# Exercises from Vakil

Size: px
Start display at page:

Transcription

1 Exercises from Vakil Ian Coley February 6, Sheaves 2.1 Motivating example: The sheaf of differentiable functions Exercise 2.1.A. Show that the only maximal ideal of the germ of differentiable functions O p is m p, the ideal of functions vanishing at p. We take for granted that m p is maximal. We will show that O p = O p \ m p. Suppose that f O p does not vanish at p, and say f(p) = α. Then since f is differentiable, it is continuous, so it is nonzero in some neighbourhood U of p. Let K U be a compact neighbourhood of p, which exists since we are working in locally Euclidean space. Then we may define g : U R by { 1/f(x) x K g(x) = 0 x U \ K. We see that g(x) is certainly continuous in K, but it may not be differentiable if f (x) = 0 somewhere in K. However in this case, we must shrink U and try again until we get it right. (CHECK) Having established that, we may define g on an open subset of p K to obtain the appropriate germ. Exercise 2.1.B. Prove that m p /m 2 p is naturally isomorphic to the cotangent space at p as an R-module. We would like to establish the exact sequence 0 m 2 p m p T p X 0. The first map is clearly given by inclusion, but the second map is not as obvious. We will take a function f and send it to its derivation df, which is a member of the cotangent space. This map d is surjective by facts from differential geometry. It is clear that m 2 p ker d by Leibniz rule: d(f 2 ) = 2f df, so d(f 2 ) p = 0 since f(p) = 0. (TO BE FINISHED) 1

2 2.2 Definition of sheaf and presheaf Exercise 2.2.A. Prove: a presheaf is the same thing as a contravariant functor. This is reasonably clear. Suppose we have a contravariant functor F : X C, where C is some (concrete) category and X the category associated to a topological space X. Then we know that given an inclusion i : V U, we have a morphism F (i) : F (U) F (V ). Further, if we have the identity inclusion id U : U U, then F (id U ) : F (U) F (U) must also be the identity. Further, we know that F respects (and reverses) compositions. This is all the data that we needed. Exercise 2.2.B. Show that the following are presheaves on C but not sheaves: (a) bounded functions and (b) holomorphic functions admitting a holomorphic square root. It is clear that both are presheaves by the same reasoning that differentiable functions were a presheaf; functions can be restricted. For (a), we see this is not a presheaf since it violates the gluability axiom. Suppose we have any open cover of C by bounded open sets. Define f i : U i C be given by f i (x) = x. Then on any U i, we have a bounded function. However, we cannot glue all these functions together, since eventually x. For (b), since he s said this exercise is unimportant and I m not sure what a holomorphic square root is, I will skip it. Exercise 2.2.C. The identity and gluability axioms may be rephrased to say that F ( i U i) is what limit? We need F ( i U i) to be the limit of the diagram J with objects F (U i ) and maps the restriction maps res Ui,U j. Let U = i U. If this is the case, then the universal property of limits tells us that, given two f, g F (U) which restricts onto each of the U i in the appropriate way, we have a unique morphism F (U) F (U) sending f to g. f F (U) res J g F (U) res Since the identity map works for this unique morphism, this must be our choice, so f = g. This proves identity. Gluability follows from the existence of the limit at all, i.e. there is some element in F (U) restricting to each of the F (U i ) in the appropriate ways. Exercise 2.2.D. 2

3 (a) Verify that differentiable functions, continuous functions, smooth functions, and ordinary functions are shaves on a manifold X R n. (b) Show that real-valued continuous functions on (open sets of) a topological space X form a sheaf. We assume that everything is a presheaf already. The method for (b) will also work for (a), so we will just do that. In a topological space, we do not have coordinate charts, but everything works fine still. The identity axiom is clear. The gluability axiom also works since the function obtained by gluing is still continuous. If we were dealing with smooth functions on a manifold, then the result would still be smooth, as the functions are glued together on open sets and not on closed sets (where we might have problems). Exercise 2.2.E. Let F (U) be maps from U to a set S that are locally constant. Show that this is a sheaf. We take the description that F (U) is the set of continuous maps U S, where S is endowed with the discrete topology. This is clearly a presheaf, so we need only check that it is a sheaf. But this is clear, as the identity axiom is trivial and the gluability axiom follows by the following: glue together f i : U i S into one function f : U S. Then for each p U, choose the constant open neighbourhood around p to be the one guaranteed to exist in U i U. Exercise 2.2.F. Suppose Y is a topological space. Show that continuous maps to Y form a sheaf of sets on X. That it is a presheaf and the identity axiom are obvious. To test gluability, suppose that we have an appropriate cover {U i } i I and functions f i : U i Y. Define f : U Y in the obvious way. Then let V Y be an open set. We know that f 1 i (V ) is open in U i for all i I. Thus f 1 (V ) = i I f 1 i (V ) is still open, since an open subset of an open subset is still open in U. Hence the function is continuous. We can apply this proof to the above cases. Exercise 2.2.G. (a) Suppose we are given a continuous map µ : Y X. how that sections of µ form a sheaf. (b) Suppose that Y is a topological group. Show that continuous maps to Y form a sheaf of groups. 3

4 (a) The identity axiom is clear as it ever was, since sections are a type of continuous functions to a topological space. Suppose now that we have our set {s i : U i Y }. Glue together the functions in the necessary way to create s : U Y. Then we need s to be injective to be left invertible, but this is easily the case. Suppose s(p) = s(q) with p q. Then p and q cannot lie in the same U i, since the s i are all injective. Therefore let p U i and q U j. We could not have (µ s)(p) = (µ s)(q) since p and q lie in different open sets, which implies that s(p) s(q), a contradiction. (b) We can put a group structure on the set of continuous maps by pointwise multiplication. The presheaf axioms are still clearly satisfied, and the identity element of any F (U) is the constant map sending every element to e Y, so we have a contravariant functor to the category of groups. There is no reason any of the other axioms should fail because we have added the rest of this structure, and indeed they do not. Exercise 2.2.H. Suppose π : X Y is a continuous map, and F is a presheaf on X. Then define π F by π F (V ) = F (π 1 (V )), where V Y is open. Show π F is a presheaf on Y, and is a sheaf of F is. If we have such a presheaf, then we can define the restriction maps in the following way: let U V Y be open subsets. Then since π 1 (U) = U and π 1 (V ) = V are open subsets in X satisfying U V, there is a restriction map r : F (V ) F (U ). As such, we can construct the restriction map r : π F (V ) π F (U) with this in the only sensible way. Thus we have a presheaf structure on π F. If F is a sheaf, then taking 2.2.C, everything still works out fine. Exercise 2.2.I. Suppose π : X Y is a continuous map, and F is a sheaf of sets on X. If π(p) = q, describe the natural morphism of stalks (π F ) q F p. We will take the definition of the stalk as a colimit. We have that (π F ) q = lim π F (U) = lim F (π 1 (U)) Since each U is an open set containing p, we have the natural map we wanted by the map induced by π 1 (U) U, i.e. π itself. Exercise 2.2.J. If (X, O X ) is a ringed space, and F is an O X -module, describe for each p X how F p is an O X,p -module. 4

5 We have that O X,p = lim O X (U) and F p = lim F (U). Each F (U) has a well-defined structure as a O X (U)-module. Further, if V U, we can turn F (U) into a O X (V )-module by moving forward in the limit diagram, since we know everything must commute. 2.3 Morphisms of presheaves and sheaves Exercise 2.3.A. If φ : F G is a morphism of sheaves on X and p X, described an induced morphism of stalks φ p : F P G p. Since we have, for p U open, F p = lim F (U), we can define φ p by elements by appealing to φ(u) : F (U) G (U). Taking the germ definition, can take a representative for an equivalence class (f, U) and map it according to φ(u), same as above. Exercise 2.3.B. Suppose π : X Y is a continuous map of topological spaces. Show that the pushforward gives a functor π : Sets X Sets Y, where Sets is an arbitrary choice. We have seen that the pushforward gives us a map of objects, but we need to check that it respects morphisms. Let F, G Sets X, and let φ : F G be a sheaf morphism. Then we see that π φ must fit in the diagram below (for every open set (U)): F π φ G π π F π φ π G Dissecting this, suppose we have an element α π F (U) = F (π 1 (U)). Then we must have π φ(u)(α) = φ(π 1 (U))(α), which is an element of G (π 1 (U)). Hence under π it is send to an element of π G (U), as required. It is clear from this description that if φ is the identify on F that π φ is the identity on π F so we are done. Exercise 2.3.C. Suppose F and G are two sheaves of sets on X, though it suffices they be presheaves. Let Hom (F, G ) be the collection of data Hom (F, G )(U) := Mor(F U, G U ), where F U is the restriction of F to the open set U. Show that this is a sheaf of sets on X. 5

6 Let us look at Hom (F, G ) as a functor X Sets. Given an inclusion V U, we can define the following map on the morphism sets: if f : F U G U, then we have a natural restriction of F U to F V, which will in turn map onto G V. This is how we map Hom (F, G )(U) Hom (F, G )(V ). This gives us a presheaf structure on Hom (F, G ). The sheaf axioms follow from the limit definition of sheaf axioms on F and G. The Hom functor that we could develop now, but Vakil hints will be developed soon after, should commute properly with limits. Exercise 2.3.D. (a) If F is a sheaf of sets on X, then show that Hom ({p}, F ) = F, where {p} is the constant sheaf associated with the one element set {p}. (b) If F is a sheaf of abelian groups on X, then show that Hom AbX (Z, F ) = F as sheaves of abelian groups. (c) If F is an O X -module, then show that Hom OX (O X, F ) = F as sheaves of O X - modules. For (a), we need to check what is happening on any open set U X. Consider Hom ({p}, F )(U). We have Hom ({p}, F )(U) = Mor({p} U, F U ) = {φ : {p} F (U)} = F (U). The Mor set is just the inclusion of one point into F (U), so these are isomorphic as sets. As described above, given V U, the restriction maps would then just map φ : {p} F (V ), and the identity and gluability should follow easily too. We are now going to generalise the above, since all we are considering is the sheaf based around the object in a category representing the identity functor. We can address (b) and (c) simultaneous by generally considering sheaves of R-modules. In general, Hom R-Mod (R, M) = M as R-modules. Therefore we have for every open U, Hom R-ModX (R, F )(U) = {φ : R F (U)} = F (U). Applying this to the case of R = Z, O X is what we want. Exercise 2.3.E. Check that, for a morphism of presheaves of abelian groups φ : F G, ker pre φ is a presheaf. To write down what this object actually is, we have (ker pre )φ(u) := ker(φ(u) : F (U) G (U)). We will take Vakil s hint and use the diagram, for V U, φ(u) 0 ker pre φ(u) F (U) G (U)? res U,V res U,V 0 ker pre φ(v ) F (V ) 6 φ(v ) G (V )

7 The map? should be the restriction map for ker pre φ if we manage to endow it with a presheaf structure. Indeed, we can take res U,V and restrict its domain to ker pre φ(u), but it is not clear that it lands in ker pre φ(v ). However, we have α ker pre φ(u), we have φ(u)(α) = 0, hence res U,V φ(u)(α) = 0 as well. By commutativity, φ(v ) res U,V (α) = 0, whence res U,V (α) ker φ(v ) as we wanted. Exercise 2.3.F. Show that the presheaf cokernel coker pre φ satisfies the universal property of cokernels. This is clear when we look at what is happening on open sets. In that case, we have the picture φ F (U) G (U) coker pre φ(u) 0. 0 p(u) Suppose that we had some sheaf T and F φ G set, we have the picture q T with q φ = 0. Then on every open 0 φ(u) F (U) G (U) coker pre φ(u) 0 p(u) q(u)! T (U) Since coker pre φ(u) is the cokernel of φ(u), we have a unique map shown above. This allows us to define a unique map coker pre φ T globally. Exercise 2.3.G. Show (or observe) that for a topological space X with open set U, F F (U) gives a functor from presheaves of abelian groups on X, Ab pre X, to Ab. Show that this functor is exact. We have now taken for granted that Ab pre X is an abelian category, otherwise this question would make no sense. Also, I have observed the fact above, so we move on to exactness. Suppose that 0 F a G b H 0 is an exact sequence of abelian group presheaves on X. Since a and b are defined on open sets, this means that 0 F (U) a(u) G (U) b(u) H (U) 0 must still be exact. That is all that we wanted to show. 7

8 Exercise 2.3.H. Show that a sequence of presheaves 0 F 1 F 2 F n 0 is exact if and only if 0 F 1 (U) F 2 (U) F n (U) 0 is exact for all U. I think based on Vakil s statement that Homological algebra (exact sequences and so forth) works, and also works open set by open set makes this trivial. The forward direction is obvious (and we have been using it this entire time), and we can build up the appropriate kernels and cokernels to show exactness open set by open set. Exercise 2.3.I. Suppose φ : F G is a morphism of sheaves. Show that the presheaf kernel ker pre φ is in fact a sheaf. Show that it satisfies the universal property of kernels. As the problem suggests, assuming that ker pre φ is a sheaf, then it must satisfy the universal property as Ab X is a full subcategory of Ab pre X. To show it is a sheaf, we just need to figure out identity and gluability. Since ker pre φ is a subobject of F, we know exactly how to do this. Exercise 2.3.J. Let X be C with the classical topology, and let Z be the constant sheaf on X associated to Z, O X the sheaf of holomorphic functions, and F the presheaf of functions admitting a holomorphic logarithm. Describe an exact sequence of presheaves on X 0 Z O X F 0 where Z O X is the natural inclusion and O X F is given by f exp(2πif). Show that F is not a sheaf. The natural inclusion is clearly injective. Suppose a function g F (U) admits a holomorphic logarithm log g. Then we may let f = 1 log g O 2πi X(U). The map is surjective on open sets, so is overall surjective. Suppose exp(2πif) = 0 identically on U. Then we must have f(z) Z for all z U, hence f comes from the inclusion Z(U) O X (U). This proves exactness. We are told that F does not satisfy gluability, so we check this. If we let D r be the open unit disc centred at the origin of radius r, let U = D 2 \ D 1, an open annulus. Take an open cover of U by A = {(x, y) U : x ( 1.5, 2)}, B = {(x, y) U : x ( 2, 1.5)}. Let f A, f B be the constant function. Since on both these sets we may make a branch cut either along arg z = 0 or arg z = π to define a holomorphic logarithm, but it cannot be done on the entire annulus, so gluability fails. 8

9 2.4 Properties determined at the level of stalks, and sheafification Exercise 2.4.A. Prove that a section of a sheaf of sets is determined by its germs, i.e., the natural map F (U) p U F p is injective. According to the hints, we will need only the identity axiom to prove this. First, the natural map f above maps an element α F (U) to its germ (α, U) over p. Indeed, this map is induced by the restriction map from F (U) to some F (V ) for some neighbourhood p V p U. Since the identity axioms tells us that two sections in F (U) restricting identically to an open cover of U (which we have here) are in fact equal, this proves injectivity. Exercise 2.4.B. Show that supp s := {p X : s p 0 in F p } is a closed subset of X. We will show its complement is open. Suppose that we have p X so that s p = 0 in F p. Then there must be some neighbourhood V of p so that s V = 0 constantly. Therefore s is locally constantly 0, so {p X : s p = 0} is open. Exercise 2.4.C. Prove that any choice of compatible germs for a sheaf of sets F over U is the image of a section of F over U. We are pushed towards using gluability. Suppose that we have such a bunch of compatible germs. Then from the definition, we obtain an open cover {U p } of p and sections s p so that we have sections (s p, U p ). Then we may glue these together to obtain a section on U, i.e. some (s, U) so that res U,Up s = s p. This implies that the value on each of the stalks is als correct so we are done. Exercise 2.4.D. If φ 1 and φ 2 are morphisms from a presheaf of sets F to a sheaf of sets G that induce the same maps on each stalk, show that φ 1 = φ 2. We use the diagram F (U) p U F p φ 1 φ 2 φ1 = φ 2 G (U) p U G p 9

10 We may do even better: since the right vertical map is injective, it is invertible from its image. Therefore we need only check that taking φ 1 on a stalk yields a compatible germ. But this is obvious. Therefore since we have equality on the bottom maps, we have equality of the top maps. Exercise 2.4.E. Show that a morphism of sheaves of sets is an isomorphism if and only if it induces an isomorphism of all stalks. Using the above picture again, let φ : F (U) G (U) be a morphism of sheaves of sets, and let ι F and ι G be the natural inclusions of the set of sections into the product of stalks. F (U) φ G (U) ι F p U F p φp ι G p U G p We refine this to F (U) φ G (U) φp im ιf im ι F im ι G If either the top or the bottom of this diagram is an isomorphism, then the other one is an isomorphism as well. As stated above, it is clear that the bottom map takes compatible germs to compatible germs, so the bottom map is well-defined, so we are done. Exercise 2.4.F. (a) Show that Exercise 2.4.A is false for general presheaves. (b) Show that Exercise 2.4.D is false for general presheaves. (c) Show that Exercise 2.4.E is false for general presheaves. (a) The hint overall is to use the two-point space X = {p, q} with the discrete topology. Define F as follows: we let F ({p} = F ({q}) = {α}, some one point set, and let F (X) = {a, b}, some two point set. This is a presheaf, since we let the restriction maps res X,{p} and res X,{q} be the constant maps with value α (as they must since one point sets are a final object in Sets). Now, the map F (X) F p F q = {(α, α)} is a set map from a two point set to a one point set, which cannot be injective. (b) We will continue using the above sheaf. Let G be very similar to F : we will let G (X) = {c, d} and G ({p}) = G ({q}) = {β}. Let φ 1, φ 2 : F G be defined as follows: we must have φ 1 (α) = β on F p and F q. On F (X), let φ 1 (a) = φ 1 (b) = c and let φ 2 (a) = φ 2 (b) = d. Then we have two different sheaf morphisms which agree on stalks, but are not equal. 10

