Arxiv:Math/0201175V3
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ALMOST RING THEORY OFER GABBER AND LORENZO RAMERO sixth (and final) release Ofer Gabber I.H.E.S. Le Bois-Marie 35, route de Chartres F-91440 Bures-sur-Yvette e-mail address: [email protected] Lorenzo Ramero Universit´ede Bordeaux I Laboratoire de Math´ematiques 351, cours de la Liberation F-33405 Talence Cedex e-mail address: [email protected] web page: http://www.math.u-bordeaux.fr/ ramero ∼ arXiv:math/0201175v3 [math.AG] 22 Jul 2002 1 2 OFERGABBERANDLORENZORAMERO CONTENTS 1. Introduction 3 2. Homological theory 7 2.1. Some ring-theoretic preliminaries 7 2.2. Categoriesofalmostmodulesandalgebras 11 2.3. Uniform spaces of almost modules 16 2.4. Almost homological algebra 22 2.5. Almost homotopical algebra 29 3. Almost ring theory 38 3.1. Flat, unramified and ´etale morphisms 39 3.2. Nilpotent deformations of almost algebras and modules 41 3.3. Nilpotent deformations of torsors 47 3.4. Descent 55 3.5. Behaviourof´etalemorphismsunderFrobenius 64 4. Fine study of almost projective modules 72 4.1. Almost traces 72 4.2. Endomorphisms of Gm. 78 4.3. Modules of almost finite rank 83 4.4. Localisation in the flatb site 88 4.5. Construction of quotients by flat equivalence relations 96 5. Henselizationandcompletionofalmostalgebras 102 5.1. Henselian pairs 103 5.2. Criteria for unramified morphisms 106 5.3. Topological algebras and modules 111 5.4. Henselian approximation of structures over adically completerings 116 5.5. Lifting theorems for henselian pairs 127 5.6. Smooth locus of an affine almost scheme 134 5.7. Quasi-projective almost schemes 141 5.8. Lifting and descent of torsors 146 6. Valuation theory 151 6.1. Ordered groups and valuations 151 6.2. Basic ramification theory 159 6.3. Algebraic extensions 162 6.4. Logarithmic differentials 170 6.5. Transcendental extensions 173 6.6. Deeply ramified extensions 180 7. Analytic geometry 186 7.1. Derived completion functor 187 7.2. Cotangent complex for formal schemes and adic spaces 192 7.3. Deformationsofformalschemesandadicspaces 200 7.4. Analyticgeometryoveradeeplyramifiedbase 209 7.5. Semicontinuity of the discriminant 213 8. Appendix 219 8.1. Simplicial almost algebras 219 8.2. Fundamental group of an almost algebra 223 References 230 Index 232 ALMOST RING THEORY 3 Le bruit des vagues ´etait encore plus paresseux, plus ´etale qu’a midi. C’´etait le mˆeme soleil, la mˆeme lumi`ere sur le mˆeme sable qui se prolongeait ici. A. Camus - L’etranger´ 1. INTRODUCTION From a pragmatic standpoint, one can describe the theory of almost rings as a useful tool for performing calculations of Galois cohomology groups. Indeed, this is the main application of Faltings’ “almost purity theorem”, which is the technical heart of [34]. Though almost ring theory is developed here as an independent branch of mathematics, stretching somewhere in between commutative algebra and category theory, the original ap- plications to Galois cohomology still provide the main motivation and influence largely the evolution of the subject. It is therefore fitting to introduce the present work by reviewing briefly the main ideas behind these calculations. Let us consider first a complete discretely valued field K of zero character- istic, with perfect residue field of characteristic p> 0, and uniformizer π; we denote by K+ the ring of integers of K. The valuation v of K extends uniquely to any algebraic extension, and we want to normalize the value group in such a way that v(p)=1 in every such extension. Let E be a finite Galois extension of K, with Galois group G. Typically, one is given a discrete E+[G]-module M (such that the G-action on M is semilinear, that is, compatible with the G-action on E+), and is interested in studying the (modified) Tate cohomology Hi := Hi(G, M) (for i Z). (Recall that Hi(M) agrees with Galois cohomology RiΓGM for i> 0, with Galois homology∈ for i < 1, and for i = 0 it equals M G/Tr (M), the G-invariantsb − E/K dividedb by the image of the trace map).b + In such a situation, the scalar multiplication map E Z M M induces natural cup product i + j i+j ⊗ → + G + i pairings H (G, E ) Z H H . Especially, the action of (E ) = K on H factors + ⊗+ → + through K /TrE/K(E ); in other words, the image of E under the trace map annihilates the modifiedb Tate cohomology.b b b + + i If now the extension E is tamely ramified over K, then TrE/K(E )= K , so the H vanish for all i Z. Even sharper results can be achieved when the extension is unramified. Indeed, in ∈ such case