. Suppose also that N(Φ) does not contain any bad point. If N q (Φ) then N q (Φ) is a pure codimension 2 subscheme which maes SNCs with B 2 (X). Suppose that C is a component of N q (Φ) and π : X X is the blowup of C, E = π (C) red and Φ = Φ π. Then Φ is strongly prepared, Z(Φ ) N(Φ ) = and A(Φ, E) = 0. Proof. Suppose that p N q (Φ) is a point, (u, v) are strongly prepared parameters at q and (x,..., x n ) are strongly permissible parameters for (u, v) at p. Let U be an étale neighborhood of p where (x,..., x n ) are uniformizing parameters. Denote by E,..., E the components of E X containing p with local equations x = 0,..., x = 0, respectively. The assumption that N(Φ) does not contain bad points implies that there is no point of the form (N.Ic) or (N.IIb) in N q (Φ). Suppose that (N.Ia) holds at p : x a )m v = (x a x a )t x +. 36

MONOMIALIZATION OF STRONGLY PREPARED MORPHISMS TO SURFACES

MONOMIALIZATION OF STRONGLY PREPARED MORPHISMS TO SURFACES MONOMIALIZATION OF STRONGLY PREPARED MORPHISMS TO SURFACES A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School University of Missouri-Columbia In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

More information

k k would be reducible. But the zero locus of f in A n+1

k k would be reducible. But the zero locus of f in A n+1 Math 145. Bezout s Theorem Let be an algebraically closed field. The purpose of this handout is to prove Bezout s Theorem and some related facts of general interest in projective geometry that arise along

More information

MA 206 notes: introduction to resolution of singularities

MA 206 notes: introduction to resolution of singularities MA 206 notes: introduction to resolution of singularities Dan Abramovich Brown University March 4, 2018 Abramovich Introduction to resolution of singularities 1 / 31 Resolution of singularities Let k be

More information

9. Birational Maps and Blowing Up

9. Birational Maps and Blowing Up 72 Andreas Gathmann 9. Birational Maps and Blowing Up In the course of this class we have already seen many examples of varieties that are almost the same in the sense that they contain isomorphic dense

More information

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 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

More information

214A HOMEWORK KIM, SUNGJIN

214A HOMEWORK KIM, SUNGJIN 214A HOMEWORK KIM, SUNGJIN 1.1 Let A = k[[t ]] be the ring of formal power series with coefficients in a field k. Determine SpecA. Proof. We begin with a claim that A = { a i T i A : a i k, and a 0 k }.

More information

A SIMPLE ALGORITHM FOR PRINCIPALIZATION OF MONOMIAL IDEALS

A SIMPLE ALGORITHM FOR PRINCIPALIZATION OF MONOMIAL IDEALS TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 357, Number 12, Pages 4805 4812 S 0002-9947(05)03866-3 Article electronically published on July 19, 2005 A SIMPLE ALGORITHM FOR PRINCIPALIZATION

More information

HARTSHORNE EXERCISES

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

More information

Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 2013 Lecture #18 11/07/2013

Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 2013 Lecture #18 11/07/2013 18.782 Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 2013 Lecture #18 11/07/2013 As usual, all the rings we consider are commutative rings with an identity element. 18.1 Regular local rings Consider a local

More information

Porteous s Formula for Maps between Coherent Sheaves

Porteous s Formula for Maps between Coherent Sheaves Michigan Math. J. 52 (2004) Porteous s Formula for Maps between Coherent Sheaves Steven P. Diaz 1. Introduction Recall what the Thom Porteous formula for vector bundles tells us (see [2, Sec. 14.4] for

More information

4. Images of Varieties Given a morphism f : X Y of quasi-projective varieties, a basic question might be to ask what is the image of a closed subset

4. Images of Varieties Given a morphism f : X Y of quasi-projective varieties, a basic question might be to ask what is the image of a closed subset 4. Images of Varieties Given a morphism f : X Y of quasi-projective varieties, a basic question might be to ask what is the image of a closed subset Z X. Replacing X by Z we might as well assume that Z

More information

12. Hilbert Polynomials and Bézout s Theorem

12. Hilbert Polynomials and Bézout s Theorem 12. Hilbert Polynomials and Bézout s Theorem 95 12. Hilbert Polynomials and Bézout s Theorem After our study of smooth cubic surfaces in the last chapter, let us now come back to the general theory of

More information

Resolution of Singularities in Algebraic Varieties

Resolution of Singularities in Algebraic Varieties Resolution of Singularities in Algebraic Varieties Emma Whitten Summer 28 Introduction Recall that algebraic geometry is the study of objects which are or locally resemble solution sets of polynomial equations.

