FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 24

Size: px
Start display at page:

Transcription

1 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, closed immersions, Segre embedding. Other schemes defined by universal property: reduction, normalization. Today: normalization (in a field extension), sheaf Spec, sheaf Proj, projective morphism. 1. NORMALIZATION, CONTINUED Last day, I defined the normalization of a reduced scheme. I have an interesting question for experts: there is a reasonable extension to schemes in general; does anything go wrong? I haven t yet given this much thought, but it seems worth exploring. I described normalization last day in the case when is irreducible, and hence integral. In this case of irreducible, the normalization satisfies the universal property, that if is any other dominant morphism from a normal scheme to, then this morphism factors uniquely through ν:!. ν Thus if it exists, then it is unique up to unique isomorphism. We then showed that it exists, using an argument we saw for the third time. (The first time was in the existence of the fibered product. The second was an argument for the existence of the reduction morphism.) The ring-theoretic case got us started: if = Spec R, then and R is the integral closure of R in its fraction field Frac(R), then I gave as an exercise that ν : Spec R Spec R satisfies the universal property. Date: Thursday, January 19, Last minor update June 28, c 2005, 2006, 2007 by Ravi Vakil. 1

2 1.1. Exercise. Show that the normalization morphism is surjective. (Hint: Going-up!) We now mention some bells and whistles. The following fact is handy Theorem (finiteness of integral closure). Suppose A is a domain, K = Frac(A), L/K is a finite field extension, and B is the integral closure of A in L ( the integral closure of A in the field extension L/K, i.e. those elements of L integral over A). (a) if A is integrally closed, then B is a finitely generated A-module. (b) if A is a finitely generated k-algebra, then B (the integral closure of A in its fraction field) is a finitely generated A-module. I hope to type up a proof of these facts at some point to show you that they are not that bad. Much of part (a) was proved by Greg Brumfiel in 210B last year. Warning: (b) does not hold for Noetherian A in general. I find this very alarming. I don t know an example offhand, but one is given in Eisenbud s book Exercise. Show that dim = dim (hint: see our going-up discussion) Exercise. Show that if is an integral finite-type k-scheme, then its normalization ν : is a finite morphism Exercise. Explain how to generalize the notion of normalization to the case where is a reduced Noetherian scheme (with possibly more than one component). This basically requires defining a universal property. I m not sure what the perfect definition, but all reasonable universal properties should lead to the same space Exercise. Show that if is an integral finite type k-scheme, then its non-normal points form a closed subset. (This is a bit trickier. Hint: consider where ν O has rank 1.) I haven t thought through all the details recently, so I hope I ve stated this correctly. Here is an explicit example to think through some of these ideas Exercise. Suppose = Spec Z[15i]. Describe the normalization. (Hint: it isn t hard to find an integral extension of Z[15i] that is integrally closed. By the above discussion, you ve then found the normalization!) Over what points of is the normalization not an isomorphism? 1.8. Exercise. (This is an important generalization!) Suppose is an integral scheme. Define the normalization of, ν :, in a given finite field extension of the function field of. Show that is normal. (This will be hard-wired into your definition.) Show that if either is itself normal, or is finite type over a field k, then the normalization in a finite field extension is a finite morphism. 2

3 Let s try this in a few cases Exercise. Suppose = Spec Z (with function field Q). Find its integral closure in the field extension Q(i). A finite extension K of Q is called a number field, and the integral closure of Z in K the ring of integers of K, denoted O K. (This notation is a little awkward given our other use of the symbol O.) By the previous exercises, Spec O K is a Noetherian normal domain of dimension 1 (hence regular). This is called a Dedekind domain. We think of it as a smooth curve Exercise. (a) Suppose = Spec k[x] (with function field k(x)). Find its integral closure in the field extension k(y), where y 2 = x 2 +x. (Again we get a Dedekind domain.) (b) Suppose = P 1, with distinguished open Spec k[x]. Find its integral closure in the field extension k(y), where y 2 = x 2 + x. (Part (a) involves computing the normalization over one affine open set; now figure out what happens over the other.) 2. SHEAF SPEC Given an A-algebra, B, we can take its Spec to get an affine scheme over Spec A: Spec B Spec A. I ll now give a universal property description of a globalization of that notation. We will take an arbitrary scheme, and a quasicoherent sheaf of algebras A on it. We will define how to take Spec of this sheaf of algebras, and we will get a scheme Spec A that is affine over, i.e. the structure morphism is an affine morphism. We will do this as you might by now expect: for each affine on, we use our affine construction, and show that everything glues together nicely. We do this instead by describing Spec A in terms of a good universal property: given any morphism π : along with a morphism of O -modules α : A π O, there is a unique map Spec A factoring π, i.e. so that the following diagram commutes,! Spec A π β and an isomorphism φ : A β O Spec A inducing α. (For experts: we need O -modules, and to leave our category of quasicoherent sheaves on, because we only showed that the pushforward of quasicoherent sheaves are quasicoherent for certain morphisms, where the preimage of each affine was a finite union of affines, the pairwise intersection of which were also finite unions. This notion will soon be formalized as quasicompact and quasiseparated.) 3

