Definition of divisor associated to a meromorphic function The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are Inlet $f$ be any meromorphic function then $operatornameord_p(f)=0$Rational/meromorphic functions on a schemeIs the divisor of a meromorphic function “actually” a “divisor-valued potential”?How to write a divisor: Exercise n 20 pag 285 from Geometry of algebraic curves by Arbarello, Cornalba, Griffiths, HarrisLine bundles with no meromorphic/holomorphic sectionsOrder of a meromorphic function at $infty$What is the morphism associated to a divisor?Finite dimensionality of space of meromorphic sections with prescrbes polesmeromorphic sections of invertible sheaves and divisors on a Riemann surfaceA confusion regarding the concept of principal divisor

JSON.serialize: is it possible to suppress null values of a map?

How are circuits which use complex ICs normally simulated?

What could be the right powersource for 15 seconds lifespan disposable giant chainsaw?

Deadlock Graph and Interpretation, solution to avoid

The difference between dialogue marks

Dual Citizen. Exited the US on Italian passport recently

Is bread bad for ducks?

Why can Shazam do this?

Inversion Puzzle

Does light intensity oscillate really fast since it is a wave?

What is the use of option -o in the useradd command?

Patience, young "Padovan"

Access elements in std::string where positon of string is greater than its size

Why is my p-value correlated to difference between means in two sample tests?

Is it possible for the two major parties in the UK to form a coalition with each other instead of a much smaller party?

What does "rabbited" mean/imply in this sentence?

Limit the amount of RAM Mathematica may access?

Realistic Alternatives to Dust: What Else Could Feed a Plankton Bloom?

How to reverse every other sublist of a list?

Why Did Howard Stark Use All The Vibranium They Had On A Prototype Shield?

Landlord wants to switch my lease to a "Land contract" to "get back at the city"

Can distinct morphisms between curves induce the same morphism on singular cohomology?

Time travel alters history but people keep saying nothing's changed

Spanish for "widget"



Definition of divisor associated to a meromorphic function



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are Inlet $f$ be any meromorphic function then $operatornameord_p(f)=0$Rational/meromorphic functions on a schemeIs the divisor of a meromorphic function “actually” a “divisor-valued potential”?How to write a divisor: Exercise n 20 pag 285 from Geometry of algebraic curves by Arbarello, Cornalba, Griffiths, HarrisLine bundles with no meromorphic/holomorphic sectionsOrder of a meromorphic function at $infty$What is the morphism associated to a divisor?Finite dimensionality of space of meromorphic sections with prescrbes polesmeromorphic sections of invertible sheaves and divisors on a Riemann surfaceA confusion regarding the concept of principal divisor










1












$begingroup$


Let $X$ be a complex manifold and let $f$ be a meromorphic function defined on it. Let $Div(X)$ be the group of locally finite sum of analytic irreducible hypersurfaxces of $X$.



One would like to define a divisor associated to $f$ as $$sum_i in I ord(f)|_V_iV_i$$ but I really can't see why this sum should be locally finite.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Are you asking for a counterexample or else a proof?
    $endgroup$
    – Somos
    Apr 5 at 18:23










  • $begingroup$
    I was not clear: i would like to see a proof
    $endgroup$
    – Tommaso Scognamiglio
    Apr 5 at 19:49










  • $begingroup$
    any comment ? the global divisor I defined are built from locally analytic hypersurfaces, it remains to find if the gluing operation ensure they are globally analytic hypersurfaces (see $x^2-y= (x-y^1/2)(x+y^1/2)$), but it doesn't matter for the locally finite part. There is also the question of the $v(phi_j)=1$ and what happens to it in the local to global part.
    $endgroup$
    – reuns
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Thank you. My problem was that I was going backward:trying to show which global hypersurface appears locally, while one should glue things from local data.
    $endgroup$
    – Tommaso Scognamiglio
    19 hours ago















1












$begingroup$


Let $X$ be a complex manifold and let $f$ be a meromorphic function defined on it. Let $Div(X)$ be the group of locally finite sum of analytic irreducible hypersurfaxces of $X$.



