A) Let $f:F\rightarrow S$ be a flat proper morphism of schemes with geometrically normal fibers. Then supposedly the number of $\textbf{connected}$ components of the geometric fibers is constant. Why is this? Without some kind of vanishing of cohomology or information on the base, I don't see why this is true.

B) Furthermore, supposedly if $F$ is now a flat proper morphism with reduced, connected, nodal curves as geometric fibers, then there is a Zariski open subset of $S$ on which the fibers all have the same number of $\textbf{irreducible}$ components. Why is this?

Finally, how far can these results be generalized? For example, is B) true for any flat proper morphism?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ For A): this is because in the Stein factorization of $f$, the quasi-finite morphism is étale. See EGA III, 2, 7.8.6 or Illusie's article in the book "FGA explained" Prop. 8.5.16. You have to assume that $S$ is noetherian, though. For B): EGA IV, 9, Prop. 9.7.8. It is the number of geometric irreducible components, which remains the same in a Zariski open set, though (I think it is false otherwise, even in the situation you consider). $\endgroup$ – Damian Rössler Nov 29 '12 at 16:45
  • $\begingroup$ You didn't want to put this in an answer and get the points? :) As usual Damian, your response has helped me a lot! Thanks $\endgroup$ – HNuer Nov 29 '12 at 16:53
  • $\begingroup$ You might like our paper arxiv.org/abs/math/0602626 in which $F$ has a finite map to $Y \times S$, $Y$ is proper, and the fibers are only required to be reduced. We prove results about completing such families at holes in $S$, you could say. $\endgroup$ – Allen Knutson Nov 29 '12 at 18:18

A) You can easily reduce to the case that $S$ is the spectrum of a DVR $R$. Furthermore, by passing to a finite extension of $R$, you can assume that the components of the closed fiber are geometrically connected. Say that there are $d$ of them; then by semicontinuity the generic geometric fiber has at most $d$ components. Take a Stein factorization $X \to T \to S$; then $T$ has $d$ points over the closed point of $S$. Then $T$ is flat over $S$; this implies that the number of connected components of the generic geometric fiber of $X$ over $S$, that equals the degree of the generic fiber of $T$ over $S$, is at least $d$. This proves the equality.

B) The number of connected components of a geometric fiber is the dimension of H^0 of the structure sheaf of the fiber; the result follows from semicontinuity.

  • $\begingroup$ Not to be pedantic, but did you switch A) and B)? Also for your argument in B), $\dim H^0$ of the fiber being the number of connected components doesn't necessarily apply if the fibers have embedded components, which I believe normality rules out, so would reduced geometric fibers be enough there? Also I don't see how semicontinuity finishes it. It implies there is an open set of $S$ upon which the minimal number of components is achieved, but why does this imply it is all of $S$? $\endgroup$ – HNuer Nov 29 '12 at 18:54
  • $\begingroup$ I did not switch A and B, but you are right that I was not answering your question. I'll clarify tomorrow. $\endgroup$ – Angelo Nov 29 '12 at 21:00

Part (A) is precisely the content of Theorem 4.7, (iii) in

Deligne, Pierre; Mumford, D., The irreducibility of the space of curves of a given genus, Publ. Math., Inst. Hautes Étud. Sci. 36, 75-109 (1969). ZBL0181.48803.

enter image description here


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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