The Stacks project

26.14 Glueing schemes

Let $I$ be a set. For each $i \in I$ let $(X_ i, \mathcal{O}_ i)$ be a locally ringed space. (Actually the construction that follows works equally well for ringed spaces.) For each pair $i, j \in I$ let $U_{ij} \subset X_ i$ be an open subspace. For each pair $i, j \in I$, let

\[ \varphi _{ij} : U_{ij} \to U_{ji} \]

be an isomorphism of locally ringed spaces. For convenience we assume that $U_{ii} = X_ i$ and $\varphi _{ii} = \text{id}_{X_ i}$. For each triple $i, j, k \in I$ assume that

  1. we have $\varphi _{ij}^{-1}(U_{ji} \cap U_{jk}) = U_{ij} \cap U_{ik}$, and

  2. the diagram

    \[ \xymatrix{ U_{ij} \cap U_{ik} \ar[rr]_{\varphi _{ik}} \ar[rd]_{\varphi _{ij}} & & U_{ki} \cap U_{kj} \\ & U_{ji} \cap U_{jk} \ar[ru]_{\varphi _{jk}} } \]

    is commutative.

Let us call a collection $(I, (X_ i)_{i\in I}, (U_{ij})_{i, j\in I}, (\varphi _{ij})_{i, j\in I})$ satisfying the conditions above a glueing data.

slogan

Lemma 26.14.1. Given any glueing data of locally ringed spaces there exists a locally ringed space $X$ and open subspaces $U_ i \subset X$ together with isomorphisms $\varphi _ i : X_ i \to U_ i$ of locally ringed spaces such that

  1. $\varphi _ i(U_{ij}) = U_ i \cap U_ j$, and

  2. $\varphi _{ij} = \varphi _ j^{-1}|_{U_ i \cap U_ j} \circ \varphi _ i|_{U_{ij}}$.

The locally ringed space $X$ is characterized by the following mapping properties: Given a locally ringed space $Y$ we have

\begin{eqnarray*} \mathop{Mor}\nolimits (X, Y) & = & \{ (f_ i)_{i\in I} \mid f_ i : X_ i \to Y, \ f_ j \circ \varphi _{ij} = f_ i|_{U_{ij}}\} \\ f & \mapsto & (f|_{U_ i} \circ \varphi _ i)_{i \in I} \\ \mathop{Mor}\nolimits (Y, X) & = & \left\{ \begin{matrix} \text{open covering }Y = \bigcup \nolimits _{i \in I} V_ i\text{ and } (g_ i : V_ i \to X_ i)_{i \in I} \text{ such that} \\ g_ i^{-1}(U_{ij}) = V_ i \cap V_ j \text{ and } g_ j|_{V_ i \cap V_ j} = \varphi _{ij} \circ g_ i|_{V_ i \cap V_ j} \end{matrix} \right\} \\ g & \mapsto & V_ i = g^{-1}(U_ i), \ g_ i = \varphi _ i^{-1} \circ g|_{V_ i} \end{eqnarray*}

Proof. We construct $X$ in stages. As a set we take

\[ X = (\coprod X_ i) / \sim . \]

Here given $x \in X_ i$ and $x' \in X_ j$ we say $x \sim x'$ if and only if $x \in U_{ij}$, $x' \in U_{ji}$ and $\varphi _{ij}(x) = x'$. This is an equivalence relation since if $x \in X_ i$, $x' \in X_ j$, $x'' \in X_ k$, and $x \sim x'$ and $x' \sim x''$, then $x' \in U_{ji} \cap U_{jk}$, hence by condition (1) of a glueing data also $x \in U_{ij} \cap U_{ik}$ and $x'' \in U_{ki} \cap U_{kj}$ and by condition (2) we see that $\varphi _{ik}(x) = x''$. (Reflexivity and symmetry follows from our assumptions that $U_{ii} = X_ i$ and $\varphi _{ii} = \text{id}_{X_ i}$.) Denote $\varphi _ i : X_ i \to X$ the natural maps. Denote $U_ i = \varphi _ i(X_ i) \subset X$. Note that $\varphi _ i : X_ i \to U_ i$ is a bijection.