One would like to define a divisor associated to $f$ as $$sum_i in I ord(f)|_V_iV_i$$ but I really can't see why this sum should be locally finite.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Are you asking for a counterexample or else a proof?
    $endgroup$
    – Somos
    Apr 5 at 18:23










  • $begingroup$
    I was not clear: i would like to see a proof
    $endgroup$
    – Tommaso Scognamiglio
    Apr 5 at 19:49










  • $begingroup$
    any comment ? the global divisor I defined are built from locally analytic hypersurfaces, it remains to find if the gluing operation ensure they are globally analytic hypersurfaces (see $x^2-y= (x-y^1/2)(x+y^1/2)$), but it doesn't matter for the locally finite part. There is also the question of the $v(phi_j)=1$ and what happens to it in the local to global part.
    $endgroup$
    – reuns
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Thank you. My problem was that I was going backward:trying to show which global hypersurface appears locally, while one should glue things from local data.
    $endgroup$
    – Tommaso Scognamiglio
    19 hours ago













1












1








1





$begingroup$


Let $X$ be a complex manifold and let $f$ be a meromorphic function defined on it. Let $Div(X)$ be the group of locally finite sum of analytic irreducible hypersurfaxces of $X$.



One would like to define a divisor associated to $f$ as $$sum_i in I ord(f)|_V_iV_i$$ but I really can't see why this sum should be locally finite.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Let $X$ be a complex manifold and let $f$ be a meromorphic function defined on it. Let $Div(X)$ be the group of locally finite sum of analytic irreducible hypersurfaxces of $X$.



One would like to define a divisor associated to $f$ as $$sum_i in I ord(f)|_V_iV_i$$ but I really can't see why this sum should be locally finite.







complex-analysis algebraic-geometry complex-geometry several-complex-variables






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Apr 5 at 15:28









Tommaso ScognamiglioTommaso Scognamiglio

581412




581412











  • $begingroup$
    Are you asking for a counterexample or else a proof?
    $endgroup$
    – Somos
    Apr 5 at 18:23










  • $begingroup$
    I was not clear: i would like to see a proof
    $endgroup$
    – Tommaso Scognamiglio
    Apr 5 at 19:49










  • $begingroup$
    any comment ? the global divisor I defined are built from locally analytic hypersurfaces, it remains to find if the gluing operation ensure they are globally analytic hypersurfaces (see $x^2-y= (x-y^1/2)(x+y^1/2)$), but it doesn't matter for the locally finite part. There is also the question of the $v(phi_j)=1$ and what happens to it in the local to global part.
    $endgroup$
    – reuns
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Thank you. My problem was that I was going backward:trying to show which global hypersurface appears locally, while one should glue things from local data.
    $endgroup$
    – Tommaso Scognamiglio
    19 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Are you asking for a counterexample or else a proof?
    $endgroup$
    – Somos
    Apr 5 at 18:23










  • $begingroup$
    I was not clear: i would like to see a proof
    $endgroup$
    – Tommaso Scognamiglio
    Apr 5 at 19:49










  • $begingroup$
    any comment ? the global divisor I defined are built from locally analytic hypersurfaces, it remains to find if the gluing operation ensure they are globally analytic hypersurfaces (see $x^2-y= (x-y^1/2)(x+y^1/2)$), but it doesn't matter for the locally finite part. There is also the question of the $v(phi_j)=1$ and what happens to it in the local to global part.
    $endgroup$
    – reuns
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Thank you. My problem was that I was going backward:trying to show which global hypersurface appears locally, while one should glue things from local data.
    $endgroup$
    – Tommaso Scognamiglio
    19 hours ago















$begingroup$
Are you asking for a counterexample or else a proof?
$endgroup$
– Somos
Apr 5 at 18:23




$begingroup$
Are you asking for a counterexample or else a proof?
$endgroup$
– Somos
Apr 5 at 18:23












$begingroup$
I was not clear: i would like to see a proof
$endgroup$
– Tommaso Scognamiglio
Apr 5 at 19:49




$begingroup$
I was not clear: i would like to see a proof
$endgroup$
– Tommaso Scognamiglio
Apr 5 at 19:49












$begingroup$
any comment ? the global divisor I defined are built from locally analytic hypersurfaces, it remains to find if the gluing operation ensure they are globally analytic hypersurfaces (see $x^2-y= (x-y^1/2)(x+y^1/2)$), but it doesn't matter for the locally finite part. There is also the question of the $v(phi_j)=1$ and what happens to it in the local to global part.
$endgroup$
– reuns
yesterday




