The Stacks project

Proposition 10.144.4. Let $R \to S$ be a ring map. Let $\mathfrak q \subset S$ be a prime. If $R \to S$ is étale at $\mathfrak q$, then there exists a $g \in S$, $g \not\in \mathfrak q$ such that $R \to S_ g$ is standard étale.

Proof. The following proof is a little roundabout and there may be ways to shorten it.

Step 1. By Definition 10.143.1 there exists a $g \in S$, $g \not\in \mathfrak q$ such that $R \to S_ g$ is étale. Thus we may assume that $S$ is étale over $R$.

Step 2. By Lemma 10.143.3 there exists an étale ring map $R_0 \to S_0$ with $R_0$ of finite type over $\mathbf{Z}$, and a ring map $R_0 \to R$ such that $R = R \otimes _{R_0} S_0$. Denote $\mathfrak q_0$ the prime of $S_0$ corresponding to $\mathfrak q$. If we show the result for $(R_0 \to S_0, \mathfrak q_0)$ then the result follows for $(R \to S, \mathfrak q)$ by base change. Hence we may assume that $R$ is Noetherian.

Step 3. Note that $R \to S$ is quasi-finite by Lemma 10.143.6. By Lemma 10.123.14 there exists a finite ring map $R \to S'$, an $R$-algebra map $S' \to S$, an element $g' \in S'$ such that $g' \not\in \mathfrak q$ such that $S' \to S$ induces an isomorphism $S'_{g'} \cong S_{g'}$. (Note that of course $S'$ is not étale over $R$ in general.) Thus we may assume that (a) $R$ is Noetherian, (b) $R \to S$ is finite and (c) $R \to S$ is étale at $\mathfrak q$ (but no longer necessarily étale at all primes).

Step 4. Let $\mathfrak p \subset R$ be the prime corresponding to $\mathfrak q$. Consider the fibre ring $S \otimes _ R \kappa (\mathfrak p)$. This is a finite algebra over $\kappa (\mathfrak p)$. Hence it is Artinian (see Lemma 10.53.2) and so a finite product of local rings

\[ S \otimes _ R \kappa (\mathfrak p) = \prod \nolimits _{i = 1}^ n A_ i \]

see Proposition 10.60.7. One of the factors, say $A_1$, is the local ring $S_{\mathfrak q}/\mathfrak pS_{\mathfrak q}$ which is isomorphic to $\kappa (\mathfrak q)$, see Lemma 10.143.5. The other factors correspond to the other primes, say $\mathfrak q_2, \ldots , \mathfrak q_ n$ of $S$ lying over $\mathfrak p$.

Step 5. We may choose a nonzero element $\alpha \in \kappa (\mathfrak q)$ which generates the finite separable field extension $\kappa (\mathfrak p) \subset \kappa (\mathfrak q)$ (so even if the field extension is trivial we do not allow $\alpha = 0$). Note that for any $\lambda \in \kappa (\mathfrak p)^*$ the element $\lambda \alpha $ also generates $\kappa (\mathfrak q)$ over $\kappa (\mathfrak p)$. Consider the element

\[ \overline{t} = (\alpha , 0, \ldots , 0) \in \prod \nolimits _{i = 1}^ n A_ i = S \otimes _ R \kappa (\mathfrak p). \]

After possibly replacing $\alpha $ by $\lambda \alpha $ as above we may assume that $\overline{t}$ is the image of $t \in S$. Let $I \subset R[x]$ be the kernel of the $R$-algebra map $R[x] \to S$ which maps $x$ to $t$. Set $S' = R[x]/I$, so $S' \subset S$. Here is a diagram

\[ \xymatrix{ R[x] \ar[r] & S' \ar[r] & S \\ R \ar[u] \ar[ru] \ar[rru] & & } \]

By construction the primes $\mathfrak q_ j$, $j \geq 2$ of $S$ all lie over the prime $(\mathfrak p, x)$ of $R[x]$, whereas the prime $\mathfrak q$ lies over a different prime of $R[x]$ because $\alpha \not= 0$.

