1

Given a finitely generated projective module $M$ over a ring $R$ with exactly two idempotents $0,1$ ($X=\operatorname{Spec} R$ is connected). We have a coherent $\mathcal{O}_X$-module $\widetilde{M}$ and the rank of $\widetilde{M}$ at $\mathfrak{p}\in X$ is defined by $$\dim_{\kappa({\mathfrak{p}})}M_{\mathfrak{p}}\otimes_{R_\mathfrak{p}}\kappa({\mathfrak{p}})$$

Question.

  1. Why is this dimension constant?
  2. For an arbitrary ring $R$, why is it locally constant (is it constant on connected components)?

My attempts. Since we have $$M_{\mathfrak{p}}\otimes_{R_\mathfrak{p}}\kappa({\mathfrak{p}})\cong M\otimes_{R}R_{\mathfrak{p}}\otimes_{R_\mathfrak{p}}\kappa(\mathfrak{p})\cong M\otimes_{R}\kappa(\mathfrak{p})$$ When $R$ is an integral domain, we do have all $\kappa({\mathfrak{p}})$ are isomorphic to the fractional field at the generic point. Hence the rank is constant. Hence I think a possible generalization is, for arbitrary ring $R$, the rank of $M$ should be constant on irreducible components of $\operatorname{Spec} R$.

Updates. As KReiser pointed out, my attempt above is NOT correct. Now I am even more confused, as irreducible spaces are connected and we cannot have constant value there.

Any help is appreciated. Just in case, I have read Mr. Brandenburg's answer in this post Rank of projective module where he did not prove his claim.

KReiser
  • 65,137
Mizutsuki
  • 484
  • 1
  • 7
  • "When $R$ is an integral domain, we do have all $\kappa({\mathfrak{p}})$ are isomorphic to the fractional field at the generic point." Absolutely not! Try any example which is not a field, for instance $\Bbb Z$. – KReiser Feb 06 '24 at 05:07
  • @KReiser Sorry, I also just realized. Now I got even more confused. – Mizutsuki Feb 06 '24 at 05:08

1 Answers1

3

The best proof of this is via the fact that if $R$ is a commutative ring and $M$ is a finitely-generated $R$-module which is projective, then there exist $f_1,\cdots,f_n\in R$ with $M_{f_i}$ free and $(f_1,\cdots,f_n)=R$, among other things. The proof is not hard, but there are plenty of sub-results to prove and use, and it has already been written up many times, and I always get impatient with proving it for someone else. For a good source, see Serre's original paper Modules projectifs et espaces fibres a fibre vectorielle, Stacks tag 00NV, and many others. It's quite nice to take a journey through this and I recommend you do so at some point!


Here is a reasonably quick proof modulo some results from algebra if you're willing to accept a restriction to rings $R$ with finitely many minimal primes (i.e. noetherian rings):

Algebra facts.

  1. $M$ is projective iff every short exact sequence ending in $M$ splits;
  2. $M$ is projective iff it is a direct summand of a free module;
  3. Every finitely-generated projective module over a local ring is free.

Lemma. Let $R$ be a commutative ring and let $M$ be a finitely-generated projective module. Then $M_P$ is a finitely-generated projective module for any prime ideal $P\subset R$.

Proof. Let $R^n\to M$ be a surjection (which exists by the finitely-generated hypothesis) with kernel $K$, so that $R^n\cong M\oplus K$ by fact 1. As localization is exact, we have $R^n_P\cong M_P\oplus K_P$, which implies $M_P$ is projective by fact 2. $\blacksquare$

Now let's prove the result. For any primes $P\subset Q \subset R$, we have $M_P\cong R_P^{n_P}$ and $M_Q\cong R_Q^{n_Q}$ for some nonnegative integers $n_P,n_Q$ by the lemma, giving $\operatorname{rank}_P M=n_P$ and $\operatorname{rank}_Q M=n_Q$. On the other hand, since localization is transitive, we have $R_P^{n_P} = M_P = (M_Q)_{P_Q} = (R_Q^{n_Q})_{P_Q} = R_P^{n_Q}$, giving $n_Q=n_P$ for any inclusion of primes $P\subset Q$. Now since $R$ has only the trivial idempotents, $\operatorname{Spec} R$ is connected, which means for any primes $P,P'\subset R$ there is a chain of inclusions of prime ideals $P\subset P_0 \supset P_1 \subset \cdots \supset P_n \subset P'$ connecting $P$ and $P'$, which by the above shows that $n_P = n_{P'}$. Such a chain exists by jumping from irreducible component to irreducible component: if there were a partition of irreducible components in to two sets where you cannot jump from one to the other, this would prove $\operatorname{Spec} R$ is disconnected.

KReiser
  • 65,137
  • In 3. you mean projective modules over local rings are free? – red_trumpet Feb 07 '24 at 07:15
  • @red_trumpet yes, thank you for pointing out the typo. – KReiser Feb 07 '24 at 13:16
  • Thank you for your great answer! It took me some time to understand everything. I still have some questions: 1. Is it true that, your proof can also show that the rank is constant on irreducible component? (since the main argument is based on the unique minimal prime). 2. do you mind explaining the part "$R$ has only 0,1, as idempotents, then it has a unique minimal prime? 3. Is it an axiom that algebraic geometers are able to read mathematics in French? I tried to look for an English translation of the paper you mentioned but failed.. – Mizutsuki Feb 13 '24 at 11:15
  • @Mizutsuki 1 & 2: sorry, there was an error in there - only two idempotents doesn't imply a unique minimal prime, say for instance $k[x,y]/(xy)$. I've fixed the proof now. 3. No, it's not - I can't read or speak French, but Google translate gets me reasonably far in reading mathematical French (modulo remembering a couple key words it likes to mistranslate - "faisceaux" is sheaf, not beam), but I also provided an English reference in the post. – KReiser Feb 13 '24 at 15:52
  • @KReiser Thank you. I am just surprised there is no English translation for some of the great works from Mr. Serre. The characterization of connectedness in ring spectrum seems interesting. I verified few examples and it is working. Do you know if there is any rigorous reference on that? I tried to prove it myself but failed. A connected component is closed, hence is of the form $V(I)$ for some ideal $I\subseteq R$. Then I got lost. I apologize for the trouble. – Mizutsuki Feb 18 '24 at 07:05
  • @Mizutsuki The essential mathematical content of that paper of Serre is duplicated elsewhere (it's now textbook-level). As far as connectedness and idempotents, luckily this proof has been on MSE for more than a decade, and it's not too hard to do yourself. – KReiser Feb 18 '24 at 07:10
  • @KReiser I am familair with the idempotent characterization. I meant the fact that in a connected component, one can "connect" two primes by inclusions. – Mizutsuki Feb 18 '24 at 07:32
  • @Mizutsuki You know, now that you mention it, there are examples of connected rings where that property doesn't hold, see for instane here. Maybe I thought you had put a noetherian assumption in your post - anyways, for the general case, read Serre's proof somewhere. I always get impatient when doing it for someone else because there's so many pieces, but they are all quite useful. – KReiser Feb 18 '24 at 08:14
  • @KReiser Great! It is good enough to know that it does not hold in general. Thank you sincerely for your help and explanation. – Mizutsuki Feb 18 '24 at 08:59