$begingroup$
any comment ? the global divisor I defined are built from locally analytic hypersurfaces, it remains to find if the gluing operation ensure they are globally analytic hypersurfaces (see $x^2-y= (x-y^1/2)(x+y^1/2)$), but it doesn't matter for the locally finite part. There is also the question of the $v(phi_j)=1$ and what happens to it in the local to global part.
$endgroup$
– reuns
yesterday












$begingroup$
Thank you. My problem was that I was going backward:trying to show which global hypersurface appears locally, while one should glue things from local data.
$endgroup$
– Tommaso Scognamiglio
19 hours ago




$begingroup$
Thank you. My problem was that I was going backward:trying to show which global hypersurface appears locally, while one should glue things from local data.
$endgroup$
– Tommaso Scognamiglio
19 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

Let $h$ be analytic and non identically zero on a small disk $U = z$ and $Hol(U)$ the ring of meromorphic functions on $U$ that are analytic on some neighborhood of $0$.



Look at the set of principal ideals $S = (alpha) , alpha in Hol(U), alpha(0) = 0 $ partially ordered by inclusion. Let $v(alpha)$ be the degree of the first non-zero term in $alpha$'s power series. $v(alpha beta) = v(alpha)v(beta)$.



If $(alpha) supsetneq (beta)$ then $ beta =alphagamma$ with $gamma(0) = 0$ so $v(gamma) ge 1$ and $v(beta) ge v(alpha)+1$.



Thus the maximal elements of $S$ are well-defined : $ M = (phi) in S, not exists (varphi) in S, (varphi) supsetneq (phi)$.



From there let $h_0 = h$, while $h_j(0) = 0$, pick some $ (phi_j+1) in M$ such that $(h_j) subset (phi_j+1)$ and let $h_j+1 = frach_jphi_j+1$. Since $v(h)$ is finite the process terminates obtaining the factorization $$forall z in U, qquad h(z) = h_J(z)prod_j=1^J phi_j(z)$$ where $J le v(h)$ and $h_J(0) ne 0$.




Todo : show $v(phi_j) = 1$ so $J = v(h)$.




Find an even smaller disk $V$ where $h_J$ is non-zero and the $phi_J$ are holomorphic. The local divisor is defined as $Div(h|_V) = sum_j=1^J Z(phi_j|_V)$ where $Z(phi|_V) = z in V, phi(z)=0$.



If $f$ is meromorphic then $f = frachg$ with $g,h$ holomorphic and $Div(f|_V) = Div(h|_V)-Div(g|_V)$.



The global divisor is obtained by gluing those local divisors.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    0












    $begingroup$

    There is an open set $U$ on which your meromorphic function doesn’t have any zeros or poles, so the only nonzero coefficients come from prime divisors on the complement of $U$ in $X$. This complement is a closed set $Z$. Now for the local finiteness: Take the intersection of $Z$ with a quasicompact open set of $X$, which is Noetherian as a topological space because $X$ is locally Noetherian, as it is a complex manifold and the ring of analytic functions in finitely many variables is Noetherian. (I learned this last fact from Huybrechts’s book Complex Geometry). Every subspace of a Noetherian topological space is Noetherian, so in particular this intersection can have only finitely many irreducible components. This gives you local finiteness.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      I was aking for a proof with complex manifold not algebraic varieties
      $endgroup$
      – Tommaso Scognamiglio
      Apr 6 at 19:38










    • $begingroup$
      This is a proof for complex manifolds.
      $endgroup$
      – Samir Canning
      Apr 6 at 20:35










    • $begingroup$
      Your answer doesn't contain the word analytic. Why do you try hiding it in some topological properties ? The ring of analytic functions is noetherian, it seems quite equivalent to OP's problem, and this is what you need to prove.
      $endgroup$
      – reuns
      Apr 6 at 20:43











    • $begingroup$
      This is just the way I learned it.
      $endgroup$
      – Samir Canning
      Apr 6 at 21:22










    • $begingroup$
      I’ll add in that I assume the fact from several complex variables that the ring of analytic functions is Noetherian. And I’ll give a reference.
      $endgroup$
      – Samir Canning
      Apr 6 at 21:28












    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3176055%2fdefinition-of-divisor-associated-to-a-meromorphic-function%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2












    $begingroup$

    Let $h$ be analytic and non identically zero on a small disk $U = z$ and $Hol(U)$ the ring of meromorphic functions on $U$ that are analytic on some neighborhood of $0$.