11 (c) Take φ 1 above. By construction, the bottom map is an isomorphism on stalks, but we do not have an isomorphism overall as φ 1 (X) is not surjective. Exercise 2.4.G. Show that sheafification is unique up to unique isomorphism, assuming it exists. Show that if F is a sheaf, then the sheafification is id : F F. Suppose that F1 sh and F2 sh are two sheafifications of F. Then these are both sheaves, so we have a diagram F sh sh F sh 1! sh id F2 sh F1 sh! The two dashed morphisms must compose to be the identity, since that is the unique map making the top triangle commute, so we have a unique isomorphism from F1 sh to F2 sh. Further, if F is itself a sheaf, F satisfies the universal property of F sh by letting sh : F F be given by the identity, so it must be its own sheafification. Exercise 2.4.H. Assume for now that sheafification exists. Use the universal property to show that for any morphism of presheaves φ : F G, we get a natural induced morphism of sheaves φ sh : F sh G sh. Show that sheafification is a functor from presheaves on X to sheaves on X. We use the diagram below: F φ sh F F sh φ sh G sh G We know there is a composite map F G sh by φ sh G. By the universal property of sheafification, there is a unique map F sh G sh making the diagram commute, which we denote by the dashed morphism φ sh. Since we have assumed how sh acts on objects of Ab pre X and now have shown how it works on morhpisms, we have a good candidate for a functor. That composition works is clear, and that sh takes the identity to the identity follows from 2.4.G. There fore we have a functor sh : Ab pre X Ab X. Exercise 2.4.I. Show that F sh forms a sheaf. 11 G sh

12 We already know what the restriction maps should be, so we have a presheaf. Suppose that {U i } is a open cover of U, and suppose that f, g F sh (U) are two sections that agree on each restriction onto F sh (U i ), which we denote f i, g i respectively. We know that we have f i = (f i,x F x : x U i, V i U i and s i F (V i ) s.t. s i,y = f i,y y V i ) and similar for g i. Because of this constructions, we see that all the f i,x and g i,x must be the same, which would make f = g overall. Now suppose that we have f i F sh (U i ) with the intersections agreeing appropriately. Then suppose we take the section f F sh (U) obtained by taking each member of the stalks f i,x, since we know that if x U i U j, then by assumption f i,x = f j,x. We know that this collection is a set of compatible germs because, at each x U, there is some U i with x U i. As such there is an open V i U i such that the set of stalks is the image of a section. Since V i U is still open, we may take this as our neighbourhood. Thus we have glued our sections together as required, so we have a sheaf. Exercise 2.4.J. Describe a natural map of presheaves sh : F F sh. We know that we have a natural maps F (U) p U F p F sh (U). This should be our natural map of presheaves. Since F sh (U) is a subobject of p U F p, the second map will make sense in abelian categories (or Sets), so we are fine. For it to be a map of presheaves, it would have to play well with restriction maps, i.e. for V U F (U) p U F p F sh (U) res U,V F (V ) res U,V q V F q F sh (V ) It is clear that the left and right squares commute individually, so we have the required commutative diagram above. Exercise 2.4.K. Show that the map sh satisfies the universal property of sheafification. Suppose that G is a sheaf and φ : F G a map of presheaves. We will first construct the map ψ : F sh G then show it is unique. Let f F sh (U). Construct an open cover U i of U so that on each U i we have a section f i F (U i ) and f x = f i,x for all x U i. Now, consider g i = φ(f i ) G (U i ). Since G is a sheaf and it is clear that the g i agree on intersections by the above work, we may glue the g i together into a unique g G (U) which 12

13 agrees on each of the restrictions. We want to define ψ(f) := g for this g. It is also clear that ψ sh = φ from this, and it is unique because we were forced by commutativity to define ψ this way. Exercise 2.4.L. Show that the sheafification functor is left adjoint to the forgetful functor from sheaves on X to presheaves on X. Let u : C X C pre X and sheaf G, be the forgetful functor. Then we need to show that, for a presheaf F Hom (sh(f ), G ) = Hom (F, u(g )). We know that given any map from a presheaf to a sheaf, we have a unique map from its sheafification to that sheaf. This gives an inclusion of the right set in the left. Now, given a map from F sh G, we can precompose with the natural map (abusing the hell out of notation) sh : F F sh to obtain a map F G, which means the opposite inclusion also holds. Therefore we have a bijection between these two sets. Depending on the category C we will want a stronger isomorphism, but this follows easily. Exercise 2.4.M. Show F F sh induces an isomorphism of stalks. We will take the set of germs definition of stalks. Recall that F p is the set of equivalence classes (f, U) where p U is open, f F (U), and (f, U) (g, V ) if there is an open W U V with res U,W (f) = res V,W (g). We know that, locally, each f F sh (U) is some tuple of stalk elements (f x ) which (locally enough) are the image a section F (V ) with V U. Therefore associated to a stalk element f x, x U, we have a section s F (V ) so that s x = f x. That is, f x is representable by (s, V ). Therefore we have an injection Fx sh F x. Further, given some germ (s, V ) in F x, we may construct the element (s y, y V ) p U F p. Then this is a compatible germ, hence is an element of F sh (U). Therefore s x is an element of the stalk Fx sh. This is the bijection which implies an isomorphism. Exercise 2.4.N. Suppose φ : F G is a morphism of sheaves of sets on a topological space X. Show that the following are equivalent: (a) φ is a monomorphism in the category of sheaves. (b) φ is injective on the level of stalks. (c) φ is injective on the level of open sets. 13

14 We will take Vakil s recommendations: since we have shown that morphisms are determined by the action on stalks for sheaves, (b) implies (a) and (b) implies (c), since we can view stalks either globally or locally. (c) also implies (a). We therefore need only show that (a) implies (c). Vakil suggests for this to use the indicator sheaf for U, which we will denote T U for lack of any other notation. φ being a monomorphism means that, for any two maps ψ 1, ψ 2 : T F, we have φ ψ 1 = φ ψ 2 = ψ 1 = ψ 2. Therefore let us try this with the indicator sheaf T U. Suppose that φ(u) : F (U) G (U) is not injective, so that φ(u)(s) = φ(u)(t) for some s t F (U). Then let ψ 1, ψ 2 : T U F be defined as follows: if {a} is the set associated to each T U (V ) for V U open, then we would like { res U,V s i = 1 ψ i (V )(a) = res U,V t i = 2, where we include the possibility V = U so that res U,U = id. This does define two sheaf morphisms such that φ ψ 1 = φ ψ 2. However, we have ψ 1 ψ 2 since s t by assumption, so we have a contradiction. Therefore φ(u) must be injective on each U. Exercise 2.4.O. Continuing the notation of the previous exercise, show that the following are equivalent: (a) φ is an epimorphism in the category of sheaves. (b) φ is surjective on the level of stalks. (b) implies (a) is clear, as it was above. For (a) implies (b), we take Vakil s hint and use the skyscraper sheaf with value {a, b, c} at p, which we denote T p. If φ is an epimorphism then for any ψ 1, ψ 2 : G T such that ψ 1 φ = ψ 2 φ, then we have ψ 1 = ψ 2. Suppose φ p : F p G p is not surjective, and let g G p not be in the image of φ p. Then let us define maps ψ 1, ψ 2 : G T p by defining what happens on stalks: since T p,q, that is the stalk of T p at q, is equal to {a, b, c} for q = p and the final object in Sets elsewhere, let us define for s G p, a s = g, i = 1 ψ i,p (s) = b s = g, i = 2. c s g There are sheaf morphisms ψ 1 and ψ 2 corresponding to these sheaf maps, and these satisfy ψ 1 φ = ψ 2 φ. However by construction ψ 1 ψ 2, so φ cannot be an epimorphism. This proves the contrapositive of the converse, so we are done. Exercise 2.4.P. Let X = C with the classical topology, let O X be the sheaf of holomorphic functions, and let O X be the sheaf of invertible (nowhere zero) holomorphic functions. Show that O exp X O X describes O X as a quotient sheaf of O X. Find an open set on which this map is not surjective. 14

15 We know that the exp sheaf map is an epimorphism if and only if exp p is surjective for all p X. Therefore we will show this. From Exercise 2.3.J, we know that we have an exact sequence of (pre)sheaves if we replace O X by holomorphic functions admitting a holomorphic logarithm. From complex analysis, we can define the log of any function whose codomain is a subset of C \ {0} by (log f)(z) = γ f (z) f(z) dz, where γ is a path between 0 and z (which one does not matter since C is simply connected). Therefore we can write f = exp(log f). Since the stalks in this case are just locally-defined functions supported at p, this shows that every exp p is surjective. We will run into the same problem if we try to define functions on an annulus. Let U be the open annulus centred at 0 constructed in Exercise 2.3.J. Then the constant function has no logarithm, so the map exp(u) : O X (U) O (U) cannot be surjective. 2.5 Sheaves of abelian groups, and O X -modules, form abelian categories Exercise 2.5.A. Show that the stalk of the kernel is the kernel of the stalks. We want a natural isomorphism (ker(f G )) x = ker(fx G x ). Let φ : F G for ease of notation. Let ker φ denote the object of the kernel of φ in the category of sheaves. Suppose we have an element f (ker φ) x (we will let ker φ x be the right hand side of the above). Then since we have a natural monomorphism ker φ F, we have an injection (ker φ) x F x (assuming we are working over a nice category, otherwise we just have a monomorphism). As such we can map (ker φ) x G x via φ x. We summarise this in the picture 0 ker φ F G φ 0 (ker φ) x F x G x The top row of this diagram is exact. By diagram chasing, we can see the bottom is exact too. Therefore (ker φ) x satisfies the requirements of ker φ x, so the two must be isomorphic. Exercise 2.5.B. Show that the stalk of the cokernel is naturally isomorphic to the cokernel of the stalk. Take the above proof and look at cokernels instead. Using additionally the fact that the presheaf cokernel and the sheaf cokernel have isomorphic stalks (Poblem 2.4.M), we are done. 15 φ x

