Etale Morphism of Affine Schemes
Let $k$ be an arbitrary field and we consider the map
$$f: Spec(k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) to Spec(k[T, T^{-1}])$$
induced by canonical inclusion $varphi: k[T, T^{-1}] to k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$. I want rigorously see why this map is etale preferably using arguments from commutative algebra.
By definition a morphism $f:X to Y$ is etale iff it is * flat *(1), locally of finite type(2) and has the separable field condition(3):
Here (1), (2) and (3) mean:
(1) For every $x in X$ the induced morphism $f_x ^{#}:mathcal{O}_{Y, f(x)} to mathcal{O}_X$ is flat
(2) There exist an open affine neighbourhood $U_x =Spec(R)$ of $x$ and an o. a. n. $V_{f(x)}= Spec(S)$ of $f(x)$ with $f(U_x) subset V_{f(x)}$ such that the induced ring map $S to R$ is of finite presentation
(3) Let $m_x subset mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ the unique maximal ideal of local ring $mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ and respectively $m_{f(x)} subset mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ the unique maximal ideal of $mathcal{O}_{Y,f(x)}$: Then the induced finite field extension $mathcal{O}_{Y,f(x)}/m_{f(x)} to mathcal{O}_{X,x}/m_x$ is separable
I have problem to check the conditions (1) and (3):
To consider the induced map on stalks we must take an prime ideal $p subset k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$ resp $f(x_p) = varphi^{-1}(p)$ and consider the induced localized map
$$varphi_p: k[T, T^{-1}]_{varphi^{-1}(p)} to k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))_p$$
Here we localize $k[T, T^{-1}]$ with respect to the multiplicative set $k[T, T^{-1}] backslash varphi^{-1}(p)$ and $k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$ wrt $k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) backslash p$.
What do we know about flatness of this map? Futhermore, what do we know about separableness of the induced field extension $k[T, T^{-1}]_{varphi^{-1}(p)}/m_{f(x_p)} subset (k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))_p) / m_p$ of residue fields?
Could anybody expain how to argue here using facts about localizations of polynomial rings? I don't really know how I can analyze the induced localized map on stalks to verify flatness / separateness of residue fields.
What goes wrong with the canonical map
$$g:Spec(k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) to Spec(k[T])$$?
algebraic-geometry
asked Nov 24 at 21:50
KarlPeter
4871313
add a comment |
Let $k$ be an arbitrary field and we consider the map
$$f: Spec(k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) to Spec(k[T, T^{-1}])$$
induced by canonical inclusion $varphi: k[T, T^{-1}] to k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$. I want rigorously see why this map is etale preferably using arguments from commutative algebra.
By definition a morphism $f:X to Y$ is etale iff it is * flat *(1), locally of finite type(2) and has the separable field condition(3):
Here (1), (2) and (3) mean:
(1) For every $x in X$ the induced morphism $f_x ^{#}:mathcal{O}_{Y, f(x)} to mathcal{O}_X$ is flat
(2) There exist an open affine neighbourhood $U_x =Spec(R)$ of $x$ and an o. a. n. $V_{f(x)}= Spec(S)$ of $f(x)$ with $f(U_x) subset V_{f(x)}$ such that the induced ring map $S to R$ is of finite presentation
(3) Let $m_x subset mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ the unique maximal ideal of local ring $mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ and respectively $m_{f(x)} subset mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ the unique maximal ideal of $mathcal{O}_{Y,f(x)}$: Then the induced finite field extension $mathcal{O}_{Y,f(x)}/m_{f(x)} to mathcal{O}_{X,x}/m_x$ is separable
I have problem to check the conditions (1) and (3):
To consider the induced map on stalks we must take an prime ideal $p subset k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$ resp $f(x_p) = varphi^{-1}(p)$ and consider the induced localized map
$$varphi_p: k[T, T^{-1}]_{varphi^{-1}(p)} to k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))_p$$
Here we localize $k[T, T^{-1}]$ with respect to the multiplicative set $k[T, T^{-1}] backslash varphi^{-1}(p)$ and $k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$ wrt $k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) backslash p$.
