Special fiber is geometrically connected if the generic fiber is under properness assumption?
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I am a beginner in algebraic geometry, and want to understand the following proof towards criterion of Néron–Ogg–Shafarevich for abelian varieties:
Why can Zariski's connectedness theorem imply fiber is geometric connected? I think this requires $f_*O_X=O_{Y}$ and follows by Stein decomposition. Is there another proof or generalization for this lemma?
algebraic-geometry
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I am a beginner in algebraic geometry, and want to understand the following proof towards criterion of Néron–Ogg–Shafarevich for abelian varieties:
Why can Zariski's connectedness theorem imply fiber is geometric connected? I think this requires $f_*O_X=O_{Y}$ and follows by Stein decomposition. Is there another proof or generalization for this lemma?
algebraic-geometry
2
You should always cite the documents that you use (namely, this one).
– Watson
Nov 27 at 7:36
@Watson thank you! The picture contains the whole part of the proof, and I am only confused at the last sentence about connectedness. But anyway, it's good to add a reference.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 7:41
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I am a beginner in algebraic geometry, and want to understand the following proof towards criterion of Néron–Ogg–Shafarevich for abelian varieties:
Why can Zariski's connectedness theorem imply fiber is geometric connected? I think this requires $f_*O_X=O_{Y}$ and follows by Stein decomposition. Is there another proof or generalization for this lemma?
algebraic-geometry
I am a beginner in algebraic geometry, and want to understand the following proof towards criterion of Néron–Ogg–Shafarevich for abelian varieties:
Why can Zariski's connectedness theorem imply fiber is geometric connected? I think this requires $f_*O_X=O_{Y}$ and follows by Stein decomposition. Is there another proof or generalization for this lemma?
algebraic-geometry
algebraic-geometry
edited Nov 27 at 15:55
asked Nov 27 at 4:18
zzy
2,2751419
2,2751419
2
You should always cite the documents that you use (namely, this one).
– Watson
Nov 27 at 7:36
@Watson thank you! The picture contains the whole part of the proof, and I am only confused at the last sentence about connectedness. But anyway, it's good to add a reference.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 7:41
add a comment |
2
You should always cite the documents that you use (namely, this one).
– Watson
Nov 27 at 7:36
@Watson thank you! The picture contains the whole part of the proof, and I am only confused at the last sentence about connectedness. But anyway, it's good to add a reference.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 7:41
2
2
You should always cite the documents that you use (namely, this one).
– Watson
Nov 27 at 7:36
You should always cite the documents that you use (namely, this one).
– Watson
Nov 27 at 7:36
@Watson thank you! The picture contains the whole part of the proof, and I am only confused at the last sentence about connectedness. But anyway, it's good to add a reference.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 7:41
@Watson thank you! The picture contains the whole part of the proof, and I am only confused at the last sentence about connectedness. But anyway, it's good to add a reference.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 7:41
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Let $Y = Spec(R)$. Let us consider the map induced by $f$
$f : mathcal{O}_{Y} rightarrow f_*mathcal{O}_X$
Since $X$ is proper over $R$, we get that $M := f_*mathcal{O}_X$ is a finite module over $R$. Note that $M$ is also a reduced $R-$algebra. Consider the natural base change map $varphi^0(y)$ for $y in Y$ not necessarily closed point
$varphi^0(y) : R^0f_*mathcal{O}_X = f_*mathcal{O}_X otimes k(y)rightarrow H^0(X_y, mathcal{O}_{X_y})$
where $X_y$ is the fiber over the point $y$. For $y = Spec(k)$, the map $Spec(k) rightarrow Spec(R)$ is a flat map and hence we know this map to be an isomorphism by flat base change theorem. Also note that $X_y$ is geometrically connected by hypothesis and hence $H^0(X_k, mathcal{O}_{X_k}) = k$. Thus we get that the $R-$module $M$ satisifes $M otimes k cong k$. More geometrically, this says $Spec(M) otimes Spec(k) cong Spec(k)$. That is the map $Spec(M) rightarrow Spec(R)$ is a normalization map since both have same function fields. Since $R$ being a dvr is already a normal ring, hence $Spec(M) xrightarrow{sim} Spec(R)$ is an isomorphism. That is $M cong R$. Thus one has
$mathcal{O}_Y rightarrow f_*mathcal{O}_X$
is an isomorphism. That is what was required.
All this is done in the following lemma. https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0AY8
Thank you, that's helpful.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 15:48
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Let $Y = Spec(R)$. Let us consider the map induced by $f$
$f : mathcal{O}_{Y} rightarrow f_*mathcal{O}_X$
Since $X$ is proper over $R$, we get that $M := f_*mathcal{O}_X$ is a finite module over $R$. Note that $M$ is also a reduced $R-$algebra. Consider the natural base change map $varphi^0(y)$ for $y in Y$ not necessarily closed point
$varphi^0(y) : R^0f_*mathcal{O}_X = f_*mathcal{O}_X otimes k(y)rightarrow H^0(X_y, mathcal{O}_{X_y})$
where $X_y$ is the fiber over the point $y$. For $y = Spec(k)$, the map $Spec(k) rightarrow Spec(R)$ is a flat map and hence we know this map to be an isomorphism by flat base change theorem. Also note that $X_y$ is geometrically connected by hypothesis and hence $H^0(X_k, mathcal{O}_{X_k}) = k$. Thus we get that the $R-$module $M$ satisifes $M otimes k cong k$. More geometrically, this says $Spec(M) otimes Spec(k) cong Spec(k)$. That is the map $Spec(M) rightarrow Spec(R)$ is a normalization map since both have same function fields. Since $R$ being a dvr is already a normal ring, hence $Spec(M) xrightarrow{sim} Spec(R)$ is an isomorphism. That is $M cong R$. Thus one has
$mathcal{O}_Y rightarrow f_*mathcal{O}_X$
is an isomorphism. That is what was required.
All this is done in the following lemma. https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0AY8
Thank you, that's helpful.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 15:48
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Let $Y = Spec(R)$. Let us consider the map induced by $f$
$f : mathcal{O}_{Y} rightarrow f_*mathcal{O}_X$
Since $X$ is proper over $R$, we get that $M := f_*mathcal{O}_X$ is a finite module over $R$. Note that $M$ is also a reduced $R-$algebra. Consider the natural base change map $varphi^0(y)$ for $y in Y$ not necessarily closed point
$varphi^0(y) : R^0f_*mathcal{O}_X = f_*mathcal{O}_X otimes k(y)rightarrow H^0(X_y, mathcal{O}_{X_y})$
where $X_y$ is the fiber over the point $y$. For $y = Spec(k)$, the map $Spec(k) rightarrow Spec(R)$ is a flat map and hence we know this map to be an isomorphism by flat base change theorem. Also note that $X_y$ is geometrically connected by hypothesis and hence $H^0(X_k, mathcal{O}_{X_k}) = k$. Thus we get that the $R-$module $M$ satisifes $M otimes k cong k$. More geometrically, this says $Spec(M) otimes Spec(k) cong Spec(k)$. That is the map $Spec(M) rightarrow Spec(R)$ is a normalization map since both have same function fields. Since $R$ being a dvr is already a normal ring, hence $Spec(M) xrightarrow{sim} Spec(R)$ is an isomorphism. That is $M cong R$. Thus one has
$mathcal{O}_Y rightarrow f_*mathcal{O}_X$
is an isomorphism. That is what was required.
All this is done in the following lemma. https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0AY8
Thank you, that's helpful.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 15:48
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Let $Y = Spec(R)$. Let us consider the map induced by $f$
$f : mathcal{O}_{Y} rightarrow f_*mathcal{O}_X$
Since $X$ is proper over $R$, we get that $M := f_*mathcal{O}_X$ is a finite module over $R$. Note that $M$ is also a reduced $R-$algebra. Consider the natural base change map $varphi^0(y)$ for $y in Y$ not necessarily closed point
$varphi^0(y) : R^0f_*mathcal{O}_X = f_*mathcal{O}_X otimes k(y)rightarrow H^0(X_y, mathcal{O}_{X_y})$
where $X_y$ is the fiber over the point $y$. For $y = Spec(k)$, the map $Spec(k) rightarrow Spec(R)$ is a flat map and hence we know this map to be an isomorphism by flat base change theorem. Also note that $X_y$ is geometrically connected by hypothesis and hence $H^0(X_k, mathcal{O}_{X_k}) = k$. Thus we get that the $R-$module $M$ satisifes $M otimes k cong k$. More geometrically, this says $Spec(M) otimes Spec(k) cong Spec(k)$. That is the map $Spec(M) rightarrow Spec(R)$ is a normalization map since both have same function fields. Since $R$ being a dvr is already a normal ring, hence $Spec(M) xrightarrow{sim} Spec(R)$ is an isomorphism. That is $M cong R$. Thus one has
$mathcal{O}_Y rightarrow f_*mathcal{O}_X$
is an isomorphism. That is what was required.
All this is done in the following lemma. https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0AY8
Let $Y = Spec(R)$. Let us consider the map induced by $f$
$f : mathcal{O}_{Y} rightarrow f_*mathcal{O}_X$
Since $X$ is proper over $R$, we get that $M := f_*mathcal{O}_X$ is a finite module over $R$. Note that $M$ is also a reduced $R-$algebra. Consider the natural base change map $varphi^0(y)$ for $y in Y$ not necessarily closed point
$varphi^0(y) : R^0f_*mathcal{O}_X = f_*mathcal{O}_X otimes k(y)rightarrow H^0(X_y, mathcal{O}_{X_y})$
where $X_y$ is the fiber over the point $y$. For $y = Spec(k)$, the map $Spec(k) rightarrow Spec(R)$ is a flat map and hence we know this map to be an isomorphism by flat base change theorem. Also note that $X_y$ is geometrically connected by hypothesis and hence $H^0(X_k, mathcal{O}_{X_k}) = k$. Thus we get that the $R-$module $M$ satisifes $M otimes k cong k$. More geometrically, this says $Spec(M) otimes Spec(k) cong Spec(k)$. That is the map $Spec(M) rightarrow Spec(R)$ is a normalization map since both have same function fields. Since $R$ being a dvr is already a normal ring, hence $Spec(M) xrightarrow{sim} Spec(R)$ is an isomorphism. That is $M cong R$. Thus one has
$mathcal{O}_Y rightarrow f_*mathcal{O}_X$
is an isomorphism. That is what was required.
All this is done in the following lemma. https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0AY8
answered Nov 27 at 11:09
random123
1,246720
1,246720
Thank you, that's helpful.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 15:48
add a comment |
Thank you, that's helpful.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 15:48
Thank you, that's helpful.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 15:48
Thank you, that's helpful.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 15:48
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3015330%2fspecial-fiber-is-geometrically-connected-if-the-generic-fiber-is-under-propernes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
You should always cite the documents that you use (namely, this one).
– Watson
Nov 27 at 7:36
@Watson thank you! The picture contains the whole part of the proof, and I am only confused at the last sentence about connectedness. But anyway, it's good to add a reference.
– zzy
Nov 27 at 7:41