## 27.5 Noetherian schemes

Recall that a ring $R$ is Noetherian if it satisfies the ascending chain condition of ideals. Equivalently every ideal of $R$ is finitely generated.

Definition 27.5.1. Let $X$ be a scheme.

1. We say $X$ is locally Noetherian if every $x \in X$ has an affine open neighbourhood $\mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R) = U \subset X$ such that the ring $R$ is Noetherian.

2. We say $X$ is Noetherian if $X$ is locally Noetherian and quasi-compact.

Here is the standard result characterizing locally Noetherian schemes.

Lemma 27.5.2. Let $X$ be a scheme. The following are equivalent:

1. The scheme $X$ is locally Noetherian.

2. For every affine open $U \subset X$ the ring $\mathcal{O}_ X(U)$ is Noetherian.

3. There exists an affine open covering $X = \bigcup U_ i$ such that each $\mathcal{O}_ X(U_ i)$ is Noetherian.

4. There exists an open covering $X = \bigcup X_ j$ such that each open subscheme $X_ j$ is locally Noetherian.

Moreover, if $X$ is locally Noetherian then every open subscheme is locally Noetherian.

Proof. To show this it suffices to show that being Noetherian is a local property of rings, see Lemma 27.4.3. Any localization of a Noetherian ring is Noetherian, see Algebra, Lemma 10.30.1. By Algebra, Lemma 10.22.2 we see the second property to Definition 27.4.1. $\square$

Lemma 27.5.3. Any immersion $Z \to X$ with $X$ locally Noetherian is quasi-compact.

Proof. A closed immersion is clearly quasi-compact. A composition of quasi-compact morphisms is quasi-compact, see Topology, Lemma 5.12.2. Hence it suffices to show that an open immersion into a locally Noetherian scheme is quasi-compact. Using Schemes, Lemma 25.19.2 we reduce to the case where $X$ is affine. Any open subset of the spectrum of a Noetherian ring is quasi-compact (for example combine Algebra, Lemma 10.30.5 and Topology, Lemmas 5.9.2 and 5.12.13). $\square$

Proof. By Schemes, Lemma 25.21.6 we have to show that the intersection $U \cap V$ of two affine opens of $X$ is quasi-compact. This follows from Lemma 27.5.3 above on considering the open immersion $U \cap V \to U$ for example. (But really it is just because any open of the spectrum of a Noetherian ring is quasi-compact.) $\square$

Lemma 27.5.5. A (locally) Noetherian scheme has a (locally) Noetherian underlying topological space, see Topology, Definition 5.9.1.

Proof. This is because a Noetherian scheme is a finite union of spectra of Noetherian rings and Algebra, Lemma 10.30.5 and Topology, Lemma 5.9.4. $\square$

Lemma 27.5.6. Any locally closed subscheme of a (locally) Noetherian scheme is (locally) Noetherian.

Proof. Omitted. Hint: Any quotient, and any localization of a Noetherian ring is Noetherian. For the Noetherian case use again that any subset of a Noetherian space is a Noetherian space (with induced topology). $\square$

Lemma 27.5.7. A Noetherian scheme has a finite number of irreducible components.

Proof. The underlying topological space of a Noetherian scheme is Noetherian (Lemma 27.5.5) and we conclude because a Noetherian topological space has only finitely many irreducible components (Topology, Lemma 5.9.2). $\square$

Lemma 27.5.8. Any morphism of schemes $f : X \to Y$ with $X$ Noetherian is quasi-compact.

Proof. Use Lemma 27.5.5 and use that any subset of a Noetherian topological space is quasi-compact (see Topology, Lemmas 5.9.2 and 5.12.13). $\square$

Here is a fun lemma. It says that every locally Noetherian scheme has plenty of closed points (at least one in every closed subset).

Lemma 27.5.9. Any nonempty locally Noetherian scheme has a closed point. Any nonempty closed subset of a locally Noetherian scheme has a closed point. Equivalently, any point of a locally Noetherian scheme specializes to a closed point.

