Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $X,Y$ be noetherian schemes and $f: X \rightarrow Y$ a morphism. What does (besides of the definition) the property finite imply. Can one make any conclusions like: dominant, birational, isomorphic on open subsets,...?

Thanks and greetings from Torrance

share|cite|improve this question
Finite morphisms are proper, so, e.g. universally closed. Closed immersions are finite, so finite morphisms definitely don't have to be dominant. – Keenan Kidwell Nov 13 '12 at 18:52
Finite is equivalent to "proper and affine". For example, a variety is at the same time proper and affine if and only if it has dimension zero. – Brenin Nov 13 '12 at 19:16

Given a field $k$ , consider the closed immersion $j:Spec(k)\to \mathbb A^1_k$ of a point into the affine line, dual to the ring morphism $k[T]\to k: f(t)\mapsto f(0)$.
This morphism $j$ between noetherian schemes is finite and gives a negative answer to all your questions: it is not dominant, not birational and not isomorphic on open sets.

share|cite|improve this answer
Dear @George, That's quite an efficient example! – Keenan Kidwell Nov 13 '12 at 18:54
Dear @Keenan, after having written my answer I had the pleasant surprise to see your comment, which is based on exactly the same idea but is much more general! – Georges Elencwajg Nov 13 '12 at 18:57
The example puts the light on the usefulness of considering even trivial examples when looking for information, as in the OP! – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Nov 13 '12 at 19:03

$f$ is affine, i.e. $f^{-1}(V)$ is an affine open subset of $X$ for every affine open subet $V$ of $Y$(Hartshorne, Ex. 3.4, Ch. II).

$f$ is closed, i.e. $f(F)$ is closed for every closed subset $F$ of $X$(Hartshorne, Ex. 3.5, Ch. II).

$f^{-1}(y)$ is finite for every $y \in Y$(Hartshorne, Ex. 3.5, Ch. II).

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.