Why does a flat finite type morphism of irreducible noetherian schemes map generic pt to generic pt

Multi tool use
Multi tool use

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite
1












Basically the title, I came across this statement reading some notes on dimension of fibers of flat maps. (I don't know if Noetherian actually matters for this question)



I think that for maps of irreducible schemes, sending generic point to generic point is the same as $f: X to Y$ being dominant $leftrightarrow$ the associated ring map (reducing to the case where everything is affine) is injective, so why should the finitely generated $A$-alg $B$, $f^sharp: A to B$ flat, imply $f$ is injective?










share|cite|improve this question



























    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite
    1












    Basically the title, I came across this statement reading some notes on dimension of fibers of flat maps. (I don't know if Noetherian actually matters for this question)



    I think that for maps of irreducible schemes, sending generic point to generic point is the same as $f: X to Y$ being dominant $leftrightarrow$ the associated ring map (reducing to the case where everything is affine) is injective, so why should the finitely generated $A$-alg $B$, $f^sharp: A to B$ flat, imply $f$ is injective?










    share|cite|improve this question

























      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1





      Basically the title, I came across this statement reading some notes on dimension of fibers of flat maps. (I don't know if Noetherian actually matters for this question)



      I think that for maps of irreducible schemes, sending generic point to generic point is the same as $f: X to Y$ being dominant $leftrightarrow$ the associated ring map (reducing to the case where everything is affine) is injective, so why should the finitely generated $A$-alg $B$, $f^sharp: A to B$ flat, imply $f$ is injective?










      share|cite|improve this question















      Basically the title, I came across this statement reading some notes on dimension of fibers of flat maps. (I don't know if Noetherian actually matters for this question)



      I think that for maps of irreducible schemes, sending generic point to generic point is the same as $f: X to Y$ being dominant $leftrightarrow$ the associated ring map (reducing to the case where everything is affine) is injective, so why should the finitely generated $A$-alg $B$, $f^sharp: A to B$ flat, imply $f$ is injective?







      algebraic-geometry commutative-algebra schemes flatness






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Sep 7 at 4:33

























      asked Sep 7 at 4:22









      edgarlorp

      405




      405




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted










          Any flat morphism $f:Xto Y$ with $X$ and $Y$ irreducible sends the generic point of $X$ to the generic point of $Y$. This is a consequence of the fact that generalizations lift along flat morphisms (of arbitrary schemes), which is itself a global version of the fact that a flat ring map $Ato B$ satisfies going down.



          Here are the relevant Stacks Project references:



          https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/03HV (generalizations lift along flat morphisms)



          https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00HS (flat ring maps satisfy going down)



          https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00HW ($Ato B$ satisfies going down if and only if generalizations lift along $mathrmSpec(B)tomathrmSpec(A)$)



          https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0063 (definition of generalizations lifting along a map)



          https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0061 (definition of generalizations in a topological space)



          Now assume $X$ and $Y$ are irreducible with generic points $eta_X$ and $eta_Y$, respectively, and let $f:Xto Y$ be flat. Consider the generalization $eta_Yrightsquigarrow f(eta_X)$ (the generic point of an irreducible scheme generalizes every point in the scheme). Since generalizations lift along $f$ (due to $f$ being flat), there is a point $xin X$ with $f(x)=eta_Y$ and $xrightsquigarrow eta_X$, i.e., $x$ is a generalization of $eta_X$. Because $eta_X$ is the generic point of $X$ and the underlying topological space of a scheme is sober (I guess just Kolmogorov is adequate–all that we need is that distinct points have distinct closures), we must have $x=eta_X$. Thus $f(eta_X)=f(x)=eta_Y$.






          share|cite|improve this answer




















            Your Answer




            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            );
            );
            , "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: false,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2908265%2fwhy-does-a-flat-finite-type-morphism-of-irreducible-noetherian-schemes-map-gener%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest






























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            4
            down vote



            accepted










            Any flat morphism $f:Xto Y$ with $X$ and $Y$ irreducible sends the generic point of $X$ to the generic point of $Y$. This is a consequence of the fact that generalizations lift along flat morphisms (of arbitrary schemes), which is itself a global version of the fact that a flat ring map $Ato B$ satisfies going down.



            Here are the relevant Stacks Project references:



            https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/03HV (generalizations lift along flat morphisms)



            https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00HS (flat ring maps satisfy going down)



            https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00HW ($Ato B$ satisfies going down if and only if generalizations lift along $mathrmSpec(B)tomathrmSpec(A)$)



            https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0063 (definition of generalizations lifting along a map)



            https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0061 (definition of generalizations in a topological space)



            Now assume $X$ and $Y$ are irreducible with generic points $eta_X$ and $eta_Y$, respectively, and let $f:Xto Y$ be flat. Consider the generalization $eta_Yrightsquigarrow f(eta_X)$ (the generic point of an irreducible scheme generalizes every point in the scheme). Since generalizations lift along $f$ (due to $f$ being flat), there is a point $xin X$ with $f(x)=eta_Y$ and $xrightsquigarrow eta_X$, i.e., $x$ is a generalization of $eta_X$. Because $eta_X$ is the generic point of $X$ and the underlying topological space of a scheme is sober (I guess just Kolmogorov is adequate–all that we need is that distinct points have distinct closures), we must have $x=eta_X$. Thus $f(eta_X)=f(x)=eta_Y$.






            share|cite|improve this answer
























              up vote
              4
              down vote



              accepted










              Any flat morphism $f:Xto Y$ with $X$ and $Y$ irreducible sends the generic point of $X$ to the generic point of $Y$. This is a consequence of the fact that generalizations lift along flat morphisms (of arbitrary schemes), which is itself a global version of the fact that a flat ring map $Ato B$ satisfies going down.



