## 27.15 Local irreducibility

Recall that in More on Algebra, Section 15.95 we introduced the notion of a (geometrically) unibranch local ring.

Definition 27.15.1. Let $X$ be a scheme. Let $x \in X$. We say $X$ is unibranch at $x$ if the local ring $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}$ is unibranch. We say $X$ is geometrically unibranch at $x$ if the local ring $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}$ is geometrically unibranch. We say $X$ is unibranch if $X$ is unibranch at all of its points. We say $X$ is geometrically unibranch if $X$ is geometrically unibranch at all of its points.

To be sure, it can happen that a local ring $A$ is geometrically unibranch (in the sense of More on Algebra, Definition 15.95.1) but the scheme $\mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A)$ is not geometrically unibranch in the sense of Definition 27.15.1. For example this happens if $A$ is the local ring at the vertex of the cone over an irreducible plane curve which has ordinary double point singularity (a node).

Proof. This follows from the definitions. Namely, a scheme is normal if the local rings are normal domains. It is immediate from the More on Algebra, Definition 15.95.1 that a local normal domain is geometrically unibranch. $\square$

Lemma 27.15.3. Let $X$ be a Noetherian scheme. The following are equivalent

1. $X$ is geometrically unibranch (Definition 27.15.1),

2. for every point $x \in X$ which is not the generic point of an irreducible component of $X$, the punctured spectrum of the strict henselization $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}^{sh}$ is connected.

Proof. More on Algebra, Lemma 15.95.5 shows that (1) implies that the punctured spectra in (2) are irreducible and in particular connected.

Assume (2). Let $x \in X$. We have to show that $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}$ is geometrically unibranch. By induction on $\dim (\mathcal{O}_{X, x})$ we may assume that the result holds for every nontrivial generalization of $x$. We may replace $X$ by $\mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(\mathcal{O}_{X, x})$. In other words, we may assume that $X = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A)$ with $A$ local and that $A_\mathfrak p$ is geometrically unibranch for each nonmaximal prime $\mathfrak p \subset A$.

Let $A^{sh}$ be the strict henselization of $A$. If $\mathfrak q \subset A^{sh}$ is a prime lying over $\mathfrak p \subset A$, then $A_\mathfrak p \to A^{sh}_\mathfrak q$ is a filtered colimit of étale algebras. Hence the strict henselizations of $A_\mathfrak p$ and $A^{sh}_\mathfrak q$ are isomorphic. Thus by More on Algebra, Lemma 15.95.5 we conclude that $A^{sh}_\mathfrak q$ has a unique minimal prime ideal for every nonmaximal prime $\mathfrak q$ of $A^{sh}$.

Let $\mathfrak q_1, \ldots , \mathfrak q_ r$ be the minimal primes of $A^{sh}$. We have to show that $r = 1$. By the above we see that $V(\mathfrak q_1) \cap V(\mathfrak q_ j) = \{ \mathfrak m^{sh}\}$ for $j = 2, \ldots , r$. Hence $V(\mathfrak q_1) \setminus \{ \mathfrak m^{sh}\}$ is an open and closed subset of the punctured spectrum of $A^{sh}$ which is a contradiction with the assumption that this punctured spectrum is connected unless $r = 1$. $\square$

Definition 27.15.4. Let $X$ be a scheme. Let $x \in X$. The number of branches of $X$ at $x$ is the number of branches of the local ring $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}$ as defined in More on Algebra, Definition 15.95.6. The number of geometric branches of $X$ at $x$ is the number of geometric branches of the local ring $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}$ as defined in More on Algebra, Definition 15.95.6.

Often we want to compare this with the branches of the complete local ring, but the comparison is not straightforward in general; some information on this topic can be found in More on Algebra, Section 15.96.

Lemma 27.15.5. Let $X$ be a scheme and $x \in X$. Let $X_ i$, $i \in I$ be the irreducible components of $X$ passing through $x$. Then the number of (geometric) branches of $X$ at $x$ is the sum over $i \in I$ of the number of (geometric) branches of $X_ i$ at $x$.

Proof. We view the $X_ i$ as integral closed subschemes of $X$, see Schemes, Definition 25.12.5 and Lemma 27.3.4. Observe that the number of (geometric) branches of $X_ i$ at $x$ is at least $1$ for all $i$ (essentially by definition). Recall that the $X_ i$ correspond $1$-to-$1$ with the minimal prime ideals $\mathfrak p_ i \subset \mathcal{O}_{X, x}$, see Algebra, Lemma 10.25.3. Thus, if $I$ is infinite, then $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}$ has infinitely many minimal primes, whence both $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}^ h$ and $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}^{sh}$ have infinitely many minimal primes (combine Algebra, Lemmas 10.29.5 and 10.29.7 and the injectivity of the maps $\mathcal{O}_{X, x} \to \mathcal{O}_{X, x}^ h \to \mathcal{O}_{X, x}^{sh}$). In this case the number of (geometric) branches of $X$ at $x$ is defined to be $\infty$ which is also true for the sum. Thus we may assume $I$ is finite. Let $A'$ be the integral closure of $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}$ in the total ring of fractions $Q$ of $(\mathcal{O}_{X, x})_{red}$. Let $A'_ i$ be the integral closure of $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}/\mathfrak p_ i$ in the total ring of fractions $Q_ i$ of $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}/\mathfrak p_ i$. By Algebra, Lemma 10.24.4 we have $Q = \prod _{i \in I} Q_ i$. Thus $A' = \prod A'_ i$. Then the equality of the lemma follows from More on Algebra, Lemma 15.95.7 which expresses the number of (geometric) branches in terms of the maximal ideals of $A'$. $\square$

Lemma 27.15.6. Let $X$ be a scheme. Let $x \in X$.

1. The number of branches of $X$ at $x$ is $1$ if and only if $X$ is unibranch at $x$.

2. The number of geometric branches of $X$ at $x$ is $1$ if and only if $X$ is geometrically unibranch at $x$.

Proof. This lemma follows immediately from the definitions and the corresponding result for rings, see More on Algebra, Lemma 15.95.7. $\square$

## 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 0BQ1. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.