DOCSLIB.ORG

From Varieties to Sheaf Cohomology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From Varieties to Sheaf Cohomology From Varieties to Sheaf Cohomology Thomas Goller September 1, 2015 Classical algebraic geometry is the study of geometry using algebraic tools. Modern algebraic geometry is the study of algebra using geometric intuition. 1 Varieties (classical) n Affine varieties are vanishing sets U = (f1,...,fr) A of polynomials fi C[x1,...,xn]. V ⇢ 2 (We write An for affine space instead of Cn because we won’t use the vector space structure; in particular, the origin is not a special point.) The algebraic functions on this affine variety U are the ring C[x1,...,xn]/ (f1,...,fr). Projective varieties are vanishing sets X = n (F1,...,Fr) P of homogenous polynomials Fi C[X0,...,Xn]. The ring of rational V ⇢ p 2 functions on X consists of homogeneous degree 0 rational functions in X0,...,Xn where the denominator cannot be in the ideal (F1,...,Fr)(weneedhomogeneousdegree0to have well-defined functions on n). Projective varieties are compact and have open covers P p by affine varieties. (These open affine ‘charts’ can be obtained by taking the subsets of X where X =0). i 6 Example. P1, the space of lines through the origin in C2,canbedescribedasthesetofpairs (a, b) =(0, 0) modulo the action of scaling by nonzero constants, so we often write points 6 of P1 as (a : b) to emphasize that the ratio of a to b is the critical feature. As a projective 1 variety, P is the vanishing set of the empty set of homogeneous polynomials in C[X0,X1]. b b The subset where X0 =0,namelywherea = 0, can be parametrized by (1 : )for C 6 6 a a 2 and is therefore the affine variety 1 with function ring [ X1 ]. Similarly, the subset where A C X0 1 X0 1 X1 =0isacopyofA with function ring C[ ]. Thus P is covered by two copies of the 6 X1 affine variety A1. (The function rings show how these two copies of A1 are glued together to produce P1.We’llcomebacktothis.) GAGA (Serre, 1956) shows that calculations on a projective variety are equivalent to calculations done on the underlying holomorphic manifold. Classical algebraic geometry is closely tied to complex analysis. 2 Toward schemes Schemes generalize varieties. To see how, let’s think about affine varieties more algebraically. The points of the affine variety U = (f ,...,f )arethemaximumspectrumofthering V 1 r of functions A = C[x1,...,xn]/ (f1,...,fr). These maximal ideals are all of the form m =(x a ,...,x a ) (f ,...,f ), which we were thinking of as a point ~a =(a ,...,a ) 1− 1 n− n ⊃ 1 p r 1 n at which all the f vanish. Think of evaluating a function f A at a point m (which yields a i 2 complex number) as taking the image under the map A A/m C (modding out by m sets ! ' xi = ai,sothisreallyisjustevaluationat~a ). If we replace the words ‘maximal spectrum’ by ‘prime spectrum’ and ‘A = C[x1,...,xn]/ (f1,...,fr)’ by ‘A is any commutative ring with identity’ in the above discussion, then we have arrived at affine schemes. One weird aspect p is that functions f A evaluated at a prime ideal p of A yield values in A/p,whichwillin general not be a field.2 An affine scheme is essentially just a ring A, viewed as functions on its prime spectrum. Morphisms of affine schemes are induced by ring morphisms B A, which by taking preimages of prime ideals (the preimage of a prime ideal is prime!) yield! set maps Spec A Spec B (note that the order of A an B changes, i.e. Spec is a contravariant functor). ! 3 Schemes (modern) General schemes are obtained by gluing affine schemes by isomorphisms along open subsets of those affine schemes. In other words, a scheme is obtained by gluing rings together.Our topology is the Zariski topology of Spec A,whereclosedsetsarealloftheform (I), namely the set of all primes containing a particular ideal I.ThesimplestopensubsetsofSpecV A are the complements Spec A of the closed sets (f)andthegluingoftenhappensalongthese f V (Spec Af consists of all prime ideals of A not containing f). Example. We can glue C[x]andC[y]alongtheopensetsobtainedbyinvertingx and y 1 via the isomorphism C[x]x C[y]y, x 1/y.ThisyieldstheprojectivelineP .(Writing ! 7! x = X1 and y = X0 reveals the connection to the previous example.) X0 X1 From now on, we will view varieties as schemes. We thereby gain a richer topology (more points!) and a general framework that gives us access to more algebraic tools. For instance, consider an affine variety Spec A.ThemaximalidealsofSpecA are in bijection with ring maps A C (the preimage of the zero ideal picks out a maximal ideal of A). More interestingly,! the tangent vectors of an affine scheme are in bijection with ring maps A C[x]/(x2)(thisisn’taclassicalmapofvarietiesduetothepresenceofnilpotents). ! Example. Consider the affine scheme C[x, y], whose maximal ideals (x a, y b)canbe − − viewed as (a, b) A2.RingmapsC[x, y] C[x]/(x2)aredeterminedbyx ↵x + a, 2 ! 