The Stacks project

52.14 Application to connectedness

In this section we discuss Grothendieck's connectedness theorem and variants; the original version can be found as [Exposee XIII, Theorem 2.1, SGA2]. There is a version called Faltings' connectedness theorem in the literature; our guess is that this refers to [Theorem 6, Faltings-some]. Let us state and prove the optimal version for complete local rings given in [Theorem 1.6, Varbaro].

reference

Lemma 52.14.1. Let $(A, \mathfrak m)$ be a Noetherian complete local ring. Let $I$ be a proper ideal of $A$. Set $X = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A)$ and $Y = V(I)$. Denote

  1. $d$ the minimal dimension of an irreducible component of $X$, and

  2. $c$ the minimal dimension of a closed subset $Z \subset X$ such that $X \setminus Z$ is disconnected.

Then for $Z \subset Y$ closed we have $Y \setminus Z$ is connected if $\dim (Z) < \min (c, d - 1) - \text{cd}(A, I)$. In particular, the punctured spectrum of $A/I$ is connected if $\text{cd}(A, I) < \min (c, d - 1)$.

Proof. Let us first prove the final assertion. As a first case, if the punctured spectrum of $A/I$ is empty, then Local Cohomology, Lemma 51.4.10 shows every irreducible component of $X$ has dimension $\leq \text{cd}(A, I)$ and we get $\min (c, d - 1) - \text{cd}(A, I) < 0$ which implies the lemma holds in this case. Thus we may assume $U \cap Y$ is nonempty where $U = X \setminus \{ \mathfrak m\} $ is the punctured spectrum of $A$. We may replace $A$ by its reduction. Observe that $A$ has a dualizing complex (Dualizing Complexes, Lemma 47.22.4) and that $A$ is complete with respect to $I$ (Algebra, Lemma 10.96.8). If we assume $d - 1 > \text{cd}(A, I)$, then we may apply Lemma 52.11.3 to see that

\[ \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits H^0(V, \mathcal{O}_ V) \longrightarrow \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits H^0(U, \mathcal{O}_ U/I^ n\mathcal{O}_ U) \]

is an isomorphism where the colimit is over opens $V \subset U$ containing $U \cap Y$. If $U \cap Y$ is disconnected, then its $n$th infinitesimal neighbourhood in $U$ is disconnected for all $n$ and we find the right hand side has a nontrivial idempotent (here we use that $U \cap Y$ is nonempty). Thus we can find a $V$ which is disconnected. Set $Z = X \setminus V$. By Local Cohomology, Lemma 51.4.10 we see that every irreducible component of $Z$ has dimension $\leq \text{cd}(A, I)$. Hence $c \leq \text{cd}(A, I)$ and this indeed proves the final statement.

We can deduce the statement of the lemma from what we just proved as follows. Suppose that $Z \subset Y$ closed and $Y \setminus Z$ is disconnected and $\dim (Z) = e$. Recall that a connected space is nonempty by convention. Hence we conclude either (a) $Y = Z$ or (b) $Y \setminus Z = W_1 \amalg W_2$ with $W_ i$ nonempty, open, and closed in $Y \setminus Z$. In case (b) we may pick points $w_ i \in W_ i$ which are closed in $U$, see Morphisms, Lemma 29.16.10. Then we can find $f_1, \ldots , f_ e \in \mathfrak m$ such that $V(f_1, \ldots , f_ e) \cap Z = \{ \mathfrak m\} $ and in case (b) we may assume $w_ i \in V(f_1, \ldots , f_ e)$. Namely, we can inductively using prime avoidance choose $f_ i$ such that $\dim V(f_1, \ldots , f_ i) \cap Z = e - i$ and such that in case (b) we have $w_1, w_2 \in V(f_ i)$. It follows that the punctured spectrum of $A/I + (f_1, \ldots , f_ e)$ is disconnected (small detail omitted). Since $\text{cd}(A, I + (f_1, \ldots , f_ e)) \leq \text{cd}(A, I) + e$ by Local Cohomology, Lemmas 51.4.4 and 51.4.3 we conclude that

\[ \text{cd}(A, I) + e \geq \min (c, d - 1) \]

by the first part of the proof. This implies $e \geq \min (c, d - 1) - \text{cd}(A, I)$ which is what we had to show. $\square$

Lemma 52.14.2. Let $I \subset \mathfrak a$ be ideals of a Noetherian ring $A$. Assume

  1. $A$ is $I$-adically complete and has a dualizing complex,

  2. if $\mathfrak p \subset A$ is a minimal prime not contained in $V(I)$ and $\mathfrak q \in V(\mathfrak p) \cap V(\mathfrak a)$, then $\dim ((A/\mathfrak p)_\mathfrak q) > \text{cd}(A, I) + 1$,

  3. any nonempty open $V \subset \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A)$ which contains $V(I) \setminus V(\mathfrak a)$ is connected1.

Then $V(I) \setminus V(\mathfrak a)$ is either empty or connected.

Proof. We may replace $A$ by its reduction. Then we have the inequality in (2) for all associated primes of $A$. By Proposition 52.12.2 we see that

\[ \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits H^0(V, \mathcal{O}_ V) = \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits H^0(T_ n, \mathcal{O}_{T_ n}) \]

where the colimit is over the opens $V$ as in (3) and $T_ n$ is the $n$th infinitesimal neighbourhood of $T = V(I) \setminus V(\mathfrak a)$ in $U = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A) \setminus V(\mathfrak a)$. Thus $T$ is either empty or connected, since if not, then the right hand side would have a nontrivial idempotent and we've assumed the left hand side does not. Some details omitted. $\square$

[1] For example if $A$ is a domain.

Comments (0)


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