3

There is proposition in page 65 of Liu's book which is: $X$ an integral scheme with generic point $\xi$. Then if we identify $\mathcal{O}_X(U)$ with and $\mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ we have $\mathcal{O}_X(U) = \bigcap_{x \in U} \mathcal{O}_{X,x}$. His proof is like this.

"By covering $U$ with affine open sets we can assume $U = \operatorname{Spec}(A)$ is affine. let $f \in \text{Frac}(A)$ be contained in all the localizations $A_\mathfrak{p}$ for $\mathfrak{p} \in \operatorname{Spec}(A)$. Let $I = \{g \in A | fg \in A\}$. Then $I$ is not contained in any prime ideal so that $I = A$. It follows $f \in A$"

I have two questions:

  1. How can we reduce to the case that $U = \operatorname{Spec}(A)$ is affine? If I write $\{V_i\}$ a cover by affines for $U$, then $\mathcal{O}(U) = \bigcap \mathcal{O}(V_i)$ but where is intersection taken inside of?

  2. Why is $I$ not contained in any prime ideal?

1 Answers1

3

For an integral scheme $X$ with generic point $\xi$, for each open subset $U\subseteq X$, $\xi\in U$, so there is a canonical homomorphism $\mathscr{O}_X(U)\rightarrow\mathscr{O}_{X,\xi}=:k(X)$ (the function field of $X$). If $U=\mathrm{Spec}(A)$ is affine, then this can be identified with the canonical inclusion of the domain $A$ into its field of fractions $\mathrm{Frac}(A)$. It then follows for a general $U$ that the map to $k(X)$ is injective, because, if $s\in\mathscr{O}_X(U)$ maps to zero, then the restriction of $s$ to each affine open inside $U$ maps to zero, which means the restriction to that affine is zero (by the affine case!), so $s=0$. So you can take the intersection of all the $\mathscr{O}_X(U)$ inside the function field $k(X)$, and then your equality $\mathscr{O}_X(U)=\bigcap_i\mathscr{O}_X(V_i)$ for $U=\bigcup_i V_i$ an affine open cover (or any open cover whatsoever) makes sense. Similarly each $\mathscr{O}_{X,x}$ canonically injects into $k(X)$, because every point $x\in X$ is a specialization of the generic point $\xi$, and, again consider an affine open around each point, localizations of a domain all canonically inject into the domain's field of fractions.

Now, the argument quoted proves that the natural map $\mathscr{O}_X(U)\rightarrow\bigcap_{x\in U}\mathscr{O}_{X,x}$ is an isomorphism for $U$ affine, but you don't actually need it. For general $U$, the map is injective simply because $\mathscr{O}_X$ is a sheaf (in fact, because $X$ is integral, each $\mathscr{O}_X(U)\rightarrow\mathscr{O}_{X,x}$, $x\in U$, is injective). Now if $s$ is an element of the intersection of the stalks (taken in $k(X)$), for each $x$ we can find an affine open $U_x\subseteq U$ containing $x$ such that $s$ is the image of a section $t(x)\in\mathscr{O}_X(U_x)$ (this is just an application of the definition of the stalk of a sheaf, and in the argument above, the $s_\mathfrak{p}$ were denoted $t(x)$). Then $U=\bigcup_x U_x$, and the sections $t(x)\vert_{U_x\cap U_y}$ and $t(y)\vert_{U_x\cap U_y}$ for $x\neq y$ map to the same element in $k(X)$ (namely $s$) so they are equal in $\mathscr{O}_X(U_x\cap U_y)$ by the injectivity proved above. So they agree on $U_x\cap U_y$, and therefore they can be glued to a section $t$ of $U$ which satisfies $t\vert_{U_x}=t(x)$, and in particular, the image of $t$ in $\bigcap_{x\in U}\mathscr{O}_{X,x}$ will be $s$.

The reason $I$ is not contained in any prime ideal is that $f\in\bigcap_\mathfrak{p}A_\mathfrak{p}$. If $\mathfrak{p}$ is a prime ideal of $A$, then because $f$ lies in $A_\mathfrak{p}$, it can be written as a fraction $a/g$ for some $g\in A\setminus\mathfrak{p}$, and then $gf=a\in A$, so $g\in I$. Therefore, for each prime ideal of $A$, there is some element of $A$ not in that prime ideal which is contained in $I$. So $I$ cannot be contained in any prime ideals of $A$.

