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.

I am trying to read the proof of the following lemma (Stacks project, 29.18.2):

Let $X$ be a 1-dimensional integral scheme and $c : X \to \mathrm{Spec}(K)$ a proper morphism to the spectrum of a field $K$. For any invertible rational function $f \in R(X)^*$, the direct image of the associated divisor $\mathrm{div}(f)$ is 0.

Let $f : U \to \mathbb{A}^1_\mathbb{Z}$ be a representative of the rational function, with $U \subset X$ a dense open subscheme. There is supposed to be a canonically associated morphism $g : U \to \mathbb{P}^1_K$; I guess the construction should be something like this: take the composite of $f$ with an isomorphism identifying $\mathbb{A}^1_\mathbb{Z}$ with an affine open subset of $\mathbb{P}^1_\mathbb{Z}$, and the canonical morphism $\mathbb{P}^1_\mathbb{Z} \to \mathbb{P}^1_K$; however I only know about a canonical morphism in the other direction. My first question is, what is the right way to construct this?

Now let $Y$ be the closure of the graph of $g$, i.e. the image of $\Gamma_g : X \to X \times_K \mathbb{P}^1_K$. Now one proves (Stacks, 29.17.3) that the projection morphism $p : Y \to X$ is proper; that the restriction of $p$ to $p^{-1}(U)$ is an isomorphism of schemes; and that the divisor $\mathrm{div}_X(f)$ is equal to the direct image $p_*(\mathrm{div}_Y(f))$ of the divisor associated to $f$ on $Y$ (presumably this means the divisor associated to the rational function $U \times_K \mathbb{P}^1_K \to U \to \mathbb{A}^1_\mathbb{Z}$).

Now to the proof of this lemma. Let $q: Y \to X \times_K \mathbb{P}^1_K \to \mathbb{P}^1_K$ and let $c' : \mathbb{P}^1_K \to \mathrm{Spec}(K)$ be the respective projection morphisms. We want to show $$c_*(\mathrm{div}_X(f)) = c_*(p_*(\mathrm{div}_Y(f))) = c'_*(q_*(\mathrm{div}_Y(f))) = 0$$ Since $\mathrm{dim}(\mathbb{P}^1_K) = 1$ and $q(Y) \subset \mathbb{P}^1_K$ is a closed irreducible subscheme, either the image $q(Y)$ is equal to a closed point or the whole projective line. In the first case, $\mathrm{div}_X(f) = 0$; why?

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 1 down vote accepted

First there is no need to use $U\to \mathbb A^1_{\mathbb Z}$, consider $U\to \mathbb A^1_{K}$ instead.

Second, when $q(Y)$ is one point, as $Y\to X$ is birational and $q$ coincide with $f$ on $U$, we have $f(U)$ equal to one point of $\mathbb A^1_K$. As $U$ is dense in $X$, we have $f(X)$ equal to one point. This point is different from $0$ because $f\in R(X)^*$. So $f$ never vanishes in $X$, this implies that $f\in O(X)^*$. So its divisor is $0$.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you. I don't understand why the divisor of a constant function is 0. This property isn't related to the morphism of sheaves, only to the topological map. So I don't see what $f$ being constant has to do with the corresponding element of the fraction field of the stalk at a point and thus I don't see how to show that the order of f at a point is 0. I must be missing something obvious? –  Adeel Feb 20 '13 at 19:59
    
I missed the fact that $U$ is not proper in general. I edited the proof. –  user18119 Feb 21 '13 at 14:32
    
Since the projection $q : U \times_K \mathbb{P}^1_K \to \mathbb{P}^1_K$ factors through $p$ and $f$, we have $f(p(Y)) = q(Y)$, a single point. But $p(Y)$ is a closed integral subscheme of the 1-dimensional scheme $X$ and hence is either a closed point or the whole space $X$; however $p(Y) \subset U$ implies that it is just a point. So we can't conclude that $f$ is really constant on $U$. Am I wrong? –  Adeel Feb 21 '13 at 18:33
    
Also $f$ could have domain of definition different than the whole $X$, so what do you mean by $f(X)$? –  Adeel Feb 21 '13 at 18:40
    
$p: Y\to X$ is an isomorphism above $U$, so $p(Y)$ contains $U$ and $p(Y)=X$. When $f$ is a constant morphism, it is defined everywhere. Suppose for simplicity that $K$ is algebraically closed. Then there exists $\lambda\in K$ such that $f(u)=\lambda$ for all $u\in U$. So $f-\lambda=0$ in $O(U)$, thus $f-\lambda=0$ in $R(U)=R(X)$. –  user18119 Feb 21 '13 at 21:35

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.