Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $\pi:Y\to X$ be a dominant, finite morphism of nonsingular varieties over an algebraically closed field $\Bbbk$. Assume furthermore that for all $Q\in Y$, with $P=\pi(Q)$, we have $$\mathcal O_{Y,Q}=\mathcal O_{X,P}[T_1,\ldots,T_k]/(T_1^n-x_1,\ldots,T_k^n-x_k)$$ for certain $x_i\in\mathcal O_{X,P}$. In other words, we have adjoined certain $n$-th roots.

Now, let $R\subseteq Y$ be the ramification divisor and $H=\pi(R)$ the branch locus (both now with the reduced subscheme structure). Let $\mathcal I(H)$ be the ideal sheaf of $H$ and $\mathcal I(H)_P$ the stalk at $P$. Can I conclude that this ideal $\mathcal I(H)_P\subseteq \mathcal O_{X,P}$ is generated by the product $x_1\cdots x_k$? Or, correspondingly, can I conclude that $\mathcal I(R)_Q$ is generated by the product $y_1\cdots y_k$?

Edit. As pointed out in the answer by Dmitry Vaintrob, I want to assume $n$ not divisible by $\mathrm{char}(\Bbbk)$. Furthermore, we assume that the $x_i$ are reduced and coprime.

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

There are two issues. You presumably mean that $x_i$ are themselves reduced and have no common divisors, or else the answer would be trivially no: just take $x_1=x_2$ and then the reduced branching ideal is generated by $x_1,$ not $x_1x_2.$ You also need to be careful what you mean in characteristic $p$, as then $T^p-x$ is everywhere ramified, no matter what $x$ is. Otherwise (in characteristic $0$ or relatively prime to $n$ and with $x_i$ reduced and having no common divisors) I don't see any reason why this would be false, just by writing out equations for the ramification and branching loci: ramification divisors under fiber products satisfy $R_{Y_1\times_X Y_2\to X}=R_{Y_1\to X}\times_X Y_2\cup Y_1\times R_{Y_2\to X}$, so it's enough to consider a single $T_1$ and you have $T_1^n-x_1=0, nT_1^{n-1}=0,$ which turns into $T_1=0, T_1^{n-1}=x_1$ (and the projection of this to $X$ is again $x_1=0$).

Is this what you were asking or am I missing something? If this is what you need, I don't deserve the bounty as I didn't say anything deep.

Edit: PS - The fact that your ring is a fiber product follows from the following general statement. Suppose $U=S[x_1,\dots, x_n]/(R_1,\dots, R_k)$ and $V = S[x_1',\dots, x_m']/(R_1',\dots, R_l')$ are commutative algebras over $S$ given by generators and relations, where $R_i$ are relations on the $x$'s and $R_j'$ are relations on the $y$'s. Then the tensor product can be written in generators and relations as follows. $$U\otimes_S V=S[x_1,\dots, x_n, x_1',\dots, x_m']/(R_1,\dots, R_k, R_1',\dots, R_l')$$ You can prove this in one line by using universal properties in the category of commutative $S$-algebras. Namely, a map of $S$-algebras from the tensor product $U\otimes_S V$ to some $S$-algebra $W$ is equivalent to a pair of maps $f_1:U\to W, f_2:V\to W$ both over $S$, and a map from $S[x_1,\dots, x_n]/(R_1,\dots, R_k)$ to $W$ is equivalent to choosing a set of elements $w_1,\dots, w_n$ of $W$ satisfying relations $R_1,\dots, R_k$. Putting this together, $U\otimes_S V$ and the ring defined by the two sets of generators and relations as above satisfy the exact same universal property.

share|improve this answer
This is exactly what I am asking. I should have added that I assume $n$ not divisible by $\mathrm{char}(\Bbbk)$ and of course, yea, I assume the $x_i$ reduced and coprime. I was pretty sure that this is true, but I wanted confirmation. To be honest, I don't perfectly understand your argument, though: Can I somehow argue that $Y$ locally looks like a fiber product? What exactly do you mean by $nT_1^{n-1}=0$, you kinda took the derivative there? I'm sorry, I just don't perfectly understand. Anyhow, it's precisely what I want and if you can elaborate, you very much deserve the bounty =). –  Jesko Hüttenhain Feb 5 '13 at 8:13
The problem is local, so we can assume $X$ affine. And since the equation for each added coordinate is independent of the rest, you get that your space is the fiber product over $X$ of the spaces defined by $O_X[T_i]/(T_i^n-x_i).$ (This is a very fundamental property of tensor products, which can be checked from the definition). If you believe what I said about ramification of fiber products, this reduces to checking what you said for a single $O_X[T_i]/(T^i-x_i). Now if a space is given by an equation like this over a base, the ramification divisor is the vanishing locus of the derivative. –  Dmitry Vaintrob Feb 6 '13 at 2:13
A personal matter came up and I missed the deadline for assigning the bounty, though I certainly would have done so. I even sent a mail to the moderators, but apparently this mistake is irreversible. I hope my heartfelt thanks are enough then =). –  Jesko Hüttenhain Feb 10 '13 at 11:39
add comment

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.