More information

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 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

More information

NONSINGULAR CURVES BRIAN OSSERMAN

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

More information

div(f ) = D and deg(d) = deg(f ) = d i deg(f i ) (compare this with the definitions for smooth curves). Let:

div(f ) = D and deg(d) = deg(f ) = d i deg(f i ) (compare this with the definitions for smooth curves). Let: Algebraic Curves/Fall 015 Aaron Bertram 4. Projective Plane Curves are hypersurfaces in the plane CP. When nonsingular, they are Riemann surfaces, but we will also consider plane curves with singularities.

More information

VERY STABLE BUNDLES AND PROPERNESS OF THE HITCHIN MAP

VERY STABLE BUNDLES AND PROPERNESS OF THE HITCHIN MAP VERY STABLE BUNDLES AND PROPERNESS OF THE HITCHIN MAP CHRISTIAN PAULY AND ANA PEÓN-NIETO Abstract. Let X be a smooth complex projective curve of genus g 2 and let K be its canonical bundle. In this note

More information

Math 6140 Notes. Spring Codimension One Phenomena. Definition: Examples: Properties:

Math 6140 Notes. Spring Codimension One Phenomena. Definition: Examples: Properties: Math 6140 Notes. Spring 2003. 11. Codimension One Phenomena. A property of the points of a variety X holds in codimension one if the locus of points for which the property fails to hold is contained in

More information

CHAPTER 1. AFFINE ALGEBRAIC VARIETIES

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

More information

ABSTRACT NONSINGULAR CURVES

ABSTRACT NONSINGULAR CURVES ABSTRACT NONSINGULAR CURVES Affine Varieties Notation. Let k be a field, such as the rational numbers Q or the complex numbers C. We call affine n-space the collection A n k of points P = a 1, a,..., a

More information

Math 418 Algebraic Geometry Notes

Math 418 Algebraic Geometry Notes Math 418 Algebraic Geometry Notes 1 Affine Schemes Let R be a commutative ring with 1. Definition 1.1. The prime spectrum of R, denoted Spec(R), is the set of prime ideals of the ring R. Spec(R) = {P R

More information

Exercise Sheet 7 - Solutions

Exercise Sheet 7 - Solutions Algebraic Geometry D-MATH, FS 2016 Prof. Pandharipande Exercise Sheet 7 - Solutions 1. Prove that the Zariski tangent space at the point [S] Gr(r, V ) is canonically isomorphic to S V/S (or equivalently

More information

DIVISORS ON NONSINGULAR CURVES

DIVISORS ON NONSINGULAR CURVES DIVISORS ON NONSINGULAR CURVES BRIAN OSSERMAN We now begin a closer study of the behavior of projective nonsingular curves, and morphisms between them, as well as to projective space. To this end, we introduce

More information

Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 2013 Lecture #24 12/03/2013

Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 2013 Lecture #24 12/03/2013 18.78 Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 013 Lecture #4 1/03/013 4.1 Isogenies of elliptic curves Definition 4.1. Let E 1 /k and E /k be elliptic curves with distinguished rational points O 1 and

More information

Resolution of Singularities. Steven Dale Cutkosky. Department of Mathematics, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211

Resolution of Singularities. Steven Dale Cutkosky. Department of Mathematics, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211 Resolution of Singularities Steven Dale Cutkosky Department of Mathematics, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211 To Hema, Ashok and Maya Contents Preface vii Chapter 1. Introduction 1 1.1.

