LIMITS OF CATEGORIES, AND SHEAVES ON IND-SCHEMES
|
|
- June Cameron
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 LIMITS OF CATEGORIES, AND SHEAVES ON IND-SCHEMES JONATHAN BARLEV 1. Inverse limits of categories This notes aim to describe the categorical framework for discussing quasi coherent sheaves and D-modules on certain ind-schemes such as GR G,G(O) and G (K). Our discussion is somewhat more general than in [1], where only ind-schemes of ind-finite type are discussed (hence G(O) and G(K) are excluded) The Data. Throughout these notes, all categories are assumed to Abelian, and possess all direct limits (equivalently arbitrary direct sums). All functors are assumed to commute with direct filtered limits. The datum we shall deal with is that of {C i } i I afiltered,orderedsystemof categories, where for every i<jwe have a pair of adjoint functors (f ji,g ij ) f ji C i C j g ij together with a co-cycle of natural isomorphisms for the compositions of g s: g jk g jk C i g ij C j = g jk C k in turn, via the adjunctions, these give rise to uniquely determined natural transformations for the composition of the f s. In light of the following examples we shall think of the f s as going up, and the g s as going down. Example 1.1. Date: April15,
2 LIMITS OF CATEGORIES, AND SHEAVES ON IND-SCHEMES 2 Let Y =lim Y i apresentationofareasonablestrictind-schemeoverc. I.e. Y i s ι ji are schemes, Y i Y j are closed embeddings, and the ideal of Y i in Y j is finitely generated (this is needed to ensure that!-pullback exists). (1) C i = Qco (Y i ) and f ji=ι ji Qco (Y i ) g ij =ι! ij Qco (Y j ) Actually even better, just think of an ind-affine scheme, i.e. let A be an abelian, complete, separated topological ring whose toplogy is generated by a filtered system of open ideals {I i },s.t. I i + I j is finitely generated over I i I j (In the affine case this assumption can be relaxed); then C i = A/I i mod. (2) C i = D mod(y i ),samemapsasabove Inverse limits. To the data {C i,g ji,f ij } one might try to associate four limits; either inverse or inductive and with respect to either f s or g s. Our object of interest is C := lim g ji C i,thisbeastisdefinedbythesameuniversal property that always characterizes inverse limits, this time in the 2-category of categories. It is a category whose objects consist of sequences of strictly 1 g ji - compatible objects, i.e. a sequence x i C i,andisomorphismsx i = g ij (x j ). Morphisms are sequences of morphisms {x i x i } i I which are compatible in the sense that following squares commute x i g ji (x j ) x i g ji (x j ) Alternatively, think of I as an index category, and think of C i as a fibered category over I. Then lim g ji C i is it s category of g ji -cartesian sections (cf. the definition of quasi coherent sheaves on algebraic stacks). g i C admits component maps C i C (for x =(xi ) C, g i (x) =x i ). These are appropriately compatible with g ji s, i.e. have natural isomorphisms 1 In contrast with lax sequences, where the maps are not required to be isomorphisms.
3 LIMITS OF CATEGORIES, AND SHEAVES ON IND-SCHEMES 3 C i g i g ij C C j g j Example 1.2. In example 1 objects of this inverse limit are often called!-sheaves. When Y = spfa, thisinverselimitisnomorethanthecategoryofcontinuous A-mod s, which are topologically discrete. Remark 1.3. C is an abelian category, and contains all filtered direct limits. In particular, kernels and filtered direct limits are taken termwise, but co-kernels require some more tampering, this is done in Mapping out of C 2. The description above makes mapping out of C easy (as is always the case for inverse limits). Note that so far we have made no use of the f s, the role they play is to allow a description of functors out ofc. Proposition 1.4. The functors g i admit left adjoints f i f i C i C g i Proof. Fix ( i I, inordertodefinef ) i we must define a g ji compatible family of (f i) j functors C i Cj (f i s components). Indeed, given an object x C i let (f i (x)) j =lim k>i,jg jk f ki (x) This is directed by the morphisms, for every k >k, g jk f ki (x) adjunction g jk g kk f k i(x) =g jk f k i(x) It is routine to check that objects are g ji compatible. Defining f i on morphisms is straightforward as well. 2 This subsection is not used until deinition 2.8.