    Look at the set of principal ideals $S = (alpha) , alpha in Hol(U), alpha(0) = 0 $ partially ordered by inclusion. Let $v(alpha)$ be the degree of the first non-zero term in $alpha$'s power series. $v(alpha beta) = v(alpha)v(beta)$.



    If $(alpha) supsetneq (beta)$ then $ beta =alphagamma$ with $gamma(0) = 0$ so $v(gamma) ge 1$ and $v(beta) ge v(alpha)+1$.



    Thus the maximal elements of $S$ are well-defined : $ M = (phi) in S, not exists (varphi) in S, (varphi) supsetneq (phi)$.



    From there let $h_0 = h$, while $h_j(0) = 0$, pick some $ (phi_j+1) in M$ such that $(h_j) subset (phi_j+1)$ and let $h_j+1 = frach_jphi_j+1$. Since $v(h)$ is finite the process terminates obtaining the factorization $$forall z in U, qquad h(z) = h_J(z)prod_j=1^J phi_j(z)$$ where $J le v(h)$ and $h_J(0) ne 0$.




    Todo : show $v(phi_j) = 1$ so $J = v(h)$.




    Find an even smaller disk $V$ where $h_J$ is non-zero and the $phi_J$ are holomorphic. The local divisor is defined as $Div(h|_V) = sum_j=1^J Z(phi_j|_V)$ where $Z(phi|_V) = z in V, phi(z)=0$.



    If $f$ is meromorphic then $f = frachg$ with $g,h$ holomorphic and $Div(f|_V) = Div(h|_V)-Div(g|_V)$.



    The global divisor is obtained by gluing those local divisors.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$

















      2












      $begingroup$

      Let $h$ be analytic and non identically zero on a small disk $U = z$ and $Hol(U)$ the ring of meromorphic functions on $U$ that are analytic on some neighborhood of $0$.



      Look at the set of principal ideals $S = (alpha) , alpha in Hol(U), alpha(0) = 0 $ partially ordered by inclusion. Let $v(alpha)$ be the degree of the first non-zero term in $alpha$'s power series. $v(alpha beta) = v(alpha)v(beta)$.



      If $(alpha) supsetneq (beta)$ then $ beta =alphagamma$ with $gamma(0) = 0$ so $v(gamma) ge 1$ and $v(beta) ge v(alpha)+1$.



      Thus the maximal elements of $S$ are well-defined : $ M = (phi) in S, not exists (varphi) in S, (varphi) supsetneq (phi)$.



      From there let $h_0 = h$, while $h_j(0) = 0$, pick some $ (phi_j+1) in M$ such that $(h_j) subset (phi_j+1)$ and let $h_j+1 = frach_jphi_j+1$. Since $v(h)$ is finite the process terminates obtaining the factorization $$forall z in U, qquad h(z) = h_J(z)prod_j=1^J phi_j(z)$$ where $J le v(h)$ and $h_J(0) ne 0$.




      Todo : show $v(phi_j) = 1$ so $J = v(h)$.




      Find an even smaller disk $V$ where $h_J$ is non-zero and the $phi_J$ are holomorphic. The local divisor is defined as $Div(h|_V) = sum_j=1^J Z(phi_j|_V)$ where $Z(phi|_V) = z in V, phi(z)=0$.



      If $f$ is meromorphic then $f = frachg$ with $g,h$ holomorphic and $Div(f|_V) = Div(h|_V)-Div(g|_V)$.



      The global divisor is obtained by gluing those local divisors.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$















        2












        2








        2





        $begingroup$

        Let $h$ be analytic and non identically zero on a small disk $U = z$ and $Hol(U)$ the ring of meromorphic functions on $U$ that are analytic on some neighborhood of $0$.



        Look at the set of principal ideals $S = (alpha) , alpha in Hol(U), alpha(0) = 0 $ partially ordered by inclusion. Let $v(alpha)$ be the degree of the first non-zero term in $alpha$'s power series. $v(alpha beta) = v(alpha)v(beta)$.