16 Exercise 2.5.C. Suppose that φ : F G is a morphism of sheaves of abelian groups. Show that the image sheaf im φ is the sheafification of the image presheaf. Show that the stalk of the image is the image of the stalk. We have now shown that we are working in an abelian category. We know that im φ = ker coker φ in this case. Taking kernels will always give us a sheaf, but we do not know that coker φ is a sheaf a priori. Writing pre when necessary, we see φ F G coker pre φ coker φ sh ker pre (coker pre φ) ker(coker φ)? We want? to be the sheafification map. As such, we will show that ker(coker φ) satisfies the universal property of the sheafification of ker pre (coker pre φ). Write H pre for ker pre (coker pre φ) and write H for its sheafification. By the above, the composite map H pre coker φ is zero, which is a map from a presheaf into a sheaf. Therefore it factors uniquely through to H coker φ. However, since ker pre (coker φ) = ker(coker φ), we know that H pre must also factor uniquely through ker(coker(φ)). Since this is another map between H pre and a sheaf, we have another factorisation through H. This gives H pre G coker pre φ coker φ H ker(coker φ) Since this diagram commutes, if the starred dashed arrow is not the identity, then we have two different ways to move from H pre through H to coker φ. Thus it must be the identity, so ker(coker φ) is the sheafification of the presheaf image. That the stalk of the image is the image of the stalk follows from the previous two exercises. Exercise 2.5.D. Show that talking the stalk of a sheaf of abelian groups is an exact functor. Consider the sheaf category Ab X. Let p X be a point. Suppose that 0 F φ G ψ H 0 16

17 is an exact sequence of sheaves. We want to show that φ p ψ p 0 F p Gp Hp 0 is also exact. A criterion for exactness in the first sequence is that im φ = ker ψ. We know that (im φ) p = im φ p, (ker ψ) p = ker ψ p by the above problems. Therefore since (im φ) p = (ker ψ) p, the sequence in Ab is exact since its maps satisfy the above criterion. Exercise 2.5.E. To check the exponential sequence 0 Z 2πi exp O x OX 1 is exact, we know that we may check it on stalks. Let p C be any point and let ι = 2πi. We have shown before that the first map is a monomorphism and the second map is an epimorphism, i.e. ι p is injective on stalks and exp p is surjective on stalks. We need only show that im ι p = ker exp p. We know that im ι p ker exp p since exp(2πim) = 0 for all m Z, so the function described is the zero function. Further, let f O X such that exp(f) = 0. Then we know that f(x) 2πiZ for all x U, where U is some small open set containing p. Since f takes values on a discrete set, we know that there is some smaller neighbourhood of p so that f is constant, with value f(p) = 2πin (for some n). This neighbourhood can be described as the connected component containing p of f 1 (2πin). Because we are working on stalks, f and the constant function 2πin represent the same germ, so we know that f comes from n Z p. This completes the proof. Exercise 2.5.F. Suppose U X is an open set, and 0 F G H is an exact sequence of sheaves of abelian groups. Show that 0 F (U) G (U) H (U) is exact. Show that the section functor need not be exact. For the second part of this problem, we showed in 2.4.P that O X (U) OX (U) is not always surjective, e.g. for U the open annulus. Therefore we would not have right exactness for that section functor. We will do this the long way, not using the fact that all right adjoints are left exact. We started this process in Exercise 2.4.N: if F G is a monomorphism, then F (U) G (U) is injective. Therefore this sequence is exact at F (U). Therefore we need only show that the image of F (U) in G (U) is the kernel of G (U) H (U). We know that any exact sequence can be factored into a short exact sequence. Exactness at G follows is equivalent to for F φ G ψ H, 0 im φ G im ψ 0 is short exact. Since we have shown that im φ = ker ψ,we need to show that ker ψ(u) G (U) im ψ(u) is short exact. But this is obvious. 17

18 Exercise 2.5.G. Suppose 0 F φ G ψ H is an exact sequence in Ab X. If π : X Y is a continuous map, show that 0 π F π φ π G π ψ π H is exact. We need to show that im π φ = ker π ψ. It would be nice to check this on stalks, but there is no clear way of writing down what the stalks in this case are, so we will check it on open sets instead. We can check this on open stalks because we do not need right exactness of π ; that would cause problems only at exactness at π H. Now, we know that π φ(u) = φ(π 1 (U)), π ψ(u) = ψ(π 1 (U)). The condition we have to check boils down thus: im π φ(u) = ker π ψ(u) im φ(π 1 (U)) = ker ψ(π 1 (U)). But this is obviously true by assumption. Exercise 2.5.H. Suppose F is a sheaf of abelian groups on a topological space X. Show that Hom (F, ) is a left exact covariant functor Ab X Ab X. Show that Hom (, F ) is a left exact contravariant functor. Let G and H be two other sheaves, and let φ : G H be a sheaf morphism. Since it is already obvious that Hom (F, ) takes one sheaf to the homomorphism sheaf, we need to demonstrate its behaviour on morphisms. We see that Hom (F, ) induces a map φ : Hom (F, G ) Hom (F, H ) given by ψ φ ψ. We see that Hom (, F ) induces a map φ : Hom (H, F ) Hom (G, F ) given by ψ ψ φ. We need only show left-exactness. We cannot use stalks again, because Hom (F, G ) p Hom(F p, G p ) in general. We can use the same open set argument as we did above, though, since we do not need to worry about the last place. The proof is virtually identical. Exercise 2.5.I. Show that if (X, O X ) is a ringed space, then O X -modules form an abelian category. This is almost immediate since we know that sheaves of abelian groups form an abelian category. We only need to notice that subobjects, quotient objects, coproducts, and products of O X -modules have a natural O X -module structure, so the sheaves of abelian groups satisfying various universal properties actually lie in the category of O X -modules. Exercise 2.5.J. 18

19 (a) Suppose O X is a sheaf of rings on X. Define (categorically) what should mean by the tensor product of two O X -modules. Give an explicit construction, and show that it satisfies your categorical definition. (b) Show that the tensor product of stalks is the stalk of the tensor product. (a) What it should be is the following: let F and G be two O X -modules. Then suppose we have a map φ : F G T of O X -modules so that on each U X, φ is O X (U)-linear in both arguments. There may be a better way to define O X -linearity in this case, but I do not see what it is. We want to define the tensor product as the morphism F G F OX G such that for any such φ as above, there is a unique map ψ such that the diagram below commutes: F G F G φ ψ Our guess for this explicit construction is, for p X, define the stalks of the tensor sheaf to be (F G ) p = F p G p. There is absolutely no guarantee what we obtain is a sheaf, so we sheafify for good measure. We will keep the same notation. We need to show that this definition works. Since morphisms are defined on stalks, we know that there is a unique morphism of sheaves that corresponds to the stalk morphisms we propose. Therefore it satisfies the universal property we described. T 2.6 The inverse image sheaf Exercise 2.6.A. Let π : X Y be a continuous map and let G be a sheaf on Y. Then let π 1 G pre (U) = lim G (V ). V π(u) Note that π(u) is not open in general. Show that this is a presheaf, but not necessarily a sheaf, on X. We will show that we have the structure of a contravariant functor. Fortunately, the restriction maps are easy: suppose that V U X. Then clearly π(v ) π(u). Therefore if we have f π 1 G pre (U), we can represent it by an element (x, W ) for some open W π(u). 19

20 Then W π(v ) is still an open set, so in fact (x, W ) represents an element of π 1 G pre (V ). We need only figure out what element of the colimit it corresponds to, and this is the value of res U,V (f). To show it is not a sheaf in general, consider Y = {p} and X = {a, b}, where π is the constant map. Give X the discrete topology. If G is the constant sheaf S on Y, where S is some set, then since the only (nontrivial) open set in Y is Y itself, we must have π 1 G pre (U) = G (Y ) = S for any open U in X. This makes π 1 G pre the constant sheaf on X. We know from previous work that this is not a sheaf if we choose S to be a set with more than one element. Exercise 2.6.B. If π : X Y is a continuous map, and F is a sheaf on X and G is a sheaf on Y, describe a bijection Mor X (π 1 G, F ) Mor Y (G, π F ). Observe that this bijection is functorial in both F and G (i.e. natural ). Thus π 1 satisfies the universal property of the left adjoint of π. We will do this using Vakil s hint. Consider U X and V Y open, and let φ V U : G (V ) F (U) be any map. Then we call a collection φ = {φ UV : U X, V Y open} compatible if the following holds: for all open U U and V V with π(u ) V, we require the diagram G (V ) φ V U F (U) res V,V res U,U φ V U G (V ) F (U ) to commute. We let Mor Y X (G, F ) be the set of all compatible collections of maps. Vakil suggest we show that both of the above sets are equal to this one we have just created. Now, suppose we have a map φ : π 1 G F. We want to show that we can turn this map into a compatible collection. Let U X. Since π 1 G (U) is a direct limit of G (V ) for V π(u) open, we can construct a map φ V U for all of these U: each x G (V ) corresponds to some element y π 1 G (U), so let φ V U (x) = φ(u)(y). This commutes with restriction maps because we know that φ(u) does. This process clearly works backwards as well. Suppose we have a map ψ : G π F. Let V Y be open. Since π F (V ) = F (π 1 (V )), we can construct a map ψ V π 1 (V ) in the obvious way. For x G (V ), let ψ V π 1 (V )(x) = ψ(v )(x). This process is clearly reversible as well. Therefore we have shown these two sets are the same. Showing functoriality should be trivial, because we require the nice commutativity of these diagrams (which would be the only snag). Exercise 2.6.C. Show that the stalks of π 1 G are the same as the stalks of G. More precisely, if π(p) = q, describe a natural isomorphism G q = (π 1 G ) p. 20