E+ is a G-torsor for the ´etale topology of K+, hence, some basic descent theoryb tells us that the natural map + G E + RΓ M M[0] ⊗K → is an isomorphism in the derived category of the category of E+[G]-modules (where we have denoted by M[0] the complex consisting of M placed in degree zero). In Tate’s paper [64] there occurs a variant of the above situation : instead of the finite ex- tension E one considers the algebraic closure Ka of K, so that G is the absolute Galois group of K, and the discrete G-module M is replaced by the topological module C(χ), where C is the p-adic completion of Ka, whose natural G-action we “twist” by a continuous character × • • χ : G K . Then the relevant H is the continuous Galois cohomology Hcont(G,C(χ)), which is→ defined in general as the homology of a complex of continuous cochains. Under the present assumptions, Hi can be computed by the formula: Hi (G,C(χ)) := (lim Hi(G,Ka+(χ) /pn )) . cont ←− Z Z Z Z Q n ⊗ ⊗ Let now K∞ be a totally ramified Galois extension with Galois group H isomorphic to Zp. Tate realized that, for cohomological purposes, the extension K∞ plays the role of a maximal totally ramified Galois extension of K. More precisely, let L be any finite extension of K, and set n L := L K , where K is the subfield of K fixed by Hp pn Z . The extension K L n · n n ∞ ≃ · p n ⊂ n 4 OFERGABBERANDLORENZORAMERO + is unramified if and only if the different ideal := + + equals L . In case this fails, Dn DLn /Kn n the valuation v(δn) of a generator δn of Dn will be a strictly positive rational number, giving a quantitative measure for the ramification of the extension. With this notation, [64, 3.2, Prop.9] reads § (1.0.1) lim v(δn)=0 n→∞ −n (indeed, v(δn) approaches zero about as fast as p ). In this sense, one can say that the extension K∞ L∞ := L K∞ is almost unramified. One immediate consequence is that the maximal ⊂ + · + ideal m of K∞ is contained in TrL∞/K∞ (L∞). If, additionally, L is a Galois extension of K, we can consider the subgroup G := Gal(L /K ) Gal(L/K) ∞ ∞ ∞ ⊂ i and the foregoing implies that m annihilates Hcont(G∞, M), for every i> 0, and every topolog- + ical L∞[G∞]-module M. More precisely, the homology of the cone of the natural morphism + G∞ (1.0.2) L + RΓ M M[0] ∞ ⊗K∞ → is annihilated by m in all degrees, i.e. it is almost zero. Equivalently, one says that the maps on homology induced by (1.0.2) are almost isomorphisms in all degrees. Tate goes on to apply these cohomological vanishings to the study of p-divisible groups; in turns, this study enables him to establish a comparison between the ´etale and the Hodge cohomology of an abelian scheme over K+, which has become the prototype for all subsequent investigation of p-adic Hodge theory. A first generalization of (1.0.1) can be found in the work [37] by Fresnel and Matignon; one interesting aspect of this work is that it does away with any consideration of local class field theory (which was used to get the main estimates in [64]); instead, Fresnel and Matignon write a general extension L as a tower of monogenic subextensions, whose structure is sufficiently well understood to allow a direct and very explicit analysis. The main tool in [37] is a notion of different ideal D + + for a possibly infinite algebraic field extension K E; then the E /K ⊂ extension K∞ considered in [64] is replaced by any extension E of K such that DE+/K+ = (0), + and (1.0.1) is generalized by the claim that DF +/E+ = F , for every finite extension E F . In some sense, the arguments of [37] anticipate those used by Faltings in the first few⊂ para- graphs of his fundamental article [33]. There we find, first of all, a further extension of (1.0.1): the residue field of K is now not necessarily perfect, instead one assumes only that it admits a finite p-basis; then the relevant K∞ is an extension whose residue field is perfect, and whose value group is p-divisible. This generalization paves the way to the almost purity theorem, of which it represents the one-dimensional case. In order to state and prove the higher dimen- sional case, Faltings invents the method of “almost ´etale extensions”, and indeed sketches in a few pages a whole program of “almost commutative algebra”, with the aim of transposing to the almost context as much as possible of the classical theory. So, for instance, if A is a given + K∞-algebra, and M is an A-module, one says that M is almost flat if, for every A-module N, the natural map of complexes L M N M N[0] ⊗A → ⊗A induces almost isomorphisms on homology in all degrees.