$\DeclareMathOperator{\Spec}{Spec}$ I'm having trouble with the exercise in the title, which states

"Suppose $Z$ is a closed subset of an affine scheme $\Spec A $ locally cut out by one equation. (In other words, $\Spec A$ can be covered by smaller open sets, and on each such set Z is cut out by one equation.) Show that the complement $Y$ of $Z$ is affine."

The comment above the exercise is "The affine-locality of affine morphisms has some nonobvious consequences, as shown in the next exercise.". This let me think that I am supposed to use the fact that Spec A affine implies that

$$\Spec A \to \Spec \mathbb{Z}$$

is affine but I cannot see how this is supposed to prove the statement. I can see that if $Z$ is so defined I can find an open cover $U_i$ of $ \Spec A$ where on every $U_i \cap Z = V(f_i)$ for every $i$ but I cannot find a way forward from there.

A hint would be really appreciated. Thanks.

Edit: If I am not mistaken it should follow obviously from the lemma proved here http://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/07ZT

Edit: Fixed typo $D(f_i) \to V(f_i)$

  • $\begingroup$ It's not completely clear to me what "cut out by one equation" means, but I don't think your interpretation is correct : if $U_i\cap Z = D(f_i)$, then $Z$ is open since each $D(f_i)$ is open. I would rather say that there is an open cover by some $D(a_i)$ such that $Z\cap D(a_i) = V(f_i)\cap D(a_i)$ for some $f_i\in \Spec A[a_i^{-1}]$. $\endgroup$ – Captain Lama Apr 9 '16 at 10:30
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, my mistake. I wanted to write $V(f_i)$ not $D(f_i)$ $\endgroup$ – Diego Fioravanti Apr 9 '16 at 10:39
  • $\begingroup$ I think the idea is rather to use that $Z\to \Spec A$ is affine. $\endgroup$ – Captain Lama Apr 9 '16 at 11:21
  • $\begingroup$ I thought about that too, but I cannot see how it should be used. Using the affinity of that map one can prove that there is an affine cover of $Z$ but then what ? I am really struggling to see how this can be used to prove anything about ${Z}^c$ $\endgroup$ – Diego Fioravanti Apr 9 '16 at 17:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, the Stacks Project reference is exactly what you need. $\endgroup$ – Georges Elencwajg Apr 9 '16 at 19:33

I think it is not the morphism $\operatorname{Spec}(A)\rightarrow \operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{Z}$ that should be considered, but rather the inclusion $\iota: U \rightarrow \operatorname{Spec}(A)$, where $U$ is the complement of $Z$. Using the result that a morphism being affine is an affine local property, we hope to find an affine open cover $V_i$ of $\operatorname{Spec}(A)$, where $U$ intersect each affine open piece (i.e. $\iota^{-1}(V_i)$) is also affine, which would then tell us that $U = \iota^{-1}(\operatorname{Spec}(A)$ is also affine.

The hypothesis says that we may cover $\operatorname{Spec}(A)$ by open subschemes $V_i$, such that $Z\cap V_i$ is locally cut out by some element of $\mathcal{O}_X(V_i)$. By covering each of the $V_i$ with affine pieces if necessary and considering the restriction of each element of $\mathcal{O}_X(V_i)$, we may therefore assume that the $V_i$ are affine open subsets of $\operatorname{Spec}(A)$, say $V_i \cong \operatorname{Spec}(A_i)$, and $Z\cap V_i = V(f_i)$ for some $f_i \in A_i$. In particular, the inclusion $U \cap V_i$ is just the inclusion of the distinguished affine open subset $D(f_i)$, and so is affine, as desired.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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