4 LIMITS OF CATEGORIES, AND SHEAVES ON IND-SCHEMES 4 Let us show that (f i,g i ) are adjoint. Hom C (f i (x i ), (y j )) = ( ) = limj>ihom Cj lim k>j g jk f ki (x i ),y j = lim j>ilim k>jhom Cj (g jk f ki (x i ),g jk (y k )) = limk>ilim k>j>ihom Cj (g jk f ki (x i ),g jk (y k )) = limk>ihom Cj (f ki (x i ),y k ) = Hom Ci (x i,y i ) The 4th equality follows from the fact that the Hom-sets in question form a double directed system with respect to j and k. Remark 1.5. The f i s are f ij compatible, i.e. there exist natural isomorphisms C i C j f i f ji Construction 1.6. We may use 1.4 to construct objects of C as follows. Given the data of c i C i and a compatible family of morphisms 3 f ji (c i ) c j (equivalently, acompatiblefamilyc i g ij (c j )), the (f i,g i )-adjunction makes f i (c i ) adirected system of objects in C, towhichweassociatetheobjectlim f i (c i ). For instance, this is the method to construct co-kernel in C from the termwise co-kernels (which are a g-lax, but not strict, sequence). Remark 1.7. If it happens that f ij g ji = 1Ci (equivalently f ij is fully faithfull), as is the case in both the examples in 1.1, then f j : C i C simply amounts to taking an object of C j f*#@-ing it up along all i>jand g ing down along all i<j(cf. exercise 1.2). Proposition 1.8. For any category D (satisfying our assumptions) the datum of afunctorφ:c D is equivalent to that of a collection of functors and a co-cycle of natural isomorphisms C f j C i C j φ i f ji D φ j 3 i.e. a lax f-sequence
5 LIMITS OF CATEGORIES, AND SHEAVES ON IND-SCHEMES 5 That is lim g ji C i = C =lim f ij C i 4. Proof. Given Φ, defineφ i =Φ f i,theadjunctionisusedtoshownf ij -compatibility. Conversely, assume we are given the datum of the φ i s and natural isomorphisms. Note that for every x =(x i ) C we get a directed system of objects in D by φ i (x i ) = φ j f ji (x i ) φ j (x j ) (the last map is given by the adjunction of (f ij,g ji )). Define Φ(x) =lim φ j (x j ) on objects, and termwise on morphisms. To complete the claim it remains to present an isomorphisms of functors Φ = lim iφ f i g i and φ i = lim jφ j g j f i Unraveling (and remembering all functors commute with direct limits) Both of these reduce to the existence of 1 C = lim if i g i We leave this as an exercise in unraveling the definitions and commuting limits. Remark 1.9. If one is only interested the construction of a functor Φ:C D, one can relax the requirement in 1.8, that the transformations be isomorphisms,and allow any co-cycle of natural transformations. The same construction is used. Of course, distinct data may now give rise to equivalent functors Compactly generated categories. Next we introduce the notions of compact objects and categories, which simplify the story above. Recall that maps in to inverse limits are easily understood, but mapping out is generally trickier. Definition An object x C is called compact if for any directed system of objects the natural map below is an isomorphism Hom(x, lim x i ) lim Hom(x, x i ) For a category C, wedenotebyc c it s full subcategory of compact objects. Definition A category C is called compactly generated if every object in C is the direct limit of compact objects. Example For any quasi-projective scheme X consider Qco (X); it s compact objects are finitely presented sheaves, and it is compactly generated. 4 In the sense that is satisfies the appropriate universal property in the 2-category of inductively complete categories and functors which preserve inductive limits.
6 Observation LIMITS OF CATEGORIES, AND SHEAVES ON IND-SCHEMES 6 (1) A compactly generated category is completely determind by it s compact objects in the sense that for any two objects, choosing alimitpresentationwemaydescribetheirmorphismsaswell. Hom(c, d) =Hom(lim c i, lim d j )=lim ilim j(c i,d j ) (2) If a functor F : C D admits a right adjoint, G, whichcommuteswith direct limits, then F sends compact objects to compact objects. If c C is compact ) ) Hom D (F (c), limd i = Hom C (c, limg (d i ) =lim Hom D (c, G (d i )) = lim Hom D (F (c),d i ) Now let use return to our system of categories {C i } and it s inverse limit C. Proposition If each C i is compactly generated, then so is C. An object in C is compact iff it is isomorphic to f i (c i ) for some i I and c i C c i. Proof. By the observation above, f i carries the compact objects of C i to compact objects in C. Sincef i also commutes with direct limits, the image of each f i consists of compactly generated objects. As noted in the proof of 1.8, for every c C we have c = lim f i g i (c). Thisprovesthefirstassertion. For the second assertion let c C be a compact object. This is the first place we use that C i and C are all abelian categories. Present c =lim f i (c i ) for c i C c i,as c is compact the identity on c must factor c f i (c i ) c for some i. It follows f i (c i )=k c for some object k C. k must be compact as well (direct summand of a compact) so the same argument shows there exists a surjection f j (k j ) k, for some k j Cj c.withoutlossofgenerality(replacingiand j by some k>i,j), we assume i = j and so obtain a presentation f i (k i ) α f i (c i ) c 0. To conclude, note Hom C (f i (k i ),f j (c j )) = lim k Hom Ck (f ki (k i ),f kj (c j )) = Hom Ci (k i,g i f j (c j )) = lim k Hom Ci (k i,g ik f kj (c j )) = lim k Hom Ck (f ki (k i ),f kj (c j )) thus α comes from some map f ki (k i ) α k f kj (c j ).Itfollowsthat ( )) c = h k (coker f ki (k i ) α k f kj (c j ) hence comes from C k.
