Introduction
Let be a smooth variety defined over an algebraic closed field of characteristic , an integral divisor on , and a linear system. A frequently seen version of Bertini’s theorem claims that a general member of is smooth if has no base points. The original version of Bertini’s theorem is about multiplicities of divisors (see (Kleiman 1998) for a historical review).
In the following, I will follow (Lazarsfeld 2004, vol. 48, sec. 5.2B) to present the theorem with a proof, and discuss other possible applications of the techniques and ideas used in the proof.
Theorem 1 (Bertini’s Theorem with Multiplicities) Let be a smooth variety, an integral divisor on , and a finite-dimensional subspace. If is a general element in the linear system , then for every .
Let , , , is a basis of . Recall that Equivalently, is the minimum of the multiplicities of all divisors in .
Let’s see a baby example first. Consider the linear system of lines in passing through , i.e. lines defined by , where . It is clear that and for . On the other hand, for any point and any member . Although it’s trivial in this example, it is worth to mention that for a general , where is the universal divisor in defined by . Indeed, this observation will be a key in the proof of [Theorem 1. We will first proof that the above observation holds true in general.
In general, for algebraic system of divisors, Bertini’s theorem may fail, see the example below (Kleiman 1998, Theorem 3.2).
Multiplicities of Divisors in Families along Fibers
Definition 1 Let be an irreducible subvariety and an effective divisor on . The multiplicity of along , denoted by is the multiplicity at a general point .
Lemma 1 (Multiplicities along fibers) Let be a morphism of smooth varieties over a algebraically closed field of characteristic . Assume that is an irreducible subvariety dominating . Let be an effective divisor. Then,
- for a general point , and any irreducible component in the the fiber ,
- for a general and every
Proof. We prove part one first.
By generic smoothness, after replacing with an affine open subset, we may assume that is a smooth morphism by the theorem on generic smoothness (see for example (Vakil 2017, Theorem 25.3.3.)). Moreover, we may assume that is smooth and dominating . By further shrinking to a smaller affine open subset, we may assume that and is the projection (see for example(The Stacks Project Authors 2020, Lemma 29.32.14)). Therefore, we may choose coordinates on such that . Since deminates , by further shrinking if it is neccessary, there exists a section defined by such that . It suffices to show that Let be a local equation of . Substitute by and write where is a multi-index and is a power series in . Shrink again if necessary, we may assume that for any . Therefore, the terms of weight in vanishes because Then it is enough to choose so that for some with . This completes the proof of part one.
We prove part two by contradiction. Suppose for every in an affine open set , there always exists a such that . Let . Then dominates . By part one, we there is a general in and a general in such that . That contradicts with our definition of .
Proof of Bertini’s Theorem
Now we are ready the prove Bertini’s theorem with multiplicities.
Proof (Proof of Bertini’s Theorem with Multiplicities). Let be the universal divisor. By part one of Lemma (Lemma 1), we may fix a general point so that for every . Let be a section in defining . We may choose an affine coordinates centered at so that is defined by where . To lighten notations, we will still write for the pullback on . Note now . We would like to show that there is a basis of such that . Define for . Because differentiation lowers the multiplicity by at most one. Then Note that still form a basis for . Take , Bertini’s theorem with multiplicities is proved.
Let be a smooth variety, and a linear series on . Then a general element is smooth away from the base locus of .
Proof. Let be a point away from the base locus of . Then . Therefore, a general divisor has multiplicity . Therefore, is smooth at .
Smoothing Divisors in Families
Using differentiation in parameter directions to lower the multiplicities of divisors in a family is central technique in many studies on Seshadri constants and related areas. For example, the following proposition plays a central role in (Ein, Küchle, and Lazarsfeld 1995).
Proposition 1 ((Ein, Küchle, and Lazarsfeld 1995), Proposition 2.3) Let and be smooth irreducible varieties with affine, and an integral divisor on . Given irreducible subvarieties such that dominates , and a divisor on , suppose Then there exists a divisor on such that
Proof (Sketch of Proof). Let be a section defining . The plan is to show that there is differential operator of order on such that has the required properties. Checking transition functions over local charts, it’s not to hard to see that is still a section in . The property is then automatic for any such . Because dominates , the property can be proved using similar argument as seen in the proof of Bertini’s theorem. Denote by is the sheaf of differential operators of order on . It’s is vector bundle on ,see for example, Proposition 2 in my previous post Bundles of Principal Parts. Because is affine. We may choose finitely may differential operators that span at every point of . Consider the subset Then is the base locus of linear system spanned by . Then for all . In particular, for every . Because dominates , for a general and a general , we have . Therefore, .
