Exercse 4.1.1 of Hartshorne: find a rational function on a curve with a pole at one point.












1














I am struggling with exercise 4.1.1 of Hartshorne. The precise question is as follows:



Let $X$ be a curve (i.e. an integral scheme of dimension 1 that is proper over some algebraically closed field $k$ such that all its local rings are regular), and let $P in X$ be a (closed) point. Then there exists a nonconstant rational function $fin K(X)$ (the function field of $X$), which is regular everywhere except at the point $P$.



I wanted to prove this first for an affine scheme $X=Spec(A)$. Here, $A$ has to be an integral domain of Krull dimension 1 such that all its localizations are regular local rings and $P$ some non-zero prime ideal of $A$. I think I should find some $fin P$ such that $fnotin Q$ for all other prime ideals $Q$. In that case the rational function $frac{1}{f}in Quot(A)$ is a function satisfying the conditions above. (Mimicking the case $A=k[X]$, $P=(x-a)$, $f=x-a$.)



I believe that it would suffice to show that $P$ is principal to show that such $f$ exists. However, I am not sure that this is true.



Does anyone know how to proceed?










share|cite|improve this question


















  • 2




    Couple thoughts. Firstly, it's been a bit, but I'm suspicious about whether affine schemes can be proper over an algebraically closed field. The universally closed assumption in particular strikes me as not likely to be true for an affine scheme. Secondly, even if you could prove this for an affine scheme that gets you almost no closer to solving it in general, since the question is not a local one.
    – jgon
    Nov 21 '18 at 16:54






  • 3




    Also we have no idea what you're assuming here. This follows more or less trivially from Riemann-Roch as far as I can see.
    – jgon
    Nov 21 '18 at 17:01






  • 1




    As jgon says, Riemann-Roch (and really just Riemann's inequality) implies this immediately: $ell(nP) geq 1 - g + n$, so $mathscr{L}(nP)$ contains a nonconstant function for any $n geq g+1$.
    – André 3000
    Nov 22 '18 at 4:20
















1














I am struggling with exercise 4.1.1 of Hartshorne. The precise question is as follows:



Let $X$ be a curve (i.e. an integral scheme of dimension 1 that is proper over some algebraically closed field $k$ such that all its local rings are regular), and let $P in X$ be a (closed) point. Then there exists a nonconstant rational function $fin K(X)$ (the function field of $X$), which is regular everywhere except at the point $P$.



I wanted to prove this first for an affine scheme $X=Spec(A)$. Here, $A$ has to be an integral domain of Krull dimension 1 such that all its localizations are regular local rings and $P$ some non-zero prime ideal of $A$. I think I should find some $fin P$ such that $fnotin Q$ for all other prime ideals $Q$. In that case the rational function $frac{1}{f}in Quot(A)$ is a function satisfying the conditions above. (Mimicking the case $A=k[X]$, $P=(x-a)$, $f=x-a$.)



I believe that it would suffice to show that $P$ is principal to show that such $f$ exists. However, I am not sure that this is true.



Does anyone know how to proceed?










share|cite|improve this question


















  • 2




    Couple thoughts. Firstly, it's been a bit, but I'm suspicious about whether affine schemes can be proper over an algebraically closed field. The universally closed assumption in particular strikes me as not likely to be true for an affine scheme. Secondly, even if you could prove this for an affine scheme that gets you almost no closer to solving it in general, since the question is not a local one.
    – jgon
    Nov 21 '18 at 16:54






  • 3




    Also we have no idea what you're assuming here. This follows more or less trivially from Riemann-Roch as far as I can see.
    – jgon
    Nov 21 '18 at 17:01






  • 1




    As jgon says, Riemann-Roch (and really just Riemann's inequality) implies this immediately: $ell(nP) geq 1 - g + n$, so $mathscr{L}(nP)$ contains a nonconstant function for any $n geq g+1$.
    – André 3000
    Nov 22 '18 at 4:20














1












1








1


1





I am struggling with exercise 4.1.1 of Hartshorne. The precise question is as follows:



Let $X$ be a curve (i.e. an integral scheme of dimension 1 that is proper over some algebraically closed field $k$ such that all its local rings are regular), and let $P in X$ be a (closed) point. Then there exists a nonconstant rational function $fin K(X)$ (the function field of $X$), which is regular everywhere except at the point $P$.



I wanted to prove this first for an affine scheme $X=Spec(A)$. Here, $A$ has to be an integral domain of Krull dimension 1 such that all its localizations are regular local rings and $P$ some non-zero prime ideal of $A$. I think I should find some $fin P$ such that $fnotin Q$ for all other prime ideals $Q$. In that case the rational function $frac{1}{f}in Quot(A)$ is a function satisfying the conditions above. (Mimicking the case $A=k[X]$, $P=(x-a)$, $f=x-a$.)



I believe that it would suffice to show that $P$ is principal to show that such $f$ exists. However, I am not sure that this is true.



