Lemma 35.25.1. Let f : X \to Y be a flat, quasi-compact, surjective monomorphism. Then f is an isomorphism.
35.25 Application of fpqc descent of properties of morphisms
The following lemma may seem a bit frivolous but turns out is a useful tool in studying étale and unramified morphisms.
Proof. As f is a flat, quasi-compact, surjective morphism we see \{ X \to Y\} is an fpqc covering of Y. The diagonal \Delta : X \to X \times _ Y X is an isomorphism (Schemes, Lemma 26.23.2). This implies that the base change of f by f is an isomorphism. Hence we see f is an isomorphism by Lemma 35.23.17. \square
We can use this lemma to show the following important result; we also give a proof avoiding fpqc descent. We will discuss this and related results in more detail in Étale Morphisms, Section 41.14.
Lemma 35.25.2. A universally injective étale morphism is an open immersion.
First proof. Let f : X \to Y be an étale morphism which is universally injective. Then f is open (Morphisms, Lemma 29.36.13) hence we can replace Y by f(X) and we may assume that f is surjective. Then f is bijective and open hence a homeomorphism. Hence f is quasi-compact. Thus by Lemma 35.25.1 it suffices to show that f is a monomorphism. As X \to Y is étale the morphism \Delta _{X/Y} : X \to X \times _ Y X is an open immersion by Morphisms, Lemma 29.35.13 (and Morphisms, Lemma 29.36.16). As f is universally injective \Delta _{X/Y} is also surjective, see Morphisms, Lemma 29.10.2. Hence \Delta _{X/Y} is an isomorphism, i.e., X \to Y is a monomorphism. \square
Second proof. Let f : X \to Y be an étale morphism which is universally injective. Then f is open (Morphisms, Lemma 29.36.13) hence we can replace Y by f(X) and we may assume that f is surjective. Since the hypotheses remain satisfied after any base change, we conclude that f is a universal homeomorphism. Therefore f is integral, see Morphisms, Lemma 29.45.5. It follows that f is finite by Morphisms, Lemma 29.44.4. It follows that f is finite locally free by Morphisms, Lemma 29.48.2. To finish the proof, it suffices that f is finite locally free of degree 1 (a finite locally free morphism of degree 1 is an isomorphism). There is decomposition of Y into open and closed subschemes V_ d such that f^{-1}(V_ d) \to V_ d is finite locally free of degree d, see Morphisms, Lemma 29.48.5. If V_ d is not empty, we can pick a morphism \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k) \to V_ d \subset Y where k is an algebraically closed field (just take the algebraic closure of the residue field of some point of V_ d). Then \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k) \times _ Y X \to \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k) is a disjoint union of copies of \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(k), by Morphisms, Lemma 29.36.7 and the fact that k is algebraically closed. However, since f is universally injective, there can only be one copy and hence d = 1 as desired. \square
We can reformulate the hypotheses in the lemma above a bit by using the following characterization of flat universally injective morphisms.
Lemma 35.25.3. Let f : X \to Y be a morphism of schemes. Let X^0 denote the set of generic points of irreducible components of X. If
f is flat and separated,
for \xi \in X^0 we have \kappa (f(\xi )) = \kappa (\xi ), and
if \xi , \xi ' \in X^0, \xi \not= \xi ', then f(\xi ) \not= f(\xi '),
then f is universally injective.
Proof. We have to show that \Delta : X \to X \times _ Y X is surjective, see Morphisms, Lemma 29.10.2. As X \to Y is separated, the image of \Delta is closed. Thus if \Delta is not surjective, we can find a generic point \eta \in X \times _ S X of an irreducible component of X \times _ S X which is not in the image of \Delta . The projection \text{pr}_1 : X \times _ Y X \to X is flat as a base change of the flat morphism X \to Y, see Morphisms, Lemma 29.25.8. Hence generalizations lift along \text{pr}_1, see Morphisms, Lemma 29.25.9. We conclude that \xi = \text{pr}_1(\eta ) \in X^0. However, assumptions (2) and (3) guarantee that the scheme (X \times _ Y X)_{f(\xi )} has at most one point for every \xi \in X^0. In other words, we have \Delta (\xi ) = \eta a contradiction. \square
Thus we can reformulate Lemma 35.25.2 as follows.
Lemma 35.25.4. Let f : X \to Y be a morphism of schemes. Let X^0 denote the set of generic points of irreducible components of X. If
f is étale and separated,
for \xi \in X^0 we have \kappa (f(\xi )) = \kappa (\xi ), and
if \xi , \xi ' \in X^0, \xi \not= \xi ', then f(\xi ) \not= f(\xi '),
then f is an open immersion.