4 At this point we re getting to be experts on this, so let s show that this Spec A exists. In the case where is affine, we are done by our affine discussion. In the case where is quasiaffine, we are done for the same reason as before. And finally, in the case where is general, we are done once again! In particular, note that Spec A is an affine morphism Exercise. Show that if f : Z is an affine morphism, then we have a natural isomorphism Z = Spec f O Z of -schemes. Hence we can recover any affine morphism in this way. More precisely, a morphism is affine if and only if it is of the form Spec A Exercise (Spec behaves well with respect to base change). Suppose f : Z is any morphism, and A is a quasicoherent sheaf of algebras on. Show that there is a natural isomorphism Z Spec A = Spec f A. An important example of this Spec construction is the total space of a finite rank locally free sheaf F, which is a vector bundle. It is Spec Sym F Exercise. Show that this is a vector bundle, i.e. that given any point p, there is a neighborhood p U such that Spec Sym F U = A n U. Show that F is isomorphic to the sheaf of sections of it. As an easy example: if F is a free sheaf of rank n, then Spec Sym F is called A n, generalizing our earlier notions of A n A. As the notion of a free sheave behaves well with respect to base change, so does the notion of A n, i.e. given, An = A n. Here is one last fact that might come in handy Exercise. Suppose f : Spec A is a morphism. Show that the category of quasicoherent sheaves on Spec A is essentially the same as (=equivalent to) the category of quasicoherent sheaves on with the structure of A-modules (quasicoherent A-modules on ). The reason you could imagine caring is when is quite simple, and Spec A is complicated. We ll use this before long when = P 1, and Spec A is a more complicated curve. (I drew a picture of this.) 3. SHEAF PROJ We ll now do a global (or sheafy ) version of Proj, which we ll denote Proj. Suppose now that S is a quasicoherent sheaf of graded algebras of. To be safe, let me assume that S is locally generated in degree 1 (i.e. there is a cover by small affine open 4

5 sets, where for each affine open set, the corresponding algebra is generated in degree 1), and S 1 is finite type. We will define Proj S. The essential ideal is that we do this affine by affine, and then glue the result together. But as before, this is tricky to do, but easier if you state the right universal property. As a preliminary, let me re-examine our earlier theorem, that Maps to P n correspond to n + 1 sections of an invertible sheaf, not all vanishing at any point (= generated by global sections), modulo sections of O. I will now describe this in a more relative setting, where relative means that we do this with morphisms of schemes. We begin with a relative notion of base-point free. Suppose f : is a morphism, and L is an invertible sheaf on. We say that L is relatively base point free if for every point p, q, with f(q) = p, there is a neighborhood U for which there is a section of L over f 1 (U) not vanishing at q. Similarly, we define relatively generated by global sections if there is a neighborhood U for which there are sections of L over f 1 (U) generating every stalk of f 1 (U). This is admittedly hideous terminology. (One can also define relatively generated by global sections at a point p. See class 16 where we defined these notions in a non-relative setting. In class 32, this will come up again.) More generally, we can define the notion of relatively generated by global sections by a subsheaf of f L. Definition. (Proj S, O Proj S (1)) satisfies the following universal property. Given any other -scheme with an invertible sheaf L, and a map of graded O -algebras α : S n=0 π L n, such that L is relatively generated by the global sections of α(s 1 ), there is a unique factorization π!f β Proj S and a canonical isomorphism L = f O Proj S (1) and a morphism S n β O(n) inducing α. In particular, Proj S comes with an invertible sheaf O Proj S (1), and this O(1) should be seen as part of the data. This definition takes some getting used to. But we prove this as usual! We first deal with the case where is affine, say = Spec A, S = S. ou won t be surprised to hear that in this case, (Proj S, O(1)) satisfies the universal property. We outline why. Clearly, given a map Proj S, we get a pullback map α. Conversely, given such a pullback map, we want to show that this induces a (unique) map Proj S. Now because S is generated in degree 1, we have a closed immersion 5