Proof. The second assertion follows from the first (using Schemes, Lemma 25.12.4 and Lemma 27.5.6). Consider any nonempty affine open $U \subset X$. Let $x \in U$ be a closed point. If $x$ is a closed point of $X$ then we are done. If not, let $X_0 \subset X$ be the reduced induced closed subscheme structure on $\overline{\{ x\} }$. Then $U_0 = U \cap X_0$ is an affine open of $X_0$ by Schemes, Lemma 25.10.1 and $U_0 = \{ x\}$. Let $y \in X_0$, $y \not= x$ be a specialization of $x$. Consider the local ring $R = \mathcal{O}_{X_0, y}$. This is a Noetherian local ring as $X_0$ is Noetherian by Lemma 27.5.6. Denote $V \subset \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R)$ the inverse image of $U_0$ in $\mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R)$ by the canonical morphism $\mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R) \to X_0$ (see Schemes, Section 25.13.) By construction $V$ is a singleton with unique point corresponding to $x$ (use Schemes, Lemma 25.13.2). By Algebra, Lemma 10.60.1 we see that $\dim (R) = 1$. In other words, we see that $y$ is an immediate specialization of $x$ (see Topology, Definition 5.20.1). In other words, any point $y \not= x$ such that $x \leadsto y$ is an immediate specialization of $x$. Clearly each of these points is a closed point as desired. $\square$

Lemma 27.5.10. Let $X$ be a locally Noetherian scheme. Let $x' \leadsto x$ be a specialization of points of $X$. Then

1. there exists a discrete valuation ring $R$ and a morphism $f : \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R) \to X$ such that the generic point $\eta$ of $\mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R)$ maps to $x'$ and the special point maps to $x$, and

2. given a finitely generated field extension $\kappa (x') \subset K$ we may arrange it so that the extension $\kappa (x') \subset \kappa (\eta )$ induced by $f$ is isomorphic to the given one.

Proof. Let $x' \leadsto x$ be a specialization in $X$, and let $\kappa (x') \subset K$ be a finitely generated extension of fields. By Schemes, Lemma 25.13.2 and the discussion following Schemes, Lemma 25.13.3 this leads to ring maps $\mathcal{O}_{X, x} \to \kappa (x') \to K$. Let $R \subset K$ be any discrete valuation ring whose field of fractions is $K$ and which dominates the image of $\mathcal{O}_{X, x} \to K$, see Algebra, Lemma 10.118.13. The ring map $\mathcal{O}_{X, x} \to R$ induces the morphism $f : \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R) \to X$, see Schemes, Lemma 25.13.1. This morphism has all the desired properties by construction. $\square$

Lemma 27.5.11. Let $S$ be a Noetherian scheme. Let $T \subset S$ be an infinite subset. Then there exists an infinite subset $T' \subset T$ such that there are no nontrivial specializations among the points $T'$.

Proof. Let $T_0 \subset T$ be the set of $t \in T$ which do not specialize to another point of $T$. If $T_0$ is infinite, then $T' = T_0$ works. Hence we may and do assume $T_0$ is finite. Inductively, for $i > 0$, consider the set $T_ i \subset T$ of $t \in T$ such that

1. $t \not\in T_{i - 1} \cup T_{i - 2} \cup \ldots \cup T_0$,

2. there exist a nontrivial specialization $t \leadsto t'$ with $t' \in T_{i - 1}$, and

3. for any nontrivial specialization $t \leadsto t'$ with $t' \in T$ we have $t' \in T_{i - 1} \cup T_{i - 2} \cup \ldots \cup T_0$.

Again, if $T_ i$ is infinite, then $T' = T_ i$ works. Let $d$ be the maximum of the dimensions of the local rings $\mathcal{O}_{S, t}$ for $t \in T_0$; then $d$ is an integer because $T_0$ is finite and the dimensions of the local rings are finite by Algebra, Proposition 10.59.8. Then $T_ i = \emptyset$ for $i > d$. Namely, if $t \in T_ i$ then we can find a sequence of nontrivial specializations $t = t_ i \leadsto t_{i - 1} \leadsto \ldots \leadsto t_0$ with $t_0 \in T_0$. As the points $t = t_ i, t_{i - 1}, \ldots , t_0$ are in $\mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(\mathcal{O}_{S, t_0})$ (Schemes, Lemma 25.13.2), we see that $i \leq d$. Thus $\bigcup T_ i = T_ d \cup \ldots \cup T_0$ is a finite subset of $T$.

Suppose $t \in T$ is not in $\bigcup T_ i$. Then there must be a specialization $t \leadsto t'$ with $t' \in T$ and $t' \not\in \bigcup T_ i$. (Namely, if every specialization of $t$ is in the finite set $T_ d \cup \ldots \cup T_0$, then there is a maximum $i$ such that there is some specialization $t \leadsto t'$ with $t' \in T_ i$ and then $t \in T_{i + 1}$ by construction.) Hence we get an infinite sequence

$t \leadsto t' \leadsto t'' \leadsto \ldots$

of nontrivial specializations between points of $T \setminus \bigcup T_ i$. This is impossible because the underlying topological space of $S$ is Noetherian by Lemma 27.5.4. $\square$

## Comments (2)

Comment #1468 by sdf on

line 493: The underlying topological of -> The underlying topological space of

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