What do we know about flatness of this map? Futhermore, what do we know about separableness of the induced field extension $k[T, T^{-1}]_{varphi^{-1}(p)}/m_{f(x_p)} subset (k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))_p) / m_p$ of residue fields?
Could anybody expain how to argue here using facts about localizations of polynomial rings? I don't really know how I can analyze the induced localized map on stalks to verify flatness / separateness of residue fields.
What goes wrong with the canonical map
$$g:Spec(k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) to Spec(k[T])$$?
algebraic-geometry
asked Nov 24 at 21:50
KarlPeter
4871313
1
For flatness note that $k[t,t^{-1}]$ is a PID and hence to check flatness is equivalent to checking that the module $k[t,t^{-1},y]/(y^d-t)$ is torsion free, which it is since $(y^d-t)$ is an irreducible polynomial. To check that is unramified, maybe it would be better to use that criteria that $Omega_{X/Y} = 0 Leftrightarrow Xrightarrow Y$ is unramified.
– random123
Nov 25 at 6:43
add a comment |
Let $k$ be an arbitrary field and we consider the map
$$f: Spec(k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) to Spec(k[T, T^{-1}])$$
induced by canonical inclusion $varphi: k[T, T^{-1}] to k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$. I want rigorously see why this map is etale preferably using arguments from commutative algebra.
By definition a morphism $f:X to Y$ is etale iff it is * flat *(1), locally of finite type(2) and has the separable field condition(3):
Here (1), (2) and (3) mean:
(1) For every $x in X$ the induced morphism $f_x ^{#}:mathcal{O}_{Y, f(x)} to mathcal{O}_X$ is flat
(2) There exist an open affine neighbourhood $U_x =Spec(R)$ of $x$ and an o. a. n. $V_{f(x)}= Spec(S)$ of $f(x)$ with $f(U_x) subset V_{f(x)}$ such that the induced ring map $S to R$ is of finite presentation
(3) Let $m_x subset mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ the unique maximal ideal of local ring $mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ and respectively $m_{f(x)} subset mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ the unique maximal ideal of $mathcal{O}_{Y,f(x)}$: Then the induced finite field extension $mathcal{O}_{Y,f(x)}/m_{f(x)} to mathcal{O}_{X,x}/m_x$ is separable
I have problem to check the conditions (1) and (3):
To consider the induced map on stalks we must take an prime ideal $p subset k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$ resp $f(x_p) = varphi^{-1}(p)$ and consider the induced localized map
$$varphi_p: k[T, T^{-1}]_{varphi^{-1}(p)} to k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))_p$$
Here we localize $k[T, T^{-1}]$ with respect to the multiplicative set $k[T, T^{-1}] backslash varphi^{-1}(p)$ and $k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$ wrt $k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) backslash p$.
What do we know about flatness of this map? Futhermore, what do we know about separableness of the induced field extension $k[T, T^{-1}]_{varphi^{-1}(p)}/m_{f(x_p)} subset (k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))_p) / m_p$ of residue fields?
Could anybody expain how to argue here using facts about localizations of polynomial rings? I don't really know how I can analyze the induced localized map on stalks to verify flatness / separateness of residue fields.
What goes wrong with the canonical map
$$g:Spec(k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) to Spec(k[T])$$?
algebraic-geometry
asked Nov 24 at 21:50
KarlPeter
4871313
Let $k$ be an arbitrary field and we consider the map
$$f: Spec(k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) to Spec(k[T, T^{-1}])$$
induced by canonical inclusion $varphi: k[T, T^{-1}] to k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$. I want rigorously see why this map is etale preferably using arguments from commutative algebra.