7 LIMITS OF CATEGORIES, AND SHEAVES ON IND-SCHEMES 7 Observation The point of all this is that f i (c i ),forallc i C c i,generateall the objects in C. Hom sfromacompactobjectconsiderably,forc i C c i ( ) ) ) Hom C (f i (c i ), c j ) =limhom Ck (f ki (c i ),c k k so every morphism comes from some finite stage. Moreover, in ordertodefinea functor C D, itsufficestodefineappropriatelycompatiblefunctorsc c i D5. 2. D-modules on infinite type schemes and on ind-schemes We wish to construct the objects in the title out of D-mod s on finite type schemes. The ind part in the title has essentially been taken care of, e.g. onafinitetype ind-scheme, Y =lim Y i (i.e. Y i are of finite type over C. e.g.gr G ), define D-mod(Y )=lim ι! ji D-mod(Y i ) One could do the same for an arbitrary ind-scheme - if only he could make sense of D-mod(Y i ),andι! ji when the Y i s are not of finite type. That is the purpose of this section D-mod s on schemes of infinite type. Definition 2.1. A scheme Y is called good if it admits a presentation Y =lim Y j where the Y j s are schemes of finite type and Y j Example 2.2. (1) Any scheme of finite type is good. π jk Yk is a smooth surjection. (2) specc[x 1,x 2, ]=lim A n is good. More generally, for any smooth finite type schemex, theschemex[[t]] = lim X[t]/t n is good, e.g. G(O) is good. (3) A closed subscheme of a good scheme, whose ideal is finitely generated,is good. (4) specc[[t]] is not good (but spfc[[t]] will be reasonable - the corresponding notion for ind-schemes). Let C i = D-mod(Y i ). Since π ij is assumed to be smooth πij inverse system of categories, as in section 1, using the maps exists, and we get an 5 We stress all functors are assumed to commute with direct limits.
8 LIMITS OF CATEGORIES, AND SHEAVES ON IND-SCHEMES 8 f ji=π ji D-mod(Y i ) D-mod(Y j ) g ij =π ji π i π i D-mod(Y ) set Y i Y π j ji Y D-mod(Y ):=lim π D-mod(Y i ) = lim π D-mod(Y i) and denote the projections by D-mod(Y ) πi D-mod(Y j ). The discussion so far has been only in the context of the abelian category, however π on this level is unsatisfactory and we shall want to make sense ofallthisina derived setting. In fact, all the notions of section 1 make sense for triangulated categories, equipped with DG-models. The issue is choosing which derived categories to use (left or right D-mod s). There is a caveat here and we postpone this point D-mod operations. Let Y h Z be a map of good schemes. We show that h : D-mod(Y ) D-mod(Z) always exists, and discuss when h! exists. Construction 2.3. h : D-mod(Y ) D-mod(Z). We must construct compatible functors D-mod(Y ) D-mod(Z i ).AsZ i is of finite type, h factors for j large enough π j Y Y j h i h ji Z i For such j, we define h i as the composition D-mod(Y ) π i D-mod(Yj ) h ji D-mod(Z i ) (note this does not depend on j, aslongasitlargeenoughsothemap factors). There exists a co-cycle of natural isomorphisms h i D-mod(Y ) D-mod(Z i ) π ii h i D-mod(Z i ) thus we get our functor D-mod(Y ) h D-mod(Z). Note that if g : Z W then g h = (g h).