6 Proj S Proj Sym S 1. The map in degree 1, S 1 π L, gives a map Proj Sym S 1 by our magic theorem Maps to P n correspond to n + 1 sections of an invertible sheaf, not all vanishing at any point (= generated by global sections), modulo sections of O Exercise. Complete this argument that if = Spec A, then (Proj S, O(1)) satisfies the universal property Exercise. Show that (Proj S, O(1)) exists in general, by following the analogous universal property argument: show that it exists for quasiaffine, then in general Exercise (Proj behaves well with respect to base change). Suppose S is a quasicoherent sheaf of graded algebras on satisfying the required hypotheses above for Proj S to exist. Let f : be any morphism. Give a natural isomorphism (Proj f S, O Proj f S (1)) = ( Proj S, g O Proj S (1)) = where g is the natural morphism in the base change diagram Proj S g Proj S Definition. If F is a finite rank locally free sheaf on. Then Proj Sym F is called its projectivization. If F is a free sheaf of rank n + 1, then we define P n := Proj Sym F. (Then P n Spec A agrees with our earlier definition of Pn A.) Clearly this notion behaves well with respect to base change. This relative O(1) we have constructed is a little subtle. Here are couple of exercises to give you practice with the concept Exercise. Proj(S [t]) = Spec S Proj S, where Spec S is an open subscheme, and Proj S is a closed subscheme. Show that Proj S is an effective Cartier divisor, corresponding to the invertible sheaf O Proj N (1). (This is the generalization of the projective and affine cone. At some point I should give an explicit reference to our earlier exercise on this.) 3.6. Exercise. Suppose L is an invertible sheaf on, and S is a quasicoherent sheaf of graded algebras on satisfying the required hypotheses above for Proj S to exist. Define S = n=0s n L n. Give a natural isomorphism of -schemes (Proj S, O Proj S (1)) = (Proj S, O Proj S (1) π L), where π : Proj S is the structure morphism. In other words, informally speaking, the Proj is the same, but the O(1) is twisted by L. 6

7 3.7. Projective morphisms. If you are tuning out because of these technicalities, please tune back in! I now want to define an essential notion. Recall that we have recast affine morphisms in the following way: is an affine morphism if = Spec A for some quasicoherent sheaf of algebras A on. I will now define the notion of a projective morphism similarly Definition. A morphism is projective if there is an isomorphism Proj S for a quasicoherent sheaf of algebras S on satisfying the required hypothesis for Proj to exist. Two warnings! 1. Notice that I didn t say anything about the O(1), which is an important definition. The notion of affine morphism is affine-local on the target, but this notion is not affine-local on the target! (In nice circumstances it is, as we ll see later. We ll also see an example where this is not.) 2. Hartshorne gives a different definition; I m following the more general definition of Grothendieck. But again, these definitions turn out to be the same in nice circumstances. This is the relative version of Proj S Spec A Exercise. Show that closed immersions are projective morphisms. (Hint: Suppose the closed immersion corresponds to O O. Consider S 0 = O, S i = O for i > 1.) Exercise (suggested by Kirsten). Suppose f : P n S where S is some scheme. Show that the structure morphism π : S is a projective morphism as follows: let L = f O P n S (1), and show that = Proj π L n. address: 7

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

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 41

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 41 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Normalization 1 2. Extending maps to projective schemes over smooth codimension one points: the clear denominators theorem 5 Welcome back!

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 24

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 24 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Vector bundles and locally free sheaves 1 2. Toward quasicoherent sheaves: the distinguished affine base 5 Quasicoherent and coherent sheaves

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 37

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 37 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Motivation and game plan 1 2. The affine case: three definitions 2 Welcome back to the third quarter! The theme for this quarter, insofar

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

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

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 19

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 19 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Recap of Last day 1 1.1. New facts 2 2. Statement of the theorem 3 2.1. GRR for a special case of closed immersions f : X Y = P(N 1) 4 2.2. GRR for closed

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.