By definition a morphism $f:X to Y$ is etale iff it is * flat *(1), locally of finite type(2) and has the separable field condition(3):
Here (1), (2) and (3) mean:
(1) For every $x in X$ the induced morphism $f_x ^{#}:mathcal{O}_{Y, f(x)} to mathcal{O}_X$ is flat
(2) There exist an open affine neighbourhood $U_x =Spec(R)$ of $x$ and an o. a. n. $V_{f(x)}= Spec(S)$ of $f(x)$ with $f(U_x) subset V_{f(x)}$ such that the induced ring map $S to R$ is of finite presentation
(3) Let $m_x subset mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ the unique maximal ideal of local ring $mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ and respectively $m_{f(x)} subset mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ the unique maximal ideal of $mathcal{O}_{Y,f(x)}$: Then the induced finite field extension $mathcal{O}_{Y,f(x)}/m_{f(x)} to mathcal{O}_{X,x}/m_x$ is separable
I have problem to check the conditions (1) and (3):
To consider the induced map on stalks we must take an prime ideal $p subset k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$ resp $f(x_p) = varphi^{-1}(p)$ and consider the induced localized map
$$varphi_p: k[T, T^{-1}]_{varphi^{-1}(p)} to k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))_p$$
Here we localize $k[T, T^{-1}]$ with respect to the multiplicative set $k[T, T^{-1}] backslash varphi^{-1}(p)$ and $k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))$ wrt $k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) backslash p$.
What do we know about flatness of this map? Futhermore, what do we know about separableness of the induced field extension $k[T, T^{-1}]_{varphi^{-1}(p)}/m_{f(x_p)} subset (k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T))_p) / m_p$ of residue fields?
Could anybody expain how to argue here using facts about localizations of polynomial rings? I don't really know how I can analyze the induced localized map on stalks to verify flatness / separateness of residue fields.
What goes wrong with the canonical map
$$g:Spec(k[T, T^{-1},Y]/(Y^d - T)) to Spec(k[T])$$?
algebraic-geometry
algebraic-geometry
asked Nov 24 at 21:50
KarlPeter
4871313
asked Nov 24 at 21:50
KarlPeter
4871313
edited Nov 24 at 21:57
asked Nov 24 at 21:50
KarlPeter
4871313
asked Nov 24 at 21:50
KarlPeter
4871313
asked Nov 24 at 21:50
KarlPeter
4871313
4871313
1
For flatness note that $k[t,t^{-1}]$ is a PID and hence to check flatness is equivalent to checking that the module $k[t,t^{-1},y]/(y^d-t)$ is torsion free, which it is since $(y^d-t)$ is an irreducible polynomial. To check that is unramified, maybe it would be better to use that criteria that $Omega_{X/Y} = 0 Leftrightarrow Xrightarrow Y$ is unramified.
– random123
Nov 25 at 6:43
add a comment |
1
For flatness note that $k[t,t^{-1}]$ is a PID and hence to check flatness is equivalent to checking that the module $k[t,t^{-1},y]/(y^d-t)$ is torsion free, which it is since $(y^d-t)$ is an irreducible polynomial. To check that is unramified, maybe it would be better to use that criteria that $Omega_{X/Y} = 0 Leftrightarrow Xrightarrow Y$ is unramified.
– random123
Nov 25 at 6:43
1
1
For flatness note that $k[t,t^{-1}]$ is a PID and hence to check flatness is equivalent to checking that the module $k[t,t^{-1},y]/(y^d-t)$ is torsion free, which it is since $(y^d-t)$ is an irreducible polynomial. To check that is unramified, maybe it would be better to use that criteria that $Omega_{X/Y} = 0 Leftrightarrow Xrightarrow Y$ is unramified.
– random123
Nov 25 at 6:43
For flatness note that $k[t,t^{-1}]$ is a PID and hence to check flatness is equivalent to checking that the module $k[t,t^{-1},y]/(y^d-t)$ is torsion free, which it is since $(y^d-t)$ is an irreducible polynomial. To check that is unramified, maybe it would be better to use that criteria that $Omega_{X/Y} = 0 Leftrightarrow Xrightarrow Y$ is unramified.
– random123
Nov 25 at 6:43
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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%2f3012131%2fetale-morphism-of-affine-schemes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
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%2f3012131%2fetale-morphism-of-affine-schemes%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
1
For flatness note that $k[t,t^{-1}]$ is a PID and hence to check flatness is equivalent to checking that the module $k[t,t^{-1},y]/(y^d-t)$ is torsion free, which it is since $(y^d-t)$ is an irreducible polynomial. To check that is unramified, maybe it would be better to use that criteria that $Omega_{X/Y} = 0 Leftrightarrow Xrightarrow Y$ is unramified.
– random123
Nov 25 at 6:43