21 Using adjointness should be the easiest way. We know that left adjoints commute with colimits, and that stalks are defined as colimits. Therefore since we have (π 1 G pre ) p = lim p U π 1 G pre (U) = lim G (V ), V π(u) π 1 G pre (U) = π 1 lim G pre (U) = π 1 (G pre ) p = (G pre ) q. p U Since presheaves and sheaves have the same stalks, this completes the proof. Exercise 2.6.D. If U is an open subset of Y, i : U Y is the inclusion, and G is a sheaf on Y, show that i 1 G is naturally isomorphic to G U. Let us look at the definition. Suppose that W is an open set in U. Then by definition, i 1 G pre (W ) = lim G (V ). V i(w ) In particular, if we look at the diagram implied by the colimit, it has a terminal object, namely W itself. Since the whole diagram must commute through the arrow W i(w ), we have that the colimit itself must be G (W ). Therefore the data of i 1 G pre is the sheaf data of every open set contained in U, which is just G U. Exercise 2.6.E. Show that π 1 is an exact functor from sheaves of abelian groups on Y to sheaves of abelian groups on X. Taking the hint, we know that we can check exactness on stalks, and by 2.6.C, we have an isomorphism of stalks under π 1. Therefore suppose we have an exact sequence 0 F G H 0 in Ab Y. Then at every point p X with π(p) = q, we have 0 F q G q H q 0 0 (π 1 F ) p (π 1 G ) p (π 1 H ) p 0 Since the top row is exact, the bottom row is also exact. Therefore π 1 is an exact functor. Exercise 2.6.F. 21

22 (a) Suppose Z Y is a closed subset, and i : Z Y is the inclusion. If F is a sheaf of sets on Z, then show that the stalk (i F ) q is a one element set if q / Z, and F q if q Z. (b) Define the support of a sheaf G of sets, denoted supp G, as the locus where the stalks are not the one-element set: supp G := {p X : G p 1}. Suppose supp G Z where Z is closed. Show that the natural map G i i 1 G is an isomorphsm. Thus a sheaf supposed on a closed subset can be considered a sheaf on that closed subset. (a) We have, for V open in Y, (i F ) q = lim q V i F (V ) = lim F (i 1 (V )). q V Since i 1 (V ) = Z V, which is open in Z, then we have two cases. If q Z, then every open set (in Z) containing q can be described as Z V for some V open in Y. Therefore we lose no data here, and we are taking the colimit over (essentially) the same diagram, whence (i F ) q = Fq. If q / Z, then V Z will be empty for sufficiently small V (because Z is a closed set). In this case, the colimit is being taken over empty sets at the end of it, whence (i F ) q must be the final object of Sets, i.e. a one-element set. (b) This is asking if the unit is a natural isomorphism. This occurs when the left adjoint is fully faithful, which is provable in an abstract categorical way. To see this: let L and R be an adjoint pair between C and D. If L is fully faithful, then we have for any A, B C, Mor C (A, B) = Mor D (L(A), L(B)) = Mor C (A, R L(B)), where the second isomorphism follows from adjunction. Since this holds for all A, B C, we must have R L naturally isomorphic to 1 C. In our case, we just need to show that i 1 is fully faithful, i.e. that the first isomorphism as above actually holds. But in this case, since supp G Z, taking i 1 does not affect the data of any important open sets; any sheaf map φ can only be defined in one way outside of supp G since the one-point set is final. Therefore i 1 is fully faithful in this case, so we have the required natural isomorphism. Exercise 2.6.G. Suppose i : U Y is the inclusion of an open set into Y. Define the extension of i by zero i! : Mod OU Mod OY as follows. Suppose F is an O U -module. For open W Y, define (i pre! F )(W ) = F (W ) if W U and 0 otherwise. This is clearly a presheaf O Y -module. Define i! as (i pre! ) sh. Note that i! F is an O Y -module, and that this defines a functor. 22

23 (a) Show that i pre! F need not be a sheaf. (b) For q Y, show that (i! F ) q = F q if q U and 0 otherwise. (c) Show that i! is an exact functor. (d) If G is an O Y -module, describe an inclusion i! i 1 G G. (e) Show that (i!, i 1 ) is an adjoint pair, so there is a natural bijection for any O U -module F and O Y -module G. Hom OY (i! F, G ) Hom OU (F, G U ) Even though Vakil says we shouldn t do this question right now, it s worth a shot. (a) The recommendation here is to try the sheaf of continuous functions on R to find a counterexample. Let F be this sheaf. Let U be the disjoint union (0, 1) (2, 3). Then i pre! F (1, 2) = 0. However, we can find continuous functions on (0, 1) and (2, 3) that cannot be glued together, since the restriction of the gluing on (1, 2) must be 0, which is not necessarily true. Concretely, the constant function 1 on (0, 1) and (2, 3) cannot be glued (continuously) to be 0 on (1, 2). (b) If we don t need this point to prove (e), then it follows because left adjoints commute with colimits. As it stands, however, I think we should prove this directly. Recalling that the stalks of a presheaf and its sheafification are isomorphic, (i pre! F ) q = lim q V i pre! F (V ). If q U, then eventually all open V with q V are also contained in U, so that i pre! F (V ) = F (V ). Then it is clear that (i pre! F ) q = Fq. If q / U, then sufficiently many V with q V yields i pre! F (V ) = 0 to force F q = 0. (c) (b) shows that i! is exact since it is easily seen to be exact on the level of stalks. If q U, then it follows from the reasoning of 2.6.E. If q / U, then the sequence on stalks is identically zero, which is trivially exact. (d) We can try to define this on the level of open sets. Let W Y be open. We have { i! i 1 G U (W ) W U G (W ) = i! G U (W ) = 0 else The inclusion G U (W ) G (W ) or 0 G (W ) is perfectly well defined. 23

24 (e) We will establish this bijection as best we can. Suppose that φ : i! F G is an O Y -module homomorphism. Suppose that we have W U open. Then we have a map φ(w ) : i! F (W ) = F (W ) G (W ). Since W U, we have G U (W ) = G (W ), so φ(w ) is a perfectly well defined map on F (W ) G U (W ) as well. If W is not contained in U, then i! F (W ) = 0. Therefore φ(w ) must be the (initial) zero map. But fortunately, this makes G U (W ) = 0 too, so φ(w ) : F (W ) G U (W ) is the (final) zero map. Therefore we have an inclusion of Hom OY (i! F, G ) Hom OU (F, G U ). The reverse inclusion follows identically. That we have a bijection follows easily as well: the pairs i! F and F and G and G U have the same stalks at the applicable open sets, so we can check to see if we get the same map back by checking stalks. 2.7 Recovering sheaves from a sheaf on a base Exercise 2.7.A. How can you recover a sheaf F from the partial information on some base {B i } of the topology on X? We know how to recover the stalks now. The stalk F p is obtained by taking the colimit over all open sets containing p. But we know for every arbitrary open U containing p, there is a base element B so that p B U. Put another way, a germ over p can be represented by some (f, U), but it can also be represented as (g, B) where B is a base element. This is enough information to give us the data of the stalks. We can reconstruct compatible germs by gluing the stalks back together for each open U X and, if U = i IB i, using the known data of F (B i ). This is probably precise enough. Exercise 2.7.B. Verify that F (B) F (B) is an isomorphism, likely by showing that it is injective and surjective. We have defined F to be a sheaf (of sets) on the base {B i }. To write back down the formal definition of F : F (U) := {(f p F p ) p U : p U, B with p B U, s F (B), with s q = f q q B}. It is the set of all compatible germs where we make sure that the open subset of U we pick is in the base. That sentence alone pretty much proves what we d like. Let us look at the natural map F (B) F (B). Let us first show it is surjective. Given some set (f p ) of the above form, we may examine the elements (s q ) guaranteed by the definition. This is an element of F (B ) for some B B. As such, there is an element of F (B) which restricts down to (s q ), and this would then be a preimage of (f p ). 24

