Lemma 38.2.5. Let S be a scheme and s \in S a point. Denote \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^ h (resp. \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^{sh}) the henselization (resp. strict henselization), see Algebra, Definition 10.155.3. Let M^{sh} be a \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^{sh}-module. The following are equivalent
M^{sh} is flat over \mathcal{O}_{S, s},
M^{sh} is flat over \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^ h, and
M^{sh} is flat over \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^{sh}.
If M^{sh} = M^ h \otimes _{\mathcal{O}_{S, s}^ h} \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^{sh} this is also equivalent to
M^ h is flat over \mathcal{O}_{S, s}, and
M^ h is flat over \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^ h.
If M^ h = M \otimes _{\mathcal{O}_{S, s}} \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^ h this is also equivalent to
M is flat over \mathcal{O}_{S, s}.
Proof.
By More on Algebra, Lemma 15.45.1 the local ring maps \mathcal{O}_{S, s} \to \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^ h \to \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^{sh} are faithfully flat. Hence (3) \Rightarrow (2) \Rightarrow (1) and (5) \Rightarrow (4) follow from Algebra, Lemma 10.39.4. By faithful flatness the equivalences (6) \Leftrightarrow (5) and (5) \Leftrightarrow (3) follow from Algebra, Lemma 10.39.8. Thus it suffices to show that (1) \Rightarrow (2) \Rightarrow (3) and (4) \Rightarrow (5). To prove these we may assume S is an affine scheme.
Assume (1). By Lemma 38.2.4 we see that M^{sh} is flat over \mathcal{O}_{T, t} for any étale neighbourhood (T, t) \to (S, s). Since \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^ h and \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^{sh} are directed colimits of local rings of the form \mathcal{O}_{T, t} (see Algebra, Lemmas 10.155.7 and 10.155.11) we conclude that M^{sh} is flat over \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^ h and \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^{sh} by Algebra, Lemma 10.39.6. Thus (1) implies (2) and (3). Of course this implies also (2) \Rightarrow (3) by replacing \mathcal{O}_{S, s} by \mathcal{O}_{S, s}^ h. The same argument applies to prove (4) \Rightarrow (5).
\square
Comments (0)