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.

Let $X$ be a noetherian topological space, $Y$ a subspace having irreducible components $Y_1, \cdots, Y_n$. Prove that the $\bar{Y_i}$ are the irreducible components of $\bar{Y}$.

I think as the irreducible components are the maximal irreducible subsets, it is enough to prove

When a set $Z \subseteq X$ is irreducible, so is $\bar{Z}$.

Is this true? If it is, is it still true when the noetherian condition is dropped?

share|improve this question
    
Double check your typing. It makes wonders. Specially in titles, which is the very first thing people see of your question! –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Sep 19 '11 at 3:47
    
@Mariano Suárez-Alvarez♦: Thank you very much for reminding me. I don't know what careless mistake I have made in my title because it might have been kindly corrected by Arturo Magidin. I will be more careful next time. Thanks again. –  ShinyaSakai Sep 19 '11 at 12:30

2 Answers 2

up vote 1 down vote accepted
+50

This is true in general; you do not need $X$ to be a noetherian space.

Continuing user3296's argument: the only thing left to check is that $C \cap Z$ and $D \cap Z$ are proper in $Z$. You do not need them closed in $X$ -- irreducibility is not a relative property: a space $Z$ is reducible if it is the union of two proper closed -in-itself subsets.

To see that for example $C \cap Z \subsetneq Z$, you have to convince yourself that $C \cap Z = Z$ implies $C = \overline{C} = \overline{C \cap Z} = \overline Z$. The first equality is true because $C$ is closed in the closed set $\overline Z$ (convince yourself that this implies that $C$ is closed). And the second because, on one hand, $C = \overline C$ is contained in $\overline Z = \overline{C \cap Z}$, and on the other hand, $C$ contains $C \cap Z$ so that $\overline C$ contains $\overline{C \cap Z}$.

share|improve this answer
    
I thought of the "closedness" part of the definition for irreducibility in a wrong way. Thank you very much! –  ShinyaSakai Oct 23 '11 at 18:08

As to your second gray box:

Suppose $\overline{Z}$ is reducible, say $\overline{Z} = C \cup D$ with $C$ and $D$ proper closed subsets of $\overline{Z}$. Then $C \cap Z$ and $D \cap Z$ are closed in $Z$, and $Z = (C \cap Z) \cup (D \cap Z)$. There is one last thing to check -- what is it, and how do you check it?

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks very much for your answer. I think I should check that both of them are closed and proper. But I have no idea... –  ShinyaSakai Sep 19 '11 at 12:37

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.