7! y βx + b. Now, Spec C[x]/(x2)isasinglepoint(x), which under the given ring map gets 7! sent to the maximal ideal (x a, y b), which can be thought of as the point (a, b) A2. − − @ @ 2 The choice of ↵ and β can be thought of as giving the tangent vector ↵ @x + β @y. Note that the ring map carries more information than the induced topological map on prime ideals. One can also observe generic behavior of a map between varieties by looking at what the map does at the generic point (the zero ideal), which can be thought of as a fuzzy point covering the entire space. Example. Consider the map Spec C[x] Spec C[y]definedbyC[y] C[x], y x2 (this is ! ! 7! analogous to the map C C, z z2). The preimage of a maximal ideal (x a)is(y a2), ! 7! − − 2 so both (x a)and(x+a)inSpecC[x]maptothesamepoint(y a2)ofSpecC[y]. A fancy way of seeing− that this map is generically two-to-one (which we− call degree 2) is to localize at the generic point: since C[x](0) = C(x), we obtain Spec C[x](0) Spec C[y](0) defined by ! C(y) , C(x), y x2,whichisafieldextensionofdegree2. ! 7! 4 Coherent sheaves When we glue together affine varieties Spec A to get a scheme X, we are also gluing together the rings of functions A to get the structure sheaf of rings X , which stores the data of all functions on all open subsets of X.Inparticular,iftheopensubsetisO U =SpecA,then (U)=A,buttoseewhatthefunctionsonU U are we have to look carefully at how OX 1 [ 2 U1 and U2 are glued together. 1 Example. Recall that P is covered by C[x]andC[y]withgluingisomorphismC[y]y 1 ! C[x]x, y .Toseewhattheglobalsectionsof 1 are (i.e. the functions on the open set 7! x OP U = P1), we try to choose sections on an open affine cover that are compatible under the gluing isomorphisms. In our case, we need an element f C[x]andanelementg C[y]that are identified under the map y 1 .Butf and g are polynomials,2 so the only2 compatible 7! x choice is the same constant f = g C and hence the global sections of 1 are just C. 2 OP The structure sheaf X is a sheaf of rings. In commutative algebra, given a ring A,a natural thing to do is toO study A-modules. In algebraic geometry, the natural extension is to study X -modules, which are simply an A-module M for each affine open Spec A together with gluingO isomorphisms that are compatible with the gluing of the rings A. When all the modules M are finitely generated, we call the resulting sheaf of modules a coherent sheaf. Coherent sheaves generalize the notion of vector bundles. When we build the sheaf of modules by gluing free modules, we get a locally free sheaf, which algebraic geometers often call a vector bundle. This is because the same gluing maps can be used to define an algebraic vector bundle over X (instead of gluing free modules of rank r, you could glue copies of Cr), and the sheaf of sections of this vector bundle is exactly the locally free sheaf you started with. Example. The structure sheaf is a locally free sheaf of rank 1 and corresponds to the OX trivial line bundle X C. ⇥ Algebraic geometers usually prefer to work with locally free modules since modules are so natural from the point of view of commutative algebra. Many operations on modules work for coherent sheaves as well (e.g. direct sum, tensor product, push forward, pullback). And we have a powerful tool known as sheaf cohomology. 5 Sheaf cohomology Given a coherent sheaf on a projective variety X (we want X to be compact to ensure that our cohomology vectorF spaces are finite dimensional), we often have a good understanding of what looks like locally (especially if is locally free!), but identifying the global sections F F 3 of is more difficult (even P1 required some work!). The global sections functor, which we’llF call H0,isleftexact,whichmeansthatgivenashortexactsequenceofcoherentsheavesO 0 0 !F1 !F2 !F3 ! 0 0 0 we get an exact sequence of C-vector spaces 0 H ( 1) H ( 2) H ( 3). As we often do when we have a left exact functor, we can! take theF derived! functorF ! of HF0,whichwecall sheaf cohomology and denote by Hi. The point is that our short exact sequence of coherent sheaves then yields a long exact sequence 0 H0( ) H0( ) H0( ) H1( ) H1( ) H1( ) H2( ) ! F1 ! F2 ! F3 ! F1 ! F2 ! F3 ! F1 !··· which often helps us compute H0.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arxiv:1708.06494V1 [Math.AG] 22 Aug 2017 Proof
    CLOSED POINTS ON SCHEMES JUSTIN CHEN Abstract. This brief note gives a survey on results relating to existence of closed points on schemes, including an elementary topological characterization of the schemes with (at least one) closed point. X Let X be a topological space. For a subset S ⊆ X, let S = S denote the closure of S in X. Recall that a topological space is sober if every irreducible closed subset has a unique generic point. The following is well-known: Proposition 1. Let X be a Noetherian sober topological space, and x ∈ X. Then {x} contains a closed point of X. Proof. If {x} = {x} then x is a closed point. Otherwise there exists x1 ∈ {x}\{x}, so {x} ⊇ {x1}. If x1 is not a closed point, then continuing in this way gives a descending chain of closed subsets {x} ⊇ {x1} ⊇ {x2} ⊇ ... which stabilizes to a closed subset Y since X is Noetherian. Then Y is the closure of any of its points, i.e. every point of Y is generic, so Y is irreducible. Since X is sober, Y is a singleton consisting of a closed point. Since schemes are sober, this shows in particular that any scheme whose under- lying topological space is Noetherian (e.g. any Noetherian scheme) has a closed point. In general, it is of basic importance to know that a scheme has closed points (or not). For instance, recall that every affine scheme has a closed point (indeed, this is equivalent to the axiom of choice). In this direction, one can give a simple topological characterization of the schemes with closed points.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2006.16553V2 [Math.AG] 26 Jul 2020