The topology on $X$ is defined by the rule that $U \subset X$ is open if and only if $\varphi _ i^{-1}(U)$ is open for all $i$. We leave it to the reader to verify that this does indeed define a topology. Note that in particular $U_ i$ is open since $\varphi _ j^{-1}(U_ i) = U_{ji}$ which is open in $X_ j$ for all $j$. Moreover, for any open set $W \subset X_ i$ the image $\varphi _ i(W) \subset U_ i$ is open because $\varphi _ j^{-1}(\varphi _ i(W)) = \varphi _{ji}^{-1}(W \cap U_{ij})$. Therefore $\varphi _ i : X_ i \to U_ i$ is a homeomorphism.

To obtain a locally ringed space we have to construct the sheaf of rings $\mathcal{O}_ X$. We do this by glueing the sheaves of rings $\mathcal{O}_{U_ i} := \varphi _{i, *} \mathcal{O}_ i$. Namely, in the commutative diagram

\[ \xymatrix{ U_{ij} \ar[rr]_{\varphi _{ij}} \ar[rd]_{\varphi _ i|_{U_{ij}}} & & U_{ji} \ar[ld]^{\varphi _ j|_{U_{ji}}} \\ & U_ i \cap U_ j & } \]

the arrow on top is an isomorphism of ringed spaces, and hence we get unique isomorphisms of sheaves of rings

\[ \mathcal{O}_{U_ i}|_{U_ i \cap U_ j} \longrightarrow \mathcal{O}_{U_ j}|_{U_ i \cap U_ j}. \]

These satisfy a cocycle condition as in Sheaves, Section 6.33. By the results of that section we obtain a sheaf of rings $\mathcal{O}_ X$ on $X$ such that $\mathcal{O}_ X|_{U_ i}$ is isomorphic to $\mathcal{O}_{U_ i}$ compatibly with the glueing maps displayed above. In particular $(X, \mathcal{O}_ X)$ is a locally ringed space since the stalks of $\mathcal{O}_ X$ are equal to the stalks of $\mathcal{O}_ i$ at corresponding points.

The proof of the mapping properties is omitted. $\square$

slogan

Lemma 26.14.2. In Lemma 26.14.1 above, assume that all $X_ i$ are schemes. Then the resulting locally ringed space $X$ is a scheme.

Proof. This is clear since each of the $U_ i$ is a scheme and hence every $x \in X$ has an affine neighbourhood. $\square$

It is customary to think of $X_ i$ as an open subspace of $X$ via the isomorphisms $\varphi _ i$. We will do this in the next two examples.

Example 26.14.3 (Affine space with zero doubled). Let $k$ be a field. Let $n \geq 1$. Let $X_1 = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k[x_1, \ldots , x_ n])$, let $X_2 = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k[y_1, \ldots , y_ n])$. Let $0_1 \in X_1$ be the point corresponding to the maximal ideal $(x_1, \ldots , x_ n) \subset k[x_1, \ldots , x_ n]$. Let $0_2 \in X_2$ be the point corresponding to the maximal ideal $(y_1, \ldots , y_ n) \subset k[y_1, \ldots , y_ n]$. Let $U_{12} = X_1 \setminus \{ 0_1\} $ and let $U_{21} = X_2 \setminus \{ 0_2\} $. Let $\varphi _{12} : U_{12} \to U_{21}$ be the isomorphism coming from the isomorphism of $k$-algebras $k[y_1, \ldots , y_ n] \to k[x_1, \ldots , x_ n]$ mapping $y_ i$ to $x_ i$ (which induces $X_1 \cong X_2$ mapping $0_1$ to $0_2$). Let $X$ be the scheme obtained from the glueing data $(X_1, X_2, U_{12}, U_{21}, \varphi _{12}, \varphi _{21} = \varphi _{12}^{-1})$. Via the slight abuse of notation introduced above the example we think of $X_1, X_2 \subset X$ as open subschemes. There is a morphism $f : X \to \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k[t_1, \ldots , t_ n])$ which on $X_1$ (resp. $X_2$) corresponds to $k$ algebra map $k[t_1, \ldots , t_ n] \to k[x_1, \ldots , x_ n]$ (resp. $k[t_1, \ldots , t_ n] \to k[y_1, \ldots , y_ n]$) mapping $t_ i$ to $x_ i$ (resp. $t_ i$ to $y_ i$). It is easy to see that this morphism identifies $k[t_1, \ldots , t_ n]$ with $\Gamma (X, \mathcal{O}_ X)$. Since $f(0_1) = f(0_2)$ we see that $X$ is not affine.

