The Stacks project

\begin{equation*} \DeclareMathOperator\Coim{Coim} \DeclareMathOperator\Coker{Coker} \DeclareMathOperator\Ext{Ext} \DeclareMathOperator\Hom{Hom} \DeclareMathOperator\Im{Im} \DeclareMathOperator\Ker{Ker} \DeclareMathOperator\Mor{Mor} \DeclareMathOperator\Ob{Ob} \DeclareMathOperator\Sh{Sh} \DeclareMathOperator\SheafExt{\mathcal{E}\mathit{xt}} \DeclareMathOperator\SheafHom{\mathcal{H}\mathit{om}} \DeclareMathOperator\Spec{Spec} \newcommand\colim{\mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits} \newcommand\lim{\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits} \newcommand\Qcoh{\mathit{Qcoh}} \newcommand\Sch{\mathit{Sch}} \newcommand\QCohstack{\mathcal{QC}\!\mathit{oh}} \newcommand\Cohstack{\mathcal{C}\!\mathit{oh}} \newcommand\Spacesstack{\mathcal{S}\!\mathit{paces}} \newcommand\Quotfunctor{\mathrm{Quot}} \newcommand\Hilbfunctor{\mathrm{Hilb}} \newcommand\Curvesstack{\mathcal{C}\!\mathit{urves}} \newcommand\Polarizedstack{\mathcal{P}\!\mathit{olarized}} \newcommand\Complexesstack{\mathcal{C}\!\mathit{omplexes}} \newcommand\Pic{\mathop{\mathrm{Pic}}\nolimits} \newcommand\Picardstack{\mathcal{P}\!\mathit{ic}} \newcommand\Picardfunctor{\mathrm{Pic}} \newcommand\Deformationcategory{\mathcal{D}\!\mathit{ef}} \end{equation*}

Lemma 10.23.1. Let $R$ be a ring. Let $f_1, \ldots , f_ n$ be elements of $R$ generating the unit ideal. Let $M$ be an $R$-module. The sequence

\[ 0 \to M \xrightarrow {\alpha } \bigoplus \nolimits _{i = 1}^ n M_{f_ i} \xrightarrow {\beta } \bigoplus \nolimits _{i, j = 1}^ n M_{f_ i f_ j} \]

is exact, where $\alpha (m) = (m/1, \ldots , m/1)$ and $\beta (m_1/f_1^{e_1}, \ldots , m_ n/f_ n^{e_ n}) = (m_ i/f_ i^{e_ i} - m_ j/f_ j^{e_ j})_{(i, j)}$.

Proof. It suffices to show that the localization of the sequence at any maximal ideal $\mathfrak m$ is exact, see Lemma 10.22.1. Since $f_1, \ldots , f_ n$ generate the unit ideal, there is an $i$ such that $f_ i \not\in \mathfrak m$. After renumbering we may assume $i = 1$. Note that $(M_{f_ i})_\mathfrak m = (M_\mathfrak m)_{f_ i}$ and $(M_{f_ if_ j})_\mathfrak m = (M_\mathfrak m)_{f_ if_ j}$, see Proposition 10.9.11. In particular $(M_{f_1})_\mathfrak m = M_\mathfrak m$ and $(M_{f_1 f_ i})_\mathfrak m = (M_\mathfrak m)_{f_ i}$, because $f_1$ is a unit. Note that the maps in the sequence are the canonical ones coming from Lemma 10.9.7 and the identity map on $M$. Having said all of this, after replacing $R$ by $R_\mathfrak m$, $M$ by $M_\mathfrak m$, and $f_ i$ by their image in $R_\mathfrak m$, and $f_1$ by $1 \in R_\mathfrak m$, we reduce to the case where $f_1 = 1$.

Assume $f_1 = 1$. Injectivity of $\alpha $ is now trivial. Let $m = (m_ i) \in \bigoplus _{i = 1}^ n M_{f_ i}$ be in the kernel of $\beta $. Then $m_1 \in M_{f_1} = M$. Moreover, $\beta (m) = 0$ implies that $m_1$ and $m_ i$ map to the same element of $M_{f_1f_ i} = M_{f_ i}$. Thus $\alpha (m_1) = m$ and the proof is complete. $\square$


Comments (0)


Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.




In order to prevent bots from posting comments, we would like you to prove that you are human. You can do this by filling in the name of the current tag in the following input field. As a reminder, this is tag 00EK. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.