25 Injectivity is also clear: if we have (g p ) and (h p ) mapping to the same (f p ) F (B), then we know that (g p ) and (h p ) must agree on all subbase elements of F (B), which (by identity) would make them the same element. This gives us the required isomorphism. Exercise 2.7.C. Suppose {B i } is a base for the topology of X. A morphism F G of sheaves on the base is a collection of maps F (B k ) G(B k ) such that the diagram commutes for all B j B i. F (B i ) G(B i ) res Bi,B j res Bi,B j F (B j ) G(B j ) (a) Verify that a morphism of sheaves is determined by the induced morphism of sheaves on the base. (b) Show that a morphism of sheaves on the base gives a morphism of the induced sheaves. We may now assume Theorem 2.7.1, which is very good. I think we can be very clever about this. We know that Hom (F, G ) is itself a sheaf on X, and so it is uniquely determined by its data on a base, i.e. the restriction maps and the data of Hom (F, G )(B) = Hom(F (B), G (B)) = Hom(F (B), G(B)), where the last isomorphism comes from 2.7.B. Therefore it seems that this proves (a) and (b) simultaneously. This might be a little too clever, and in particular incorrect. Exercise 2.7.D. Suppose X = U i is an open cover of X, and we have sheaves F i on U i along with isomorphisms φ ij : F i Ui U j F j Ui U j that agree on triple overlaps, i.e. φ jk φ ij = φ ik on U i U j U k. Show that these sheaves can be glued together into a sheaf F on X (unique up to unique isomorphism) such that F i = F Ui, and the isomorphisms over U i U j are the obvious ones. We know that each F i (for i I) is determined by its information on a base {Bj} i for j J i some index set. Then we claim that B = Bj i i I j J i is a base for X. Indeed, let V X be open. Then we can write V = V i, where V i = U i V is open. In turn, each V i = Bk i since each of those sets are a base for U i. Therefore we have V = Bk, i i I k J i 25

26 so we indeed have a base for X. The conditions above guarantee that we can come up with a well defined sheaf F on the base B. To be more explicit, we gluability and identity hold because they hold on each U i and they agree on double and triple intersections. Therefore we have a sheaf F on X from F on B. Everything else, including unique up to unique isomorphism, follows from the theorem. Exercise 2.7.E. Suppose a morphism of sheaves F G on a base B i is surjective for all B i. Show that the corresponding morphism of sheaves is surjective (or more precisely, an epimorphism). The converse is not true, unlike the case for injectivity. Suppose we had some φ(u) : F (U) G (U) which was not surjective. Let q G (U) be an element not in the image of φ(u). Then q G (B) for some basis element B. As such q is in the image of φ(b). This is a flagrant contradiction. 3 Toward affine schemes: the underlying set, and topological space 3.1 Toward schemes Exercise 3.1.A. Suppose that π : X Y is a continuous map of differentiable manifolds (as topological spaces). Show that π is differentiable if differentiable functions pull back to differentiable functions, i.e. if pullback by π gives a map O Y π O X. Since we are working with differentiable manifolds, let V be an open subset of Y diffeomorphic to R n (for whatever appropriate n). Then we shall construct the map π : O Y π O X on V, using the terminology from First, what is π O X (V )? It is precisely O X (π 1 (V )), π 1 (V ) being (for a properly chosen V ) a chart on X. Therefore what is the map π? Given a function f O Y, we should have π (f) = f π. If this map is differentiable, then we know by the chain rule that π itself must be differentiable, as (f π) (x) = f (π(x)) π (x). In particular, we can extract π (x) using only the data from the derivatives of f and f π that we are guaranteed exist. Since we have shown what we must on a base of the topology for Y, we are done because now we need only glue everything together. Exercise 3.1.B. Show that a morphism of differentiable manifolds π : X Y with π(p) = q induces a morphism of stalks π : O Y,q O X,p. Show that π (m Y,q ) m X,p. 26

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 5

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 5 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. The inverse image sheaf 1 2. Recovering sheaves from a sheaf on a base 3 3. Toward schemes 5 4. The underlying set of affine schemes 6 Last

### which is a group homomorphism, such that if W V U, then

4. Sheaves Definition 4.1. Let X be a topological space. A presheaf of groups F on X is a a function which assigns to every open set U X a group F(U) and to every inclusion V U a restriction map, ρ UV

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 3

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 3 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Kernels, cokernels, and exact sequences: A brief introduction to abelian categories 1 2. Sheaves 7 3. Motivating example: The sheaf of differentiable

### Elementary (ha-ha) Aspects of Topos Theory

Elementary (ha-ha) Aspects of Topos Theory Matt Booth June 3, 2016 Contents 1 Sheaves on topological spaces 1 1.1 Presheaves on spaces......................... 1 1.2 Digression on pointless topology..................

### LECTURE 1: SOME GENERALITIES; 1 DIMENSIONAL EXAMPLES

LECTURE 1: SOME GENERALITIES; 1 DIMENSIONAL EAMPLES VIVEK SHENDE Historically, sheaves come from topology and analysis; subsequently they have played a fundamental role in algebraic geometry and certain

### SOME OPERATIONS ON SHEAVES

SOME OPERATIONS ON SHEAVES R. VIRK Contents 1. Pushforward 1 2. Pullback 3 3. The adjunction (f 1, f ) 4 4. Support of a sheaf 5 5. Extension by zero 5 6. The adjunction (j!, j ) 6 7. Sections with support

### ABSTRACT DIFFERENTIAL GEOMETRY VIA SHEAF THEORY

ABSTRACT DIFFERENTIAL GEOMETRY VIA SHEAF THEORY ARDA H. DEMIRHAN Abstract. We examine the conditions for uniqueness of differentials in the abstract setting of differential geometry. Then we ll come up

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 24

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 24 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Vector bundles and locally free sheaves 1 2. Toward quasicoherent sheaves: the distinguished affine base 5 Quasicoherent and coherent sheaves

### Modules over a Ringed Space

Modules over a Ringed Space Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 In these notes we collect some useful facts about sheaves of modules on a ringed space that are either left as exercises in [Har77] or omitted

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Some constructions using universal properties, old and new 1 2. Adjoint functors 3 3. Sheaves 6 Last day: What is algebraic geometry? Crash

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Where we were 1 2. Yoneda s lemma 2 3. Limits and colimits 6 4. Adjoints 8 First, some bureaucratic details. We will move to 380-F for Monday

### 3. The Sheaf of Regular Functions

24 Andreas Gathmann 3. The Sheaf of Regular Functions After having defined affine varieties, our next goal must be to say what kind of maps between them we want to consider as morphisms, i. e. as nice

### Solutions to some of the exercises from Tennison s Sheaf Theory

Solutions to some of the exercises from Tennison s Sheaf Theory Pieter Belmans June 19, 2011 Contents 1 Exercises at the end of Chapter 1 1 2 Exercises in Chapter 2 6 3 Exercises at the end of Chapter

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 25

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 25 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Quasicoherent sheaves 1 2. Quasicoherent sheaves form an abelian category 5 We began by recalling the distinguished affine base. Definition.

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY PROBLEM SET 1

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY PROBLEM SET 1 RAVI VAKIL This set is due at noon on Friday October 5. You can hand it in to Jarod Alper (jarod@math.stanford.edu) in the big yellow envelope outside his

### Algebraic Geometry

MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry

### Lecture 9: Sheaves. February 11, 2018

Lecture 9: Sheaves February 11, 2018 Recall that a category X is a topos if there exists an equivalence X Shv(C), where C is a small category (which can be assumed to admit finite limits) equipped with

### ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 9: SCHEMES AND THEIR MODULES.

ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY COURSE NOTES, LECTURE 9: SCHEMES AND THEIR MODULES. ANDREW SALCH 1. Affine schemes. About notation: I am in the habit of writing f (U) instead of f 1 (U) for the preimage of a subset

### Modules over a Scheme

Modules over a Scheme Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 In these notes we collect various facts about quasi-coherent sheaves on a scheme. Nearly all of the material is trivial or can be found in [Gro60]. These

### HARTSHORNE EXERCISES

HARTSHORNE EXERCISES J. WARNER Hartshorne, Exercise I.5.6. Blowing Up Curve Singularities (a) Let Y be the cusp x 3 = y 2 + x 4 + y 4 or the node xy = x 6 + y 6. Show that the curve Ỹ obtained by blowing

### FORMAL GLUEING OF MODULE CATEGORIES

FORMAL GLUEING OF MODULE CATEGORIES BHARGAV BHATT Fix a noetherian scheme X, and a closed subscheme Z with complement U. Our goal is to explain a result of Artin that describes how coherent sheaves on

### A CATEGORICAL INTRODUCTION TO SHEAVES

A CATEGORICAL INTRODUCTION TO SHEAVES DAPING WENG Abstract. Sheaf is a very useful notion when defining and computing many different cohomology theories over topological spaces. There are several ways

### Direct Limits. Mathematics 683, Fall 2013

Direct Limits Mathematics 683, Fall 2013 In this note we define direct limits and prove their basic properties. This notion is important in various places in algebra. In particular, in algebraic geometry

### PERVERSE SHEAVES. Contents

PERVERSE SHEAVES SIDDHARTH VENKATESH Abstract. These are notes for a talk given in the MIT Graduate Seminar on D-modules and Perverse Sheaves in Fall 2015. In this talk, I define perverse sheaves on a

### 1 Replete topoi. X = Shv proét (X) X is locally weakly contractible (next lecture) X is replete. D(X ) is left complete. K D(X ) we have R lim

Reference: [BS] Bhatt, Scholze, The pro-étale topology for schemes In this lecture we consider replete topoi This is a nice class of topoi that include the pro-étale topos, and whose derived categories

### CHAPTER 1. AFFINE ALGEBRAIC VARIETIES

CHAPTER 1. AFFINE ALGEBRAIC VARIETIES During this first part of the course, we will establish a correspondence between various geometric notions and algebraic ones. Some references for this part of the

### Formal power series rings, inverse limits, and I-adic completions of rings

Formal power series rings, inverse limits, and I-adic completions of rings Formal semigroup rings and formal power series rings We next want to explore the notion of a (formal) power series ring in finitely

### Algebraic v.s. Analytic Point of View

Algebraic v.s. Analytic Point of View Ziwen Zhu September 19, 2015 In this talk, we will compare 3 different yet similar objects of interest in algebraic and complex geometry, namely algebraic variety,

### Locally G-ringed spaces and rigid spaces

18.727, Topics in Algebraic Geometry (rigid analytic geometry) Kiran S. Kedlaya, fall 2004 Rigid analytic spaces (at last!) We are now ready to talk about rigid analytic spaces in earnest. I ll give the

### 3. Categories and Functors We recall the definition of a category: Definition 3.1. A category C is the data of two collections. The first collection

3. Categories and Functors We recall the definition of a category: Definition 3.1. A category C is the data of two collections. The first collection is called the objects of C and is denoted Obj(C). Given

### Equivalence Relations

Equivalence Relations Definition 1. Let X be a non-empty set. A subset E X X is called an equivalence relation on X if it satisfies the following three properties: 1. Reflexive: For all x X, (x, x) E.

