Proof.
Let \xi \in Y be the generic point. Let X_\xi be the scheme theoretic fibre of \varphi over \xi . Denote \mathcal{L}_\xi the pullback of \mathcal{L} to X_\xi . Assumption (5) means that \mathcal{L}_\xi is trivial. Choose a trivializing section s \in \Gamma (X_\xi , \mathcal{L}_\xi ). Observe that X is integral by Lemma 31.11.7. Hence we can think of s as a regular meromorphic section of \mathcal{L}. Pullbacks of meromorphic functions are defined for \varphi by Lemma 31.23.5. Let \mathcal{N} \subset \mathcal{K}_ Y be the \mathcal{O}_ Y-module whose sections over an open V \subset Y are those meromorphic functions g \in \mathcal{K}_ Y(V) such that \varphi ^*(g)s \in \mathcal{L}(\varphi ^{-1}V). A priori \varphi ^*(g)s is a section of \mathcal{K}_ X(\mathcal{L}) over \varphi ^{-1}V. We claim that \mathcal{N} is an invertible \mathcal{O}_ Y-module and that the map
\varphi ^*\mathcal{N} \longrightarrow \mathcal{L},\quad g \longmapsto gs
is an isomorphism.
We first prove the claim in the following situation: X and Y are affine and \mathcal{L} trivial. Say Y = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R), X = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A) and s given by the element s \in A \otimes _ R K where K is the fraction field of R. We can write s = a/r for some nonzero r \in R and a \in A. Since s generates \mathcal{L} on the generic fibre we see that there exists an s' \in A \otimes _ R K such that ss' = 1. Thus we see that s = r'/a' for some nonzero r' \in R and a' \in A. Let \mathfrak p_1, \ldots , \mathfrak p_ n \subset R be the minimal primes over rr'. Each R_{\mathfrak p_ i} is a discrete valuation ring (Algebra, Lemmas 10.60.11 and 10.157.4). By assumption \mathfrak q_ i = \mathfrak p_ i A is a prime. Hence \mathfrak q_ i A_{\mathfrak q_ i} is generated by a single element and we find that A_{\mathfrak q_ i} is a discrete valuation ring as well (Algebra, Lemma 10.119.7). Of course R_{\mathfrak p_ i} \to A_{\mathfrak q_ i} has ramification index 1. Let e_ i, e'_ i \geq 0 be the valuation of a, a' in A_{\mathfrak q_ i}. Then e_ i + e'_ i is the valuation of rr' in R_{\mathfrak p_ i}. Note that
\mathfrak p_1^{(e_1 + e'_1)} \cap \ldots \cap \mathfrak p_ i^{(e_ n + e'_ n)} = (rr')
in R by Algebra, Lemma 10.157.6. Set
I = \mathfrak p_1^{(e_1)} \cap \ldots \cap \mathfrak p_ i^{(e_ n)} \quad \text{and}\quad I' = \mathfrak p_1^{(e'_1)} \cap \ldots \cap \mathfrak p_ i^{(e'_ n)}
so that II' \subset (rr'). Observe that
IA = (\mathfrak p_1^{(e_1)} \cap \ldots \cap \mathfrak p_ i^{(e_ n)})A = (\mathfrak p_1A)^{(e_1)} \cap \ldots \cap (\mathfrak p_ i A)^{(e_ n)}
by Algebra, Lemmas 10.64.3 and 10.39.2. Similarly for I'A. Hence a \in IA and a' \in I'A. We conclude that IA \otimes _ A I'A \to rr'A is surjective. By faithful flatness of R \to A we find that I \otimes _ R I' \to (rr') is surjective as well. It follows that II' = (rr') and I and I' are finite locally free of rank 1, see Algebra, Lemma 10.120.16. Thus Zariski locally on R we can write I = (g) and I' = (g') with gg' = rr'. Then a = ug and a' = u'g' for some u, u' \in A. We conclude that u, u' are units. Thus Zariski locally on R we have s = ug/r and the claim follows in this case.
Let y \in Y be a point. Pick x \in X mapping to y. We may apply the result of the previous paragraph to \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(\mathcal{O}_{X, x}) \to \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(\mathcal{O}_{Y, y}). We conclude there exists an element g \in R(Y)^* well defined up to multiplication by an element of \mathcal{O}_{Y, y}^* such that \varphi ^*(g)s generates \mathcal{L}_ x. Hence \varphi ^*(g)s generates \mathcal{L} in a neighbourhood U of x. Suppose x' is a second point lying over y and g' \in R(Y)^* is such that \varphi ^*(g')s generates \mathcal{L} in an open neighbourhood U' of x'. Then we can choose a point x'' in U \cap U' \cap \varphi ^{-1}(\{ y\} ) because the fibre is irreducible. By the uniqueness for the ring map \mathcal{O}_{Y, y} \to \mathcal{O}_{X, x''} we find that g and g' differ (multiplicatively) by an element in \mathcal{O}_{Y, y}^*. Hence we see that \varphi ^*(g)s is a generator for \mathcal{L} on an open neighbourhood of \varphi ^{-1}(y). Let Z \subset X be the set of points z \in X such that \varphi ^*(g)s does not generate \mathcal{L}_ z. The arguments above show that Z is closed and that Z = \varphi ^{-1}(T) for some subset T \subset Y with y \not\in T. If we can show that T is closed, then g will be a generator for \mathcal{N} as an \mathcal{O}_ Y-module in the open neighbourhood Y \setminus T of y thereby finishing the proof (some details omitted).
If \varphi is quasi-compact, then T is closed by Morphisms, Lemma 29.25.12. If \varphi is locally of finite type, then \varphi is open by Morphisms, Lemma 29.25.10. Then Y \setminus T is open as the image of the open X \setminus Z.
\square
Comments (0)