        If $(alpha) supsetneq (beta)$ then $ beta =alphagamma$ with $gamma(0) = 0$ so $v(gamma) ge 1$ and $v(beta) ge v(alpha)+1$.



        Thus the maximal elements of $S$ are well-defined : $ M = (phi) in S, not exists (varphi) in S, (varphi) supsetneq (phi)$.



        From there let $h_0 = h$, while $h_j(0) = 0$, pick some $ (phi_j+1) in M$ such that $(h_j) subset (phi_j+1)$ and let $h_j+1 = frach_jphi_j+1$. Since $v(h)$ is finite the process terminates obtaining the factorization $$forall z in U, qquad h(z) = h_J(z)prod_j=1^J phi_j(z)$$ where $J le v(h)$ and $h_J(0) ne 0$.




        Todo : show $v(phi_j) = 1$ so $J = v(h)$.




        Find an even smaller disk $V$ where $h_J$ is non-zero and the $phi_J$ are holomorphic. The local divisor is defined as $Div(h|_V) = sum_j=1^J Z(phi_j|_V)$ where $Z(phi|_V) = z in V, phi(z)=0$.



        If $f$ is meromorphic then $f = frachg$ with $g,h$ holomorphic and $Div(f|_V) = Div(h|_V)-Div(g|_V)$.



        The global divisor is obtained by gluing those local divisors.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        Let $h$ be analytic and non identically zero on a small disk $U = z$ and $Hol(U)$ the ring of meromorphic functions on $U$ that are analytic on some neighborhood of $0$.



        Look at the set of principal ideals $S = (alpha) , alpha in Hol(U), alpha(0) = 0 $ partially ordered by inclusion. Let $v(alpha)$ be the degree of the first non-zero term in $alpha$'s power series. $v(alpha beta) = v(alpha)v(beta)$.



        If $(alpha) supsetneq (beta)$ then $ beta =alphagamma$ with $gamma(0) = 0$ so $v(gamma) ge 1$ and $v(beta) ge v(alpha)+1$.



        Thus the maximal elements of $S$ are well-defined : $ M = (phi) in S, not exists (varphi) in S, (varphi) supsetneq (phi)$.



        From there let $h_0 = h$, while $h_j(0) = 0$, pick some $ (phi_j+1) in M$ such that $(h_j) subset (phi_j+1)$ and let $h_j+1 = frach_jphi_j+1$. Since $v(h)$ is finite the process terminates obtaining the factorization $$forall z in U, qquad h(z) = h_J(z)prod_j=1^J phi_j(z)$$ where $J le v(h)$ and $h_J(0) ne 0$.




        Todo : show $v(phi_j) = 1$ so $J = v(h)$.




        Find an even smaller disk $V$ where $h_J$ is non-zero and the $phi_J$ are holomorphic. The local divisor is defined as $Div(h|_V) = sum_j=1^J Z(phi_j|_V)$ where $Z(phi|_V) = z in V, phi(z)=0$.



        If $f$ is meromorphic then $f = frachg$ with $g,h$ holomorphic and $Div(f|_V) = Div(h|_V)-Div(g|_V)$.



        The global divisor is obtained by gluing those local divisors.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Apr 6 at 21:45

























        answered Apr 6 at 21:36









        reunsreuns

        20.7k21353




        20.7k21353





















            0












            $begingroup$

            There is an open set $U$ on which your meromorphic function doesn’t have any zeros or poles, so the only nonzero coefficients come from prime divisors on the complement of $U$ in $X$. This complement is a closed set $Z$. Now for the local finiteness: Take the intersection of $Z$ with a quasicompact open set of $X$, which is Noetherian as a topological space because $X$ is locally Noetherian, as it is a complex manifold and the ring of analytic functions in finitely many variables is Noetherian. (I learned this last fact from Huybrechts’s book Complex Geometry). Every subspace of a Noetherian topological space is Noetherian, so in particular this intersection can have only finitely many irreducible components. This gives you local finiteness.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              I was aking for a proof with complex manifold not algebraic varieties
              $endgroup$
              – Tommaso Scognamiglio
              Apr 6 at 19:38










