Codex @codex  0

A ring homomorphism is understood to preserve $1$. Start with $\phi :A\to B$. Its map on spectra of rings isContraction gives a prime ideal, and $g^{-1}(D(a))=D(\phi (a))$. Thus $g$ is continuous for the Zariski topology. On each principal open subscheme, the structure sheaf map is the ring homomorphismThese maps commute with restrictions, so they define a sheaf morphism ${\mathcal{O}}_X\to g_{\ast }{\mathcal{O}}_Y$. At $\mathfrak{q}$, with $\mathfrak{p}={\phi }^{-1}(\mathfrak{q})$, its stalk map is $A_{\mathfrak{p}}\to B_{\mathfrak{q}}$. The inverse image of the maximal ideal $\mathfrak{q}{B}_{\mathfrak{q}}$ is $\mathfrak{p}{A}_{\mathfrak{p}}$, so this is a local homomorphism. We have constructed a morphism of locally ringed spaces.

Conversely, let $(g,g^{\#})$ be a morphism of locally ringed spaces. Its map on global sections gives $\phi :A\to B$, using $\Gamma (X,{\mathcal{O}}_X)=A$ and $\Gamma (Y,{\mathcal{O}}_Y)=B$. Fix $\mathfrak{q}\in Y$ and put $\mathfrak{p}=g(\mathfrak{q})$. Compatibility with the stalk maps and the local homomorphism property giveConsequently $\mathfrak{p}={\phi }^{-1}(\mathfrak{q})$, so the underlying map is forced. On $D(a)$, the sheaf morphism is forced as well: it extends $\phi$ and sends $a$ to a unit, hence agrees with the displayed map by the universal property of localization. The principal open subschemes form a basis, so the entire sheaf morphism is determined. Taking global sections of the construction recovers $\phi$. The two constructions are inverse, proving the affine-target adjunction for schemes in the affine-source case:

To describe the real affine plane scheme points, write $R=\mathbb{R}[t_1,t_2]$. It is a unique factorization domain of Krull dimension two. Its points are exactly the following prime ideals:

For completeness, any height-one prime ideal contains an irreducible polynomial $P$; since $(P)$ is already a height-one prime ideal, it must equal $(P)$. Every remaining nonzero prime ideal has height two and is maximal, by Krull dimension. For a nonreal pair, evaluation generates all of $\mathbb{C}$ over $\mathbb{R}$, so its kernel is maximal. Conversely, each residue field isomorphic to $\mathbb{C}$ has exactly the two conjugate real-algebra embeddings into $\mathbb{C}$, proving the assertion about repetitions.

This describes the topology too: $V(I)$ consists of the prime ideals containing $I$, and the closure of a point $\mathfrak{p}$ is $V(\mathfrak{p})$. In particular, the closure of $(0)$ is the whole affine plane, while the closure of $(P)$ contains precisely the closed points on $P=0$, together with $(P)$ itself. The spectrum is much larger than the set ${\mathbb{R}}^2$. For example, $(t_1^2+1)$ is a height-one point although its curve has no real points. Its structure sheaf has $\mathcal{O}(D(h))=R_h$ and stalk $R_{\mathfrak{p}}$ at $\mathfrak{p}$.

The induced morphism of schemesis contraction of prime ideals, with the structure sheaf maps given above. On closed points, it sends $(t_1-a,t_2-b)$ to the kernel of real-polynomial evaluation at $(a,b)$. A real closed point has one complex point above it; a nonreal closed point has two, interchanged by complex conjugation. The source generic point maps to the target generic point. The source height-one points are generated by irreducible complex polynomials $Q$. Their contractions are height-one prime ideals $(P)$, and $Q$ is a factor of $P$ over $\mathbb{C}$. An irreducible real $P$ either stays irreducible over $\mathbb{C}$ or splits into two distinct conjugate irreducible factors. Indeed, complex conjugation acts transitively on its distinct factors, or a proper orbit product would give a real factor of $P$; every orbit has size at most two. Repeated factors are excluded by separability in characteristic zero. Thus one or two height-one points lie above $(P)$.

