[Theorem 1.6, Varbaro]
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
$d$ the minimal dimension of an irreducible component of $X$, and
$c$ 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
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
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. $\square$
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).
All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
Comments (0)