Blog Archive

Thursday, June 27, 2024

Commutative Algebra and Algebraic Geometry (4): Zariski topology on affine scheme

Zariski topology on Spec(R)

 

Claude Monet - Waterloo Bridge, Sunlight Effect

Zariski topology on Spec(R) (1)

Let us go back to calculus first. Consider the ring of continuous functions over R, C(R). Evaluating fC(R) at a point p induces a ring homomorphism evp:ff(p). The kernel of evp is the maximal ideal mp:={gC(R)g(p)=0}.

Hence evaluating a function at p corresponds to taking the quotient by mp by the first isomorphism theorem.

Remark. The notation x and px refer the same thing. But when we use x, we view it as a point, and when we use px, we view it as a prime ideal.

Now let us consider a ring R and Spec(R). View fR as a function on Spec(R) and for a point pxSpec(R), define f(x)=πpx(f)R/px. Hence the codomain of f is xSpec(R)R/pxxSpec(R)k(x).

Where k(x) is the fraction fields of R/pxi.e.

(1)f:Spec(R)xSpec(R)k(x)

Then whether f(x)=0 or not makes sense since that means fpx​​.

Notice that (fg)(x)=f(x)g(x)=0f(x)=0g(x)=0 since px is prime ideal.

Hence we define the zero locus of f as

(2)V(f)={xSpec(R)fpx}

In addition, for a subset IR, define

(3)V(I)={xSpec(R)Ipx}=fIV(f)

to be the Zariski closed set on Spec(R).

Again, let YSpec(R), we get I(Y):=pxYpx. i.e. the function that vanish on Y.

Hence we have I(Y)=I(Y). i.e. the codomain of I() is the set of radical ideal.

Then we have the following bijections:

  • Points of X (resp. Spec(A)) maximal ideals of A (resp. A(X)).

  • Irreducible closed subsets of X (resp. Spec(A)) prime ideals of A (resp. A(X)).

Finally, it is worth mentioning that taking the zero locus reverses inclusions. abV(a)V(b)​​​. This is in line with the fact that radical ideals correspond to affine varieties.

Proposition. (0)=pxSpec(R)px.

Proof. Obviously (0)pxSpec(R)px. Since prime ideal is radical and each prime ideal contains 0. Hence if an=0anpxapx.

For the converse, see Nilradical of a ring - Wikipedia

Hence V((0))=pxSpec(R)V(px)=Spec(R).

Remark.

If f(x)=0px, then fpxSpec(R)px=(0). That is, the radical ideal of (0)​ collect all the function that vanish at all the point.

Corollary. I=pxSpec(R),Ipxpx.

Proof. By the Galois connection of contraction and extension of ideals for π:RR/I and (0)=pxSpec(R)px

Galois connection between ideal and variety

Proposition. Galois connection.

Let YSpec(R) be a subset and aR be an ideal. Then

(4)IV(a)=a,VI(Y)=Y

Proof. By definition, V(a)={xSpec(R)|apx}, hence I(Y)=pxSpec(R),apxpx=aa.

For VI(Y)=Y, since I(Y)=pxYpx, we have VI(Y)=V(pxYpx)={xSpec(R)pxYpxpx}Y​.

Hence I,V form a pair of Galois connection, and both IV,VI are closure operator.

But to check that VI is the Zariski closure operator, we need (5) in the next proposition. Our prove for (5) is neat. Use the property of Galois connection, we see that VIV(a)=V(a). But V(IV)(a)=V(a). Hence we know that the image of VI is all the closed set in Spec(R)​.

Proof for VI(Y)=Y. (1)

As we already see, YVI(Y), hence YVI(Y)=VI(Y). Also, we know that YY, hence we have VI(Y)VI(Y)=Y. Hence we have VI(Y)=Y.

Proof for VI(Y)=Y. (2) Reader should review the closure operator and Galois connection

Since the image of VI and () is Clo(Spec(R)),

Hence we have

(5)VI(X)YXι(Y),XYXι(Y)

But the left adjoint of ι is unique, hence VI(X)=X.

Proposition.

