3
$\begingroup$

The following is an example I saw in a book on Algebraic Geometry.

Example: Let $A$ be a ring and consider $A[t]$, with the grading given by $\deg t = 1$ and $\deg a = 0$ for $a \in A$. Then the structure map gives an isomorphism $\operatorname{Proj} A[t] \cong \operatorname{Spec} A$

By structure map, the authors mean a morphism of schemes $\varphi : \operatorname{Proj} A[t] \to \operatorname{Spec} A$. I am not sure exactly what this morphism would be however, I assume that we start off with the standard embedding $A \hookrightarrow A[t]$ and then apply the functor $\operatorname{Spec}$ to get a map $\operatorname{Spec} A[t] \to \operatorname{Spec} A$ and then pre-compose that with the inclusion $i : \operatorname{Proj} A[t] \to \operatorname{Spec} A[t]$ to get the desired morphism $\varphi$.

Now firstly, the $\operatorname{Proj}$ construction only works for graded rings. So $A[t]$ should be of the form $A[t] = \bigoplus_{d \geq 0} A_d$. The authors say above "the grading given by $\deg t = 1$ and $\deg a = 0$ for $a \in A$", and I assume that this means that $A_0$ is the image of the standard inclusion of $A$ in $A[t]$, and that $A_1 = (t)$, the ideal generated by $t$ so that "essentially" $A[t] = A_0 \oplus A_1 = A \oplus (t)$. Is this the correct interpretation?

Now onto the claim that the $\varphi$ yields an isomorphism. I don't even see why $\varphi$ is a bijection, let alone a homeomorphism. If I label the embedding $A \hookrightarrow A[t]$ as $j$, then $\varphi$ is given by $\varphi(\mathfrak{p}) = j^{-1}(\mathfrak{p})$ for any $\mathfrak{p} \in \operatorname{Proj} A[t]$ and to say that $\varphi$ is bijective would mean that every prime ideal $\mathfrak{q}$ of $A$ is of the form $\mathfrak{q} = j^{-1}(\mathfrak{p})$ for some unique $\mathfrak{p} \in \operatorname{Proj} A[t]$ and for starters I do not see why this would be the case.

Furthermore I would need to show that the morphism of sheaves $\varphi^\sharp : \mathcal{O}_{\operatorname{Spec} A} \to \varphi_* \mathcal{O}_{\operatorname{Proj} A[t]}$ is also isomorphic and the way one usually does is by looking at basic open sets on $\operatorname{Spec} A$. In more words - if I wanted to see what $\varphi^\sharp$ would be in this case, then if I chose an $f \in A$ and considered the open subset $D(f) \subseteq \operatorname{Spec} A$ then $\Gamma(D(f), \mathcal{O}_{\operatorname{Spec} A}) \cong A_f$. But $$\Gamma(D(f), \varphi_*\mathcal{O}_{\operatorname{Proj} A[t]}) = \Gamma(\varphi^{-1}(D(f)), \mathcal{O}_{\operatorname{Proj} A[t]})$$ and this may not have such a nice form as far as I know, since $\varphi^{-1}(D(f))$ might not be a basic open subset of $\operatorname{Proj} A[t]$. So I cannot express $\varphi^\sharp_{D(f)} : \Gamma(D(f), \mathcal{O}_{\operatorname{Spec} A}) \to \Gamma(\varphi^{-1}(D(f)), \mathcal{O}_{\operatorname{Proj} A[t]})$ in any nice way to allow me to check that $\varphi^\sharp$ would indeed be an isomorphism.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Surely you mean $\operatorname{Spec} A$, not $\operatorname{Spec} A[t]$? $\endgroup$
    – KReiser
    Dec 30, 2020 at 21:43
  • $\begingroup$ Oh yes, you are right! This question needs to be edited. I will do that now $\endgroup$ Dec 30, 2020 at 21:45
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ "The grading given by $\deg t=1$...." surely means that $\deg t^2=2$ and so on, so that the grading is $A[t] = A \oplus tA \oplus t^2A \oplus \cdots$. $\endgroup$ Dec 30, 2020 at 21:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The idea is that $\operatorname{Spec} A[t]$ is a "line over $\operatorname{Spec} A$" and $\operatorname{Proj}$ is the set of lines in $\operatorname{Spec} A[t]$ (of which there is just one). So $\operatorname{Proj} A[t]$ is a "point over $\operatorname{Spec} A$" and a "point over $\operatorname{Spec} A$" is just $\operatorname{Spec} A$. I'll try to write a more rigorous explanation when I have more time, if nobody else gets to it. $\endgroup$ Dec 30, 2020 at 22:15

1 Answer 1

6
$\begingroup$

For $R$ a graded ring, $\operatorname{Proj} R$ has as its underlying set the homogeneous prime ideals of $R$ which do not contain the irrelevant ideal. In our case, the irrelevant ideal is $(t)$, and so no homogeneous prime ideal in $\operatorname{Proj} A[t]$ contains $t$. So $D_+(t)\subset\operatorname{Proj} A[t]$ is all of $\operatorname{Proj} A[t]$, and therefore by the identification $D_+(t)\cong \operatorname{Spec} A[t]_{(t)}$ (where this denotes the homogeneous localization, or $(A[t]_t)_0$) and the observation that $A[t]_{(t)}=A$, we see that $\operatorname{Proj} A[t]\cong\operatorname{Spec} A$.


If you want to get more hands-on, you can verify that any homogeneous prime $P\subset A[t]$ not containing the irrelevant ideal is exactly specified by it's intersection with $A$. For every homogeneous element $at^n\in P$, we get that either $a\in P$ or $t\in P$ by primality of $P$. By the assumption that $(t)\not\subset P$, the former must be the case, so $P$ is the ideal generated by $P\cap A$. Thus there's a bijection as sets between $\operatorname{Proj} A[t]$ and $\operatorname{Spec} A$, and one can verify that this induces a bijection between basic open sets ($D(a)\subset \operatorname{Spec} A$ and $D_+(f)\subset \operatorname{Proj} A[t]$ where $f$ is homogeneous of positive degree), so it is even a homeomorphism.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ There are a few things wrong with the first half of your answer and I'm not sure what the best way to fix it is. First, $D(t)$ should be the localization at $t$ not at $(t)$. So that should be $A[t,t^{-1}]$. Second, taking Spec of that isn't right because that considers in-homogeneous primes as well. And lastly, I don't believe one can obtain $A$ (generally) as a localization of $A[t]$; the correct identity would be $A \cong A[t]/(t)$. $\endgroup$ Dec 30, 2020 at 23:55
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @TrevorGunn I mean the homogeneous localization - that is, the degree-zero portion of $A[t]_t$. It's unfortunate that the notation is so close to the localization at the ideal $(t)$. $\endgroup$
    – KReiser
    Dec 31, 2020 at 0:04

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.