More information

CHEVALLEY S THEOREM AND COMPLETE VARIETIES

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

More information

Preliminary Exam Topics Sarah Mayes

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

More information

3. The Sheaf of Regular Functions

3. The Sheaf of Regular Functions 24 Andreas Gathmann 3. The Sheaf of Regular Functions After having defined affine varieties, our next goal must be to say what kind of maps between them we want to consider as morphisms, i. e. as nice

More information

Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009

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

More information

Oral exam practice problems: Algebraic Geometry

Oral exam practice problems: Algebraic Geometry Oral exam practice problems: Algebraic Geometry Alberto García Raboso TP1. Let Q 1 and Q 2 be the quadric hypersurfaces in P n given by the equations f 1 x 2 0 + + x 2 n = 0 f 2 a 0 x 2 0 + + a n x 2 n

More information

Math 145. Codimension

Math 145. Codimension Math 145. Codimension 1. Main result and some interesting examples In class we have seen that the dimension theory of an affine variety (irreducible!) is linked to the structure of the function field in

More information

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 27

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:

More information

1 Existence of the Néron model

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

More information

ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CAUCHER BIRKAR

ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CAUCHER BIRKAR ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CAUCHER BIRKAR Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Affine varieties 3 Exercises 10 3. Quasi-projective varieties. 12 Exercises 20 4. Dimension 21 5. Exercises 24 References 25 1. Introduction

More information

10. Smooth Varieties. 82 Andreas Gathmann

10. Smooth Varieties. 82 Andreas Gathmann 82 Andreas Gathmann 10. Smooth Varieties Let a be a point on a variety X. In the last chapter we have introduced the tangent cone C a X as a way to study X locally around a (see Construction 9.20). It

More information

APPENDIX 3: AN OVERVIEW OF CHOW GROUPS

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

More information

Polynomials, Ideals, and Gröbner Bases

Polynomials, Ideals, and Gröbner Bases Polynomials, Ideals, and Gröbner Bases Notes by Bernd Sturmfels for the lecture on April 10, 2018, in the IMPRS Ringvorlesung Introduction to Nonlinear Algebra We fix a field K. Some examples of fields

More information

mult V f, where the sum ranges over prime divisor V X. We say that two divisors D 1 and D 2 are linearly equivalent, denoted by sending

mult V f, where the sum ranges over prime divisor V X. We say that two divisors D 1 and D 2 are linearly equivalent, denoted by sending 2. The canonical divisor In this section we will introduce one of the most important invariants in the birational classification of varieties. Definition 2.1. Let X be a normal quasi-projective variety

More information

A MORE GENERAL ABC CONJECTURE. Paul Vojta. University of California, Berkeley. 2 December 1998

A MORE GENERAL ABC CONJECTURE. Paul Vojta. University of California, Berkeley. 2 December 1998 A MORE GENERAL ABC CONJECTURE Paul Vojta University of California, Berkeley 2 December 1998 In this note we formulate a conjecture generalizing both the abc conjecture of Masser-Oesterlé and the author

More information

Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 2013 Lecture #17 11/05/2013

Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 2013 Lecture #17 11/05/2013 18.782 Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 2013 Lecture #17 11/05/2013 Throughout this lecture k denotes an algebraically closed field. 17.1 Tangent spaces and hypersurfaces For any polynomial f k[x

More information

Igusa fibre integrals over local fields

Igusa fibre integrals over local fields March 25, 2017 1 2 Standard definitions The map ord S The map ac S 3 Toroidal constructible functions Main Theorem Some conjectures 4 Toroidalization Key Theorem Proof of Key Theorem Igusa fibre integrals

More information

0.1 Spec of a monoid

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.