9 LIMITS OF CATEGORIES, AND SHEAVES ON IND-SCHEMES 9 Also note, on the abelian level h i is a composition of left exact functors, hence is left exact. h is an inverse limit of left exact functors hence also left exact. In general, h! will not exist, however we do have the following special case. Proposition 2.4. If h : Y Z is a closed embedding, and the ideal of Y in Z is finitely generated; then h admits a right adjoint h! : D-mod(Z) D-mod(Y ). Proof. As this is a local question, assume Y = speca and Z = specb are affine. Let Z =lim j J Z j be a presentation of Z. In general, there is no reason for Y to have a presentation whose underlying poset is related to that of Z. However, in our case we can arrange for both schemes to be presented on the same poset and for the map to factor through the presentation as follows. Let I B be the ideal of Y in Z, it is finitely generated by assumption;whence we may assume that for all ji B j generates I, where B j := O Zj. Certainly A = B/I =lim j B i /B i I, moreover the following square is cartesian by construction B i /B i I B i B j /B i I implying this is a good presentation of Y.Evidentlyh =lim h i,where B j h i : Y i := specb i /B i I specb i = Z i Since for every i we have the adjoint pair D-mod(Y i ) h i h! i D-mod(Z i ) we are led to define h! =lim ι! h! i. This is indeed seen to be a right adjoint to ji h. Remark 2.5. It is obvious from the proof that h! exists in somewhat greater generality than closed embeddings, i.e. whenever Y and Z may be presented on the same poset, I, andthemaph factors through this presentation, with cartesian squares as above. For instance this is the case when Y h Z is finitely presented, i.e. factors locally Y Z A n Z where the first map has a finitely generated ideal.
10 LIMITS OF CATEGORIES, AND SHEAVES ON IND-SCHEMES D-mod s on reasonable ind-schemes. A reasonable ind-schemewillbe any scheme where the constructions above go through, namely Definition 2.6. An ind-scheme Y is called reasonable if it admits a presentation Y =lim i where Y ij are schemes of finite type, Y ij Y ik is smooth and surjective, and lim j Y i Y i is a closed embedding (of schemes) with locally finitely generated ideal. For a reasonable ind-scheme Y, we define D-mod(Y )=lim ι! D-mod(Y i ).Notewe i i could have defined this category using the universal presentation (using all good closed sub-schemes of Y ). As any other presentation is co-final in the universal one, Y ij the definition does not depend on the presentation. Example 2.7. (1) Any ind-scheme of ind-finite type is reasonable. (2) G(K) is a reasonable ind-scheme 6.ToseethisrecallthatGr G = G(K)/G(O) = lim Z i i,forsomefinitetypeschemesz i,lety i = Z i GrG G(K) it is a closed sub-scheme of G(K). We proceed to show that G(K) = lim i Y i is a good presentation of G(K). Indeed, G(O) =lim j G[t]/t j,letg j = ker ( G(O) G[t]/t j) then Y i =limy i /G j j If j > j then the map Y i /G j (Y i /G j ) /G j = Y i /G j is smooth and surjective, hence the presentation of Y i above is good. Definition 2.8 (De-Rham cohomology). Define the functor H DR (Y, ) :=lim i H DR (Y i, ) using 1.8, by noting that the latter functors are π i -compatible. References [1] Beilinson; Drinfeld. Hitchin s integrable system. http : // gaitsgde/grad However, even when X is smooth, X((t)) is not always reasonable
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
More informationDirect 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
More informationIndCoh Seminar: Ind-coherent sheaves I
IndCoh Seminar: Ind-coherent sheaves I Justin Campbell March 11, 2016 1 Finiteness conditions 1.1 Fix a cocomplete category C (as usual category means -category ). This section contains a discussion of
More information1 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
More informationQUANTIZATION VIA DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS ON STACKS
QUANTIZATION VIA DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS ON STACKS SAM RASKIN 1. Differential operators on stacks 1.1. We will define a D-module of differential operators on a smooth stack and construct a symbol map when
More informationIntroduction to Chiral Algebras
Introduction to Chiral Algebras Nick Rozenblyum Our goal will be to prove the fact that the algebra End(V ac) is commutative. The proof itself will be very easy - a version of the Eckmann Hilton argument
More informationWhat is an ind-coherent sheaf?