### Lecture 2 Sheaves and Functors

Lecture 2 Sheaves and Functors In this lecture we will introduce the basic concept of sheaf and we also will recall some of category theory. 1 Sheaves and locally ringed spaces The definition of sheaf

### Sheaves. S. Encinas. January 22, 2005 U V. F(U) F(V ) s s V. = s j Ui Uj there exists a unique section s F(U) such that s Ui = s i.

Sheaves. S. Encinas January 22, 2005 Definition 1. Let X be a topological space. A presheaf over X is a functor F : Op(X) op Sets, such that F( ) = { }. Where Sets is the category of sets, { } denotes

### Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009

MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry

### C -Algebraic Geometry

C -Algebraic Geometry Elana Kalashnikov Linacre College University of Oxford A thesis submitted for the degree of MSc in Mathematics and the Foundations of Computer Science Sept 1, 2014 Acknowledgements

### Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009

MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 18

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 18 CONTENTS 1. Invertible sheaves and divisors 1 2. Morphisms of schemes 6 3. Ringed spaces and their morphisms 6 4. Definition of morphisms of schemes 7 Last day:

### Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009

MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry

### AFFINE PUSHFORWARD AND SMOOTH PULLBACK FOR PERVERSE SHEAVES

AFFINE PUSHFORWARD AND SMOOTH PULLBACK FOR PERVERSE SHEAVES YEHAO ZHOU Conventions In this lecture note, a variety means a separated algebraic variety over complex numbers, and sheaves are C-linear. 1.

### CATEGORY THEORY. Cats have been around for 70 years. Eilenberg + Mac Lane =. Cats are about building bridges between different parts of maths.

CATEGORY THEORY PROFESSOR PETER JOHNSTONE Cats have been around for 70 years. Eilenberg + Mac Lane =. Cats are about building bridges between different parts of maths. Definition 1.1. A category C consists

### Representable presheaves

Representable presheaves March 15, 2017 A presheaf on a category C is a contravariant functor F on C. In particular, for any object X Ob(C) we have the presheaf (of sets) represented by X, that is Hom

### DESCENT THEORY (JOE RABINOFF S EXPOSITION)

DESCENT THEORY (JOE RABINOFF S EXPOSITION) RAVI VAKIL 1. FEBRUARY 21 Background: EGA IV.2. Descent theory = notions that are local in the fpqc topology. (Remark: we aren t assuming finite presentation,

### i = f iα : φ i (U i ) ψ α (V α ) which satisfy 1 ) Df iα = Df jβ D(φ j φ 1 i ). (39)

2.3 The derivative A description of the tangent bundle is not complete without defining the derivative of a general smooth map of manifolds f : M N. Such a map may be defined locally in charts (U i, φ

### h M (T ). The natural isomorphism η : M h M determines an element U = η 1

MODULI PROBLEMS AND GEOMETRIC INVARIANT THEORY 7 2.3. Fine moduli spaces. The ideal situation is when there is a scheme that represents our given moduli functor. Definition 2.15. Let M : Sch Set be a moduli

### ALGEBRAIC K-THEORY HANDOUT 5: K 0 OF SCHEMES, THE LOCALIZATION SEQUENCE FOR G 0.

ALGEBRAIC K-THEORY HANDOUT 5: K 0 OF SCHEMES, THE LOCALIZATION SEQUENCE FOR G 0. ANDREW SALCH During the last lecture, we found that it is natural (even just for doing undergraduatelevel complex analysis!)

### Lecture 9 - Faithfully Flat Descent

Lecture 9 - Faithfully Flat Descent October 15, 2014 1 Descent of morphisms In this lecture we study the concept of faithfully flat descent, which is the notion that to obtain an object on a scheme X,

### Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009

MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry

### Geometry 9: Serre-Swan theorem

Geometry 9: Serre-Swan theorem Rules: You may choose to solve only hard exercises (marked with!, * and **) or ordinary ones (marked with! or unmarked), or both, if you want to have extra problems. To have

### Geometry 2: Manifolds and sheaves

Rules:Exam problems would be similar to ones marked with! sign. It is recommended to solve all unmarked and!-problems or to find the solution online. It s better to do it in order starting from the beginning,

### 14 Lecture 14: Basic generallities on adic spaces

14 Lecture 14: Basic generallities on adic spaces 14.1 Introduction The aim of this lecture and the next two is to address general adic spaces and their connection to rigid geometry. 14.2 Two open questions

### AN INTRODUCTION TO AFFINE SCHEMES

AN INTRODUCTION TO AFFINE SCHEMES BROOKE ULLERY Abstract. This paper gives a basic introduction to modern algebraic geometry. The goal of this paper is to present the basic concepts of algebraic geometry,

### EXAMPLES AND EXERCISES IN BASIC CATEGORY THEORY

EXAMPLES AND EXERCISES IN BASIC CATEGORY THEORY 1. Categories 1.1. Generalities. I ve tried to be as consistent as possible. In particular, throughout the text below, categories will be denoted by capital

### 121B: ALGEBRAIC TOPOLOGY. Contents. 6. Poincaré Duality

121B: ALGEBRAIC TOPOLOGY Contents 6. Poincaré Duality 1 6.1. Manifolds 2 6.2. Orientation 3 6.3. Orientation sheaf 9 6.4. Cap product 11 6.5. Proof for good coverings 15 6.6. Direct limit 18 6.7. Proof

### 1 Differentiable manifolds and smooth maps

1 Differentiable manifolds and smooth maps Last updated: April 14, 2011. 1.1 Examples and definitions Roughly, manifolds are sets where one can introduce coordinates. An n-dimensional manifold is a set

### Exercises on chapter 0

Exercises on chapter 0 1. A partially ordered set (poset) is a set X together with a relation such that (a) x x for all x X; (b) x y and y x implies that x = y for all x, y X; (c) x y and y z implies that

### 0.1 Spec of a monoid

These notes were prepared to accompany the first lecture in a seminar on logarithmic geometry. As we shall see in later lectures, logarithmic geometry offers a natural approach to study semistable schemes.

### A Grothendieck site is a small category C equipped with a Grothendieck topology T. A Grothendieck topology T consists of a collection of subfunctors

Contents 5 Grothendieck topologies 1 6 Exactness properties 10 7 Geometric morphisms 17 8 Points and Boolean localization 22 5 Grothendieck topologies A Grothendieck site is a small category C equipped

### Scheme theoretic vector bundles

Scheme theoretic vector bundles The best reference for this material is the first chapter of [Gro61]. What can be found below is a less complete treatment of the same material. 1. Introduction Let s start

### where Σ is a finite discrete Gal(K sep /K)-set unramified along U and F s is a finite Gal(k(s) sep /k(s))-subset

Classification of quasi-finite étale separated schemes As we saw in lecture, Zariski s Main Theorem provides a very visual picture of quasi-finite étale separated schemes X over a henselian local ring

### ALGEBRAIC GROUPS. Disclaimer: There are millions of errors in these notes!

ALGEBRAIC GROUPS Disclaimer: There are millions of errors in these notes! 1. Some algebraic geometry The subject of algebraic groups depends on the interaction between algebraic geometry and group theory.

