Lemma 10.159.1. Let (R, \mathfrak m, k) be a local ring. Let K/k be a field extension. There exists a local ring (R', \mathfrak m', k'), a flat local ring map R \to R' such that \mathfrak m' = \mathfrak mR' and such that k' is isomorphic to K as an extension of k.
10.159 Constructing flat ring maps
The following lemma is occasionally useful.
Proof. Suppose that k' = k(\alpha ) is a monogenic extension of k. Then k' is the residue field of a flat local extension R \subset R' as in the lemma. Namely, if \alpha is transcendental over k, then we let R' be the localization of R[x] at the prime \mathfrak mR[x]. If \alpha is algebraic with minimal polynomial T^ d + \sum \overline{\lambda }_ iT^{d - i}, then we let R' = R[T]/(T^ d + \sum \lambda _ i T^{d - i}).
Consider the collection of triples (k', R \to R', \phi ), where k \subset k' \subset K is a subfield, R \to R' is a local ring map as in the lemma, and \phi : R' \to k' induces an isomorphism R'/\mathfrak mR' \cong k' of k-extensions. These form a “big” category \mathcal{C} with morphisms (k_1, R_1, \phi _1) \to (k_2, R_2, \phi _2) given by ring maps \psi : R_1 \to R_2 such that
commutes. This implies that k_1 \subset k_2.
Suppose that I is a directed set, and ((R_ i, k_ i, \phi _ i), \psi _{ii'}) is a system over I, see Categories, Section 4.21. In this case we can consider
This is a local ring with maximal ideal \mathfrak mR', and residue field k' = \bigcup _{i \in I} k_ i. Moreover, the ring map R \to R' is flat as it is a colimit of flat maps (and tensor products commute with directed colimits). Hence we see that (R', k', \phi ') is an “upper bound” for the system.
An almost trivial application of Zorn's Lemma would finish the proof if \mathcal{C} was a set, but it isn't. (Actually, you can make this work by finding a reasonable bound on the cardinals of the local rings occurring.) To get around this problem we choose a well ordering on K. For x \in K we let K(x) be the subfield of K generated by all elements of K which are \leq x. By transfinite recursion on x \in K we will produce ring maps R \subset R(x) as in the lemma with residue field extension K(x)/k. Moreover, by construction we will have that R(x) will contain R(y) for all y \leq x. Namely, if x has a predecessor x', then K(x) = K(x')[x] and hence we can let R(x') \subset R(x) be the local ring extension constructed in the first paragraph of the proof. If x does not have a predecessor, then we first set R'(x) = \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _{x' < x} R(x') as in the third paragraph of the proof. The residue field of R'(x) is K'(x) = \bigcup _{x' < x} K(x'). Since K(x) = K'(x)[x] we see that we can use the construction of the first paragraph of the proof to produce R'(x) \subset R(x). This finishes the proof of the lemma. \square
Lemma 10.159.2. Let (R, \mathfrak m, k) be a local ring. If k \subset K is a separable algebraic extension, then there exists a directed set I and a system of finite étale extensions R \subset R_ i, i \in I of local rings such that R' = \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits R_ i has residue field K (as extension of k).
Proof. Let R \subset R' be the extension constructed in the proof of Lemma 10.159.1. By construction R' = \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _{\alpha \in A} R_\alpha where A is a well-ordered set and the transition maps R_\alpha \to R_{\alpha + 1} are finite étale and R_\alpha = \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _{\beta < \alpha } R_\beta if \alpha is not a successor. We will prove the result by transfinite induction.
Suppose the result holds for R_\alpha , i.e., R_\alpha = \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits R_ i with R_ i finite étale over R. Since R_\alpha \to R_{\alpha + 1} is finite étale there exists an i and a finite étale extension R_ i \to R_{i, 1} such that R_{\alpha + 1} = R_\alpha \otimes _{R_ i} R_{i, 1}. Thus R_{\alpha + 1} = \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _{i' \geq i} R_{i'} \otimes _{R_ i} R_{i, 1} and the result holds for \alpha + 1. Suppose \alpha is not a successor and the result holds for R_\beta for all \beta < \alpha . Since every finite subset E \subset R_\alpha is contained in R_\beta for some \beta < \alpha and we see that E is contained in a finite étale subextension by assumption. Thus the result holds for R_\alpha . \square
Lemma 10.159.3. Let R be a ring. Let \mathfrak p \subset R be a prime and let L/\kappa (\mathfrak p) be a finite extension of fields. Then there exists a finite free ring map R \to S such that \mathfrak q = \mathfrak pS is prime and \kappa (\mathfrak q)/\kappa (\mathfrak p) is isomorphic to the given extension L/\kappa (\mathfrak p).
Proof. By induction of the degree of \kappa (\mathfrak p) \subset L. If the degree is 1, then we take R = S. In general, if there exists a sub extension \kappa (\mathfrak p) \subset L' \subset L then we win by induction on the degree (by first constructing R \subset S' corresponding to L'/\kappa (\mathfrak p) and then construction S' \subset S corresponding to L/L'). Thus we may assume that L \supset \kappa (\mathfrak p) is generated by a single element \alpha \in L. Let X^ d + \sum _{i < d} a_ iX^ i be the minimal polynomial of \alpha over \kappa (\mathfrak p), so a_ i \in \kappa (\mathfrak p). We may write a_ i as the image of f_ i/g for some f_ i, g \in R and g \not\in \mathfrak p. After replacing \alpha by g\alpha (and correspondingly replacing a_ i by g^{d - i}a_ i) we may assume that a_ i is the image of some f_ i \in R. Then we simply take S = R[x]/(x^ d + \sum f_ ix^ i). \square
Lemma 10.159.4. Let A be a ring. Let \kappa = \max (|A|, \aleph _0). Then every flat A-algebra B is the filtered colimit of its flat A-subalgebras B' \subset B of cardinality |B'| \leq \kappa . (Observe that B' is faithfully flat over A if B is faithfully flat over A.)
Proof. If B has cardinality \leq \kappa then this is true. Let E \subset B be an A-subalgebra with |E| \leq \kappa . We will show that E is contained in a flat A-subalgebra B' with |B'| \leq \kappa . The lemma follows because (a) every finite subset of B is contained in an A-subalgebra of cardinality at most \kappa and (b) every pair of A-subalgebras of B of cardinality at most \kappa is contained in an A-subalgebra of cardinality at most \kappa . Details omitted.
We will inductively construct a sequence of A-subalgebras
each having cardinality \leq \kappa and we will show that B' = \bigcup E_ k is flat over A to finish the proof.
The construction is as follows. Set E_0 = E. Given E_ k for k \geq 0 we consider the set S_ k of relations between elements of E_ k with coefficients in A. Thus an element s \in S_ k is given by an integer n \geq 1 and a_1, \ldots , a_ n \in A, and e_1, \ldots , e_ n \in E_ k such that \sum a_ i e_ i = 0 in E_ k. The flatness of A \to B implies by Lemma 10.39.11 that for every s = (n, a_1, \ldots , a_ n, e_1, \ldots , e_ n) \in S_ k we may choose
where m_ s \geq 0 is an integer, b_{s, j} \in B, a_{s, ij} \in A, and
Given these choicse, we let E_{k + 1} \subset B be the A-subalgebra generated by
E_ k and
the elements b_{s, 1}, \ldots , b_{s, m_ s} for every s \in S_ k.
Some set theory (omitted) shows that E_{k + 1} has at most cardinality \kappa (this uses that we inductively know |E_ k| \leq \kappa and consequently the cardinality of S_ k is also at most \kappa ).
To show that B' = \bigcup E_ k is flat over A we consider a relation \sum _{i = 1, \ldots , n} a_ i b'_ i = 0 in B' with coefficients in A. Choose k large enough so that b'_ i \in E_ k for i = 1, \ldots , n. Then (n, a_1, \ldots , a_ n, b'_1, \ldots , b'_ n) \in S_ k and hence we see that the relation is trivial in E_{k + 1} and a fortiori in B'. Thus A \to B' is flat by Lemma 10.39.11. \square
Comments (0)