What is an ind-coherent sheaf? Harrison Chen March 8, 2018 0.1 Introduction All algebras in this note will be considered over a field k of characteristic zero (an assumption made in [Ga:IC]), so that we
More informationINTRODUCTION TO PART V: CATEGORIES OF CORRESPONDENCES
INTRODUCTION TO PART V: CATEGORIES OF CORRESPONDENCES 1. Why correspondences? This part introduces one of the two main innovations in this book the (, 2)-category of correspondences as a way to encode
More informationLecture 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,
More informationCHAPTER I.2. BASICS OF DERIVED ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY
CHAPTER I.2. BASICS OF DERIVED ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY Contents Introduction 2 0.1. Why prestacks? 2 0.2. What do we say about prestacks? 3 0.3. What else is done in this Chapter? 5 1. Prestacks 6 1.1. The
More informationDescent on the étale site Wouter Zomervrucht, October 14, 2014
Descent on the étale site Wouter Zomervrucht, October 14, 2014 We treat two eatures o the étale site: descent o morphisms and descent o quasi-coherent sheaves. All will also be true on the larger pp and
More informationFormal 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
More informationUNIVERSAL DERIVED EQUIVALENCES OF POSETS
UNIVERSAL DERIVED EQUIVALENCES OF POSETS SEFI LADKANI Abstract. By using only combinatorial data on two posets X and Y, we construct a set of so-called formulas. A formula produces simultaneously, for
More informationMATH 101B: ALGEBRA II PART A: HOMOLOGICAL ALGEBRA
MATH 101B: ALGEBRA II PART A: HOMOLOGICAL ALGEBRA These are notes for our first unit on the algebraic side of homological algebra. While this is the last topic (Chap XX) in the book, it makes sense to
More informationPART II.2. THE!-PULLBACK AND BASE CHANGE
PART II.2. THE!-PULLBACK AND BASE CHANGE Contents Introduction 1 1. Factorizations of morphisms of DG schemes 2 1.1. Colimits of closed embeddings 2 1.2. The closure 4 1.3. Transitivity of closure 5 2.
More information1 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,
More information14 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
More informationDERIVED 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
More informationNOTES ON GEOMETRIC LANGLANDS: STACKS
NOTES ON GEOMETRIC LANGLANDS: STACKS DENNIS GAITSGORY This paper isn t even a paper. I will try to collect some basic definitions and facts about stacks in the DG setting that will be used in other installments
More informationAlgebraic 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
More informationPART III.3. IND-COHERENT SHEAVES ON IND-INF-SCHEMES
PART III.3. IND-COHERENT SHEAVES ON IND-INF-SCHEMES Contents Introduction 1 1. Ind-coherent sheaves on ind-schemes 2 1.1. Basic properties 2 1.2. t-structure 3 1.3. Recovering IndCoh from ind-proper maps
More informationLecture 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
More informationLecture 3: Flat Morphisms
Lecture 3: Flat Morphisms September 29, 2014 1 A crash course on Properties of Schemes For more details on these properties, see [Hartshorne, II, 1-5]. 1.1 Open and Closed Subschemes If (X, O X ) is a
More information8 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
More informationAssume the left square is a pushout. Then the right square is a pushout if and only if the big rectangle is.
COMMUTATIVE ALGERA LECTURE 2: MORE CATEGORY THEORY VIVEK SHENDE Last time we learned about Yoneda s lemma, and various universal constructions initial and final objects, products and coproducts (which
More informationDeformation theory of representable morphisms of algebraic stacks
Deformation theory of representable morphisms of algebraic stacks Martin C. Olsson School of Mathematics, Institute for Advanced Study, 1 Einstein Drive, Princeton, NJ 08540, molsson@math.ias.edu Received:
More informationTHE SMOOTH BASE CHANGE THEOREM
THE SMOOTH BASE CHANGE THEOREM AARON LANDESMAN CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2 1.1. Statement of the smooth base change theorem 2 1.2. Topological smooth base change 4 1.3. A useful case of smooth base change
More informationIND-COHERENT SHEAVES AND SERRE DUALITY II. 1. Introduction
IND-COHERENT SHEAVES AND SERRE DUALITY II 1. Introduction Let X be a smooth projective variety over a field k of dimension n. Let V be a vector bundle on X. In this case, we have an isomorphism H i (X,
More informationLecture 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
More informationMath 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
More information58 CHAPTER 2. COMPUTATIONAL METHODS
58 CHAPTER 2. COMPUTATIONAL METHODS 23 Hom and Lim We will now develop more properties of the tensor product: its relationship to homomorphisms and to direct limits. The tensor product arose in our study
More informationAlgebraic 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
More information3. 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
More informationAdjoints, naturality, exactness, small Yoneda lemma. 1. Hom(X, ) is left exact
(April 8, 2010) Adjoints, naturality, exactness, small Yoneda lemma Paul Garrett garrett@math.umn.edu http://www.math.umn.edu/ garrett/ The best way to understand or remember left-exactness or right-exactness
More information1 Motivation. If X is a topological space and x X a point, then the fundamental group is defined as. the set of (pointed) morphisms from the circle
References are: [Szamuely] Galois Groups and Fundamental Groups [SGA1] Grothendieck, et al. Revêtements étales et groupe fondamental [Stacks project] The Stacks Project, https://stacks.math.columbia. edu/
More informationAPPENDIX 2: AN INTRODUCTION TO ÉTALE COHOMOLOGY AND THE BRAUER GROUP
APPENDIX 2: AN INTRODUCTION TO ÉTALE COHOMOLOGY AND THE BRAUER GROUP In this appendix we review some basic facts about étale cohomology, give the definition of the (cohomological) Brauer group, and discuss
More informationFILTERED RINGS AND MODULES. GRADINGS AND COMPLETIONS.
