Proof. [039F]
Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.
Complete original source context · Original author HTML
Proof.
To prove (a), we pick any projective -model of . By [Lü93, Lemma 2.2], there is a blowing up such that dominates . Since is a projective morphism, is a projective -model dominating . Hence (a) follows from (b).
To prove (b), we note that the morphism is a blowing up morphism along a vertical closed subscheme of (see [Liu06, Thm. 8.1.24]). Since the ideal sheaf of contains a power of the uniformizer of , we may define it over and hence the same is true for the blowing up morphism and for proving (b).
To prove (c), we may assume that the model function is associated to a vertical Cartier divisor . Replacing by for a suitable non-zero and using (a) and (b), we may assume that is an effective Cartier divisor on a projective -model of . As in (b), we see that the ideal sheaf of is defined by the ideal sheaf of a Cartier divisor defined over proving (c). ∎