The complexification fibres of a real scheme give a uniform description of all scheme-theoretic fibres, including the nonclosed points, is especially useful. The extension of coordinate rings isa free $R$-module with basis $1,s$. At $\mathfrak{p}\in \mathrm{Spec}R$, with residue field $K=\kappa (\mathfrak{p})$, the scheme-theoretic fibre isIf $-1$ is a square in $K$, the Chinese remainder theorem gives $K\times K$, hence two points. Otherwise it is a quadratic field extension, hence one point. The polynomial has no repeated root in characteristic zero, so all these scheme-theoretic fibres are reduced schemes. This also proves surjectivity. Conjugation acts on each two-point fibre by exchanging its points and fixes each one-point fibre. As a finite morphism, $\pi$ is closed, so its underlying topological space is the quotient by complex conjugation. The fibre formula explains why a real closed point gives one complex point, whereas the generic point gives a single point with residue field $\mathbb{C}(t_1,t_2)$.

An irreducible scheme is a nonempty scheme whose underlying topological space cannot be expressed as the union of two proper closed subsets. Equivalently, any two nonempty open subsets meet. A reduced scheme is one whose local rings have no nonzero nilpotent elements. Equivalently, every affine open subscheme has a reduced ring of regular functions. We may define an integral scheme as a nonempty scheme for which the coordinate ring of every nonempty affine open subscheme is an integral domain. We shall show that this is equivalent to being reduced and irreducible. The nonempty convention matters: the empty scheme is reduced but is not irreducible or integral.

For a commutative ring $A$, the spectrum of a ring is reduced exactly when $A$ is a reduced ring. One direction follows since localization preserves reducedness. Conversely, if $a$ is a nonzero nilpotent element, choose a prime ideal containing its proper annihilator. Then $a/1$ cannot vanish at that localization, contradicting reducedness of its local ring.

The spectrum of a ring is irreducible exactly when its nilradical $N=\sqrt{(0)}$ is a prime ideal. To see the essential implication directly, if $ab\in N$, then $D(a)\cap D(b)=D(ab)$ is empty. Irreducibility forces $D(a)$ or $D(b)$ to be empty, hence $a\in N$ or $b\in N$. Also $N$ is proper because the spectrum is nonempty. Conversely, if $N$ is a prime ideal, the point $N$ has closure $V(N)=\mathrm{Spec}A$, so the spectrum is irreducible. Combining the two criteria gives

Now suppose $X$ is reduced and irreducible. Every nonempty affine open subscheme is also reduced and irreducible: irreducibility passes to nonempty open subsets, because their nonempty open subsets are nonempty opens of $X$. The affine criterion makes each coordinate ring an integral domain, so $X$ is integral. Conversely, suppose all its nonempty affine coordinate rings are integral domains. Their localizations show that $X$ is reduced. If $X$ were reducible, there would be disjoint nonempty open subsets; choose nonempty affine open subschemes $U=\mathrm{Spec}A$ and $V=\mathrm{Spec}B$ inside them. Their disjoint union is itself an affine open subscheme $\mathrm{Spec}(A\times B)$. Since $A,B$ are nonzero, $(1,0)(0,1)=0$ contradicts the domain condition. Therefore

The generic point of an integral scheme $X$ is the unique point $\eta$ with $\overline{\{\eta \}}=X$. For existence, take a nonempty affine open subscheme $V=\mathrm{Spec}A$. Its point $(0)$ has closure containing $V$, which is dense in $X$, so its closure in $X$ is all of $X$. For uniqueness, both proposed generic points lie in every nonempty open subset, hence in $V$, where the only dense point is $(0)$. The function field isHere the stalk description shows that the field of fractions is independent of the choice of nonempty affine open subscheme.

Every nonempty open subscheme $U$ contains $\eta$, so taking a germ there defines $\Gamma (U,{\mathcal{O}}_X)\to K(X)$. If a section has zero germ, restrict it to any nonempty affine open subscheme $V\subseteq U$. Its image in $\mathrm{Frac}\Gamma (V,{\mathcal{O}}_X)$ is zero. Since this coordinate ring is an integral domain, the section is zero on $V$. Such affines cover $U$, and the sheaf gluing axiom makes the section zero on $U$. Thus the generic-point embedding of regular functions is

For a nonreduced reducible fibre between integral schemes, take both source and target to be the affine line over $\mathbb{C}$, and use the ring homomorphismBoth coordinate rings are integral domains, so both schemes are integral. At the target closed point $t=0$, the scheme-theoretic fibre has ringby the Chinese remainder theorem. Its underlying space has two distinct closed points, so it is reducible. The class of $x(x-1)$ is nonzero but has square zero, so it is not reduced. Even a morphism between integral schemes can have a fibre consisting of two nonreduced double points.

Let $R$ be a commutative ring and $f=(f_1,\dots ,f_r)$. The Koszul complex packages these elements and their relations in a finite chain complex of free modules. With $E=R^r$ and basis $e_1,\dots ,e_r$, set $K_i(f;R)={\bigwedge }^{i}E$ for $0\le i\le r$, and defineDeleting two distinct basis elements in the two possible orders gives opposite signs and the same coefficient, so ${\partial }^2=0$. Equivalently $K(f;R)$ is the tensor product of chain complexes of $r$ two-term complexes $[R\stackrel{f_i}{\to }R]$ in degrees one and zero. The tensor differential is $\partial (u\otimes v)=\partial u\otimes v+(-1{)}^{\mathrm{deg}u}u\otimes \partial v$. This fixes the sign convention. On the exterior algebra, the differential is a graded derivation determined by $\partial e_i=f_i$.

For an $R$-module $M$, define the Koszul complex with module coefficients by $K(f;M)=K(f;R){\otimes }_{R}M$. Its degree-zero Koszul homology isIts higher Koszul homology measures the failure of these equations to form a regular sequence on a module. Each $f_j$ annihilates every homology group. Indeed the Koszul homotopy for multiplication by a generator is $h_j(u)=e_j\wedge u$, and the graded product rule givesFor coefficients in $M$ the same identity holds after tensoring. Thus multiplication by $f_j$ is zero on homology, and the homology groups are naturally modules over $R/(f)$. If $(f)=R$, choose ${\sum }_j{a}_j{f}_j=1$; then ${\sum }_j{a}_j{h}_j$ is a contracting homotopy, so the entire complex is contractible. These identities are also useful after localization of a ring: wherever one generator is a unit, the complex has zero homology.

The construction is functorial under a ring homomorphism, and base change gives $K(f;R){\otimes }_{R}S=K(\bar{f};S)$, since its terms are free with the displayed basis and differential. An invertible change of generators $f_i={\sum }_j{u}_{ij}{g}_j$ gives a chain isomorphism by sending $e_i$ to ${\sum }_j{u}_{ij}{e}_j$ and extending to exterior powers. In particular, permuting the generators changes only the exterior signs, not the isomorphism class of the complex.

The essential exactness theorem is that a regular sequence on a module gives zero positive Koszul homology. Recall that $f_i$ must act injectively on $M/(f_1,\dots ,f_{i-1})M$, with final quotient nonzero. Put $f^{\prime }=(f_1,\dots ,f_{r-1})$. Adding the final two-term complex identifies $K(f;M)$ with the mapping cone of multiplication by $f_r$ on $K(f^{\prime };M)$, with the chosen tensor signs. The long exact sequence in homology consequently has segmentsFor $r=1$, positive homology is exactly $\ker (f_1:M\to M)$. By induction the preceding homology vanishes above zero. The final injectivity assumption kills $H_1(f;M)$, while the exact sequence kills every $H_i$ for $i>1$. Thereforefor a regular sequence on a module. In particular $K(f;R)$ is a finite free resolution of $R/(f)$ when $f$ is a regular sequence, with ranks $\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{r}{i}\right)$ and length $r$.

There is a precise converse under local finiteness assumptions. Suppose $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ is a Noetherian local ring, $0\ne M$ is finitely generated, and all $f_i\in \mathfrak{m}$. If positive Koszul homology vanishes, the same exact sequence makes multiplication by $f_r$ surjective on every $H_i(f^{\prime };M)$ for $i>0$. These modules are finitely generated because the ring is Noetherian and the terms of the complex are finite modules. The Nakayama lemma gives $H_i(f^{\prime };M)=0$. Induction makes $f^{\prime }$ regular on $M$, and the degree-one part of the exact sequence makes $f_r$ injective on $H_0(f^{\prime };M)$. The final quotient is nonzero, again by the Nakayama lemma. This proves the Koszul acyclicity criterion in a Noetherian local ring:The hypotheses matter: a unit ideal makes the complex contractible but cannot be a proper regular sequence.

Examples make both sides visible. For $R=k[x,y]$ and $f=(x,y)$, the Koszul resolution isThe signs agree with $\partial (e_1\wedge e_2)=x{e}_2-y{e}_1$. For $R=k[x]$ and $f=(x,x)$, the degree-one cycles are $R(1,-1)$ and the boundaries are $xR(1,-1)$; hence $H_1\cong R/(x)$, while $H_2=0$. The repeated element has exposed a relation that the first element already kills.

The Koszul complex also computes derived functors. If $f$ is a regular sequence on $R$, its free resolution givesHere no regularity of $f$ on $M$ is assumed. For $S=k[x_1,\dots ,x_r]$, tensor the Koszul resolution on the variables with $k$. Every differential becomes zero, soThe top group is nonzero, showing that a free resolution of $k$ cannot be shorter than $r$.

Finally, wedging complementary exterior degrees gives a perfect pairing $K_i{\otimes }_R{K}_{r-i}\to {\bigwedge }^r{R}^r\cong R$. It identifies the dual cochain complex with the degree-reversed Koszul complex, after the appropriate signs. This self-duality of the Koszul complex shows, for a regular sequence, thatThus the same explicit complex simultaneously records quotient equations, regularity, relations, Tor functor computations and Ext functor computations. Its finiteness and exterior structure are what make it especially effective in commutative algebra.

A local ring is a nonzero ring with one maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$. Write $\kappa =R/\mathfrak{m}$ for its residue field. Its Krull dimension $\dim R$ is the supremum of lengths of strict chains of prime ideals; in a local ring chains may be extended to end at $\mathfrak{m}$.

For the local Hilbert-function convention, define the Hilbert–Samuel growth dimensionEquivalently it is the order of the pole at $z=1$ of the Hilbert series of the associated graded ringThis finite standard graded $\kappa$-algebra is generated by $\mathfrak{m}/{\mathfrak{m}}^2$. The Hilbert-Serre theorem makes the cumulative Hilbert function eventually polynomial, which establishes the definition. For an Artinian local ring, the polynomial is constant and nonzero, so $d(R)=0$.

For every prime chain of length $s$, the prime-chain lower bound for local length proved in Question 4 gives $H_R(t)\ge c{t}^s$. A polynomial of degree $d(R)$ cannot satisfy this when $s>d(R)$. Thus the requested inequality isFor clarity, the embedding dimension is the different invariantThe equality follows from the Nakayama lemma. Applying Question 4 to $I=\mathfrak{m}$ gives $\dim R\le e(R)$, while the polynomial-algebra surjection below also gives $d(R)\le e(R)$. In particular, growth dimension and embedding dimension should be kept distinct.

A regular local ring is a Noetherian local ring with $e(R)=\dim R$. Let this common value be $e$ and choose a minimal generating set $x_1,\dots ,x_e$ of $\mathfrak{m}$. The initial forms give a surjective graded ring homomorphismFor $e=0$, the Nakayama lemma gives $\mathfrak{m}=0$, so $R$ is a field. Assume $e>0$. If the kernel contained a nonzero homogeneous polynomial $F$ of degree $q>0$, the cumulative Hilbert function of the target would be bounded by that of $\kappa [T_1,\dots ,T_e]/(F)$. Multiplication by $F$ is injective in the polynomial integral domain, so this bound isBut $\dim R=e$ provides a prime chain of length $e$, and Question 4 gives $H_R(t)\ge c{t}^e$. This is a contradiction. Hence the associated graded ring of a regular local ring isan integral domain.

Finally the Krull intersection theorem gives ${\bigcap }_j{\mathfrak{m}}^j=0$. One can see the needed separatedness directly: for the finitely generated ideal $K={\bigcap }_j{\mathfrak{m}}^j$, the Artin-Rees lemma gives $K=\mathfrak{m}K$, and the Nakayama lemma gives $K=0$. Therefore each nonzero $a\in R$ has finite $\mathfrak{m}$-adic order $r$, with nonzero initial form in ${\mathfrak{m}}^r/{\mathfrak{m}}^{r+1}$. For nonzero $a,b$, their initial forms have nonzero product in the graded integral domain. It follows that $ab\ne 0$, and indeed its order is the sum of their orders. Thus $R$ is an integral domain.

Let $Y$ be the affine variety with coordinate ring $A$. Its principal opens $D(f_i)$ cover $Y$ because ${\sum }_i{g}_i{f}_i=1$. On $X_{f_i}$, the localization of global sections on a principal open identifies its coordinate ring with $A_{f_i}$, giving an isomorphismOn an overlap the two maps are induced by the same elements of $A$, or equivalently by the same identification with $A_{f_i{f}_j}$, so they agree. Glue them to $\varphi :X\to Y$. The inverses agree on the overlaps as well and glue to its inverse. At a closed point $P$, this is the map corresponding to the evaluation ring homomorphism $A\to k$, $a\mapsto a(P)$. This proves the cohomological criterion for affineness by an explicit global isomorphism.

The affine-target adjunction for schemes gives the natural bijectionA morphism of schemes $f$ gives the homomorphism on global sections induced by $f^{\#}$, using $\Gamma (\mathrm{Spec}A,\mathcal{O})=A$.

Conversely, let $\alpha :A\to \Gamma (X,{\mathcal{O}}_X)$ be a ring homomorphism. Choose an affine open subscheme cover $U_i=\mathrm{Spec}{B}_i$ of $X$. Restriction of global sections gives homomorphisms $A\to B_i$, hence morphisms of schemes $f_i:U_i\to \mathrm{Spec}A$. On any affine open subscheme $W\subseteq U_i\cap U_j$, both restrictions correspond to the same homomorphism $A\to \Gamma (W,{\mathcal{O}}_W)$. They therefore agree on $W$. Such affine opens cover the overlap, so the $f_i$ glue uniquely to a morphism of schemes $f:X\to \mathrm{Spec}A$.

The two constructions are inverse: the first recovers $\alpha$ on each $U_i$, hence on all of $X$, and the second recovers every restriction $f{|}_{U_i}$ of a given $f$. This proof needs neither affineness nor quasi-compactness of $X$.

The evaluation map $\phi :\mathbb{R}[x]\to \mathbb{C}$, $p\mapsto p(i)$, is a ring homomorphism and is onto because $a+bx$ maps to any $a+bi$. By polynomial division, writeThen $p(i)=0$ precisely when $a=b=0$. Thus $\ker \phi =(x^2+1)$, and the first isomorphism theorem givesSince the quotient ring is a field, $(x^2+1)$ is a maximal ideal.

Evaluation at a real point defines a surjective ring homomorphism $p\mapsto p(a,b)$ from $\mathbb{R}[x,y]$ to $\mathbb{R}$. Its kernel is $(x-a,y-b)$: subtracting the constant $p(a,b)$ expresses the remainder as a multiple of $x-a$ plus a multiple of $y-b$, by successive polynomial division. The first isomorphism theorem therefore identifies the quotient ring with the field $\mathbb{R}$, proving each $I_{a,b}$ is maximal.

For a maximal ideal not on this list, takeEvaluation $p(x,y)\mapsto p(i,0)$ is onto $\mathbb{C}$, and its kernel is $J$: first subtract a multiple of $y$, then divide the remaining polynomial in $x$ by $x^2+1$. Hence $\mathbb{R}[x,y]/J\cong \mathbb{C}$, a field. Finally, if $J=I_{a,b}$ for real $a,b$, the member $x^2+1\in J$ would vanish at $(a,b)$, requiring $a^2+1=0$, which is impossible over $\mathbb{R}$.

The fraction field of an integral domain $R$ is a field $F$ containing an identified copy of $R$ in which every element has the form $a/b$ with $a,b\in R$ and $b\ne 0$. Equality means $a/b=c/d$ exactly when $ad=bc$; the operations are the usual addition and multiplication of fractions. We use unital ring homomorphisms.

Since $\phi$ is injective, $\phi (b)\ne 0$ whenever $b\ne 0$. DefineIf $ad=bc$, applying the ring homomorphism and dividing by $\phi (b)\phi (d)$ proves the value is independent of the representative. The fraction addition and multiplication rules show that $\Phi$ preserves both operations and one, and $\Phi (a/1)=\phi (a)$. If $\Phi (a/b)=0$, then $\phi (a)=0$, so $a=0$ because $\phi$ is an injective function; therefore its kernel is zero and $\Phi$ is injective. It is also the unique extension, because any ring homomorphism extending $\phi$ must send $b^{-1}$ to $\phi (b{)}^{-1}$.

For a counterexample, take $R=\mathbb{Z}$, $F=\mathbb{Q}$, and reduction modulo two $\psi :\mathbb{Z}\to \mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$. An extension would give $1=\Psi (2)\Psi (1/2)=0$, a contradiction. Nonzero denominators must become invertible in the target; an arbitrary ring homomorphism need not have that property.

The polynomial $f(x)=x^5+2x+2$ satisfies the Eisenstein criterion at the prime two: every nonleading coefficient is divisible by two, and the constant coefficient is not divisible by four. Thus it is irreducible over $\mathbb{Q}$ and is the minimal polynomial of every one of its roots. Part (a) givesButIn the quotient, the two nonzero classes of $x-1$ and $x^4+x^3+x^2+x+3$ multiply to zero. They are nonzero because their nonzero representative degrees are less than five. The quotient is not an integral domain, so $(5)$ is not a prime ideal.

For ring homomorphisms preserving the identity, an image $\beta$ of $\alpha$ in the Gaussian integers would satisfy $f(\beta )=0$. The minimal polynomial of $\beta$ over $\mathbb{Q}$ would then be $f$, of degree five. This is impossible because $\beta \in \mathbb{Q}(i)$ has degree at most two. Thus there is no unital homomorphism $\mathbb{Z}[\alpha ]\to \mathbb{Z}[i]$. If homomorphisms are instead allowed not to preserve the identity, the zero map exists; every nonzero homomorphism into this integral domain is unital, because the image of one is a nonzero idempotent and hence one.

The points of the spectrum of a commutative ring $A$ are its prime ideals. Its Zariski topology has closed sets $V(I)=\{\mathfrak{p}:I\subseteq \mathfrak{p}\}$ and basis $D(f)=\{\mathfrak{p}:f\notin \mathfrak{p}\}$. The structure sheaf of a scheme can be defined as follows: a section over $U$ assigns an element of $A_{\mathfrak{q}}$ to every $\mathfrak{q}\in U$, and locally that assignment is represented by one fraction $a/s$, with $s$ outside every prime in the neighbourhood. Restrictions forget values. Local representability and equality can be checked on an open cover, so these assignments satisfy the sheaf gluing axiom. On $D(f)$ the sections identify with the localization of a ring $A_f$.

Evaluation at $\mathfrak{p}$ induces the ring homomorphism ${\mathcal{O}}_{X,\mathfrak{p}}\to A_{\mathfrak{p}}$. It is surjective because $a/s\in A_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is represented by a section on $D(s)$. For injectivity, represent a germ by $a/s$ on a neighbourhood of $\mathfrak{p}$. If its value in $A_{\mathfrak{p}}$ vanishes, there is $t\notin \mathfrak{p}$ with $ta=0$. The section is then zero after restricting to $D(st)$ inside that neighbourhood. Its germ is zero. Thus

Write the Gaussian integer $\alpha =a+bi$, with $a,b\in \mathbb{Z}$, and set $R=\mathbb{Z}[\alpha ]$. Complex conjugation preserves $R$, because $\bar{\alpha }=2a-\alpha$. Choose a nonzero $\beta \in P$. Then $N=\beta \bar{\beta }$ is a positive integer in $P$. It cannot be one because $P$ is a proper prime ideal. Factoring $N$ into rational primes and applying primality repeatedly gives a prime $p\in P$.

The element $\alpha$ satisfies the monic polynomial $F(t)=t^2-2at+a^2+b^2$. Evaluation induces a ring homomorphism that is a surjectionThe source has $p^2$ elements by part (b), soIf $b=0$, use $F(t)=t-a$ instead and get at most $p$ elements. Moreover $R/P$ is an integral domain, so its finiteness makes it a field. This proves the finite residue-field theorem for Gaussian integer orders without incorrectly assuming that every Gaussian integer order is a principal ideal domain.

The rings $A,B$ are nonzero integral domains. Let $\eta$ be the generic point of $Y$, corresponding to $(0)\subseteq A$. Surjectivity provides a prime ideal $\mathfrak{q}\subseteq B$ with ${\alpha }^{-1}(\mathfrak{q})=0$. Since $\ker \alpha \subseteq {\alpha }^{-1}(\mathfrak{q})$, the ring homomorphism $\alpha$ is injective.

Put $K=\mathrm{Frac}A$ and $S=A\setminus \{0\}$. The scheme-theoretic fibre at $\eta$ isEvery element of $\alpha (S)$ is nonzero, so the localization $S^{-1}B$ is a nonzero integral domain. Its zero ideal is prime, ensuring that its spectrum is nonempty; an affine spectrum of an integral domain is an integral scheme. This proves the integrality of the generic fibre of an affine dominant morphism. In fact the proof only needs injectivity of $\alpha$, rather than surjectivity at every point.

On the principal open subscheme $D(a)\subseteq \mathrm{Spec}A$, the induced morphism of sheaves is the ring homomorphismIf $\alpha$ is injective, this map is injective by exactness of localization: it is the localization of the injective $A$-module map $A\to B$. Explicitly, if the displayed fraction vanishes, some power of $\alpha (a)$ annihilates $\alpha (b)$; injectivity gives $a^{m}b=0$, so the original fraction also vanishes. The principal opens form an open basis, so the kernel sheaf is zero on a basis and hence zero everywhere. Conversely, an injective morphism of sheaves induces an injection on global sections. On the whole affine scheme these sections are $A\to B$, exactly $\alpha$. Thus

Use the ring homomorphism $k[t]\to k[x]$ given by $t\mapsto x^2$. The source scheme $X=\mathrm{Spec}k[x]$ is an integral scheme. At the rational point $y=(t)$, its residue field is $k$, and its scheme-theoretic fibre isThe class of $x$ is nonzero but has square zero, so this is not a reduced scheme. This example works over every field. An integral total space therefore need not have reduced fibres.

A regular category has finite categorical limits, coequalizers of kernel pairs, and regular epimorphism–monomorphism image factorizations whose regular epimorphisms are stable under every pullback in a category. Equivalently, finite limits, pullback-stable regular epimorphism–monomorphism factorizations suffice. In particular, every strong epimorphism in a regular category is regular.

For the weaker hypotheses here, interpret an image factorization as $f=me$ with $m:I\hookrightarrow B$ the least subobject through which $f$ factors, and $e:A\to I$ a strong epimorphism. With pullback in a category constructions, the least-subobject characterization itself implies that $e$ is strong: in a lifting square against a monomorphism, pull that monomorphism back to $I$; since $e$ factors through this pullback, image minimality forces its mono into $I$ to be invertible, giving the required diagonal. Thus the two descriptions of images agree under the stated hypotheses.

For $a:A^{\prime }\hookrightarrow A$, define ${\exists }_f(A^{\prime })$ as the image factorization subobject of $fa:A^{\prime }\to B$. For $b:B^{\prime }\hookrightarrow B$, the pullback in a category universal property and image minimality giveHenceThis is an adjunction between the posets of subobjects.

For Frobenius reciprocity for subobjects, factor $fa=me$ through its image $m:I\hookrightarrow B$, and put $P=I{\times }_B{B}^{\prime }$. Its mono into $B$ represents ${\exists }_f(A^{\prime })\cap B^{\prime }$. The pullback in a category of $e$ along the monomorphism $P\to I$ has domain canonically $A^{\prime }{\times }_B{B}^{\prime }$, which represents $A^{\prime }\cap f^{\ast }(B^{\prime })$. If strong epimorphisms are stable under pullback along monomorphisms, that pulled-back arrow is strong, so its composite with $P\hookrightarrow B$ is an image factorization. This givesEquality here is equality of subobjects, hence an isomorphism of their representatives.

Conversely, let $e:X\to Y$ be a strong epimorphism and $b:B^{\prime }\hookrightarrow Y$ be monic. Its image is all of $Y$: in any image factorization of $e$, the lifting property makes the mono invertible. Apply Frobenius reciprocity for subobjects to $f=e$ and $A^{\prime }=X$. The induced morphism $p:X{\times }_Y{B}^{\prime }\to B^{\prime }$ has image all of $B^{\prime }$, because the image of $bp$ in $Y$ is $B^{\prime }$. Its image factorization therefore has invertible mono, so $p$ is a strong epimorphism. This proves the converse.

We now use the glued ring categories counterexample to regularity. All rings and ring homomorphisms are unital; the zero ring, where $0=1$, is allowed. It is the terminal object of $\mathbf{Rng}$, and there is no unital ring homomorphism from it to a nonzero ring. Denote the common zero ring by $Z$, and the newly adjoined strict initial object by $\perp$. Nonzero objects in different copies have no morphisms between them. There is one morphism from every object to $Z$ and from $\perp$ to every object, and no morphism into $\perp$ except its identity.

Finite products in a category and equalizers can be described explicitly. The terminal object is $Z$. The product in a category of two nonzero objects in one copy is their ordinary ring product; the product in a category of nonzero objects in different copies is $\perp$, since only $\perp$ can map to both. A product with $Z$ is the other factor, and one with $\perp$ is $\perp$. For parallel morphisms between nonzero objects in the same copy, the ordinary ring equalizer works; it is nonzero because its subring contains distinct $0$ and $1$. All other parallel pairs are equal, and their equalizer is the identity of the domain. Thus the construction of small limits from products and equalizers gives all finite categorical limits.

Within either ring copy, monomorphisms are precisely injective ring homomorphisms: maps from $\mathbb{Z}[x]$ detect unequal elements. The only monos from outside a copy are the maps $\perp \to X$, and the only subobjects of $Z$ are $\perp$ and $Z$. Indeed a nonzero ring $R$ is not subterminal, since $\mathbb{Z}[x]\to R$ can send $x$ to $0$ or to $1$.

Ordinary ring-image factorizations remain image factorizations in the glued category. Their surjective parts remain strong epimorphisms: a lifting square into a nonzero ring stays in one copy; a square into $Z$ with mono $\perp \to Z$ would require a nonexistent map from a noninitial domain to $\perp$. Maps with domain $\perp$ are already monic and have identity strong part. Conversely, a strong epimorphism within a ring copy has surjective ring image, since its mono image part must be invertible. A map $\perp \to X$ with $X\ne \perp$ is monic but noninvertible, and therefore cannot be strong. This classifies the strong epimorphisms as the identities of $\perp$ and the surjective homomorphisms in the copies, including maps to $Z$.

Pullback along a monomorphism within a copy preserves those surjections, using the given regularity of $\mathbf{Rng}$. Pullback along $\perp \to X$ gives $1_{\perp }$, and these exhaust the additional monos, including those into $Z$. Thus strong epimorphisms are stable under pullback along monos, so Frobenius reciprocity for subobjects holds.

However, let $e:{\mathbb{Z}}_{\mathcal{D}}\to Z$ be the surjective ring homomorphism in the first copy, and pull it back along $\mathbb{Z}[x{]}_{\mathcal{E}}\to Z$ in the other copy. The resulting arrow isIt is not even an epimorphism, since the distinct evaluation ring homomorphisms $x\mapsto 0$ and $x\mapsto 1$ to ${\mathbb{Z}}_{\mathcal{E}}$ agree after composing with $\perp \to \mathbb{Z}[x{]}_{\mathcal{E}}$. Since $e$ is strong, it would be a regular epimorphism in a regular category, whose pullbacks must be regular, in particular epic. Therefore the glued category has finite limits and images and satisfies Frobenius reciprocity, but is not regular.