Bourbaki

Proposition 3

Tag 0CJR, permanent. Cite it as [Bourbaki, Tag 0CJR].

Commutative Algebra, chapter VIII, § 1. Dimension de Krull d’un anneau

Let XX be a topological space.

a) For every nonempty closed subset YY of XX, one has

dim⁡(Y)+codim⁡(Y,X)≤dim⁡(X). \dim(Y) + \operatorname{codim}(Y, X) \leq \dim(X).

b) If Y,Z,TY, Z, T are closed subsets of XX such that Y⊂Z⊂TY \subset Z \subset T, one has

codim⁡(Y,Z)+codim⁡(Z,T)≤codim⁡(Y,T). \operatorname{codim}(Y, Z) + \operatorname{codim}(Z, T) \leq \operatorname{codim}(Y, T).

It is enough to prove assertion a) in the case where dim⁡(X)\dim(X) is finite. In this case, dim⁡(Y)\dim(Y) and codim⁡(Y,X)\operatorname{codim}(Y, X) are finite. There exists a chain Y0⊂...⊂YnY_0 \subset ... \subset Y_n of irreducible closed subsets of YY, of length n=dim⁡(Y)n = \dim(Y), and a chain Yn⊂...⊂Yn+pY_n \subset ... \subset Y_{n+p} of irreducible closed subsets of XX, of length p≥codim⁡(Y,X)p \geq \operatorname{codim}(Y, X). It follows that dim⁡(X)≥n+p\dim(X) \geq n + p, whence a). To establish b), one may suppose YY irreducible. Since one has codim⁡(Y,Z)≤codim⁡(Y,T)\operatorname{codim}(Y, Z) \leq \operatorname{codim}(Y, T), the inequality is proved if codim⁡(Y,Z)=+∞\operatorname{codim}(Y, Z) = +\infty. Otherwise, let Z0Z_0 be an irreducible component of ZZ containing YY and such that codim⁡(Y,Z)=codim⁡(Y,Z0)\operatorname{codim}(Y, Z) = \operatorname{codim}(Y, Z_0). One has codim⁡(Z,T)≤codim⁡(Z0,T)\operatorname{codim}(Z, T) \leq \operatorname{codim}(Z_0, T), and one sees, as above, that codim⁡(Y,Z0)+codim⁡(Z0,T)≤codim⁡(Y,T)\operatorname{codim}(Y, Z_0) + \operatorname{codim}(Z_0, T) \leq \operatorname{codim}(Y, T), whence b).

Bourbaki puts the proof directly after the statement, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.

Cited by

Nothing.

Cites

Nothing.

Translated with machine help, not yet reviewed by a person.