For a rigorous proof and a more formal discussion, we refer the reader to (Ein, Küchle, and Lazarsfeld 1995, Proposition 2.3) and (Lazarsfeld 2004, Proposition 5.2.13).
Differentiate Divisors in Linear Systems
In the proof of Proposition 1, we used the fact that is globally generated because is affine. In fact, if we assume that the twisted tangent bundle is nef (see Definition 6.2.3 in [(Lazarsfeld2004a]), where is the tangent bundle, is a positive rational number, and is an ample line bundle, then we get a similar result for linear systems (see, for example, Proof of Theorem 2.1 in [(Ein1996], or Lemma 1.3 in (Nakamaye 2005))
Let be the blow-up at a point with the exceptional divisor . Given a –divisor and a positive rational number , we write and where is the stable base locus of . Suppose that is a big divisor and is a subvariety of the stable base locus . The asymptotic vanishing order is defined by where is a general element in for any sufficiently large and divisible . Let be an irreducible subvariety of . Denote by the birational transform of in . We defined
Following the proof of Theorem 2.1 in (Ein, Lazarsfeld, and Nakamaye 1996), we present the following result (see Proposition 4.4 in (Lozovanu 2018)) which is a slight generalization of Lemma 1.3 in (Nakamaye 2005).
Proposition 2 Let be a smooth projective variety of dimension , an irreducible subvariety, and an integral ample divisor. Assume that the sheaf of differential operators of order is generated by its sections for a rational number , and all sufficiently large integers and such that is a positive integer. Let be a rational number in the interval such that with . Then for any we have In particular, if is nef, then the inequality (1) holds true.
Proof. Let be any sufficiently small positive rational number. Then is ample. We may replace by as the conclusion for can be obtained by taking the limit in . We may assume that is sufficiently large and sufficiently divisible so that , and are both integers. Note that a section defines a morphism where and is the ideal sheaf. By the assumption that the sheaf of differential operators of order is generated by its sections, we have a morphism of global sections We call the sections in the image of the morphism differential sections of order . Then for any differential operator . Therefore, for any , the differential section is also in and hence Assume that is a general section and is a general point such that . It can be checked that there exists a differential operator of order such that . By upper semi-continuity, we see that . Therefore, The completes the proof for the first part of the assertion.
Since is nef and hence is ample for any positive number , by Lemma 2.5 in (Ein, Lazarsfeld, and Nakamaye 1996), the sheaf of differential operators of order is generated by its sections. The proof is then completed.
References
Ein, Lawrence, Oliver Küchle, and Robert Lazarsfeld. 1995. “Local Positivity of Ample Line Bundles.” J. Differential Geom. 42 (2): 193–219.
Ein, Lawrence, Robert Lazarsfeld, and Michael Nakamaye. 1996. “Zero-Estimates, Intersection Theory, and a Theorem of Demailly.” In Higher Dimensional Complex Varieties. Proceedings of the International Conference, Trento, Italy, June 15–24, 1994, 183–207. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Kleiman, Steven L. 1998. “Bertini and His Two Fundamental Theorems.” In Studies in the History of Modern Mathematics. III, 9–37. Palermo: Circolo Matematico di Palermo.
Lazarsfeld, Robert. 2004.
Positivity in Algebraic Geometry. I. Vol. 48. Ergebnisse Der Mathematik Und Ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas. 3rd Series. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18808-4.
Lozovanu, Victor. 2018.
“Singular Divisors and Syzygies of Polarized Abelian Threefolds.” ArXiv e-Prints, March.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.08780.
Nakamaye, Michael. 2005.
“Seshadri Constants at Very General Points.” Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 357 (8): 3285–97.
https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9947-04-03668-2.
The Stacks Project Authors. 2020.
“Stacks Project.” https://stacks.math.columbia.edu.
Vakil, Ravi. 2017.
“Foundations of Algebraic Geometry.” http://math.stanford.edu/~vakil/216blog/index.html.