The Stacks project

31.26 Weil divisors

We will introduce Weil divisors and rational equivalence of Weil divisors for locally Noetherian integral schemes. Since we are not assuming our schemes are quasi-compact we have to be a little careful when defining Weil divisors. We have to allow infinite sums of prime divisors because a rational function may have infinitely many poles for example. For quasi-compact schemes our Weil divisors are finite sums as usual. Here is a basic lemma we will often use to prove collections of closed subschemes are locally finite.

Lemma 31.26.1. Let $X$ be a locally Noetherian scheme. Let $Z \subset X$ be a closed subscheme. The collection of irreducible components of $Z$ is locally finite in $X$.

Proof. Let $U \subset X$ be a quasi-compact open subscheme. Then $U$ is a Noetherian scheme, and hence has a Noetherian underlying topological space (Properties, Lemma 28.5.5). Hence every subspace is Noetherian and has finitely many irreducible components (see Topology, Lemma 5.9.2). $\square$

Recall that if $Z$ is an irreducible closed subset of a scheme $X$, then the codimension of $Z$ in $X$ is equal to the dimension of the local ring $\mathcal{O}_{X, \xi }$, where $\xi \in Z$ is the generic point. See Properties, Lemma 28.10.3.

Definition 31.26.2. Let $X$ be a locally Noetherian integral scheme.

  1. A prime divisor is an integral closed subscheme $Z \subset X$ of codimension $1$.

  2. A Weil divisor is a formal sum $D = \sum n_ Z Z$ where the sum is over prime divisors of $X$ and the collection $\{ Z \mid n_ Z \not= 0\} $ is locally finite (Topology, Definition 5.28.4).

The group of all Weil divisors on $X$ is denoted $\text{Div}(X)$.

Our next task is to define the Weil divisor associated to a rational function. In order to do this we use the order of vanishing of a rational function along a prime divisor which is defined as follows.

Definition 31.26.3. Let $X$ be a locally Noetherian integral scheme. Let $f \in R(X)^*$. For every prime divisor $Z \subset X$ we define the order of vanishing of $f$ along $Z$ as the integer

\[ \text{ord}_ Z(f) = \text{ord}_{\mathcal{O}_{X, \xi }}(f) \]

where the right hand side is the notion of Algebra, Definition 10.121.2 and $\xi $ is the generic point of $Z$.

Note that for $f, g \in R(X)^*$ we have

\[ \text{ord}_ Z(fg) = \text{ord}_ Z(f) + \text{ord}_ Z(g). \]

Of course it can happen that $\text{ord}_ Z(f) < 0$. In this case we say that $f$ has a pole along $Z$ and that $-\text{ord}_ Z(f) > 0$ is the order of pole of $f$ along $Z$. It is important to note that the condition $\text{ord}_ Z(f) \geq 0$ is not equivalent to the condition $f \in \mathcal{O}_{X, \xi }$ unless the local ring $\mathcal{O}_{X, \xi }$ is a discrete valuation ring.

Lemma 31.26.4. Let $X$ be a locally Noetherian integral scheme. Let $f \in R(X)^*$. Then the collections

\[ \{ Z \subset X \mid Z\text{ a prime divisor with generic point }\xi \text{ and }f\text{ not in }\mathcal{O}_{X, \xi }\} \]


\[ \{ Z \subset X \mid Z \text{ a prime divisor and }\text{ord}_ Z(f) \not= 0\} \]

are locally finite in $X$.

Proof. There exists a nonempty open subscheme $U \subset X$ such that $f$ corresponds to a section of $\Gamma (U, \mathcal{O}_ X^*)$. Hence the prime divisors which can occur in the sets of the lemma are all irreducible components of $X \setminus U$. Hence Lemma 31.26.1 gives the desired result. $\square$

This lemma allows us to make the following definition.

Definition 31.26.5. Let $X$ be a locally Noetherian integral scheme. Let $f \in R(X)^*$. The principal Weil divisor associated to $f$ is the Weil divisor

\[ \text{div}(f) = \text{div}_ X(f) = \sum \text{ord}_ Z(f) [Z] \]

where the sum is over prime divisors and $\text{ord}_ Z(f)$ is as in Definition 31.26.3. This makes sense by Lemma 31.26.4.

Lemma 31.26.6. Let $X$ be a locally Noetherian integral scheme. Let $f, g \in R(X)^*$. Then

\[ \text{div}_ X(fg) = \text{div}_ X(f) + \text{div}_ X(g) \]

as Weil divisors on $X$.

Proof. This is clear from the additivity of the $\text{ord}$ functions. $\square$

We see from the lemma above that the collection of principal Weil divisors form a subgroup of the group of all Weil divisors. This leads to the following definition.

Definition 31.26.7. Let $X$ be a locally Noetherian integral scheme. The Weil divisor class group of $X$ is the quotient of the group of Weil divisors by the subgroup of principal Weil divisors. Notation: $\text{Cl}(X)$.

By construction we obtain an exact complex
\begin{equation} \label{divisors-equation-Weil-divisor-class} R(X)^* \xrightarrow {\text{div}} \text{Div}(X) \to \text{Cl}(X) \to 0 \end{equation}

which we can think of as a presentation of $\text{Cl}(X)$. Our next task is to relate the Weil divisor class group to the Picard group.

Comments (2)

Comment #4235 by Zhenhua Wu on

In 31.26.4, the argument will be more transparent if we pick to be the domain of definition of . A more detailed proof is following:

There exists a largest nonempty open subscheme such that corresponds to a section of . Hence any prime divisor with generic point s.t. must have . Since is irreducible, we have . Since is of codimension 1, it is easy to see it is an irreducible component of . Hence Lemma 31.26.1 gives the desired result.

If , equivalently or . Hence we have either or . Apply previous argument then we are done.

Comment #4414 by on

OK, I actually think this is the same as written, so I am going to leave it as is.

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 0BE0. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.