              Here are the relevant Stacks Project references:



              https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/03HV (generalizations lift along flat morphisms)



              https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00HS (flat ring maps satisfy going down)



              https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00HW ($Ato B$ satisfies going down if and only if generalizations lift along $mathrmSpec(B)tomathrmSpec(A)$)



              https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0063 (definition of generalizations lifting along a map)



              https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0061 (definition of generalizations in a topological space)



              Now assume $X$ and $Y$ are irreducible with generic points $eta_X$ and $eta_Y$, respectively, and let $f:Xto Y$ be flat. Consider the generalization $eta_Yrightsquigarrow f(eta_X)$ (the generic point of an irreducible scheme generalizes every point in the scheme). Since generalizations lift along $f$ (due to $f$ being flat), there is a point $xin X$ with $f(x)=eta_Y$ and $xrightsquigarrow eta_X$, i.e., $x$ is a generalization of $eta_X$. Because $eta_X$ is the generic point of $X$ and the underlying topological space of a scheme is sober (I guess just Kolmogorov is adequate–all that we need is that distinct points have distinct closures), we must have $x=eta_X$. Thus $f(eta_X)=f(x)=eta_Y$.






              share|cite|improve this answer






















                up vote
                4
                down vote



                accepted







                up vote
                4
                down vote



                accepted






                Any flat morphism $f:Xto Y$ with $X$ and $Y$ irreducible sends the generic point of $X$ to the generic point of $Y$. This is a consequence of the fact that generalizations lift along flat morphisms (of arbitrary schemes), which is itself a global version of the fact that a flat ring map $Ato B$ satisfies going down.



                Here are the relevant Stacks Project references:



                https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/03HV (generalizations lift along flat morphisms)



                https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00HS (flat ring maps satisfy going down)



                https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00HW ($Ato B$ satisfies going down if and only if generalizations lift along $mathrmSpec(B)tomathrmSpec(A)$)



                https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0063 (definition of generalizations lifting along a map)



                https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0061 (definition of generalizations in a topological space)



                Now assume $X$ and $Y$ are irreducible with generic points $eta_X$ and $eta_Y$, respectively, and let $f:Xto Y$ be flat. Consider the generalization $eta_Yrightsquigarrow f(eta_X)$ (the generic point of an irreducible scheme generalizes every point in the scheme). Since generalizations lift along $f$ (due to $f$ being flat), there is a point $xin X$ with $f(x)=eta_Y$ and $xrightsquigarrow eta_X$, i.e., $x$ is a generalization of $eta_X$. Because $eta_X$ is the generic point of $X$ and the underlying topological space of a scheme is sober (I guess just Kolmogorov is adequate–all that we need is that distinct points have distinct closures), we must have $x=eta_X$. Thus $f(eta_X)=f(x)=eta_Y$.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                Any flat morphism $f:Xto Y$ with $X$ and $Y$ irreducible sends the generic point of $X$ to the generic point of $Y$. This is a consequence of the fact that generalizations lift along flat morphisms (of arbitrary schemes), which is itself a global version of the fact that a flat ring map $Ato B$ satisfies going down.



                Here are the relevant Stacks Project references:



                https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/03HV (generalizations lift along flat morphisms)



                https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00HS (flat ring maps satisfy going down)



                https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00HW ($Ato B$ satisfies going down if and only if generalizations lift along $mathrmSpec(B)tomathrmSpec(A)$)



                https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0063 (definition of generalizations lifting along a map)



                https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/0061 (definition of generalizations in a topological space)



                Now assume $X$ and $Y$ are irreducible with generic points $eta_X$ and $eta_Y$, respectively, and let $f:Xto Y$ be flat. Consider the generalization $eta_Yrightsquigarrow f(eta_X)$ (the generic point of an irreducible scheme generalizes every point in the scheme). Since generalizations lift along $f$ (due to $f$ being flat), there is a point $xin X$ with $f(x)=eta_Y$ and $xrightsquigarrow eta_X$, i.e., $x$ is a generalization of $eta_X$. Because $eta_X$ is the generic point of $X$ and the underlying topological space of a scheme is sober (I guess just Kolmogorov is adequate–all that we need is that distinct points have distinct closures), we must have $x=eta_X$. Thus $f(eta_X)=f(x)=eta_Y$.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Sep 7 at 5:17









                Keenan Kidwell

                19.1k13169




                19.1k13169



























                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded















































                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2908265%2fwhy-does-a-flat-finite-type-morphism-of-irreducible-noetherian-schemes-map-gener%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest













































































                    8tuPbwLefnFSvE4fXdRDt hGKC63kXHLjHBs6tRH,mtpTj2fk,0ysQj87 W
                    W30XNu OA9EplN 50l,5Lgixm3ntZ4IlRmG,2D5

                    這個網誌中的熱門文章

                    How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

                    Propositional logic and tautologies

                    Distribution of Stopped Wiener Process with Stochastic Volatility