Lemma 35.25.5. Let f : X \to Y be a morphism of schemes which is locally of finite type. Let Z be a closed subset of X. If there exists an fpqc covering \{ Y_ i \to Y\} such that the inverse image Z_ i \subset Y_ i \times _ Y X is proper over Y_ i (Cohomology of Schemes, Definition 30.26.2) then Z is proper over Y.
Proof. Endow Z with the reduced induced closed subscheme structure, see Schemes, Definition 26.12.5. For every i the base change Y_ i \times _ Y Z is a closed subscheme of Y_ i \times _ Y X whose underlying closed subset is Z_ i. By definition (via Cohomology of Schemes, Lemma 30.26.1) we conclude that the projections Y_ i \times _ Y Z \to Y_ i are proper morphisms. Hence Z \to Y is a proper morphism by Lemma 35.23.14. Thus Z is proper over Y by definition. \square
Lemma 35.25.6. Let f : X \to S be a morphism of schemes. Let \mathcal{L} be an invertible \mathcal{O}_ X-module. Let \{ g_ i : S_ i \to S\} _{i \in I} be an fpqc covering. Let f_ i : X_ i \to S_ i be the base change of f and let \mathcal{L}_ i be the pullback of \mathcal{L} to X_ i. The following are equivalent
\mathcal{L} is ample on X/S, and
\mathcal{L}_ i is ample on X_ i/S_ i for every i \in I.
Proof. The implication (1) \Rightarrow (2) follows from Morphisms, Lemma 29.37.9. Assume \mathcal{L}_ i is ample on X_ i/S_ i for every i \in I. By Morphisms, Definition 29.37.1 this implies that X_ i \to S_ i is quasi-compact and by Morphisms, Lemma 29.37.3 this implies X_ i \to S is separated. Hence f is quasi-compact and separated by Lemmas 35.23.1 and 35.23.6.
This means that \mathcal{A} = \bigoplus _{d \geq 0} f_*\mathcal{L}^{\otimes d} is a quasi-coherent graded \mathcal{O}_ S-algebra (Schemes, Lemma 26.24.1). Moreover, the formation of \mathcal{A} commutes with flat base change by Cohomology of Schemes, Lemma 30.5.2. In particular, if we set \mathcal{A}_ i = \bigoplus _{d \geq 0} f_{i, *}\mathcal{L}_ i^{\otimes d} then we have \mathcal{A}_ i = g_ i^*\mathcal{A}. It follows that the natural maps \psi _ d : f^*\mathcal{A}_ d \to \mathcal{L}^{\otimes d} of \mathcal{O}_ X pullback to give the natural maps \psi _{i, d} : f_ i^*(\mathcal{A}_ i)_ d \to \mathcal{L}_ i^{\otimes d} of \mathcal{O}_{X_ i}-modules. Since \mathcal{L}_ i is ample on X_ i/S_ i we see that for any point x_ i \in X_ i, there exists a d \geq 1 such that f_ i^*(\mathcal{A}_ i)_ d \to \mathcal{L}_ i^{\otimes d} is surjective on stalks at x_ i. This follows either directly from the definition of a relatively ample module or from Morphisms, Lemma 29.37.4. If x \in X, then we can choose an i and an x_ i \in X_ i mapping to x. Since \mathcal{O}_{X, x} \to \mathcal{O}_{X_ i, x_ i} is flat hence faithfully flat, we conclude that for every x \in X there exists a d \geq 1 such that f^*\mathcal{A}_ d \to \mathcal{L}^{\otimes d} is surjective on stalks at x. This implies that the open subset U(\psi ) \subset X of Constructions, Lemma 27.19.1 corresponding to the map \psi : f^*\mathcal{A} \to \bigoplus _{d \geq 0} \mathcal{L}^{\otimes d} of graded \mathcal{O}_ X-algebras is equal to X. Consider the corresponding morphism
It is clear from the above that the base change of r_{\mathcal{L}, \psi } to S_ i is the morphism r_{\mathcal{L}_ i, \psi _ i} which is an open immersion by Morphisms, Lemma 29.37.4. Hence r_{\mathcal{L}, \psi } is an open immersion by Lemma 35.23.16 and we conclude \mathcal{L} is ample on X/S by Morphisms, Lemma 29.37.4. \square
Comments (3)
Comment #7749 by Ashutosh Roy Choudhury on
Comment #7994 by Stacks Project on
Comment #7995 by Stacks Project on