Lemma 29.41.8. A universally closed morphism of schemes is quasi-compact.
Due to Bjorn Poonen.
Proof. Let f : X \to S be a morphism. Assume that f is not quasi-compact. Our goal is to show that f is not universally closed. By Schemes, Lemma 26.19.2 there exists an affine open V \subset S such that f^{-1}(V) is not quasi-compact. To achieve our goal it suffices to show that f^{-1}(V) \to V is not universally closed, hence we may assume that S = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A) for some ring A.
Write X = \bigcup _{i \in I} X_ i where the X_ i are affine open subschemes of X. Let T = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A[y_ i ; i \in I]). Let T_ i = D(y_ i) \subset T. Let Z be the closed set (X \times _ S T) - \bigcup _{i \in I} (X_ i \times _ S T_ i). It suffices to prove that the image f_ T(Z) of Z under f_ T : X \times _ S T \to T is not closed.
There exists a point s \in S such that there is no neighborhood U of s in S such that X_ U is quasi-compact. Otherwise we could cover S with finitely many such U and Schemes, Lemma 26.19.2 would imply f quasi-compact. Fix such an s \in S.
First we check that f_ T(Z_ s) \ne T_ s. Let t \in T be the point lying over s with \kappa (t) = \kappa (s) such that y_ i = 1 in \kappa (t) for all i. Then t \in T_ i for all i, and the fiber of Z_ s \to T_ s above t is isomorphic to (X - \bigcup _{i \in I} X_ i)_ s, which is empty. Thus t \in T_ s - f_ T(Z_ s).
Assume f_ T(Z) is closed in T. Then there exists an element g \in A[y_ i; i \in I] with f_ T(Z) \subset V(g) but t \not\in V(g). Hence the image of g in \kappa (t) is nonzero. In particular some coefficient of g has nonzero image in \kappa (s). Hence this coefficient is invertible on some neighborhood U of s. Let J be the finite set of j \in I such that y_ j appears in g. Since X_ U is not quasi-compact, we may choose a point x \in X - \bigcup _{j \in J} X_ j lying above some u \in U. Since g has a coefficient that is invertible on U, we can find a point t' \in T lying above u such that t' \not\in V(g) and t' \in V(y_ i) for all i \notin J. This is true because V(y_ i; i \in I, i \not\in J) = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A[t_ j; j\in J]) and the set of points of this scheme lying over u is bijective with \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(\kappa (u)[t_ j; j \in J]). In other words t' \notin T_ i for each i \notin J. By Schemes, Lemma 26.17.5 we can find a point z of X \times _ S T mapping to x \in X and to t' \in T. Since x \not\in X_ j for j \in J and t' \not\in T_ i for i \in I \setminus J we see that z \in Z. On the other hand f_ T(z) = t' \not\in V(g) which contradicts f_ T(Z) \subset V(g). Thus the assumption “f_ T(Z) closed” is wrong and we conclude indeed that f_ T is not closed, as desired. \square
Comments (0)
There are also: