MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

In Kollár and Mori's Birational Geometry of Algebraic Varieties, lemma2.60 claim some multiple of a big divisor induced birational morphism onto its image in a projective space. But the proof only show it can be written as a sum of an ample divisor and an effective divisor, and say the result is obvious for the latter. I try to find the details for the latter but have no clues. Thank you for any answer or comments. Furthermore the lemma assume the scheme is a projective variety, does it must be integral? Can the result be done for proper varieties?

The second question: The authors also claim a divisor is big iff its birational pullback is big. I know when the varieties are integral normal and proper, this can be done by Zariski' main theorem and projective formula. Are these conditions necessary?

Thank you!

share|cite|improve this question
3  
If $mD=A+E$, where A is wlog very ample, the dimension of the image of $\phi_{|mD|}$ is at least the dimension of the image of $\phi_{|A|}$, because $H^0(X,kA)\subset H^0(X,mkD)$ for $k\ge 0$. – J.C. Ottem Apr 23 '12 at 2:52
3  
And to see that the rational map you obtain is birational, take a non-zero section $s_E$ of $E$ whose divisor is $E$, and then the rational map $x\mapsto [s_0\otimes s_E:\cdots:s_N\otimes s_E]$ defined outside of $E$ ($(s_i)$ being a basis of $H^0(X,kA)$ for $k$ large enough) is clearly birational onto its image whose dimension is $\dim X$ as John explained above. – Henri Apr 23 '12 at 9:03
1  
By the way, the book you're referring to has two authors. – user5117 Apr 24 '12 at 20:11
3  
Actually, the missing author is Kollár... – Sándor Kovács Apr 25 '12 at 5:54
    
But mD may not be generated by global sections, right? So if the definition domain of $\phi_{|mD|}$ is not the entire X, while the image would be a closed subscheme with its image scheme structure, why $\phi_{|mD|}$ should be a morphism and onto its image? – MZWang Apr 28 '12 at 6:20

Your Answer

 
discard

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.