Kurs:Vector bundles, forcing algebras and local cohomology (Medellin 2012)/Lecture 5

Aus Wikiversity

In this lecture we deal with closure operations which depend only on the torsor which the forcing algebra defines, so they only depend on the cohomology class of the forcing data inside the syzygy bundle. Our main example is tight closure, a theory developed by Hochster and Huneke, and related closure operations like solid closure and plus closure.



Tight closure and solid closure

Let be a noetherian domain of positive characteristic, let

be the Frobenius homomorphism and

(mit ) its th iteration. Let be an ideal and set

Then define the tight closure of to be the ideal


The element defines the cohomology class . Suppose that is normal and that has height at least (think of a local normal domain of dimension at least and an -primary ideal ). Then the th Frobenius pull-back of the cohomology class is

() and this is the cohomology class corresponding to . By the height assumption, if and only if , and if this holds for all then by definition. This shows already that tight closure under the given conditions does only depend on the cohomology class.

This is also a consequence of the following theorem of Hochster which gives a characterization of tight closure in terms of forcing algebra and local cohomology.


Theorem

Let be a normal excellent local domain with maximal ideal over a field of positive characteristic. Let generate an -primary ideal and let be another element in . Then

if and only if

where

denotes the forcing algebra of these elements.

If the dimension is at least two, then

This means that we have to look at the cohomological properties of the complement of the exceptional fiber over the closed point, i.e. the torsor given by these data. If then this is true for all quasicoherent sheaves instead of the structure sheaf. This property can be expressed by saying that the cohomological dimension of is and thus smaller than the cohomological dimension of the punctured spectrum , which is exactly . So belonging to tight closure can be rephrased by saying that the formation of the corresponding torsor does not change the cohomological dimension.

If the dimension is two, then we have to look whether the first cohomology of the structure sheaf vanishes. This is true (by Serre's cohomological criterion for affineness) if and only if the open subset is an affine scheme (the spectrum of a ring).

The right hand side of the equivalence in Theorem 5.1 - the non-vanishing of the top-dimensional local cohomology - is independent of any characteristic assumption, and can be taken as the basis for the definition of another closure operation, called solid closure. So the theorem above says that in positive characteristic tight closure and solid closure coincide. There is also a definition of tight closure for algebras over a field of characteristic by reduction to positive characteristic.

An important property of tight closure is that it is trivial for regular rings, i.e. for every ideal . This rests upon Kunz's theorem saying that the Frobenius homomorphism for regular rings is flat. This property implies the following cohomological property of torsors.


Corollary  

Let denote a regular local ring of dimension and of positive characteristic, let be an -primary ideal and be an element with . Let be the corresponding forcing algebra.

Then the extended ideal satisfies

Proof  

This follows from Theorem 5.1 and .


In dimension two this is true in every (even mixed) characteristic.


Theorem

Let denote a two-dimensional regular local ring, let be an -primary ideal and an element with . Let

be the corresponding forcing algebra.

Then for the extended ideal we have

In particular, the open subset is an affine scheme if and only if .

The main point for the proof of this result is that for , the natural mapping

is not injective by a Matlis duality argument. Since the local cohomology of a regular ring is explicitly known, this map annihilates some cohomology class of the form where are parameters. But then it annihilates the complete local cohomology module and then is an affine scheme.

For non-regular two-dimensional rings it is a difficult question in general to decide whether a torsor is affine or not. A satisfactory answer is only known in the normal twodimensional graded case over a field, which we will deal with in the final lectures.

In higher dimension in characteristic zero it is not true that a regular ring is solidly closed (meaning that every ideal equals its solid closure), as was shown by the following example of Paul Roberts.


Example  

Let be a field of characteristic and let

Then the ideal has the property that . This means that in , the element belongs to the solid closure of the ideal , and hence the three-dimensional polynomial ring is not solidly closed.

This example was the motivation for the introduction of parasolid closure, which has all the good properties of solid closure but which is also trivial for regular rings.


Pdf-version