            • $begingroup$
              This is a proof for complex manifolds.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 20:35










            • $begingroup$
              Your answer doesn't contain the word analytic. Why do you try hiding it in some topological properties ? The ring of analytic functions is noetherian, it seems quite equivalent to OP's problem, and this is what you need to prove.
              $endgroup$
              – reuns
              Apr 6 at 20:43











            • $begingroup$
              This is just the way I learned it.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 21:22










            • $begingroup$
              I’ll add in that I assume the fact from several complex variables that the ring of analytic functions is Noetherian. And I’ll give a reference.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 21:28
















            0












            $begingroup$

            There is an open set $U$ on which your meromorphic function doesn’t have any zeros or poles, so the only nonzero coefficients come from prime divisors on the complement of $U$ in $X$. This complement is a closed set $Z$. Now for the local finiteness: Take the intersection of $Z$ with a quasicompact open set of $X$, which is Noetherian as a topological space because $X$ is locally Noetherian, as it is a complex manifold and the ring of analytic functions in finitely many variables is Noetherian. (I learned this last fact from Huybrechts’s book Complex Geometry). Every subspace of a Noetherian topological space is Noetherian, so in particular this intersection can have only finitely many irreducible components. This gives you local finiteness.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              I was aking for a proof with complex manifold not algebraic varieties
              $endgroup$
              – Tommaso Scognamiglio
              Apr 6 at 19:38










            • $begingroup$
              This is a proof for complex manifolds.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 20:35










            • $begingroup$
              Your answer doesn't contain the word analytic. Why do you try hiding it in some topological properties ? The ring of analytic functions is noetherian, it seems quite equivalent to OP's problem, and this is what you need to prove.
              $endgroup$
              – reuns
              Apr 6 at 20:43











            • $begingroup$
              This is just the way I learned it.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 21:22










            • $begingroup$
              I’ll add in that I assume the fact from several complex variables that the ring of analytic functions is Noetherian. And I’ll give a reference.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 21:28














            0












            0








            0





            $begingroup$

            There is an open set $U$ on which your meromorphic function doesn’t have any zeros or poles, so the only nonzero coefficients come from prime divisors on the complement of $U$ in $X$. This complement is a closed set $Z$. Now for the local finiteness: Take the intersection of $Z$ with a quasicompact open set of $X$, which is Noetherian as a topological space because $X$ is locally Noetherian, as it is a complex manifold and the ring of analytic functions in finitely many variables is Noetherian. (I learned this last fact from Huybrechts’s book Complex Geometry). Every subspace of a Noetherian topological space is Noetherian, so in particular this intersection can have only finitely many irreducible components. This gives you local finiteness.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            There is an open set $U$ on which your meromorphic function doesn’t have any zeros or poles, so the only nonzero coefficients come from prime divisors on the complement of $U$ in $X$. This complement is a closed set $Z$. Now for the local finiteness: Take the intersection of $Z$ with a quasicompact open set of $X$, which is Noetherian as a topological space because $X$ is locally Noetherian, as it is a complex manifold and the ring of analytic functions in finitely many variables is Noetherian. (I learned this last fact from Huybrechts’s book Complex Geometry). Every subspace of a Noetherian topological space is Noetherian, so in particular this intersection can have only finitely many irreducible components. This gives you local finiteness.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Apr 6 at 21:29

























            answered Apr 6 at 17:45









            Samir CanningSamir Canning

            50839




            50839











            • $begingroup$
              I was aking for a proof with complex manifold not algebraic varieties
              $endgroup$
              – Tommaso Scognamiglio
              Apr 6 at 19:38










            • $begingroup$
              This is a proof for complex manifolds.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 20:35










            • $begingroup$
              Your answer doesn't contain the word analytic. Why do you try hiding it in some topological properties ? The ring of analytic functions is noetherian, it seems quite equivalent to OP's problem, and this is what you need to prove.
              $endgroup$
              – reuns
              Apr 6 at 20:43











            • $begingroup$
              This is just the way I learned it.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 21:22










            • $begingroup$
              I’ll add in that I assume the fact from several complex variables that the ring of analytic functions is Noetherian. And I’ll give a reference.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 21:28

















