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

I vaguely recall the following fact that I'd like to use in my research. It should be easy to see that this holds (if it does) but I can't seem to prove it.

Let $p:X\longrightarrow S$ be a (regular) arithmetic surface over a Dedekind scheme $S$.

Let $P:S\longrightarrow X$ be a section and let $\omega$ be a non-zero rational section of $\omega_{X/S}$. Let $K_{X} = \mathrm{div}(\omega) $ be the canonical divisor defined by $\omega$. (A better notation for $K_X$ would be $K_{X/S}$, maybe.)

By definition, the intersection number $(K_X,P)$ is defined as $$\sum_{s } i_s (K_{X}, P) \log( \mathrm{card}( k (s)) ), $$ where the sum runs over the closed points of $S$ and $$i_s(K_{X},P) = \sum_{x} i_x(K_{X}, P) [k(x):k(s)],$$ where the sum runs over the closed points of $X_s$ and $i_x$ denotes the intersection number at $x$.

Now, I wonder if the following equality is trivial to see.

Write $\omega = df$ for some rational function $f\in K(X)$. (We assume this to be possible.) Do we have that

$$(K_{X}, P) = \sum_{s} \mathrm{ord}_s(P^\ast\omega) \log(\mathrm{card}(k(s)))?$$

To see this, it suffices to prove the following equality: $$\mathrm{ord}_s(P^\ast \omega) =i_s (K_{X}, P) .$$ Does this hold?

share|improve this question
    
$ord_s(P^*\omega)$ doesn't necessarily make sense. Plus, $P^*\omega$ may not be what you think it is. Consider the case $S = \Spec \mathbb{Z}$ and, I don't know, $X = \mathbb{P}^1, P=(0:1)$. –  Felipe Voloch Jul 23 '11 at 16:18
    
Thanks for your comment. I edited the question and hopefully $\mathrm{ord}_s(P^\ast \omega)$ makes sense now. I really want $P^\ast \omega$ to be a nonzero rational section of $P^\ast \omega_{X/S}$. Maybe there are smoothness conditions that need to be fulfilled? –  Enchanted Jul 23 '11 at 17:14
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 3 down vote accepted

This is correct if $P(S)$ is not contained in the support of $\mathrm{div}(\omega)$. It comes essentially from the definition of $i_x(K_X, P)$. You don't need $\omega$ to be an exact differential from. However the intersection number depends on the choice of $\omega$ (as well as the Weil divisor $K_X$). You can check this by yourself by multiplying $\omega$ by a non-zero constant in $K(S)$ and see the effect on the total intersection number. If $P(S)$ is contained in the support of $K_X$, then you can't define $i_x(K_X, P)$.

EDIT. Let me add some more details. Denote by $K(X)$ the field of rational functions on $X$, viewed as a constant sheaf on $X$. Then $\omega\in \omega_{X/S}\otimes K(X)$. Hence $\omega\cdot\omega_{X/S}^{\vee}$ is a subsheaf of $K(X)$, hence equal (not only isomorphic) to $O_X(-D)$ for some Cartier divisor $D$ on $X$. We have $$ \omega_{X/S}=\omega\cdot O_X(D). $$ A straightforward local computation shows that $\mathrm{div}(\omega)=D$ as Cartier divisors. Let us identify $P$ with $P(S)$. Let $I\subset O_X$ be the ideal sheaf defining $P$ in $X$. As $P$ is not contained in the support of $D$, $D|_P$ is a well defined Cartier divisor on $P$. Namely, if a local equation of $D$ at some point $x\in P$ is given by $f_x\in K(X)$, then we can write $f_x=a/b$ with $a, b\notin I_x$ (here we use the fact that $O_{X,x}$ is a UFD). Then a local equation of $D$ restricted to $P$ is $\bar{a}/\bar{b}$ where $\bar{c}$ means the image of $c$ in $O_{X,x}/I$.

The above equality restricted to $P$ reads $$P^{*}(\omega_{X/S})=P^{*}(\omega) \cdot O_P(D|_P).$$ So $P^{*}(\omega)$ is a rational section of

$P^{*}\omega_{X/S}$ and its divisor on $S$ is $D|_P$.

To get an intersection number independent of the choice of a rational section $\omega$, you have to use Arakelov intersection theory.

share|improve this answer
1  
Under the condition on $P(S)$, $P^*\omega$ can be viewed as a rational section of $P^*\omega_{X/S}$. Then its order in the DVR $O_{S,s}$ makes sense. If you want, $K_{X}$ is a Cartier divisor, and the divisor of $P^*\omega$ is equal to $P^*K_{X}$. Probably Felip was concerned with the case when $P(S)$ is contained in the support of $K_X$. –  Qing Liu Jul 23 '11 at 19:08
1  
Isn't $P^*\omega =0$ if e.g. $S=Spec \mathbb{Z}$? After all $\Omega^1_{Spec \mathbb{Z}} = 0$. You can pull back the divisor allright, but not the differential. –  Felipe Voloch Jul 23 '11 at 19:08
1  
@Felipe: $P^*\omega_{X/S}\ne \Omega^1_{P/S}$. The first is an invertible sheaf while the second is equal to $0$. –  Qing Liu Jul 23 '11 at 21:53
1  
$1^*dx = d1 = 0$, Enchanted was pulling back a differential, not a line bundle. –  Felipe Voloch Jul 24 '11 at 0:18
1  
I think he/she is trying to give a meaning to $P^*\omega$. For a general coherent sheaf $L$ and a regular section $s$, $P^*s$ is a regular section of $P^*L$. In the case $L=\Omega_{X/S}$, a commun meaning for $P^*s$ is its image by the canonical map $P^*\Omega_{X/S}\to \Omega_{P/S}$. The two notions differ for $L=\Omega_{X/S}$ and this is sometimes confusing. In the current context, his/her $\omega$ is a rational differential form, so it is more reasonable to view $P^*\omega$ as a rational section of $P^*\omega_{X/S}$. Then the desired equality holds under the condition on the support, ... –  Qing Liu Jul 24 '11 at 9:08
show 3 more comments

Your Answer

 
discard

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.