Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In EGA (IV, §§ 20 – 21), the sheaf of meromorphic functions $\mathscr{M}_X$ on a ringed space $(X, \mathscr{O}_X)$ is defined as the sheaf associated to the presheaf that associates to an open $U \subset X$ the localization of the ring $\Gamma(U, \mathscr{O}_X)$ at its regular elements. There is a canonical homormophism $\mathrm{div} : \Gamma(X, \mathscr{M}_X^*) \to \mathrm{Div}(X) = \Gamma(X, \mathscr{M}_X^*/\mathscr{O}_X^*)$ that associates to a regular meromorphic function a (Cartier) divisor; and there is a homomorphism $\mathrm{cyc} : \mathrm{Div}(X) \to Z^1(X)$ to the group of 1-codimensional cycles which is defined for positive divisors $D \in \mathrm{Div}_+(X)$ as $$ \mathrm{cyc}(D) = \sum_{x \in X^{(1)}} \mathrm{long}_{\mathscr{O}_{X,x}} (\mathscr{O}_{D,x}) . \overline{\{ x \}} $$ (and extends in a unique manner to the whole group $\mathrm{Div}(X)$).

When $X$ is a locally Noetherian scheme, Vakil (6.5.5) defines the ring of rational functions on $X$ as the inductive limit of the rings $\Gamma(U, \mathscr{O}_X)$ along the family of open sets $U \subset X$ containing the associated points. He notes that when $X$ is integral, this ring is indeed isomorphic to the traditional "function field", i.e. the stalk $\mathscr{O}_{X,\xi}$ of the structure sheaf at the generic point $\xi$. In Fulton's "Intersection theory" (§§ 1.4 – 1.5), for an integral scheme $X$, he defines the 1-codimensional cycle associated to a rational function $r \in K(X)^*$ by $$ [\mathrm{div}(r)] = \sum_{x \in X^{(1)}} \mathrm{ord}_x(r) . \overline{\{x\}} $$ where $\mathrm{ord}_x : K(X)^* \to \mathbb{Z}$ is the homomorphism defined by $$ \mathrm{ord}_x(r) = \mathrm{long}(\mathscr{O}_{X,x}/(a_x)) - \mathrm{long}(\mathscr{O}_{X,x}/(b_x)) $$ where $a_x/b_x \in \mathrm{Frac}(\mathscr{O}_{X,x})$ is the fraction corresponding to $r$ under the isomorphism $K(X) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathrm{Frac}(\mathscr{O}_{X,x})$. (I believe I remember reading about such an isomorphism in Liu's book, but I don't have it with me at the moment so I can't be sure.)

I am under the impression that the terms "rational function" and "meromorphic function" are used more or less interchangeably (I guess the former is more popular in modern literature). Also I believe that Grothendieck's definition is a generalization of the second one, but I can't quite understand why. Further I would like to understand how the definitions of the divisor associated to a rational function coincide.

share|improve this question
    
For locally noetherian schemes, the stalk of $\mathcal K$ at $x$ is isomorphic to $\mathrm{Frac}(O_{X,x})$ (total ring of fractions). –  user18119 Jan 21 '13 at 9:04

1 Answer 1

up vote 6 down vote accepted

Grothendieck's definition doesn't even make sense because the "presheaf" that you mention in your second line is not a presheaf at all: non zero-divisors may restrict to zero-divisors when passing from $U$ to a smaller open subset $V$.
This was noticed by Kleiman in 1979, in a celebrated four-page article Misconceptions About $K_X$ whose theme is close to your question and will certainly interest you.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you for sharing this important paper! However, my question still stands, with Kleiman's definition of $\mathscr{M}_X$ ($K_X$). –  Adeel Jan 20 '13 at 13:54
2  
Dear Adeel, here is De Jong's position explained in his blog, with a comment by Brian Conrad. It seems that no example is known of a scheme on which there is a pseudo-function that is not a meromorphic function. So your question is a very delicate one and I don't feel sufficiently qualified to add anything to these great mathematicians' discussion. –  Georges Elencwajg Jan 20 '13 at 16:13
1  
Here is a related thread –  Georges Elencwajg Jan 20 '13 at 16:44
    
Thank you again! The first link was especially insightful. I should have known to look in the Stacks Project. –  Adeel Jan 20 '13 at 17:10
    
You are welcome, Adeel. –  Georges Elencwajg Jan 20 '13 at 18:16

Your Answer

 
discard

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.