More information

ON ECKL S PSEUDO-EFFECTIVE REDUCTION MAP

ON ECKL S PSEUDO-EFFECTIVE REDUCTION MAP ON ECKL S PSEUDO-EFFECTIVE REDUCTION MAP BRIAN LEHMANN Abstract. Suppose that X is a complex projective variety and L is a pseudo-effective divisor. A numerical reduction map is a quotient of X by all

More information

Multiplication of Polynomials

Multiplication of Polynomials Summary 391 Chapter 5 SUMMARY Section 5.1 A polynomial in x is defined by a finite sum of terms of the form ax n, where a is a real number and n is a whole number. a is the coefficient of the term. n is

More information

Algebraic Varieties. Notes by Mateusz Micha lek for the lecture on April 17, 2018, in the IMPRS Ringvorlesung Introduction to Nonlinear Algebra

Algebraic Varieties. Notes by Mateusz Micha lek for the lecture on April 17, 2018, in the IMPRS Ringvorlesung Introduction to Nonlinear Algebra Algebraic Varieties Notes by Mateusz Micha lek for the lecture on April 17, 2018, in the IMPRS Ringvorlesung Introduction to Nonlinear Algebra Algebraic varieties represent solutions of a system of polynomial

More information

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. 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

More information

9. Integral Ring Extensions

9. Integral Ring Extensions 80 Andreas Gathmann 9. Integral ing Extensions In this chapter we want to discuss a concept in commutative algebra that has its original motivation in algebra, but turns out to have surprisingly many applications

More information

8. Prime Factorization and Primary Decompositions

8. Prime Factorization and Primary Decompositions 70 Andreas Gathmann 8. Prime Factorization and Primary Decompositions 13 When it comes to actual computations, Euclidean domains (or more generally principal ideal domains) are probably the nicest rings

More information

COMPLEX VARIETIES AND THE ANALYTIC TOPOLOGY

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

More information

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

(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

More information

AN EXPOSITION OF THE RIEMANN ROCH THEOREM FOR CURVES

AN EXPOSITION OF THE RIEMANN ROCH THEOREM FOR CURVES AN EXPOSITION OF THE RIEMANN ROCH THEOREM FOR CURVES DOMINIC L. WYNTER Abstract. We introduce the concepts of divisors on nonsingular irreducible projective algebraic curves, the genus of such a curve,

More information

ARC VALUATIONS ON SMOOTH VARIETIES

ARC VALUATIONS ON SMOOTH VARIETIES ARC VALUATIONS ON SMOOTH VARIETIES by Yogesh K. More A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Mathematics) in The University of Michigan

More information

A finite universal SAGBI basis for the kernel of a derivation. Osaka Journal of Mathematics. 41(4) P.759-P.792

A finite universal SAGBI basis for the kernel of a derivation. Osaka Journal of Mathematics. 41(4) P.759-P.792 Title Author(s) A finite universal SAGBI basis for the kernel of a derivation Kuroda, Shigeru Citation Osaka Journal of Mathematics. 4(4) P.759-P.792 Issue Date 2004-2 Text Version publisher URL https://doi.org/0.890/838

More information

M3P14 LECTURE NOTES 8: QUADRATIC RINGS AND EUCLIDEAN DOMAINS

M3P14 LECTURE NOTES 8: QUADRATIC RINGS AND EUCLIDEAN DOMAINS M3P14 LECTURE NOTES 8: QUADRATIC RINGS AND EUCLIDEAN DOMAINS 1. The Gaussian Integers Definition 1.1. The ring of Gaussian integers, denoted Z[i], is the subring of C consisting of all complex numbers

More information

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

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

More information

MATH 326: RINGS AND MODULES STEFAN GILLE

MATH 326: RINGS AND MODULES STEFAN GILLE MATH 326: RINGS AND MODULES STEFAN GILLE 1 2 STEFAN GILLE 1. Rings We recall first the definition of a group. 1.1. Definition. Let G be a non empty set. The set G is called a group if there is a map called

More information

INTRODUCTION TO ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY. Throughout these notes all rings will be commutative with identity. k will be an algebraically

INTRODUCTION TO ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY. Throughout these notes all rings will be commutative with identity. k will be an algebraically INTRODUCTION TO ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY STEVEN DALE CUTKOSKY Throughout these notes all rings will be commutative with identity. k will be an algebraically closed field. 1. Preliminaries on Ring Homomorphisms

More information

HILBERT FUNCTIONS. 1. Introduction

HILBERT FUNCTIONS. 1. Introduction HILBERT FUCTIOS JORDA SCHETTLER 1. Introduction A Hilbert function (so far as we will discuss) is a map from the nonnegative integers to themselves which records the lengths of composition series of each