FILTERED RINGS AND MODULES. GRADINGS AND COMPLETIONS. Let A be a ring, for simplicity assumed commutative. A filtering, or filtration, of an A module M means a descending sequence of submodules M = M 0
More informationIntroduction and preliminaries Wouter Zomervrucht, Februari 26, 2014
Introduction and preliminaries Wouter Zomervrucht, Februari 26, 204. Introduction Theorem. Serre duality). Let k be a field, X a smooth projective scheme over k of relative dimension n, and F a locally
More informationAn overview of D-modules: holonomic D-modules, b-functions, and V -filtrations
An overview of D-modules: holonomic D-modules, b-functions, and V -filtrations Mircea Mustaţă University of Michigan Mainz July 9, 2018 Mircea Mustaţă () An overview of D-modules Mainz July 9, 2018 1 The
More informationWhat 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
More informationSeminar on Crystalline Cohomology
Seminar on Crystalline Cohomology Yun Hao November 28, 2016 Contents 1 Divided Power Algebra October 31, 2016 1 1.1 Divided Power Structure.............................. 1 1.2 Extension of Divided Power
More informationCOMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA LECTURE 1: SOME CATEGORY THEORY
COMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA LECTURE 1: SOME CATEGORY THEORY VIVEK SHENDE A ring is a set R with two binary operations, an addition + and a multiplication. Always there should be an identity 0 for addition, an
More informationA Homological Study of Bornological Spaces
Prépublications Mathématiques de l Université Paris 13 A Homological Study of Bornological Spaces by Fabienne Prosmans Jean-Pierre Schneiders 00-21 December 2000 Laboratoire Analyse, Géométrie et Applications,
More informationRelative 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
More informationGrothendieck duality for affine M 0 -schemes.
Grothendieck duality for affine M 0 -schemes. A. Salch March 2011 Outline Classical Grothendieck duality. M 0 -schemes. Derived categories without an abelian category of modules. Computing Lf and Rf and
More informationTRIANGULATED CATEGORIES, SUMMER SEMESTER 2012
TRIANGULATED CATEGORIES, SUMMER SEMESTER 2012 P. SOSNA Contents 1. Triangulated categories and functors 2 2. A first example: The homotopy category 8 3. Localization and the derived category 12 4. Derived
More informationLOCAL 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
More informationwhich 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
More informationwhere 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
More informationHomology and Cohomology of Stacks (Lecture 7)
Homology and Cohomology of Stacks (Lecture 7) February 19, 2014 In this course, we will need to discuss the l-adic homology and cohomology of algebro-geometric objects of a more general nature than algebraic
More informationModules 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
More informationPART IV.2. FORMAL MODULI
PART IV.2. FORMAL MODULI Contents Introduction 1 1. Formal moduli problems 2 1.1. Formal moduli problems over a prestack 2 1.2. Situation over an affine scheme 2 1.3. Formal moduli problems under a prestack
More informationPERVERSE SHEAVES: PART I
PERVERSE SHEAVES: PART I Let X be an algebraic variety (not necessarily smooth). Let D b (X) be the bounded derived category of Mod(C X ), the category of left C X -Modules, which is in turn a full subcategory
More informationAlgebraic 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
More informationFOUNDATIONS 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
More informationLecture 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
More informationALGEBRAIC 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!)
