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.
Proper morphisms are closed
Statement
Let be a proper morphism of schemes. Then is a closed map of topological spaces: for every closed subset its image is closed in . In particular is closed. Moreover, for every -scheme the base-changed projection is closed, so the image of , and of any closed subset of it, is closed in .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A proper morphism and an arbitrary morphism .
A morphism of schemes is proper if and only if it is separated, of finite type, and universally closed. (Proper morphisms)
A morphism is universally closed if for every -scheme the base-changed projection is a closed map, and explicitly, for every closed subset , its image is closed in . (Universally closed morphisms)
For an -scheme and a morphism , the base change is , with structure map the second projection. (Base change of objects, morphisms and properties)
A fibre product of is a scheme with projections and such that for every morphism and with there is exactly one satisfying and . (Fibre product of schemes)
Proof
Since is proper, [F1] makes it universally closed, and in particular of finite type; only universal closedness is used below.
Take the -scheme , with structure morphism the identity, so that [F3] identifies the base-changed projection with . By [F2] this is a closed map. The universal property [F4] applies to and the identity with test morphisms and : the required identity holds, so there is a unique with and . The same universal property applied to and in place of and shows that and have the same composites with and , hence is the identity and is an isomorphism. Therefore is closed, so the image of every closed is closed in ; taking gives that is closed.
Now let be any -scheme. By [F2] the projection is closed, which by [F3] is exactly the assertion that the base change of along maps closed subsets of to closed subsets of . In particular the image of the closed subset itself is closed in , and the same holds for every closed subset.
If is empty, then every image is empty and closed, and if is empty the identity base-change case of step 1.2 is the empty morphism; both are covered by the same argument. No step uses a choice principle, a Noetherian hypothesis, or a separatedness hypothesis beyond the one hidden in properness. ∎
Depends on
Used by
- Proper birational normal curves agree off finitely many points Corollary
- A nonclosed open immersion is not proper Counterexample
- Incidence projection has closed determinantal image Example
- Finite decomposition around isolated fibre points after an elementary étale change Lemma
- Upper semicontinuity of proper fibre dimension Lemma
- A proper quasi-finite morphism is finite Theorem
- Fibre dimension of proper flat finitely presented families Theorem
- Global functions on proper integral schemes form a finite extension of the base field Theorem
- High powers of an ample line bundle embed a proper scheme Theorem
- Veronese embedding pulls O(1) back to O(d) Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
9 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
- The Stacks Project, Morphisms of Schemes, Definition 29.42.1 (tag 01W0) and Section 29.41 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Vakil, The Rising Sea, Proposition 11.3.2 and the discussion of properness in §11.3 (standard reference, not scraped)