More information

MATH32062 Notes. 1 Affine algebraic varieties. 1.1 Definition of affine algebraic varieties

MATH32062 Notes. 1 Affine algebraic varieties. 1.1 Definition of affine algebraic varieties MATH32062 Notes 1 Affine algebraic varieties 1.1 Definition of affine algebraic varieties We want to define an algebraic variety as the solution set of a collection of polynomial equations, or equivalently,

More information

HYPERSURFACES IN PROJECTIVE SCHEMES AND A MOVING LEMMA

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

More information

arxiv:math/ v3 [math.ag] 27 Jan 2004

arxiv:math/ v3 [math.ag] 27 Jan 2004 arxiv:math/0303382v3 [math.ag] 27 Jan 2004 MORE ÉTALE COVERS OF AFFINE SPACES IN POSITIVE CHARACTERISTIC KIRAN S. KEDLAYA Abstract. We prove that every geometrically reduced projective variety of pure

More information

Compatibly split subvarieties of Hilb n (A 2 k)

Compatibly split subvarieties of Hilb n (A 2 k) Compatibly split subvarieties of Hilb n (A 2 k) Jenna Rajchgot MSRI Combinatorial Commutative Algebra December 3-7, 2012 Throughout this talk, let k be an algebraically closed field of characteristic p

More information

Chapter 1 : The language of mathematics.

Chapter 1 : The language of mathematics. MAT 200, Logic, Language and Proof, Fall 2015 Summary Chapter 1 : The language of mathematics. Definition. A proposition is a sentence which is either true or false. Truth table for the connective or :

More information

MATH 8253 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY WEEK 12

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

More information

Honors Algebra 4, MATH 371 Winter 2010 Assignment 3 Due Friday, February 5 at 08:35

Honors Algebra 4, MATH 371 Winter 2010 Assignment 3 Due Friday, February 5 at 08:35 Honors Algebra 4, MATH 371 Winter 2010 Assignment 3 Due Friday, February 5 at 08:35 1. Let R 0 be a commutative ring with 1 and let S R be the subset of nonzero elements which are not zero divisors. (a)

More information

Some questions on minimal log discrepancies

Some questions on minimal log discrepancies Some questions on minimal log discrepancies Mircea Mustaţă University of Michigan Aussois June 25, 2015 Mircea Mustaţă (University of Michigan) Some questions on minimal log discrepancies Aussois June

More information

Section Projective Morphisms

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

More information

Dedekind Domains. Mathematics 601

Dedekind Domains. Mathematics 601 Dedekind Domains Mathematics 601 In this note we prove several facts about Dedekind domains that we will use in the course of proving the Riemann-Roch theorem. The main theorem shows that if K/F is a finite

More information

Rings and groups. Ya. Sysak

Rings and groups. Ya. Sysak Rings and groups. Ya. Sysak 1 Noetherian rings Let R be a ring. A (right) R -module M is called noetherian if it satisfies the maximum condition for its submodules. In other words, if M 1... M i M i+1...

More information

AN INTRODUCTION TO AFFINE SCHEMES

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,

More information

ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 9: SCHEMES AND THEIR MODULES.

ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 9: SCHEMES AND THEIR MODULES. ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 9: SCHEMES AND THEIR MODULES. ANDREW SALCH 1. Affine schemes. About notation: I am in the habit of writing f (U) instead of f 1 (U) for the preimage of a subset

More information

11. Dimension. 96 Andreas Gathmann

11. Dimension. 96 Andreas Gathmann 96 Andreas Gathmann 11. Dimension We have already met several situations in this course in which it seemed to be desirable to have a notion of dimension (of a variety, or more generally of a ring): for

More information

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 7

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 7 INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 7 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Intersecting with a pseudodivisor 1 2. The first Chern class of a line bundle 3 3. Gysin pullback 4 4. Towards the proof of the big theorem 4 4.1. Crash

More information

Classification of Complex Algebraic Surfaces

Classification of Complex Algebraic Surfaces ALGANT Master Thesis in Mathematics Classification of Complex Algebraic Surfaces Alberto Corato Advised by Prof. Dajano Tossici Università degli Studi di Padova Université de Bordeaux Academic year 2017/2018