(1).V(0)=Spec(R),V(1)=(2)aaV(a)V(a)(3)V(iIai)=iIV(a)(4)V(aa)=V(a)V(a),aa:={ff:fa,fa}(5)V(a)=V(a)(6)V(p)={px}Spec(R/p)

Hence all the V(a) do form a topology, we call it Zariski topology on Spec(A).

Proof. (1),(2) is obvious, (3) follows from the property of Galois connection directly. (map colimit to limit)

To prove (4), notice that xSpec(R) is prime ideal, hence ff(x)=0f(x)=0f(x)=0​.

Our prove for (5) is neat. Use the property of Galois connection, we see that VIV(a)=V(a). But V(IV)(a)=V(a).

For (6), let π:RR/p be the quoient map. Then V(f)V(p) one-one corresponding to V(π(f))Spec(R/p).

Remark. This induce the one-one corresponding between radical ideal and closed set.

By the property of Galois connection, we get I(jJVj)=jJI(Vj). V(iIai)=iIV(a).

CRing to Top

Let h:RS be a ring homomorphism. Then we claim that Spec:CRingTop is a functor.

What we need to prove is Spec(ψ)=ψ1 is continuous.

Consider

(6)aψ:=Spec(ψ):Spec(S)Spec(R)

It induce a pull back

(7)[f:Spec(R)xSpec(R)R/px][(aψ)(f):Spec(S)xSpec(S)S/px]]

by

(8)(aψ)(f)(x)=f(aψ(x))

We need to check that the preimage of ψ​​​ map closed set to closed set.

Lemma.

(9)(aψ)1V(I)=V(ψ(I)e)

Proof.

(10)(aψ)1(V(I))=(aψ)1{pxSpec(R)|f(px)=0fI}

and

(11)x(aψ)1{pxSpec(R)|f(px)=0fI}aψ(x)=ψ1(x){pxSpec(R)|f(px)=0fI}

Hence

(12)fI,f(ψ1(x))=0fψ1(x)ψ(f)xψ(f)(x)=0

i.e.

(13)(aψ)1{pxSpec(R)|f(px)=0fI}={pxSpec(S)|ψ(f)(px)=0fI}=V(ψ(I)e)

Hence aψ is continuous.

Proposition. aψ(V(a))=V(ψ1(a))

Proof. Since VI=(), we can write left hand side as VI(aψ(V(a))).

But

(14)I(aψ(V(a)))=qV(a)ψ1(q)=(ψ1(a))

and apply V() both side we complete the proof.

Corollary. The nap aψ is dominant (i.e. the image is dense in Spec(R)) iff Kerψ(0).

Proof. aψ(V(0))=V(ψ1(0))=V(Kerψ)V(0)=Spec(R).

The connection between the spectrum of ring and spectrum of linear operator

Definition. Annhilator.

Let M be a Rmodule, the kernel of the ring homomorphism f:REndAb(M) is the annihilator of M respect to R.

Let K be an algebraic closed field (e.g. C), V be a finite dimension vector space over K and T:VV be a linear map.

Then f:K[X]K[T] makes V become a K[X] module, and AnnK[X](V) is an ideal in K[X]. Since K[X]​ is PID,

(15)AnnK[X](V)=(m(X))

Recall the spectrum of a linaer map refer to the set of eigen value of T​, and spectrum of a ring refer to the set of prime ideal. A natural question is, what is the connection between two different spectrum?

Observe that λ is a eigenvalue of T if and only if Tλ is not invertible. Hence (Tλ) is a proper ideal in K[T] iff λ is the eigenvalue of T. The operator polynomial ring K[T]K[X]/(m(X)). Let m(X) be a monic polynomial.

By K is algebraic closed field, m(X)=(Xλ1)e1...(Xλn)en.

Hence

(16)Spec(K[X]/(m(X))={(Xλ1),...,(Xλn)}{(Tλ1),...,(Tλn)}=Spec(K[T])

Then we see the corresponding between spectrum of ring and spectrum of linear operator.

Think about that, if we map a linear operator T on a finite dimension vector space to the algebraic curve defined by its characteristic polynomial, i.e.

(17)ydet(TxI)

What is the intersection multiplicity means?

What if we consider the minimal polynomial of T​?

Category of Affine Scheme and Algebra-Geometry Duality

An affine scheme is a triple (X,α,A), where X is a topological space, A a ring and α:XSpecA an isomorphism of topological spaces.