Does anyone know how to proceed?










share|cite|improve this question













I am struggling with exercise 4.1.1 of Hartshorne. The precise question is as follows:



Let $X$ be a curve (i.e. an integral scheme of dimension 1 that is proper over some algebraically closed field $k$ such that all its local rings are regular), and let $P in X$ be a (closed) point. Then there exists a nonconstant rational function $fin K(X)$ (the function field of $X$), which is regular everywhere except at the point $P$.



I wanted to prove this first for an affine scheme $X=Spec(A)$. Here, $A$ has to be an integral domain of Krull dimension 1 such that all its localizations are regular local rings and $P$ some non-zero prime ideal of $A$. I think I should find some $fin P$ such that $fnotin Q$ for all other prime ideals $Q$. In that case the rational function $frac{1}{f}in Quot(A)$ is a function satisfying the conditions above. (Mimicking the case $A=k[X]$, $P=(x-a)$, $f=x-a$.)



I believe that it would suffice to show that $P$ is principal to show that such $f$ exists. However, I am not sure that this is true.



Does anyone know how to proceed?







algebraic-geometry commutative-algebra






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Nov 21 '18 at 10:35









PP123

1077




1077








  • 2




    Couple thoughts. Firstly, it's been a bit, but I'm suspicious about whether affine schemes can be proper over an algebraically closed field. The universally closed assumption in particular strikes me as not likely to be true for an affine scheme. Secondly, even if you could prove this for an affine scheme that gets you almost no closer to solving it in general, since the question is not a local one.
    – jgon
    Nov 21 '18 at 16:54






  • 3




    Also we have no idea what you're assuming here. This follows more or less trivially from Riemann-Roch as far as I can see.
    – jgon
    Nov 21 '18 at 17:01






  • 1




    As jgon says, Riemann-Roch (and really just Riemann's inequality) implies this immediately: $ell(nP) geq 1 - g + n$, so $mathscr{L}(nP)$ contains a nonconstant function for any $n geq g+1$.
    – André 3000
    Nov 22 '18 at 4:20














  • 2




    Couple thoughts. Firstly, it's been a bit, but I'm suspicious about whether affine schemes can be proper over an algebraically closed field. The universally closed assumption in particular strikes me as not likely to be true for an affine scheme. Secondly, even if you could prove this for an affine scheme that gets you almost no closer to solving it in general, since the question is not a local one.
    – jgon
    Nov 21 '18 at 16:54






  • 3




    Also we have no idea what you're assuming here. This follows more or less trivially from Riemann-Roch as far as I can see.
    – jgon
    Nov 21 '18 at 17:01






  • 1




    As jgon says, Riemann-Roch (and really just Riemann's inequality) implies this immediately: $ell(nP) geq 1 - g + n$, so $mathscr{L}(nP)$ contains a nonconstant function for any $n geq g+1$.
    – André 3000
    Nov 22 '18 at 4:20








2




2




Couple thoughts. Firstly, it's been a bit, but I'm suspicious about whether affine schemes can be proper over an algebraically closed field. The universally closed assumption in particular strikes me as not likely to be true for an affine scheme. Secondly, even if you could prove this for an affine scheme that gets you almost no closer to solving it in general, since the question is not a local one.
– jgon
Nov 21 '18 at 16:54




Couple thoughts. Firstly, it's been a bit, but I'm suspicious about whether affine schemes can be proper over an algebraically closed field. The universally closed assumption in particular strikes me as not likely to be true for an affine scheme. Secondly, even if you could prove this for an affine scheme that gets you almost no closer to solving it in general, since the question is not a local one.
– jgon
Nov 21 '18 at 16:54




3




3




Also we have no idea what you're assuming here. This follows more or less trivially from Riemann-Roch as far as I can see.
– jgon
Nov 21 '18 at 17:01




Also we have no idea what you're assuming here. This follows more or less trivially from Riemann-Roch as far as I can see.
– jgon
Nov 21 '18 at 17:01




1




1




As jgon says, Riemann-Roch (and really just Riemann's inequality) implies this immediately: $ell(nP) geq 1 - g + n$, so $mathscr{L}(nP)$ contains a nonconstant function for any $n geq g+1$.
– André 3000
Nov 22 '18 at 4:20




As jgon says, Riemann-Roch (and really just Riemann's inequality) implies this immediately: $ell(nP) geq 1 - g + n$, so $mathscr{L}(nP)$ contains a nonconstant function for any $n geq g+1$.
– André 3000
Nov 22 '18 at 4:20










0






active

oldest

votes











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',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
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%2f3007543%2fexercse-4-1-1-of-hartshorne-find-a-rational-function-on-a-curve-with-a-pole-at%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























0






active

oldest

votes








0






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes
















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3007543%2fexercse-4-1-1-of-hartshorne-find-a-rational-function-on-a-curve-with-a-pole-at%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

android studio warns about leanback feature tag usage required on manifest while using Unity exported app?

SQL update select statement

WPF add header to Image with URL pettitions [duplicate]