Step 6. Denote $\mathfrak q' \subset S'$ the prime of $S'$ corresponding to $\mathfrak q$. By the above $\mathfrak q$ is the only prime of $S$ lying over $\mathfrak q'$. Thus we see that $S_{\mathfrak q} = S_{\mathfrak q'}$, see Lemma 10.41.11 (we have going up for $S' \to S$ by Lemma 10.36.22 since $S' \to S$ is finite as $R \to S$ is finite). It follows that $S'_{\mathfrak q'} \to S_{\mathfrak q}$ is finite and injective as the localization of the finite injective ring map $S' \to S$. Consider the maps of local rings

\[ R_{\mathfrak p} \to S'_{\mathfrak q'} \to S_{\mathfrak q} \]

The second map is finite and injective. We have $S_{\mathfrak q}/\mathfrak pS_{\mathfrak q} = \kappa (\mathfrak q)$, see Lemma 10.143.5. Hence a fortiori $S_{\mathfrak q}/\mathfrak q'S_{\mathfrak q} = \kappa (\mathfrak q)$. Since

\[ \kappa (\mathfrak p) \subset \kappa (\mathfrak q') \subset \kappa (\mathfrak q) \]

and since $\alpha $ is in the image of $\kappa (\mathfrak q')$ in $\kappa (\mathfrak q)$ we conclude that $\kappa (\mathfrak q') = \kappa (\mathfrak q)$. Hence by Nakayama's Lemma 10.20.1 applied to the $S'_{\mathfrak q'}$-module map $S'_{\mathfrak q'} \to S_{\mathfrak q}$, the map $S'_{\mathfrak q'} \to S_{\mathfrak q}$ is surjective. In other words, $S'_{\mathfrak q'} \cong S_{\mathfrak q}$.

Step 7. By Lemma 10.126.7 there exist $g \in S$, $g \not\in \mathfrak q$ and $g' \in S'$, $g' \not\in \mathfrak q'$ such that $S'_{g'} \cong S_ g$. As $R$ is Noetherian the ring $S'$ is finite over $R$ because it is an $R$-submodule of the finite $R$-module $S$. Hence after replacing $S$ by $S'$ we may assume that (a) $R$ is Noetherian, (b) $S$ finite over $R$, (c) $S$ is étale over $R$ at $\mathfrak q$, and (d) $S = R[x]/I$.

Step 8. Consider the ring $S \otimes _ R \kappa (\mathfrak p) = \kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]/\overline{I}$ where $\overline{I} = I \cdot \kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]$ is the ideal generated by $I$ in $\kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]$. As $\kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]$ is a PID we know that $\overline{I} = (\overline{h})$ for some monic $\overline{h} \in \kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]$. After replacing $\overline{h}$ by $\lambda \cdot \overline{h}$ for some $\lambda \in \kappa (\mathfrak p)$ we may assume that $\overline{h}$ is the image of some $h \in I \subset R[x]$. (The problem is that we do not know if we may choose $h$ monic.) Also, as in Step 4 we know that $S \otimes _ R \kappa (\mathfrak p) = A_1 \times \ldots \times A_ n$ with $A_1 = \kappa (\mathfrak q)$ a finite separable extension of $\kappa (\mathfrak p)$ and $A_2, \ldots , A_ n$ local. This implies that

\[ \overline{h} = \overline{h}_1 \overline{h}_2^{e_2} \ldots \overline{h}_ n^{e_ n} \]

for certain pairwise coprime irreducible monic polynomials $\overline{h}_ i \in \kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]$ and certain $e_2, \ldots , e_ n \geq 1$. Here the numbering is chosen so that $A_ i = \kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]/(\overline{h}_ i^{e_ i})$ as $\kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]$-algebras. Note that $\overline{h}_1$ is the minimal polynomial of $\alpha \in \kappa (\mathfrak q)$ and hence is a separable polynomial (its derivative is prime to itself).

Step 9. Let $m \in I$ be a monic element; such an element exists because the ring extension $R \to R[x]/I$ is finite hence integral. Denote $\overline{m}$ the image in $\kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]$. We may factor

\[ \overline{m} = \overline{k} \overline{h}_1^{d_1} \overline{h}_2^{d_2} \ldots \overline{h}_ n^{d_ n} \]

for some $d_1 \geq 1$, $d_ j \geq e_ j$, $j = 2, \ldots , n$ and $\overline{k} \in \kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]$ prime to all the $\overline{h}_ i$. Set $f = m^ l + h$ where $l \deg (m) > \deg (h)$, and $l \geq 2$. Then $f$ is monic as a polynomial over $R$. Also, the image $\overline{f}$ of $f$ in $\kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]$ factors as