A morphism of affine scheme (Y,β,B)(X,α,A) is a pair (f,φ) is a pair, where f:XY is a continuous function and φ:AB is a ring homomorphism, such that the diagram commute.

(18)YβSpec(B)faφXαSpec(A)

In deed, we define a functor from affine scheme to category of Spec.

(19)YSpec(B),(f:YX)(αfβ1=aφ:Spec(B)Spec(A))

Readers can see that actually the relation between category of affine scheme and category of specturum of comuutative ring is just like the relation between category of finite dimension vector space over F and category of Fn.

Reader could get some geometry intuition from homotopy here (image a contraction from X​ to Y).

Math Essays: ... Fundamental group and Homotopy as Natural Transformation (marco-yuze-zheng.blogspot.com)

Spec functor, redefined.

Let us review our point of view of Spec. At the beginning, we observe that for a ring homomorphism φ:RS and a prime ideal pxSpec(S), φ1(px) is a prime ideal as well, hence we get a functor as follows:

(20)Spec:CRingopSet

Then we observe that we could view fR as a function f:Spec(R)xSpec(R)R/px and define vanishing set of ideals in R to be the Zariski closed sets, we assign a topology on Spec(R) and make it become a functor such that:

(21)Spec:CRingopTop

But, actually, what we want is not a topological space, we want a ringed space. The object should record both Algebra and Geometry information. If we viewed Spec() as a functor to Top, then every field F will be mped to {}, hence isomorphic to each other.

The proper point of view of Spec is a functor

(22)Spec:CRingopAffineScheme
(23)R(Spec(R),IdSpec(R),R)

Easy to see that this is essential full and faithful, hence it induce a anti categorical equivalence.

Corollary.

(24)AiIAi(Spec(A),A)(iISpec(Ai),iIAi)

But actually I think we need add more details for that.

Proposition. The following conditions are equivalent:

(i) Spec(A) is not connected.

(ii) AA1×A2,A1,A20.

(iii) There exists aA,a1a0,a2=a.

Proof.

(ii)(iii) is easy since if AA1×A2, then we have (1,0),(0,1).

(iii)(i) Let f=f2, then f(f1)=0. Hence V(0)=V(f(f1))=V(f)V(f1)=Spec(A)​.

Also V(f)V(f1)= since if f(x)=0(f1)(x)=1.

(i)(ii)​. We know that Spec(A)Spec(A/0). Denote A/(0) as A and the extension of ideals respect to the quotient map as I.

If Spec(A) is not connected, then Spec(A)=V(I)V(J)=V(IJ)=V(0). Also, V(I)V(J)=.

Since A=A/(0) is reduced, hence IJ=0. Also, V(I)V(J)=V(I+J)==V(A).

Hence I+J=A​. By Chinese Remainder Theorem, AA/I×A/J​.

By the third isomorphism theorem. A/IA/I,A/JA/J, hence AA/I×A/J.

Zariski Topology on Spec(R) (2)

Definition. We call D(f):=DA(f):=Spec(A)V(f) principal open sets of Spec(A).

It is clear that D(0)=,D(1)=Spec(A).

Notice that D(f) is the points that f(x)0. Hence it will correspoding to localization respect to S={f,f2,f3,...}. We will talk about that in next section.

Now, easy to see that D(f)D(g)=D(fg) since fg(x)0f(x)0g(x)0​​​​.

In addition, D(f+g)D(f)D(g) since V(f+g)V(f)V(g).

Also, D(f)=D(f)V(f)=V(f)V((f))=V((f))(f)=(f).

For example, D(2)=D(4)=D(8)=D(16)=D(32)=D(64)Spec(Z)​.

Spec(A) as T0 space

Proposition. Zariski topology on X=Spec(A) is a Kolmogorov space(T0 space), i.e. a topological space satisfying the following separation axiom:

Given two different points x,yX, there exists a open neighborhood of x, denote as Ux such that yUx, or an open neighborhood of y denote as Uy such that xUy.

Proof. xy in Spec(A) means pxpypxpypypx. If pxpy, then yV(px)={x},

Hence Uy=Spec(A){x} is an open neighborhood of y such that xUy.

