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*}

[II Proposition 7.2.3, EGA]

Proof. By assumption (1), Proposition 25.20.6, and Lemma 25.10.4 we see that it suffices to prove the morphism $\Delta _{X/S} : X \to X \times _ S X$ satisfies the existence part of the valuative criterion. Let a solid commutative diagram

\[ \xymatrix{ \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(K) \ar[r] \ar[d] & X \ar[d] \\ \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A) \ar[r] \ar@{-->}[ru] & X \times _ S X } \]

be given. The lower right arrow corresponds to a pair of morphisms $a, b : \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A) \to X$ over $S$. By (2) we see that $a = b$. Hence using $a$ as the dotted arrow works. $\square$


Comments (5)

Comment #1725 by Keenan Kidwell on

Maybe it would be good to add, in addition to the reference to 01KF, a reference (in the same place) to 01IQ, since the valuative criterion shows (in particular) that the diagonal is closed, while 01IQ says that this closedness is enough to conclude that the diagonal is a closed immersion.

Comment #2706 by Ariyan Javanpeykar on

A reference for the valuative criterion of separatedness: EGA II, Proposition 7.2.3

Comment #3814 by Kestutis Cesnavicius on

Same comment as for https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/01KE


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Your email address will not be published.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 01L0. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.