\[ \overline{f} = \overline{h}_1 \overline{h}_2^{e_2} \ldots \overline{h}_ n^{e_ n} + \overline{k}^ l \overline{h}_1^{ld_1} \overline{h}_2^{ld_2} \ldots \overline{h}_ n^{ld_ n} = \overline{h}_1(\overline{h}_2^{e_2} \ldots \overline{h}_ n^{e_ n} + \overline{k}^ l \overline{h}_1^{ld_1 - 1} \overline{h}_2^{ld_2} \ldots \overline{h}_ n^{ld_ n}) = \overline{h}_1 \overline{w} \]

with $\overline{w}$ a polynomial relatively prime to $\overline{h}_1$. Set $g = f'$ (the derivative with respect to $x$).

Step 10. The ring map $R[x] \to S = R[x]/I$ has the properties: (1) it maps $f$ to zero, and (2) it maps $g$ to an element of $S \setminus \mathfrak q$. The first assertion is clear since $f$ is an element of $I$. For the second assertion we just have to show that $g$ does not map to zero in $\kappa (\mathfrak q) = \kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]/(\overline{h}_1)$. The image of $g$ in $\kappa (\mathfrak p)[x]$ is the derivative of $\overline{f}$. Thus (2) is clear because

\[ \overline{g} = \frac{\text{d}\overline{f}}{\text{d}x} = \overline{w}\frac{\text{d}\overline{h}_1}{\text{d}x} + \overline{h}_1\frac{\text{d}\overline{w}}{\text{d}x}, \]

$\overline{w}$ is prime to $\overline{h}_1$ and $\overline{h}_1$ is separable.

Step 11. We conclude that $\varphi : R[x]/(f) \to S$ is a surjective ring map, $R[x]_ g/(f)$ is étale over $R$ (because it is standard étale, see Lemma 10.144.2) and $\varphi (g) \not\in \mathfrak q$. Pick an element $g' \in R[x]/(f)$ such that also $\varphi (g') \not\in \mathfrak q$ and $S_{\varphi (g')}$ is étale over $R$ (which exists since $S$ is étale over $R$ at $\mathfrak q$). Then the ring map $R[x]_{gg'}/(f) \to S_{\varphi (gg')}$ is a surjective map of étale algebras over $R$. Hence it is étale by Lemma 10.143.8. Hence it is a localization by Lemma 10.143.9. Thus a localization of $S$ at an element not in $\mathfrak q$ is isomorphic to a localization of a standard étale algebra over $R$ which is what we wanted to show. $\square$


Comments (2)

Comment #6330 by suggestion_bot on

For practical use, I think it would be very nice to mildly generalize the statement as follows.

Let be a ring map. Let be distinct prime ideals at which the map is étale. Then there exists a such that is standard étale.

Essentially the same proof works, with some straigt-forward minor changes (I did actually read the proof and check carefully, I am not bluffing). For instance, as an initial reduction, the statement reduces to the case when there are no nontrivial specializations between the 's.

Here are some small comments about the proof, as it is currently written:

  1. is used twice for two different things, this is pretty confusing! To get around this, maybe in Step 3 just rename to , this is probably the quickest fix.
  2. In Step 6, a period is missing in the first display.
  3. In Step 7, we may choose : basically, we already know that , so the claim is a matter of simple of spreading out, there is no need to refer to Lemma 00QS. Of course, once the statement is generalized to finitely many primes as I am suggesting, at this step we would be spreading out from the semilocalization of at finitely many primes, instead of from the localization at a single prime.
  4. In Step 11, I am not sure why we are referring to Lemma 00UC: the thing is standard étale basically by definition, so we should refer to Definition 00UB instead.
  5. Once we have finitely many primes as I am suggesting, we should partition them according to -fibers (so according to the 's that they lie over). Multiple 's may lie over the same , that is not a problem: for example, when we analyze in Step 9, then we will then have finitely many distinct factors instead of just a single one, but this does not cause a problem.

(Sorry, this last point is rather trivial, I just thought I'd indicate the type of changes that one needs to make in the proof.)

Comment #6434 by on

OK, I think what you say cannot be true. Namely, consider the etale algebra map and let your set of primes be all maximal ideals of . Since is not standard etale over what you ask cannot be true. Right?


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 00UE. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.