More information

Exercises for algebraic curves

Exercises for algebraic curves Exercises for algebraic curves Christophe Ritzenthaler February 18, 2019 1 Exercise Lecture 1 1.1 Exercise Show that V = {(x, y) C 2 s.t. y = sin x} is not an algebraic set. Solutions. Let us assume that

More information

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 2

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 2 INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 2 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Last day 1 2. Zeros and poles 2 3. The Chow group 4 4. Proper pushforwards 4 The webpage http://math.stanford.edu/ vakil/245/ is up, and has last day

More information

SPACES OF ARCS IN BIRATIONAL GEOMETRY

SPACES OF ARCS IN BIRATIONAL GEOMETRY SPACES OF ARCS IN BIRATIONAL GEOMETRY MIRCEA MUSTAŢǍ These lecture notes have been prepared for the Summer school on Moduli spaces and arcs in algebraic geometry, Cologne, August 2007. The goal is to explain

More information

Algebra Qualifying Exam August 2001 Do all 5 problems. 1. Let G be afinite group of order 504 = 23 32 7. a. Show that G cannot be isomorphic to a subgroup of the alternating group Alt 7. (5 points) b.

More information

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

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

More information

ON THE GRAPH ATTACHED TO TRUNCATED BIG WITT VECTORS

ON THE GRAPH ATTACHED TO TRUNCATED BIG WITT VECTORS ON THE GRAPH ATTACHED TO TRUNCATED BIG WITT VECTORS NICHOLAS M. KATZ Warning to the reader After this paper was written, we became aware of S.D.Cohen s 1998 result [C-Graph, Theorem 1.4], which is both

More information

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

(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

More information

ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 2: HILBERT S NULLSTELLENSATZ.

ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 2: HILBERT S NULLSTELLENSATZ. ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 2: HILBERT S NULLSTELLENSATZ. ANDREW SALCH 1. Hilbert s Nullstellensatz. The last lecture left off with the claim that, if J k[x 1,..., x n ] is an ideal, then

More information

LEVINE S CHOW S MOVING LEMMA

LEVINE S CHOW S MOVING LEMMA LEVINE S CHOW S MOVING LEMMA DENIS NARDIN The main result of this note is proven in [4], using results from [2]. What is here is essentially a simplified version of the proof (at the expense of some generality).

More information

ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 4: MORE ABOUT VARIETIES AND REGULAR FUNCTIONS.

ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 4: MORE ABOUT VARIETIES AND REGULAR FUNCTIONS. ALGERAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 4: MORE AOUT VARIETIES AND REGULAR FUNCTIONS. ANDREW SALCH. More about some claims from the last lecture. Perhaps you have noticed by now that the Zariski topology

More information

MONOMIAL RESOLUTIONS OF MORPHISMS OF ALGEBRAIC SURFACES

MONOMIAL RESOLUTIONS OF MORPHISMS OF ALGEBRAIC SURFACES MONOMIAL RESOLUTIONS OF MORPHISMS OF ALGEBRAIC SURFACES Dale Cutkosky Department of Mathematics University of Missouri Columbia, MO 65211, USA Olivier Piltant Centre de Mathématiques École polytechnique

More information

INTRODUCTION TO ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY, CLASS 14

INTRODUCTION TO ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY, CLASS 14 INTRODUCTION TO ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY, CLASS 14 RAVI VAKIL Contents 1. Dimension 1 1.1. Last time 1 1.2. An algebraic definition of dimension. 3 1.3. Other facts that are not hard to prove 4 2. Non-singularity:

More information

Algebra SEP Solutions

Algebra SEP Solutions Algebra SEP Solutions 17 July 2017 1. (January 2017 problem 1) For example: (a) G = Z/4Z, N = Z/2Z. More generally, G = Z/p n Z, N = Z/pZ, p any prime number, n 2. Also G = Z, N = nz for any n 2, since