Quasi-compact

Definition. The word quasi-compact means compact but without Hausdorff separation axiom. Hence U is quasi-compact if every open covering of U​ admit a finite subcover.

Lemma. D(g)iID(fi)(g)iI(fi) . In other word, nN,gniI(fi).

Proof. D(g)iID(fi)V(g)iIV(fi)=V(iI(fi))IV(g)=(g)IV(iI(fi))=iI(fi)

and

(25)(g)iI(fi)(g)iI(fi)

Let g=1 we get that D(fi)iI is a covering of Spec(A) iff iI(fi)=A​​​.

Proposition.

Let A be a commutative ring. The principal open subsets D(f) for fA form a basis for the topology Spec(A). For all fA, the open sets D(f) are quasi-compact. In particular, the space Spec(A)=D(1) is quasi-compact.

Proof. Since every closed set V(I)=fIV(f), hence every open set Spec(A)V(I)=fID(f), we say that D(f) form a basis. Let D(g)iID(fi), then by the lemma, gn=iIaifi, where aiA and ai=0iJ,JI is a suitable finite subset of I. Hence D(g)iJD(fi).

Irreducible space and generic point

Definition. Let X be a topological space.

We say X is irreducible if X is not empty, and whenever X=Z1Z2 with Z1,Z2 closed, we have X=Z1 or X=Z2. A subset EX is irreducible when it is irreducible as a subspace of X. Otherwise we say it is reducible.

Remark.

Let X=Spec(A). Easy to see that fg(0)V(fg)=V(f)V(g)=V(0)=X.

Hence X is irreducible iff V(f)=X=V(0) or V(g)=X=V(0).

i.e. f(x)=0xSpec(A) or g(x)=0xSpec(A). i.e. f(0)g(0). i.e. (0) is a prime ideal.

Radical of (0) is prime or not is a kind of generalization of (0) is prime or not, i.e. the ring A is integral domain of not.

Also, fg(0) or not could be thought as a generalization of zero divisor.

Remark.

An irreducible space is obviously connected.

Proposition. Let f:XY be a continuous function, if EX is irreducible subset, then f(E) is irreducible as well.

Remark. Hence irreducible is a topological property, just like compact, path connected and connected, it preserved by homomorphism. In category of group, abelian property is also preserved by homomorphism.

Proof. Clearly we assume that E=X and f(E)=Y. First, X,Y. Now assume that Y=Y1Y2 with Y1,Y2 is closed. Then X=f1(Y1)f1(Y2). By X is irreducible, f1(Y1)=Xf1(Y2)=X. Hence Y=Y1Y=Y2.

Proposition. Let X be a non-empty topological space. The following assertions are equivalent.

(i) X is irreducible.

(ii) Any two non-empty open subsets of X have a non-empty intersection.

(iii) Every non-empty open subset is dense in X​.

(iv) Every non-empty open subset is connected.

(v)​​ Every non-empty open subset is irreducible.

(vi) For any set |E|2, the E valued constant function presheaf over X is a sheaf.

Proof. Taking complements then (i),(ii) is equivalent by definition of irreducible space.

To see (ii)(iii), we need a lemma.

Lemma. Let X be a topological space and let AX be a subset. A is dense if and only if for any non-empty open set UX, AU. i.e. A is dense if and only if for any open set U,AU=U=​​.

Proof. AU= iff AUc. As A is dense, the only closed set contains A is X. Hence Uc=X, U=.

Then (ii)(iii)​ is obviously.

Now we want to shows that (ii)(iv), but this is obviously.

Then if we can prove (i)(v), we finish. Obviously (v)(i), now let us show that (iii)(v).

Let U be a non empty open set with subspace topology, we want to show that every open set in U is dense in U, hence U is irreducible by (iii)(i). By (iii), every non empty subset VX is dense in X hence VU is dense in U. Hence U​ is irreducible.

