I've just started learning about schemes, so maybe I'm missing something basic.

This is exercise I-24(a):

Take Z = Spec$\mathbb{C}[x]$, let $X$ be the result of identifying the two closed points (x) and (x-1) of |Z|, and let $\phi: Z \to X$ be the natural projection. Let $\mathcal{O}$ be $\phi_* \mathcal{O}_Z$, a sheaf of rings on $X$. Show that $(X, \mathcal{O})$ satisfies condition (i) above for all elements $f \in \mathcal{O}(X) = \mathbb{C}[x]$.

The condition (i) referred to: For any $f \in \mathbb{C}[x]$ define $U_f \subset X$ as the set of points $x \in X$ such that $f$ maps to a unit of the stalk $\mathcal{O}_x$. (i) means that $\mathcal{O}(U_f) = \mathbb{C}[x][f^{-1}]$ for all f.

But how can this be? Put f = x. Then

$U_f = X \setminus \{(x)\}$

$\phi^{-1}(U_f) = Z \setminus \{ (x), (x-1) \}$

$\mathcal{O}(U_f) = \mathcal{O}_Z(\phi^{-1}(U_f)) = \mathbb{C}[x][ ((x)(x-1))^{-1} ]$.

And that is not $\mathbb{C}[x][f^{-1}]$.

Edit: Regarding the answer and comments.

evgeniamerkulova's answer reassures me that I'm not out of my mind, but obviously Matt E and Mariano know what they're talking about, so I don't know what to think.

Both Mariano and Matt E imply that $\mathcal{O}(X)$ is not $\mathbb{C}[x]$, but that seems obviously wrong (and contradicts the book itself).

Here's my reasoning, spelled out. O(X) is C[x]. This is because $\mathcal{O}_Z(\phi^{-1}(X)) = \mathcal{O}_Z(Z) = \mathbb{C}[x]$. In order for the condition to be satisfied, we need $\mathcal{O}(U) = \mathbb{C}[x,x^{-1}]$ for some open U in X. So we need $\mathcal{O}_Z(\phi^{-1}(U)) = \mathbb{C}[x,x^{-1}]$. For that to happen we need $\phi^{-1}(U) = Z \setminus \{ (x) \}$. But all the inverse images of sets in X either include both (x) and (x-1) or neither of them, so this can never happen.

  • $\begingroup$ What is $R$ here? Note that $x$ is not a well-defined function on $X$ (since it doesn't know what value to take at the node, where $x = 0$ and $x = 1$ have been identified). $\endgroup$ – Matt E Oct 30 '10 at 3:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Dear Mike, I misread the question; when you wrote $\mathcal O(X)$, I was thinking that $\mathcal O_X$ is the structure sheaf, whereas it is the pushforward of the structure sheaf of $Z$ to $X$. So yes, you are correct, $\mathcal O(X) = \mathbb C[x].$ Now $X$ has a natural scheme structure (it is a nodal curve) and its structure sheaf $\mathcal O_X$ embeds into $\mathcal O$. The statement of Eisenbud and Harris will be true if you choose $f$ to be a section of $\mathcal O_X$. In other words, it is only valid for $f$ which are actually well-defined functions on $X$ ... $\endgroup$ – Matt E Oct 30 '10 at 15:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ... and $x$ is not such a function. $\endgroup$ – Matt E Oct 30 '10 at 15:59
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Very good that beginner in schemes finds mistake in difficult book: continue! $\endgroup$ – evgeniamerkulova Oct 30 '10 at 20:46
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ just found this after trying to do the same problem and googling "eisenbud and harris errata". you're the man. $\endgroup$ – Tim kinsella Jan 18 '18 at 22:33

Everything you say is right and Eisenbud and Harris are false. I don't inderstand Matt E ' comments either because you did no mistake:

a) That "x" is not function on $X$ has nothing to do with problem, and you never said it was function.

b) He writes "To compute correctly on $X$, you need to figure out what $\mathcal O(X)$ is" : you have computed that it is $\mathbb C[x]$ and you are right.

For completeness stalk $\mathcal O_a$ of $\mathcal O$ at quotient point $a\in X$ corresponding to $0,1$ [you write x, but you may not because x is already polynomial] is ring $S \subset \mathbb C(x)$ of all fractions $f(x)/g(x)$ ($f(x), g(x) \in \mathbb C [x])$) such that $g(0)\neq 0$ and $ g(1)\neq 0$

  • $\begingroup$ If $\mathcal O(X)$ is a polynomial ring, then there is a globally defined regular function on $X$ which generates $\mathcal O(X)$: can you describe it? $\endgroup$ – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Oct 30 '10 at 14:39
  • $\begingroup$ (By the way, if you agree that "x" is not a function on $X$, then you cannot say that $\mathcal O(x)$ is $\mathbb C[x]$...) $\endgroup$ – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Oct 30 '10 at 14:40
  • $\begingroup$ I misread the question, and am posting a new comment above to reflect this. $\endgroup$ – Matt E Oct 30 '10 at 15:55

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.