Hartshorne proposition III.9.7

algebraic-geometrycommutative-algebrasheaf-theory

I cannot follow the end of the proof of proposition III.9.7. The situation is as follows. We have a map $f:X\to Y$ of schemes with $Y$ integral, regular of dimension 1. The proposition says that $f$ is flat if and only if every associated point of $X$ maps to the generic point of $Y$. It's the if-part I cannot follow. Hartshorne takes $x\in X$ and assumes $y:=f(x)$ is a closed point. Then $\mathcal{O}_{Y,y}$ is a DVR so we can choose a uniformizing parameter $t$. We want to show $\mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ is torsion free so to get a contradiction we assume $t$ is a zero divisor on $\mathcal{O}_{X,x}$. This means $f^\#(t)$ lands in some associated prime $P\subset \mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ of $(0)$ and $P$ corresponds to an associated point $x'\in X$. Hartshorne claims that $f(x')=y$ which would be a contradiction but I cannot figure out why $x'$ could not map to the generic point of $Y$. Any help is appreciated!

Best Answer

Are you asking why $f(x')=y$? Suppose $f:U=\operatorname{Spec} B \to V=\operatorname{Spec}A $ where $U\subset X, V\subset Y,A$ is an integral domain and $y\in V$. Since $y$ is a closed point, it corresponds to a maximal ideal $m$ of $A$. Since $dimA=1$ and $A$ is an integral domain, $(0)\subsetneq m$. We have the following commutative diagram: $$\require{AMScd} \begin{CD} A @>{\phi} >> B;\\ @VVV @VVV \\ A_{m} @>{f^{\#}}>> B_{n}; \end{CD}$$

Suppose $nB_{n}$ is not torsion free, then by definition $f^{\#}t$ is a zero divisor where $mA_{m}=(t)$ . By prop 1.11 and the remark below prop 4.7 of Atiyah and MacDonald's Commutative Algebra, $f^{\#}t$ is contained in some associated prime ideal $\tilde{\mathfrak{p}}$ of $B_{n}$. Let $\mathfrak{p}=\tilde{\mathfrak{p}}\bigcap B$, then $\phi^{-1}(\mathfrak{p})=m$ since $f^{\# -1}(\tilde{\mathfrak{p}})=(t)$. Hence $f(x')=y$, where $x'$ is the point corresponding to $\mathfrak{p}$. Contradiction.