Proof.
If for some i some matrix coefficient of \varphi _ i is not in \mathfrak m, then we apply Lemma 10.102.2. It is easy to see that the proposition for a complex and for the same complex with a trivial complex added to it are equivalent. Thus we may assume that all matrix entries of each \varphi _ i are elements of the maximal ideal. We may also assume that e \geq 1.
Assume the complex is exact at R^{n_ e}, \ldots , R^{n_1}. Let \mathfrak q \in \text{Ass}(R). Note that the ring R_{\mathfrak q} has depth 0 and that the complex remains exact after localization at \mathfrak q. We apply Lemmas 10.102.3 and 10.102.6 to the localized complex over R_{\mathfrak q}. We conclude that \varphi _{i, \mathfrak q} has rank r_ i for all i. Since R \to \bigoplus _{\mathfrak q \in \text{Ass}(R)} R_\mathfrak q is injective (Lemma 10.63.19), we conclude that \varphi _ i has rank r_ i over R by the definition of rank as given in Definition 10.102.5. Therefore we see that I(\varphi _ i)_\mathfrak q = I(\varphi _{i, \mathfrak q}) as the ranks do not change. Since all of the ideals I(\varphi _ i)_{\mathfrak q}, e \geq i \geq 1 are equal to R_{\mathfrak q} (by the lemmas referenced above) we conclude none of the ideals I(\varphi _ i) is contained in \mathfrak q. This implies that I(\varphi _ e)I(\varphi _{e-1})\ldots I(\varphi _1) is not contained in any of the associated primes of R. By Lemma 10.15.2 we may choose x \in I(\varphi _ e)I(\varphi _{e - 1})\ldots I(\varphi _1), x \not\in \mathfrak q for all \mathfrak q \in \text{Ass}(R). Observe that x is a nonzerodivisor (Lemma 10.63.9). According to Lemma 10.102.7 the complex 0 \to (R/xR)^{n_ e} \to \ldots \to (R/xR)^{n_1} is exact at (R/xR)^{n_ e}, \ldots , (R/xR)^{n_2}. By induction on e all the ideals I(\varphi _ i)/xR have a regular sequence of length i - 1. This proves that I(\varphi _ i) contains a regular sequence of length i.
Assume (2)(a) and (2)(b) hold. We will prove that (1) holds by induction on \dim (R). If \dim (R) = 0, then we must have I(\varphi _ i) = R for 1 \leq i \leq e by (2)(b). Since the coefficients of \varphi _ i are contained in the maximal ideal this can happen only if r_ i = 0 for all i. By (2)(a) we conclude that e = 0 and (1) holds. Assume \dim (R) > 0. We claim that for any prime \mathfrak p \subset R conditions (2)(a) and (2)(b) hold for the complex 0 \to R_\mathfrak p^{n_ e} \to R_\mathfrak p^{n_{e - 1}} \to \ldots \to R_\mathfrak p^{n_0} with maps \varphi _{i, \mathfrak p} over R_\mathfrak p. Namely, since I(\varphi _ i) contains a nonzero divisor, the image of I(\varphi _ i) in R_\mathfrak p is nonzero. This implies that the rank of \varphi _{i, \mathfrak p} is the same as the rank of \varphi _ i: the rank as defined above of a matrix \varphi over a ring R can only drop when passing to an R-algebra R' and this happens if and only if I(\varphi ) maps to zero in R'. Thus (2)(a) holds. Having said this we know that I(\varphi _{i, \mathfrak p}) = I(\varphi _ i)_\mathfrak p and we see that (2)(b) is preserved under localization as well. By induction on the dimension of R we may assume the complex is exact when localized at any nonmaximal prime \mathfrak p of R. Thus \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\varphi _ i)/\mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(\varphi _{i + 1}) has support contained in \{ \mathfrak m\} and hence if nonzero has depth 0. As I(\varphi _ i) \subset \mathfrak m for all i because of what was said in the first paragraph of the proof, we see that (2)(b) implies \text{depth}(R) \geq e. By Lemma 10.102.8 we see that the complex is exact at R^{n_ e}, \ldots , R^{n_1} concluding the proof.
\square
Comments (9)
Comment #2226 by David Savitt on
Comment #2228 by David Savitt on
Comment #2229 by Johan on
Comment #2231 by David Savitt on
Comment #2232 by Johan on
Comment #2233 by David Savitt on
Comment #2268 by Johan on
Comment #8330 by Et on
Comment #8945 by Stacks project on
There are also: