How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
The product of affine varieties has coordinate ring k[X] tensor_k k[Y]
Statement
Let be classical affine varieties over an algebraically closed field . Then their affine product exists, is a classical affine variety, and has coordinate ring Its projections make it a product in the classical affine-variety category.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Classical affine varieties over an algebraically closed field .
Proof
Put , , and . The prime-coordinate-ring criterion makes and domains. The algebra is finitely generated by generators of tensored with and elements for generators of . To prove it is a domain, take nonzero and , choosing the linearly independent and, separately, the linearly independent, with . Since is a domain, is a nonzero function on , so it is nonzero at some . Evaluation in the first factor sends to nonzero elements of by linear independence. Their product is nonzero because is a domain; therefore in . Also over the field . Hence is a nonzero reduced affine -algebra.
Now thm-affine-algebraic-sets-coordinate-duality constructs an affine algebraic set with coordinate algebra . It is nonempty, since the empty set has zero coordinate ring, whereas . Since is a domain, thm-affine-variety-prime-coordinate-ring makes a classical affine variety. Only now apply thm-affine-morphisms-coordinate-ring-anti-equivalence: the two canonical maps , give morphisms , .
For a classical affine variety and morphisms , , the tensor coproduct theorem gives a unique -algebra map extending and . Since and are now both classical affine varieties, the affine morphism correspondence turns this into the unique morphism with projections . This is the required universal property, and proves the ring formula. If a factor is a point, its ring is and the same argument gives .
Depends on
Used by
- Products of nonempty projective varieties exist as projective varieties Corollary
- Tensor products of domains need not be domains over a nonclosed field Counterexample
- Base change of classical varieties when the pullback exists Definition
- The affine diagonal is cut out by coordinate differences Lemma
- The Zariski topology on an affine product is generally not the product topology Lemma
- Why scheme fibre products are needed beyond the classical setting Remark
- Fixed-multidegree forms define maps from products to projective space Theorem
- Irreducible classical varieties and integral separated finite-type schemes Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
7 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- J. S. Milne, Algebraic Geometry, Example 5.16, equation (5.17), Proposition 5.20 (standard reference, not scraped)
- MIT 18.725 Algebraic Geometry, Lecture 7 Products and Lemma 15 (standard reference, not scraped)