### Category Theory. Categories. Definition.

Category Theory Category theory is a general mathematical theory of structures, systems of structures and relationships between systems of structures. It provides a unifying and economic mathematical modeling

### Chapter 1 Sheaf theory

This version: 28/02/2014 Chapter 1 Sheaf theory The theory of sheaves has come to play a central rôle in the theories of several complex variables and holomorphic differential geometry. The theory is also

### TCC Homological Algebra: Assignment #3 (Solutions)

TCC Homological Algebra: Assignment #3 (Solutions) David Loeffler, d.a.loeffler@warwick.ac.uk 30th November 2016 This is the third of 4 problem sheets. Solutions should be submitted to me (via any appropriate

### Exercises of the Algebraic Geometry course held by Prof. Ugo Bruzzo. Alex Massarenti

Exercises of the Algebraic Geometry course held by Prof. Ugo Bruzzo Alex Massarenti SISSA, VIA BONOMEA 265, 34136 TRIESTE, ITALY E-mail address: alex.massarenti@sissa.it These notes collect a series of

### SMA. Grothendieck topologies and schemes

SMA Grothendieck topologies and schemes Rafael GUGLIELMETTI Semester project Supervised by Prof. Eva BAYER FLUCKIGER Assistant: Valéry MAHÉ April 27, 2012 2 CONTENTS 3 Contents 1 Prerequisites 5 1.1 Fibred

### Lecture 6: Etale Fundamental Group

Lecture 6: Etale Fundamental Group October 5, 2014 1 Review of the topological fundamental group and covering spaces 1.1 Topological fundamental group Suppose X is a path-connected topological space, and

### Relative Affine Schemes

Relative Affine Schemes Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 The fundamental Spec( ) construction associates an affine scheme to any ring. In this note we study the relative version of this construction, which

### 1. Introduction. Let C be a Waldhausen category (the precise definition

K-THEORY OF WLDHUSEN CTEGORY S SYMMETRIC SPECTRUM MITY BOYRCHENKO bstract. If C is a Waldhausen category (i.e., a category with cofibrations and weak equivalences ), it is known that one can define its

### Math 762 Spring h Y (Z 1 ) (1) h X (Z 2 ) h X (Z 1 ) Φ Z 1. h Y (Z 2 )

Math 762 Spring 2016 Homework 3 Drew Armstrong Problem 1. Yoneda s Lemma. We have seen that the bifunctor Hom C (, ) : C C Set is analogous to a bilinear form on a K-vector space, : V V K. Recall that

### Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 2013 Lecture #18 11/07/2013

18.782 Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 2013 Lecture #18 11/07/2013 As usual, all the rings we consider are commutative rings with an identity element. 18.1 Regular local rings Consider a local

### CHAPTER 1. Étale cohomology

CHAPTER 1 Étale cohomology This chapter summarizes the theory of the étale topology on schemes, culminating in the results on l-adic cohomology that are needed in the construction of Galois representations

### Categories and functors

Lecture 1 Categories and functors Definition 1.1 A category A consists of a collection ob(a) (whose elements are called the objects of A) for each A, B ob(a), a collection A(A, B) (whose elements are called

### An Introduction to Spectral Sequences

An Introduction to Spectral Sequences Matt Booth December 4, 2016 This is the second half of a joint talk with Tim Weelinck. Tim introduced the concept of spectral sequences, and did some informal computations,

### Schemes via Noncommutative Localisation

Schemes via Noncommutative Localisation Daniel Murfet September 18, 2005 In this note we give an exposition of the well-known results of Gabriel, which show how to define affine schemes in terms of the

### TOPICS IN ALGEBRA COURSE NOTES AUTUMN Contents. Preface Notations and Conventions

TOPICS IN ALGEBRA COURSE NOTES AUTUMN 2003 ROBERT E. KOTTWITZ WRITTEN UP BY BRIAN D. SMITHLING Preface Notations and Conventions Contents ii ii 1. Grothendieck Topologies and Sheaves 1 1.1. A Motivating

### Section Higher Direct Images of Sheaves

Section 3.8 - Higher Direct Images of Sheaves Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 In this note we study the higher direct image functors R i f ( ) and the higher coinverse image functors R i f! ( ) which will

### FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 37

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 37 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Motivation and game plan 1 2. The affine case: three definitions 2 Welcome back to the third quarter! The theme for this quarter, insofar

### LOCAL VS GLOBAL DEFINITION OF THE FUSION TENSOR PRODUCT

LOCAL VS GLOBAL DEFINITION OF THE FUSION TENSOR PRODUCT DENNIS GAITSGORY 1. Statement of the problem Throughout the talk, by a chiral module we shall understand a chiral D-module, unless explicitly stated

### SUMMER COURSE IN MOTIVIC HOMOTOPY THEORY

SUMMER COURSE IN MOTIVIC HOMOTOPY THEORY MARC LEVINE Contents 0. Introduction 1 1. The category of schemes 2 1.1. The spectrum of a commutative ring 2 1.2. Ringed spaces 5 1.3. Schemes 10 1.4. Schemes

### 8 Perverse Sheaves. 8.1 Theory of perverse sheaves

8 Perverse Sheaves In this chapter we will give a self-contained account of the theory of perverse sheaves and intersection cohomology groups assuming the basic notions concerning constructible sheaves

### What are stacks and why should you care?

What are stacks and why should you care? Milan Lopuhaä October 12, 2017 Todays goal is twofold: I want to tell you why you would want to study stacks in the first place, and I want to define what a stack

### MATH 101B: ALGEBRA II PART A: HOMOLOGICAL ALGEBRA 23

MATH 101B: ALGEBRA II PART A: HOMOLOGICAL ALGEBRA 23 6.4. Homotopy uniqueness of projective resolutions. Here I proved that the projective resolution of any R-module (or any object of an abelian category

### GALOIS CATEGORIES MELISSA LYNN

GALOIS CATEGORIES MELISSA LYNN Abstract. In abstract algebra, we considered finite Galois extensions of fields with their Galois groups. Here, we noticed a correspondence between the intermediate fields

### Algebra Qualifying Exam Solutions January 18, 2008 Nick Gurski 0 A B C 0

1. Show that if B, C are flat and Algebra Qualifying Exam Solutions January 18, 2008 Nick Gurski 0 A B C 0 is exact, then A is flat as well. Show that the same holds for projectivity, but not for injectivity.

### LECTURE 3: RELATIVE SINGULAR HOMOLOGY

LECTURE 3: RELATIVE SINGULAR HOMOLOGY In this lecture we want to cover some basic concepts from homological algebra. These prove to be very helpful in our discussion of singular homology. The following

### PARABOLIC SHEAVES ON LOGARITHMIC SCHEMES

PARABOLIC SHEAVES ON LOGARITHMIC SCHEMES Angelo Vistoli Scuola Normale Superiore Bordeaux, June 23, 2010 Joint work with Niels Borne Université de Lille 1 Let X be an algebraic variety over C, x 0 X. What

### Math 797W Homework 4

Math 797W Homework 4 Paul Hacking December 5, 2016 We work over an algebraically closed field k. (1) Let F be a sheaf of abelian groups on a topological space X, and p X a point. Recall the definition

### NONSINGULAR CURVES BRIAN OSSERMAN

NONSINGULAR CURVES BRIAN OSSERMAN The primary goal of this note is to prove that every abstract nonsingular curve can be realized as an open subset of a (unique) nonsingular projective curve. Note that

### Math 210B. Profinite group cohomology

Math 210B. Profinite group cohomology 1. Motivation Let {Γ i } be an inverse system of finite groups with surjective transition maps, and define Γ = Γ i equipped with its inverse it topology (i.e., the

### EXT, TOR AND THE UCT

EXT, TOR AND THE UCT CHRIS KOTTKE Contents 1. Left/right exact functors 1 2. Projective resolutions 2 3. Two useful lemmas 3 4. Ext 6 5. Ext as a covariant derived functor 8 6. Universal Coefficient Theorem

### 8 Complete fields and valuation rings

18.785 Number theory I Fall 2017 Lecture #8 10/02/2017 8 Complete fields and valuation rings In order to make further progress in our investigation of finite extensions L/K of the fraction field K of a

### RIEMANN S INEQUALITY AND RIEMANN-ROCH

RIEMANN S INEQUALITY AND RIEMANN-ROCH DONU ARAPURA Fix a compact connected Riemann surface X of genus g. Riemann s inequality gives a sufficient condition to construct meromorphic functions with prescribed

The Adjoint Functor Theorem. Kevin Buzzard February 7, 2012 Last modified 17/06/2002. 1 Introduction. The existence of free groups is immediate from the Adjoint Functor Theorem. Whilst I ve long believed

### 1 Categorical Background

1 Categorical Background 1.1 Categories and Functors Definition 1.1.1 A category C is given by a class of objects, often denoted by ob C, and for any two objects A, B of C a proper set of morphisms C(A,

### PMATH 950 (Riemann Surfaces) Notes

PMATH 950 (Riemann Surfaces) Notes Patrick Naylor February 28, 2018 These are notes for PMATH 950, taught by Ruxandra Moraru in the Winter 2018 term at the University of Waterloo. These notes are not guaranteed

### PART II.1. IND-COHERENT SHEAVES ON SCHEMES

PART II.1. IND-COHERENT SHEAVES ON SCHEMES Contents Introduction 1 1. Ind-coherent sheaves on a scheme 2 1.1. Definition of the category 2 1.2. t-structure 3 2. The direct image functor 4 2.1. Direct image

### DERIVED CATEGORIES OF STACKS. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Conventions, notation, and abuse of language The lisse-étale and the flat-fppf sites

DERIVED CATEGORIES OF STACKS Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Conventions, notation, and abuse of language 1 3. The lisse-étale and the flat-fppf sites 1 4. Derived categories of quasi-coherent modules 5

### Math 396. Quotient spaces

Math 396. Quotient spaces. Definition Let F be a field, V a vector space over F and W V a subspace of V. For v, v V, we say that v v mod W if and only if v v W. One can readily verify that with this definition