More informationFORMAL 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
More informationMath 248B. Applications of base change for coherent cohomology
Math 248B. Applications of base change for coherent cohomology 1. Motivation Recall the following fundamental general theorem, the so-called cohomology and base change theorem: Theorem 1.1 (Grothendieck).
More informationHochschild homology and Grothendieck Duality
Hochschild homology and Grothendieck Duality Leovigildo Alonso Tarrío Universidade de Santiago de Compostela Purdue University July, 1, 2009 Leo Alonso (USC.es) Hochschild theory and Grothendieck Duality
More informationThus we get. ρj. Nρj i = δ D(i),j.
1.51. The distinguished invertible object. Let C be a finite tensor category with classes of simple objects labeled by a set I. Since duals to projective objects are projective, we can define a map D :
More informationEtale cohomology of fields by Johan M. Commelin, December 5, 2013
Etale cohomology of fields by Johan M. Commelin, December 5, 2013 Etale cohomology The canonical topology on a Grothendieck topos Let E be a Grothendieck topos. The canonical topology T on E is given in
More informationFOUNDATIONS 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.
More informationMATH 233B, FLATNESS AND SMOOTHNESS.
MATH 233B, FLATNESS AND SMOOTHNESS. The discussion of smooth morphisms is one place were Hartshorne doesn t do a very good job. Here s a summary of this week s material. I ll also insert some (optional)
More informationSEMINAR NOTES: QUANTIZATION OF HITCHIN S INTEGRABLE SYSTEM AND HECKE EIGENSHEAVES (SEPT. 8, 2009)
SEMINAR NOTES: QUANTIZATION OF HITCHIN S INTEGRABLE SYSTEM AND HECKE EIGENSHEAVES (SEPT. 8, 2009) DENNIS GAITSGORY 1. Hecke eigensheaves The general topic of this seminar can be broadly defined as Geometric
More informationCommutative Algebra Lecture 3: Lattices and Categories (Sept. 13, 2013)
Commutative Algebra Lecture 3: Lattices and Categories (Sept. 13, 2013) Navid Alaei September 17, 2013 1 Lattice Basics There are, in general, two equivalent approaches to defining a lattice; one is rather
More informationVertex algebras, chiral algebras, and factorisation algebras
Vertex algebras, chiral algebras, and factorisation algebras Emily Cliff University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign 18 September, 2017 Section 1 Vertex algebras, motivation, and road-plan Definition A
More informationLectures on Galois Theory. Some steps of generalizations
= Introduction Lectures on Galois Theory. Some steps of generalizations Journée Galois UNICAMP 2011bis, ter Ubatuba?=== Content: Introduction I want to present you Galois theory in the more general frame
More informationAlgebraic 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
More informationDESCENT 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,
More informationDerived categories, perverse sheaves and intermediate extension functor
Derived categories, perverse sheaves and intermediate extension functor Riccardo Grandi July 26, 2013 Contents 1 Derived categories 1 2 The category of sheaves 5 3 t-structures 7 4 Perverse sheaves 8 1
More informationAn introduction to derived and triangulated categories. Jon Woolf
An introduction to derived and triangulated categories Jon Woolf PSSL, Glasgow, 6 7th May 2006 Abelian categories and complexes Derived categories and functors arise because 1. we want to work with complexes
More informationDerivations and differentials
Derivations and differentials Johan Commelin April 24, 2012 In the following text all rings are commutative with 1, unless otherwise specified. 1 Modules of derivations Let A be a ring, α : A B an A algebra,
More informationFOUNDATIONS 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
More informationMath 248B. Base change morphisms
Math 248B. Base change morphisms 1. Motivation A basic operation with shea cohomology is pullback. For a continuous map o topological spaces : X X and an abelian shea F on X with (topological) pullback
More informationMotivic integration on Artin n-stacks
Motivic integration on Artin n-stacks Chetan Balwe Nov 13,2009 1 / 48 Prestacks (This treatment of stacks is due to B. Toën and G. Vezzosi.) Let S be a fixed base scheme. Let (Aff /S) be the category of
More informationFourier Mukai transforms II Orlov s criterion
Fourier Mukai transforms II Orlov s criterion Gregor Bruns 07.01.2015 1 Orlov s criterion In this note we re going to rely heavily on the projection formula, discussed earlier in Rostislav s talk) and
More informationSynopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 4. Proposition (4.1.6). The canonical homomorphism ( ) is surjective [(3.2.4)].
Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 4 4.1. Definition of projective bundles. 4. Projective bundles. Ample sheaves Definition (4.1.1). Let S(E) be the symmetric algebra of a quasi-coherent O Y -module.
More informationSynopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 5
Synopsis of material from EGA Chapter II, 5 5. Quasi-affine, quasi-projective, proper and projective morphisms 5.1. Quasi-affine morphisms. Definition (5.1.1). A scheme is quasi-affine if it is isomorphic
More informationSection 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
More informationCHAPTER 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
More informationDERIVED CATEGORIES OF COHERENT SHEAVES
DERIVED CATEGORIES OF COHERENT SHEAVES OLIVER E. ANDERSON Abstract. We give an overview of derived categories of coherent sheaves. [Huy06]. Our main reference is 1. For the participants without bacground
More informationCategories 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
More informationSchemes 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
More informationMath 249B. Nilpotence of connected solvable groups
Math 249B. Nilpotence of connected solvable groups 1. Motivation and examples In abstract group theory, the descending central series {C i (G)} of a group G is defined recursively by C 0 (G) = G and C
More informationsset(x, Y ) n = sset(x [n], Y ).
1. Symmetric monoidal categories and enriched categories In practice, categories come in nature with more structure than just sets of morphisms. This extra structure is central to all of category theory,
More information121B: 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
More informationAn introduction to Algebra and Topology
An introduction to Algebra and Topology Pierre Schapira http://www.math.jussieu.fr/ schapira/lectnotes schapira@math.jussieu.fr Course at University of Luxemburg 1/3/2012 30/4/2012, v5 2 Contents 1 Linear
More informationMODULI TOPOLOGY. 1. Grothendieck Topology
MODULI TOPOLOG Abstract. Notes from a seminar based on the section 3 of the paper: Picard groups of moduli problems (by Mumford). 1. Grothendieck Topology We can define a topology on any set S provided
More information9. The Lie group Lie algebra correspondence
9. The Lie group Lie algebra correspondence 9.1. The functor Lie. The fundamental theorems of Lie concern the correspondence G Lie(G). The work of Lie was essentially local and led to the following fundamental
More informationarxiv: v6 [math.ag] 29 Nov 2013
DG INDSCHEMES arxiv:1108.1738v6 [math.ag] 29 Nov 2013 DENNIS GAITSGORY AND NICK ROZENBLYUM To Igor Frenkel on the occasion of his 60th birthday Abstract. We develop the notion of indscheme in the context
More informationSOME 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
More informationNon characteristic finiteness theorems in crystalline cohomology
Non characteristic finiteness theorems in crystalline cohomology 1 Non characteristic finiteness theorems in crystalline cohomology Pierre Berthelot Université de Rennes 1 I.H.É.S., September 23, 2015
More informationMATH 8254 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY HOMEWORK 1
MATH 8254 ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY HOMEWORK 1 CİHAN BAHRAN I discussed several of the problems here with Cheuk Yu Mak and Chen Wan. 4.1.12. Let X be a normal and proper algebraic variety over a field k. Show
More informationTHE DERIVED CATEGORY OF A GRADED GORENSTEIN RING
THE DERIVED CATEGORY OF A GRADED GORENSTEIN RING JESSE BURKE AND GREG STEVENSON Abstract. We give an exposition and generalization of Orlov s theorem on graded Gorenstein rings. We show the theorem holds
More informationDerived Algebraic Geometry IX: Closed Immersions
Derived Algebraic Geometry I: Closed Immersions November 5, 2011 Contents 1 Unramified Pregeometries and Closed Immersions 4 2 Resolutions of T-Structures 7 3 The Proof of Proposition 1.0.10 14 4 Closed
More informationALGEBRAIC 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
More informationBasic Modern Algebraic Geometry
Version of December 13, 1999. Final version for M 321. Audun Holme Basic Modern Algebraic Geometry Introduction to Grothendieck s Theory of Schemes Basic Modern Algebraic Geometry Introduction to Grothendieck
More informationCHAPTER III.4. AN APPLICATION: CRYSTALS
CHAPTER III.4. AN APPLICATION: CRYSTALS Contents Introduction 1 0.1. Let s do D-modules! 2 0.2. D-modules via crystals 2 0.3. What else is done in this chapter? 4 1. Crystals on prestacks and inf-schemes
More informationDe Rham Cohomology. Smooth singular cochains. (Hatcher, 2.1)
II. De Rham Cohomology There is an obvious similarity between the condition d o q 1 d q = 0 for the differentials in a singular chain complex and the condition d[q] o d[q 1] = 0 which is satisfied by the
More information