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

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













































































                    這個網誌中的熱門文章

                    How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

                    Carbon dioxide

                    Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?