Remark 42.19.6. Let (S, \delta ) be as in Situation 42.7.1. Let X be a scheme locally of finite type over S. Suppose we have infinite collections \alpha _ i, \beta _ i \in Z_ k(X), i \in I of k-cycles on X. Suppose that the supports of \alpha _ i and \beta _ i form locally finite collections of closed subsets of X so that \sum \alpha _ i and \sum \beta _ i are defined as cycles. Moreover, assume that \alpha _ i \sim _{rat} \beta _ i for each i. Then it is not clear that \sum \alpha _ i \sim _{rat} \sum \beta _ i. Namely, the problem is that the rational equivalences may be given by locally finite families \{ W_{i, j}, f_{i, j} \in R(W_{i, j})^*\} _{j \in J_ i} but the union \{ W_{i, j}\} _{i \in I, j\in J_ i} may not be locally finite.
In many cases in practice, one has a locally finite family of closed subsets \{ T_ i\} _{i \in I} such that \alpha _ i, \beta _ i are supported on T_ i and such that \alpha _ i = \beta _ i in \mathop{\mathrm{CH}}\nolimits _ k(T_ i), in other words, the families \{ W_{i, j}, f_{i, j} \in R(W_{i, j})^*\} _{j \in J_ i} consist of subschemes W_{i, j} \subset T_ i. In this case it is true that \sum \alpha _ i \sim _{rat} \sum \beta _ i on X, simply because the family \{ W_{i, j}\} _{i \in I, j\in J_ i} is automatically locally finite in this case.
Comments (0)