Lemma 26.12.7. Let $X$ be a scheme. Let $Z \subset X$ be a closed subscheme. Let $Y$ be a reduced scheme. A morphism $f : Y \to X$ factors through $Z$ if and only if $f(Y) \subset Z$ (set theoretically). In particular, any morphism $Y \to X$ factors as $Y \to X_{red} \to X$.

Proof. Assume $f(Y) \subset Z$ (set theoretically). Let $I \subset \mathcal{O}_ X$ be the ideal sheaf of $Z$. For any affine opens $U \subset X$, $\mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(B) = V \subset Y$ with $f(V) \subset U$ and any $g \in \mathcal{I}(U)$ the pullback $b = f^\sharp (g) \in \Gamma (V, \mathcal{O}_ Y) = B$ maps to zero in the residue field of any $y \in V$. In other words $b \in \bigcap _{\mathfrak p \subset B} \mathfrak p$. This implies $b = 0$ as $B$ is reduced (Lemma 26.12.2, and Algebra, Lemma 10.16.2). Hence $f$ factors through $Z$ by Lemma 26.4.6. $\square$

Comment #651 by Anfang on

Typo. In the proof, it should be that $b \in \bigcap_{\mathfrak p \subset B} \mathfrak p$, not $g \in \bigcap_{\mathfrak p \subset B} \mathfrak p$.

Comment #4900 by Lukas Sauer on

Typo. For any affine open $U \sub X, instead of For any affine opens. Comment #4903 by Lukas Sauer on Ah. "opens" refers to both $U$ and $V$. Excuse me. Comment #4904 by Lukas Sauer on However, it should be $\mathcal I \subset \mathcal O_X$ instead of $I \subset \mathcal O_X$ for the sake of consistent notation within the proof. ## Post a comment Your email address will not be published.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.