    ON ULRICH BUNDLES ON PROJECTIVE BUNDLES ANDREAS HOCHENEGGER Abstract. In this article, the existence of Ulrich bundles on projective bundles P(E) → X is discussed. In the case, that the base variety X is a curve or surface, a close relationship between Ulrich bundles on X and those on P(E) is established for specific polarisations. This yields the existence of Ulrich bundles on a wide range of projective bundles over curves and some surfaces. 1. Introduction Given a smooth projective variety X, polarised by a very ample divisor A, let i: X ֒→ PN be the associated closed embedding. A locally free sheaf F on X is called Ulrich bundle (with respect to A) if and only if it satisfies one of the following conditions: • There is a linear resolution of F: ⊕bc ⊕bc−1 ⊕b0 0 → OPN (−c) → OPN (−c + 1) →···→OPN → i∗F → 0, where c is the codimension of X in PN . • The cohomology H•(X, F(−pA)) vanishes for 1 ≤ p ≤ dim(X). • For any finite linear projection π : X → Pdim(X), the locally free sheaf π∗F splits into a direct sum of OPdim(X) . Actually, by [18], these three conditions are equivalent. One guiding question about Ulrich bundles is whether a given variety admits an Ulrich bundle of low rank. The existence of such a locally free sheaf has surprisingly strong implications about the geometry of the variety, see the excellent surveys [6, 14]. Given a projective bundle π : P(E) → X, this article deals with the ques- tion, what is the relation between Ulrich bundles on the base X and those on P(E)? Note that answers to such a question depend much on the choice arXiv:2006.16553v3 [math.AG] 15 Aug 2021 of a very ample divisor.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 Lecture 3: Spectral Spaces and Constructible Sets
    3 Lecture 3: Spectral spaces and constructible sets 3.1 Introduction We want to analyze quasi-compactness properties of the valuation spectrum of a commutative ring, and to do so a digression on constructible sets is needed, especially to define the notion of constructibility in the absence of noetherian hypotheses. (This is crucial, since perfectoid spaces will not satisfy any kind of noetherian condition in general.) The reason that this generality is introduced in [EGA] is for the purpose of proving openness and closedness results on the locus of fibers satisfying reasonable properties, without imposing noetherian assumptions on the base. One first proves constructibility results on the base, often by deducing it from constructibility on the source and applying Chevalley’s theorem on images of constructible sets (which is valid for finitely presented morphisms), and then uses specialization criteria for constructible sets to be open. For our purposes, the role of constructibility will be quite different, resting on the interesting “constructible topology” that is introduced in [EGA, IV1, 1.9.11, 1.9.12] but not actually used later in [EGA]. This lecture is organized as follows. We first deal with the constructible topology on topological spaces. We discuss useful characterizations of constructibility in the case of spectral spaces, aiming for a criterion of Hochster (see Theorem 3.3.9) which will be our tool to show that Spv(A) is spectral, our ultimate goal. Notational convention. From now on, we shall write everywhere (except in some definitions) “qc” for “quasi-compact”, “qs” for “quasi-separated”, and “qcqs” for “quasi-compact and quasi-separated”.
    [Show full text]
  • Projective Varieties and Their Sheaves of Regular Functions
    Math 6130 Notes. Fall 2002. 4. Projective Varieties and their Sheaves of Regular Functions. These are the geometric objects associated to the graded domains: C[x0;x1; :::; xn]=P (for homogeneous primes P ) defining“global” complex algebraic geometry. Definition: (a) A subset V ⊆ CPn is algebraic if there is a homogeneous ideal I ⊂ C[x ;x ; :::; x ] for which V = V (I). 0 1 n p (b) A homogeneous ideal I ⊂ C[x0;x1; :::; xn]isradical if I = I. Proposition 4.1: (a) Every algebraic set V ⊆ CPn is the zero locus: V = fF1(x1; :::; xn)=F2(x1; :::; xn)=::: = Fm(x1; :::; xn)=0g of a finite set of homogeneous polynomials F1; :::; Fm 2 C[x0;x1; :::; xn]. (b) The maps V 7! I(V ) and I 7! V (I) ⊂ CPn give a bijection: n fnonempty alg sets V ⊆ CP g$fhomog radical ideals I ⊂hx0; :::; xnig (c) A topology on CPn, called the Zariski topology, results when: U ