The Stacks project

Lemma 5.16.4. Let $X$ be a Noetherian topological space. Let $x \in X$. Let $E \subset X$ be constructible in $X$. The following are equivalent:

  1. $E$ is a neighbourhood of $x$, and

  2. for every irreducible closed subset $Y$ of $X$ which contains $x$ the intersection $E \cap Y$ is dense in $Y$.

Proof. It is clear that (1) implies (2). Assume (2). Consider the set $\mathcal{S}$ of closed subsets $Y$ of $X$ containing $x$ such that $E \cap Y$ is not a neighbourhood of $x$ in $Y$. If $\mathcal{S} \not= \emptyset $, then it has a minimal element $Y$ as $X$ is Noetherian. Suppose $Y = Y_1 \cup Y_2$ with two smaller nonempty closed subsets $Y_1$, $Y_2$. If $x \in Y_ i$ for $i = 1, 2$, then $Y_ i \cap E$ is a neighbourhood of $x$ in $Y_ i$ and we conclude $Y \cap E$ is a neighbourhood of $x$ in $Y$ which is a contradiction. If $x \in Y_1$ but $x \not\in Y_2$ (say), then $Y_1 \cap E$ is a neighbourhood of $x$ in $Y_1$ and hence also in $Y$, which is a contradiction as well. We conclude that $Y$ is irreducible closed. By assumption (2) we see that $E \cap Y$ is dense in $Y$. Thus $E \cap Y$ contains an open $V$ of $Y$, see Lemma 5.16.3. If $x \in V$ then $E \cap Y$ is a neighbourhood of $x$ in $Y$ which is a contradiction. If $x \not\in V$, then $Y' = Y \setminus V$ is a proper closed subset of $Y$ containing $x$. By minimality of $Y$ we see that $E \cap Y'$ contains an open neighbourhood $V' \subset Y'$ of $x$ in $Y'$. But then $V' \cup V$ is an open neighbourhood of $x$ in $Y$ contained in $E$, a contradiction. This contradiction finishes the proof of the lemma. $\square$

Comments (1)

Comment #672 by Wei Xu on

There is a small gap in the proof, from line 2293 to line 2297: "Let be the decomposition of into its irreducible components, see Lemma 5.9.2. If , then each is a neighbourhood of in by minimality of . "

We can't conclude that EACH
is a neighbourhood of in since we don't know if for every .

One possible revision could be: "Suppose with two smaller (nonempty) closed subsets ". If for , then is a neighbourhood of in , one can conclude is a neighbourhood of in . If but (say), then there is an open of such that , then , we also get that is a neighbourhood of in . This is a contradiction, so is irreducible closed.....

Besides, I don't know whether the word "smallest element" replaced by "minimal element" would be better?


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Your email address will not be published.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.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.

In order to prevent bots from posting comments, we would like you to prove that you are human. You can do this by filling in the name of the current tag in the following input field. As a reminder, this is tag 0540. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.