For (vi), we prove that (ii)(vi)

If any two non-empty open subsets of X have a non-empty intersection, then let UX be an open set. For every open covering of U (Ui)iI . If si|UiUj=sj|UiUj for all i,jI, then there exist a uniqe constant function sF(U) such that s|Ui=si. Since UiUj for any two non-empty open subsets. Conversely, if X is reducible, then there exists two non-empty open subsets U,VX have an empty intersection. Let Y=UV, and U,V is an open covering of Y. Consider fF(U),f(x)=a for all xU and gF(V),g(x)=b for all xV. If ab, there exists not a constant function hF(Y) such that hU=f,hV=g. ​​

Lemma. Let X be a topological space. Let YX is irreducible iff Y​ is irreducible. Hence if Y=Y and Y is irreducible then Y is irredducible as well.

Proof. By previous proposition (ii), we can see that Y is irreducible iff for any two open sets U,V, we have YU,YVY(UV). (Consider the subspace topology)

This implies the lemma because an open set UYUY​.

Remark. UYUY since every points xY is a limit point. As xU, U is a open neighborhood of x, hence intercet with Y.

Proposition. Let A be a commutative ring. A subset YSpec(A) is irreducible iff p:=I(Y) is a prime ideal. In this case, {p} is dense in Y since {p}=VI(Y)=Y.

Proof. Assume Y is irreducible. Let f,gA,fgp. Then

(26)YV(fg)=V(f)V(g)

Hence Y=(YV(f))(YV(g)). As Y is irreducible, Y=YV(f) or Y=YV(g). This implies that V(f)Y or V(g)Y. Hence IV(f)=(f)I(Y)=p or IV(g)=(g)I(Y)=p. Hence fp or gp. Hence p is prime.

Conversely let p be a prime ideal, then Y=VI(Y)=V(p)={p}. Hence Y is irreducible since {p} is irreducible by the previous lemma.

Definition. We say ZX is an irreducible component of X if Z is a maximal irreducible subset of X.

Corollary. The map pV(p) is a one-one corresponding from prime ideals to irreducible closed subset in Spec(A). Via this bijection, the minimal prime ideals of A correspond to the irreducible component of Spec(A).

Definition. Let X be an arbitrary topological space.

(i) A point x is called closed if the set {x} is closed.

(ii) We say that a point ηX is a generic point if {η}=X.

(iii) Let x,y be two points of X. We say that x is a generization of y or that y is a specialization of x if y{x}.

(iv) A point xX is a maximal point if {x} is an irreducible component of X.

Thus a point ηX is a generic point iff its a generization of every point of X. As the closure of an irreducible set is again irreducible, the existence of a generic point implies that X is irreducible.

Let X=Spec(A), then the notation introduced have the following algebraic meaning.

(i) A point xX is closed iff px is maximal ideal.

(ii) A point ηX is a generic point of X iff pη is the unique minimal prime ideal. This exist iff the nillradical ideal is prime ideal. Hence we have Spec(A) is irreducible n(A)=(0) is prime A/n(A) is integral domain.

(iii) A point xX is a generization of y iff pxpy.

(iv) A point xX is a maximal point iff px is a minimal prime ideal.

Krull Dimension: A first glance

For commutative ring

Definition. Let R be a commutative ring, we use the strictly accending chains of prime ideals in R.

(27)p0p1...pn

Where n is the length of this chain. We define the supremum length of those strictly accending chains of prime ideals in R to be the Krull dimension of R. Notice that the it is sup{0,1,2,3,...,n1,n}N{±}. For a Ring R, we denote the Krull dimension of R as dimR.

Example.

The Krull dimension of 0 is . Since sup means least upper bound. But every elements is a upper bound of . Hence sup=​​.

The Krull dimension of a field F is 0, dim(Z)=1. The Krull dimension of K[T1,...,Tn] is n. We only give a prove for

dim(K[T1,...,Tn])n. Consider (T1)(T1,T2)...(T1,...,Tn).

For topological space

Let X be a topological space, we use the strictly accending chains of irreducible closed subset in X

(28)ZnZn1...Z1Z0

Where n is the length of this chain. We define the supremum length of those strictly accending chains of those strictly accending chains of irreducible closed subset in X. For a topological space X, we denote the Krull dimension of X as dimX.

Proposition. Let R be a commutative ring, then dimR=dimSpec(R).

Proof. It follows from pV(p) is a bijection between prime ideals and irreducible closed sets directly.

The bijection, indeed, is an anti poset isomorphism between (p,) and (Z,).

 

Popular Posts