COMPLEX ALGEBRAIC SURFACES CLASS 9

COMPLEX ALGEBRAIC SURFACES CLASS 9 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Construction of Castelnuovo s contraction map 1 2. Ruled surfaces 3 (At the end of last lecture I discussed the Weak Factorization Theorem, Resolution

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

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASSES 43 AND 44

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASSES 43 AND 44 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Flat implies constant Euler characteristic 1 2. Proof of Important Theorem on constancy of Euler characteristic in flat families

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:

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 16

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 16 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Where we are 1 1.1. Deformation to the normal cone 1 1.2. Gysin pullback for local complete intersections 2 1.3. Intersection products on smooth varieties

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 48

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 48 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. A little more about cubic plane curves 1 2. Line bundles of degree 4, and Poncelet s Porism 1 3. Fun counterexamples using elliptic curves

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,

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:

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 5

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 5 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. The inverse image sheaf 1 2. Recovering sheaves from a sheaf on a base 3 3. Toward schemes 5 4. The underlying set of affine schemes 6 Last

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 6

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 6 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Divisors 2 1.1. Crash course in Cartier divisors and invertible sheaves (aka line bundles) 3 1.2. Pseudo-divisors 3 2. Intersecting with divisors 4 2.1.

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

DESCENT THEORY (JOE RABINOFF S EXPOSITION)

DESCENT THEORY (JOE RABINOFF S EXPOSITION) RAVI VAKIL 1. FEBRUARY 21 Background: EGA IV.2. Descent theory = notions that are local in the fpqc topology. (Remark: we aren t assuming finite presentation,

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

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

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

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

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 18

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 18 CONTENTS 1. Invertible sheaves and divisors 1 2. Morphisms of schemes 6 3. Ringed spaces and their morphisms 6 4. Definition of morphisms of schemes 7 Last day:

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

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Where we were 1 2. Yoneda s lemma 2 3. Limits and colimits 6 4. Adjoints 8 First, some bureaucratic details. We will move to 380-F for Monday

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

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 1

INTERSECTION THEORY CLASS 1 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Welcome! 1 2. Examples 2 3. Strategy 5 1. WELCOME! Hi everyone welcome to Math 245, Introduction to intersection theory in algebraic geometry. Today I

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

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 21

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 21 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Integral extensions, the going-up theorem, Noether normalization, and a proof of the big dimension theorem (that transcendence degree =

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:

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

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).

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

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

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.

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Some constructions using universal properties, old and new 1 2. Adjoint functors 3 3. Sheaves 6 Last day: What is algebraic geometry? Crash

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

BRIAN OSSERMAN. , let t be a coordinate for the line, and take θ = d. A differential form ω may be written as g(t)dt,

CONNECTIONS, CURVATURE, AND p-curvature BRIAN OSSERMAN 1. Classical theory We begin by describing the classical point of view on connections, their curvature, and p-curvature, in terms of maps of sheaves

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,

Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 5

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

INTRODUCTION TO ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY, CLASS 23

INTRODUCTION TO ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY, CLASS 23 RAVI VAKIL Contents 1. More background on invertible sheaves 1 1.1. Operations on invertible sheaves 1 1.2. Maps to projective space correspond to a vector

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

ALGEBRAIC K-THEORY HANDOUT 5: K 0 OF SCHEMES, THE LOCALIZATION SEQUENCE FOR G 0.

ALGEBRAIC K-THEORY HANDOUT 5: K 0 OF SCHEMES, THE LOCALIZATION SEQUENCE FOR G 0. ANDREW SALCH During the last lecture, we found that it is natural (even just for doing undergraduatelevel complex analysis!)

Chern classes à la Grothendieck

Chern classes à la Grothendieck Theo Raedschelders October 16, 2014 Abstract In this note we introduce Chern classes based on Grothendieck s 1958 paper [4]. His approach is completely formal and he deduces

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 37

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 37 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Motivation and game plan 1 2. The affine case: three definitions 2 Welcome back to the third quarter! The theme for this quarter, insofar

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 45

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 45 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Hyperelliptic curves 1 2. Curves of genus 3 3 1. HYPERELLIPTIC CURVES A curve C of genus at least 2 is hyperelliptic if it admits a degree

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

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

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 3

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 3 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Kernels, cokernels, and exact sequences: A brief introduction to abelian categories 1 2. Sheaves 7 3. Motivating example: The sheaf of differentiable

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS

SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS BRIAN OSSERMAN The notions o separatedness and properness are the algebraic geometry analogues o the Hausdor condition and compactness in topology. For varieties over the

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

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 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

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)