Note that $X_1$ and $X_2$ are affine opens of $X$. But, if $n = 2$, then $X_1 \cap X_2$ is the scheme described in Example 26.9.3 and hence not affine. Thus in general the intersection of affine opens of a scheme is not affine. (This fact holds more generally for any $n > 1$.)

Another curious feature of this example is the following. If $n > 1$ there are many irreducible closed subsets $T \subset X$ (take the closure of any non closed point in $X_1$ for example). But unless $T = \{ 0_1\} $, or $T = \{ 0_2\} $ we have $0_1 \in T \Leftrightarrow 0_2 \in T$. Proof omitted.

Example 26.14.4 (Projective line). Let $k$ be a field. Let $X_1 = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k[x])$, let $X_2 = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k[y])$. Let $0 \in X_1$ be the point corresponding to the maximal ideal $(x) \subset k[x]$. Let $\infty \in X_2$ be the point corresponding to the maximal ideal $(y) \subset k[y]$. Let $U_{12} = X_1 \setminus \{ 0\} = D(x) = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k[x, 1/x])$ and let $U_{21} = X_2 \setminus \{ \infty \} = D(y) = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k[y, 1/y])$. Let $\varphi _{12} : U_{12} \to U_{21}$ be the isomorphism coming from the isomorphism of $k$-algebras $k[y, 1/y] \to k[x, 1/x]$ mapping $y$ to $1/x$. Let $\mathbf{P}^1_ k$ be the scheme obtained from the glueing data $(X_1, X_2, U_{12}, U_{21}, \varphi _{12}, \varphi _{21} = \varphi _{12}^{-1})$. Via the slight abuse of notation introduced above the example we think of $X_ i \subset \mathbf{P}^1_ k$ as open subschemes. In this case we see that $\Gamma (\mathbf{P}^1_ k, \mathcal{O}) = k$ because the only polynomials $g(x)$ in $x$ such that $g(1/y)$ is also a polynomial in $y$ are constant polynomials. Since $\mathbf{P}^1_ k$ is infinite we see that $\mathbf{P}^1_ k$ is not affine.

We claim that there exists an affine open $U \subset \mathbf{P}^1_ k$ which contains both $0$ and $\infty $. Namely, let $U = \mathbf{P}^1_ k \setminus \{ 1\} $, where $1$ is the point of $X_1$ corresponding to the maximal ideal $(x - 1)$ and also the point of $X_2$ corresponding to the maximal ideal $(y - 1)$. Then it is easy to see that $s = 1/(x - 1) = y/(1 - y) \in \Gamma (U, \mathcal{O}_ U)$. In fact you can show that $\Gamma (U, \mathcal{O}_ U)$ is equal to the polynomial ring $k[s]$ and that the corresponding morphism $U \to \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k[s])$ is an isomorphism of schemes. Details omitted.


Comments (5)

Comment #1261 by Lau on

In the proof of Lemma 25.14.1, the author writes that because is an isomorphism of ringed spaces, we get an isomorphism of ringed spaces . Can someone explain how this morphism is defined?

Comment #1262 by Lau on

Another little thing: In the proof of this Lemma, right before the line "Namely, in the commutative diagram", the structure sheaf of is refered to as , while in the description of a gluing data, it's called .

Comment #1264 by on

The answer to your first question is that you take and push it down with to . The second comment I fixed here. Thanks!

Comment #2438 by Dmitrii Pedchenko on

The characterization of by the rule seems to produce a map . If we want it to land in we have to compose with - .


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 01JA. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.