            • $begingroup$
              I was aking for a proof with complex manifold not algebraic varieties
              $endgroup$
              – Tommaso Scognamiglio
              Apr 6 at 19:38










            • $begingroup$
              This is a proof for complex manifolds.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 20:35










            • $begingroup$
              Your answer doesn't contain the word analytic. Why do you try hiding it in some topological properties ? The ring of analytic functions is noetherian, it seems quite equivalent to OP's problem, and this is what you need to prove.
              $endgroup$
              – reuns
              Apr 6 at 20:43











            • $begingroup$
              This is just the way I learned it.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 21:22










            • $begingroup$
              I’ll add in that I assume the fact from several complex variables that the ring of analytic functions is Noetherian. And I’ll give a reference.
              $endgroup$
              – Samir Canning
              Apr 6 at 21:28
















            $begingroup$
            I was aking for a proof with complex manifold not algebraic varieties
            $endgroup$
            – Tommaso Scognamiglio
            Apr 6 at 19:38




            $begingroup$
            I was aking for a proof with complex manifold not algebraic varieties
            $endgroup$
            – Tommaso Scognamiglio
            Apr 6 at 19:38












            $begingroup$
            This is a proof for complex manifolds.
            $endgroup$
            – Samir Canning
            Apr 6 at 20:35




            $begingroup$
            This is a proof for complex manifolds.
            $endgroup$
            – Samir Canning
            Apr 6 at 20:35












            $begingroup$
            Your answer doesn't contain the word analytic. Why do you try hiding it in some topological properties ? The ring of analytic functions is noetherian, it seems quite equivalent to OP's problem, and this is what you need to prove.
            $endgroup$
            – reuns
            Apr 6 at 20:43





            $begingroup$
            Your answer doesn't contain the word analytic. Why do you try hiding it in some topological properties ? The ring of analytic functions is noetherian, it seems quite equivalent to OP's problem, and this is what you need to prove.
            $endgroup$
            – reuns
            Apr 6 at 20:43













            $begingroup$
            This is just the way I learned it.
            $endgroup$
            – Samir Canning
            Apr 6 at 21:22




            $begingroup$
            This is just the way I learned it.
            $endgroup$
            – Samir Canning
            Apr 6 at 21:22












            $begingroup$
            I’ll add in that I assume the fact from several complex variables that the ring of analytic functions is Noetherian. And I’ll give a reference.
            $endgroup$
            – Samir Canning
            Apr 6 at 21:28





            $begingroup$
            I’ll add in that I assume the fact from several complex variables that the ring of analytic functions is Noetherian. And I’ll give a reference.
            $endgroup$
            – Samir Canning
            Apr 6 at 21:28


















            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3176055%2fdefinition-of-divisor-associated-to-a-meromorphic-function%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            What does it mean to find percent difference when two values are equivalent? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhat does “percent of change” mean?Find what percent X is between two numbers?Unable to determine 'original amount' in simple percentage problemsWhat is the correct percent difference formula?How does proportionality hold when quantities are high? And the percentage increase formulaprofit and loss GRE questionProfitability calculationWhat is the difference between $xtimes 0.8$ and $x div 1.2 ? $Finding the percent probability of completing BUDs trainingCalculating Percent Difference with zero and near zero values

            Why did some early computer designers eschew integers?What register size did early computers use?What other computers used this floating-point format?Why did so many early microcomputers use the MOS 6502 and variants?Why were early computers named “Mark”?Why did expert systems fall?Why were early personal computer monitors not green?When did “Zen” in computer programming become a thing?History of advanced hardwareWere there any working computers using residue number systems?Why did some CPUs use two Read/Write lines, and others just one?

            How to avoid repetitive long generic constraints in Rust The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) The Ask Question Wizard is Live! Data science time! April 2019 and salary with experienceIs it possible to automatically implement a trait for any tuple that is made up of types that all implement the trait?Is there a constraint that restricts my generic method to numeric types?How can foreign key constraints be temporarily disabled using T-SQL?How do I use reflection to call a generic method?How to create a generic array in Java?How to get a class instance of generics type THow is `last` allowed to be called for an Args value?How to implement a trait for a parameterized traitAvoiding PhantomData in a struct to enforce type constraintsIs it possible to return part of a struct by reference?Associated References types as Value Types