Let me now say why, when $X=\mathrm{Spec}(A)$ is affine, and I want to prove that $\mathscr{O}_X(X)\rightarrow\bigcap_{x\in X}\mathscr{O}_{X,x}$ is an isomorphism, meaning I want to prove that $A\rightarrow\bigcap_{\mathfrak{p}\in\mathrm{Spec}(A)}A_\mathfrak{p}\subseteq\mathrm{Frac}(A)$ is an isomorphism, the argument I gave translates to one involving the "ideal of denominators of $f$," which is the ideal $I$ of the previous paragraph. Given $f\in \mathrm{Frac}(A)$ which lies in all the stalks $A_\mathfrak{p}$ (more precisely their images in $\mathrm{Frac}(A)$), I know from the definition of localization that for each $\mathfrak{p}$ I can write $f=a_\mathfrak{p}/s_\mathfrak{p}$ for some $a_\mathfrak{p},s_\mathfrak{p}$ with $s_\mathfrak{p}\notin \mathfrak{p}$. In geometric terminology, this is saying precisely that $f$ comes from a section of the affine open $D(s_\mathfrak{p})$ of $\mathrm{Spec}(A)$, namely it comes from $a_\mathfrak{p}/s_\mathfrak{p}\in A_{s_\mathfrak{p}}=\mathscr{O}_X(D(s_\mathfrak{p}))$. Since $\mathfrak{p}\in D(s_\mathfrak{p})$ for each $\mathfrak{p}$ by construction, these open sets cover $\mathrm{Spec}(A)$. The equality $\mathrm{Spec}(A)=\bigcup_{\mathfrak{p}\in\mathrm{Spec}(A)}D(s_\mathfrak{p})$ is literally equivalent to: the ideal of $A$ generated by the $s_\mathfrak{p}$ (which is contained in the ideal $I$ of the previous paragraph) is equal to $A$. So the ideal of denominators is all of $A$, and that means $f=1\cdot f\in A$.

  • Dear Keenan, I have not learned about schemes yet but how would I translate the first line of your answer into the language of varieties? For example would "integral scheme" just be irreducible variety; though what would $\xi$ correspond to? Btw +1 for such a nice answer. –  Jun 13 '13 at 13:43
  • 1
    Dear @BenjaLim, Classical varieties don't have generic points (as literal topological points). In the affine case, as I tried (although perhaps it's a bit muddled now that I look at it) to explain, the statement is literally equivalent to the statement that $A\hookrightarrow\bigcap_\mathfrak{p}A_\mathfrak{p}\subseteq\mathrm{Frac}(A)$ is an isomorphism for $A$ a domain. The field of functions on a classical affine variety over an algebraically closed field (which is, by definition and the Nullstellensatz, the set of maximal ideals of a domain of finite type over the field) is just defined as – Keenan Kidwell Jun 13 '13 at 13:51
  • the field of fractions of the ring (the coordinate ring). I'm afraid I don't really know how things are defined for more general classical varieties. But the affine case is where all the content is. – Keenan Kidwell Jun 13 '13 at 13:56
  • I thought this would be the case, because $(0)$ is a non-maximal, prime ideal and in classical varieties this doesn't correspond to any point. Though I think we can still say that $\mathcal{O}X(U)$ injects inside of $k(X)$ right? Also, once we know $\mathcal{O}_X(U) = \bigcap \mathcal{O}_X(V_i)$, then we use the fact that $\mathcal{O}_X(V_i) = \bigcap{x \in V_i} \mathcal{O}_{V_i,x}$ to complete the reduction the affine case yes? –  Jun 13 '13 at 13:56
  • Dear @BenjaLim, I don't really know what $\mathscr{O}_X(U)$ is for a non-affine classical variety. But if, on $D(f)$ (which I guess in this context means the set of maximal ideals not containing $f$), if $\mathscr{O}_X(D(f))=A_f$ as it does for schemes, then yes, what you say is correct. Also, the equality $\mathscr{O}_X(U)=\varprojlim\mathscr{O}_X(V_i)$ holds with $\mathscr{O}_X$ replaced by any sheaf on any space (ever!), and $U=\bigcup_i V_i$ any open cover, where the transition maps for the limit are the restriction maps. The difference in this setting is that all these rings of sections – Keenan Kidwell Jun 13 '13 at 13:58
  • live in some larger ring, so the projective limit can be interpreted as an intersection. – Keenan Kidwell Jun 13 '13 at 14:00
  • Dear Keenan, I should say why I am asking so many questions! I am now reading section 1.6 of Hartshorne and in the last line of the proof of Propositin 7.6, he claims that for any open subset $V$ of an affine variety $Y$, one has $\mathcal{O}(V) = \bigcap_{p \in V} \mathcal{O}_{p,Y}$. I don't understand how he made this claim, and it is not mentioned anywhere in the text before. Thus my interest in the OP's question. –  Jun 13 '13 at 14:08
  • Dear @BenjaLim, I remember reading the first chapter of Hartshorne, and now I think I recall that he does define the sheaf of regular functions on an affine algebraic set in the same way as he does for affine schemes (with the regular functions on $D(f)$ being the identified with the elements of $A_f$). This implies that the stalks are the rings $A_\mathfrak{m}$, $A$ localized at the maximal ideal corresponding to the point. Once you know this, you know that the maps to the stalks are all injective, and the rest is formal, using properties of sheaves, so you should be able to – Keenan Kidwell Jun 13 '13 at 14:11
  • prove Hartshorne's claim in the same way as I did in my answer. – Keenan Kidwell Jun 13 '13 at 14:12
  • Thanks @KeenanKidwell! I will try to! –  Jun 13 '13 at 14:16