6
$\begingroup$

In the book "The Geometry of Schemes" of Eisenbud and Harris, page 26, it is said that the scheme theoretic closure of a closed subscheme Z of an open subscheme U is the closed subscheme of X defined by the sheaf of ideals consisting of regular functions whose restrictions to U vanish on Z. I cannot verify this assertion when the open immersion of U in X is not quasi-compact (I mean I cannot prove that this sheaf of ideals is quasi-coherent). Am I missing something here ?

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

It seems indeed that example 2.10 in the Stacks project morphisms of schemes chapter provides a counter example, where the sheaf of ideals of regular functions whose restrictions to U vanish on Z is not quasi-coherent, because if it were part (3) of lemma 4.3 would be fulfilled. Thank you again for this hint, and if I am not mistaken, I have answered my own question, and an errata should be added for this book on page 26, where the open immersion of U in X should be supposed quasi-compact.

$\endgroup$

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.