3
$\begingroup$

Suppose $X$ is a smooth, projective curve, $Y$ is an arbitrary curve(may be singular), and both curves are over an algebraically closed field $k$ with character 0. Let $f: X \to Y$ be a morphism between curves. Is $f$ a projective morphism? Here, projective morphism is in the sense of Hartshorne, i.e. $X \to Y$ factors through $X \to \mathbb{P}^{n}_{Y} \to Y$, with $X \to \mathbb{P}^{n}_{Y}$ a closed embedding, $\mathbb{P}^{n}_{Y} \to Y$ the the natural projection to $Y$ factor.

I guess it is projective by the following general heuristic argument:

Statement:Suppose $X \subset \mathbb{P}^{n}$ is a closed subvariety, $Y$ is another variety, then any morphism $f: X \to Y$ is projective.

One can define $f' :X \to \mathbb{P}^{n}_{Y}$ by $x \mapsto (x,f(x))$, and this is an injective map. Moreover, because $X$ is proper, its image must be closed. I guess these guarantee $f'$ is a closed embedding, and the projection $\mathbb{P}^{n}_{Y} \to Y$ is easy to define.

I am not quite sure about the above argument, especially $f'$ being a closed embedding. Any suggestions?

  • 0
    Hmm, now that I think of it, I've always treated curve as just "reduced separated scheme of dimension 1", which would imply separated. I don't think I've seen a formal definition of curve...2012-08-27

1 Answers 1

3

The answer is yes. Your proof looks fine to me. If you want a way to do it with less explicit computation, are you familiar with the notion of a base change? If you are, The map you define is the composition of X→X×Y and X×Y→Pn×Y. The first one is a base change from Y→Y×Y, and is thus a closed embedding. The second one is a base change of X→Pn. This proves that f′ is a closed embedding.

There is also a more general statement (Which I know as the cancellation theorem) that is very useful: Let X, Y be Z-schemes, with structure morphisms g and h, and let f:X→Y be a map of Z-schemes. Then f is just the composition of the graph morphism X→X×ZY and the projection X×ZY→Y. The most important application of this is that if we have some property P of morphisms closed under composition/base change, then to prove f is P, it suffices to show g and the diagonal morphism of h have property P.