Saturday, 15 March 2008

ag.algebraic geometry - Points and DVR's

Suppose that X is a projective variety, and that v is a discete valuation on K(X)
(trivial on k) whose corresponding valuation ring we will denote by R. The valuative criterion shows that
the map Spec K(X)rightarrowX extends to a map Spec RrightarrowX. If I have the terminology correct, the image of the closed point of Spec R is called the centre of
the valuation v on X. It has codimension anywhere between 1 and dim X.
Note that if xinX is the centre, then R dominates mathcalOx in K(X)
(i.e. we have a local inclusion of local rings mathcalOxsubsetR).



Let's suppose for a moment that X is a smooth surface. If the centre x is codimension 1,
then both mathcalOx and R are (discrete) valuation rings. Since valuation rings
are (characterized by being) maximal for the partial order of dominance, R and mathcalOx coincide, and so the discrete valuation v is just that given by the divisor of which
x is the generic point.



Suppose instead that x is a closed point.
Now we can blow up x in X, to get a projective variety X1, and the centre of v in X1 will now be contained in the exceptional divisor of X1 (i.e. the preimage of x). If it coincides with the exceptional divisor,
then we have found a curve on X1 giving rise to v; otherwise it is a point
x1, which we can blow up again.



Either we eventually obtain a divisor on some iterated blow-up of X, or we
obtain a sequence of points xinX,x1inX1,ldots, with each Xn a blow-up
of the previous. In this case one sees that R=bigcupmathcalOxn.



There are a couple of exercises related to this issue in Hartshorne, namely II.4.5, II.4.12, and V.5.6. If I understand them correctly, any such sequence of xn gives
a valuation ring R in this way, and R is a discrete valuation ring unless one constructs the sequene xn in the following manner: choose an irreducible curve C in X and define xn to
be the intersection of the proper transform of C in Xn with the exceptional
divisor. For a sequence xn constructed in this latter manner, one obtains not
a discrete valuation ring, but rather a rank 2 valuation ring: the valuation is determined
by first taking the valuation at the generic point of C, and then (for those functions
which are defined and non-zero at this generic point) restricting to C and computing
the order of zero or pole at x.



What is the geometric intuition for the discrete valuation rings that correspond
to an infinite sequence xn rather than to some curve on X? One can think of
them as a transcendental curve on X, passing through x.
Indeed, imagine you had such a curve.
Then you could restrict a rational function to it; since it is transcendental,
a non-zero rational function would not have a zero or pole along this curve, and so
would restrict to give a non-zero meromorphic function on the curve. We could then
compute the order of the zero or pole of this meromorphic function at x. In other
words, because the curve is transcendental, we get a rank one valuation, in contrast to the rank two valuations that arise when we apply this process with an algebraic curve
C passing through x.



I'm not sure about the details of the higher dimensional case. (Among other things, I am worried about the possibility of the center being codim > 1, but singular, which seems like it could complicate the analysis.) Does anyone here know how it goes?

No comments:

Post a Comment