More information

ALGEBRA PH.D. QUALIFYING EXAM September 27, 2008

ALGEBRA PH.D. QUALIFYING EXAM September 27, 2008 ALGEBRA PH.D. QUALIFYING EXAM September 27, 2008 A passing paper consists of four problems solved completely plus significant progress on two other problems; moreover, the set of problems solved completely

More information

Section Divisors

Section Divisors Section 2.6 - Divisors Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 Contents 1 Weil Divisors 1 2 Divisors on Curves 9 3 Cartier Divisors 13 4 Invertible Sheaves 17 5 Examples 23 1 Weil Divisors Definition 1. We say a

More information

SPACES OF RATIONAL CURVES ON COMPLETE INTERSECTIONS

SPACES OF RATIONAL CURVES ON COMPLETE INTERSECTIONS SPACES OF RATIONAL CURVES ON COMPLETE INTERSECTIONS ROYA BEHESHTI AND N. MOHAN KUMAR Abstract. We prove that the space of smooth rational curves of degree e on a general complete intersection of multidegree

More information

6]. (10) (i) Determine the units in the rings Z[i] and Z[ 10]. If n is a squarefree

6]. (10) (i) Determine the units in the rings Z[i] and Z[ 10]. If n is a squarefree Quadratic extensions Definition: Let R, S be commutative rings, R S. An extension of rings R S is said to be quadratic there is α S \R and monic polynomial f(x) R[x] of degree such that f(α) = 0 and S

More information

Math Midterm Solutions

Math Midterm Solutions Math 145 - Midterm Solutions Problem 1. (10 points.) Let n 2, and let S = {a 1,..., a n } be a finite set with n elements in A 1. (i) Show that the quasi-affine set A 1 \ S is isomorphic to an affine set.

More information

Math 249B. Geometric Bruhat decomposition

Math 249B. Geometric Bruhat decomposition Math 249B. Geometric Bruhat decomposition 1. Introduction Let (G, T ) be a split connected reductive group over a field k, and Φ = Φ(G, T ). Fix a positive system of roots Φ Φ, and let B be the unique

More information

LECTURE 6: THE ARTIN-MUMFORD EXAMPLE

LECTURE 6: THE ARTIN-MUMFORD EXAMPLE LECTURE 6: THE ARTIN-MUMFORD EXAMPLE In this chapter we discuss the example of Artin and Mumford [AM72] of a complex unirational 3-fold which is not rational in fact, it is not even stably rational). As

More information

Math 429/581 (Advanced) Group Theory. Summary of Definitions, Examples, and Theorems by Stefan Gille

Math 429/581 (Advanced) Group Theory. Summary of Definitions, Examples, and Theorems by Stefan Gille Math 429/581 (Advanced) Group Theory Summary of Definitions, Examples, and Theorems by Stefan Gille 1 2 0. Group Operations 0.1. Definition. Let G be a group and X a set. A (left) operation of G on X is

More information

A course in. Algebraic Geometry. Taught by Prof. Xinwen Zhu. Fall 2011

A course in. Algebraic Geometry. Taught by Prof. Xinwen Zhu. Fall 2011 A course in Algebraic Geometry Taught by Prof. Xinwen Zhu Fall 2011 1 Contents 1. September 1 3 2. September 6 6 3. September 8 11 4. September 20 16 5. September 22 21 6. September 27 25 7. September

More information

Math 203A - Solution Set 4

Math 203A - Solution Set 4 Math 203A - Solution Set 4 Problem 1. Let X and Y be prevarieties with affine open covers {U i } and {V j }, respectively. (i) Construct the product prevariety X Y by glueing the affine varieties U i V

More information

DEFORMATIONS VIA DIMENSION THEORY

DEFORMATIONS VIA DIMENSION THEORY DEFORMATIONS VIA DIMENSION THEORY BRIAN OSSERMAN Abstract. We show that standard arguments for deformations based on dimension counts can also be applied over a (not necessarily Noetherian) valuation ring

More information

Resolution of Singularities I

Resolution of Singularities I Resolution of Singularities I The Blow-Up Operation Will Pazner February 12, 2010 1. Set up. k := field of characteristic 0 Defn. Algebraic variety k n X := zeros of f 1,..., f k Pol Defn. Multiplicity

More information