The Stacks project

Lemma 15.13.2. Let $(A, I)$ be a henselian pair. The functor $B \to B/IB$ determines an equivalence between finite étale $A$-algebras and finite étale $A/I$-algebras.

Proof. Let $B, B'$ be two $A$-algebras finite étale over $A$. Then $B' \to B'' = B \otimes _ A B'$ is finite étale as well (Algebra, Lemmas 10.143.3 and 10.36.13). Now we have $1$-to-$1$ correspondences between

  1. $A$-algebra maps $B \to B'$,

  2. sections of $B' \to B''$, and

  3. idempotents $e$ of $B''$ such that $B' \to B'' \to eB''$ is an isomorphism.

The bijection between (2) and (3) sends $\sigma : B'' \to B'$ to $e$ such that $(1 - e)$ is the idempotent that generates the kernel of $\sigma $ which exists by Algebra, Lemmas 10.143.8 and 10.143.9. There is a similar correspondence between $A/I$-algebra maps $B/IB \to B'/IB'$ and idempotents $\overline{e}$ of $B''/IB''$ such that $B'/IB' \to B''/IB'' \to \overline{e}(B''/IB'')$ is an isomorphism. However every idempotent $\overline{e}$ of $B''/IB''$ lifts uniquely to an idempotent $e$ of $B''$ (Lemma 15.11.6). Moreover, if $B'/IB' \to \overline{e}(B''/IB'')$ is an isomorphism, then $B' \to eB''$ is an isomorphism too by Nakayama's lemma (Algebra, Lemma 10.20.1). In this way we see that the functor is fully faithful.

Essential surjectivity. Let $A/I \to C$ be a finite étale map. By Algebra, Lemma 10.143.10 there exists an étale map $A \to B$ such that $B/IB \cong C$. Let $B'$ be the integral closure of $A$ in $B$. By Lemma 15.11.5 we have $B'/IB' = C \times C'$ for some ring $C'$ and $B'_ g \cong B_ g$ for some $g \in B'$ mapping to $(1, 0) \in C \times C'$. Since idempotents lift (Lemma 15.11.6) we get $B' = B'_1 \times B'_2$ with $C = B'_1/IB'_1$ and $C' = B'_2/IB'_2$. The image of $g$ in $B'_1$ is invertible. Then $B_ g = B'_ g = B'_1 \times (B_2)_ g$ and this implies that $A \to B'_1$ is étale. We conclude that $B'_1$ is finite étale over $A$ (integral étale implies finite étale by Algebra, Lemma 10.36.5 for example) and the proof is done. $\square$

Comments (2)

Comment #2173 by JuanPablo on

I don't see why .

But it is not necessary as , implies is étale.

There are also:

  • 2 comment(s) on Section 15.13: Lifting and henselian pairs

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Your email address will not be published.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 09ZL. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.