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

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

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

h M (T ). The natural isomorphism η : M h M determines an element U = η 1

MODULI PROBLEMS AND GEOMETRIC INVARIANT THEORY 7 2.3. Fine moduli spaces. The ideal situation is when there is a scheme that represents our given moduli functor. Definition 2.15. Let M : Sch Set be a moduli

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

ON THE ISOMORPHISM BETWEEN THE DUALIZING SHEAF AND THE CANONICAL SHEAF

ON THE ISOMORPHISM BETWEEN THE DUALIZING SHEAF AND THE CANONICAL SHEAF MATTHEW H. BAKER AND JÁNOS A. CSIRIK Abstract. We give a new proof of the isomorphism between the dualizing sheaf and the canonical

Summer Algebraic Geometry Seminar

Summer Algebraic Geometry Seminar Lectures by Bart Snapp About This Document These lectures are based on Chapters 1 and 2 of An Invitation to Algebraic Geometry by Karen Smith et al. 1 Affine Varieties

Geometry 9: Serre-Swan theorem

Geometry 9: Serre-Swan theorem Rules: You may choose to solve only hard exercises (marked with!, * and **) or ordinary ones (marked with! or unmarked), or both, if you want to have extra problems. To have

MODULI TOPOLOGY. 1. Grothendieck Topology

MODULI TOPOLOG Abstract. Notes from a seminar based on the section 3 of the paper: Picard groups of moduli problems (by Mumford). 1. Grothendieck Topology We can define a topology on any set S provided

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

AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO SERRE DUALITY FOR PROJECTIVE VARIETIES

AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO SERRE DUALITY FOR PROJECTIVE VARIETIES MATTHEW H. BAKER AND JÁNOS A. CSIRIK This paper was written in conjunction with R. Hartshorne s Spring 1996 Algebraic Geometry course at

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

Raynaud on F -vector schemes and prolongation

Raynaud on F -vector schemes and prolongation Melanie Matchett Wood November 7, 2010 1 Introduction and Motivation Given a finite, flat commutative group scheme G killed by p over R of mixed characteristic

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.

(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

MODULI SPACES AND DEFORMATION THEORY, CLASS 1. Contents 1. Preliminaries 1 2. Motivation for moduli spaces Deeper into that example 4

MODULI SPACES AND DEFORMATION THEORY, CLASS 1 RAVI VAKIL Contents 1. Preliminaries 1 2. Motivation for moduli spaces 3 2.1. Deeper into that example 4 1. Preliminaries On the off chance that any of you

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.

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

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,

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

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

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY PROBLEM SET 1

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY PROBLEM SET 1 RAVI VAKIL This set is due at noon on Friday October 5. You can hand it in to Jarod Alper (jarod@math.stanford.edu) in the big yellow envelope outside his

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

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.

Normality of secant varieties

Normality of secant varieties Brooke Ullery Joint Mathematics Meetings January 6, 2016 Brooke Ullery (Joint Mathematics Meetings) Normality of secant varieties January 6, 2016 1 / 11 Introduction Let X

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,

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

Lecture 21: Crystalline cohomology and the de Rham-Witt complex

Lecture 21: Crystalline cohomology and the de Rham-Witt complex Paul VanKoughnett November 12, 2014 As we ve been saying, to understand K3 surfaces in characteristic p, and in particular to rediscover

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

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

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

1 Flat, Smooth, Unramified, and Étale Morphisms

1 Flat, Smooth, Unramified, and Étale Morphisms 1.1 Flat morphisms Definition 1.1. An A-module M is flat if the (right-exact) functor A M is exact. It is faithfully flat if a complex of A-modules P N Q

Lecture 7: Etale Fundamental Group - Examples

Lecture 7: Etale Fundamental Group - Examples October 15, 2014 In this lecture our only goal is to give lots of examples of etale fundamental groups so that the reader gets some feel for them. Some of

Vector Bundles vs. Jesko Hüttenhain. Spring Abstract

Vector Bundles vs. Locally Free Sheaves Jesko Hüttenhain Spring 2013 Abstract Algebraic geometers usually switch effortlessly between the notion of a vector bundle and a locally free sheaf. I will define

LINE BUNDLES ON PROJECTIVE SPACE

LINE BUNDLES ON PROJECTIVE SPACE DANIEL LITT We wish to show that any line bundle over P n k is isomorphic to O(m) for some m; we give two proofs below, one following Hartshorne, and the other assuming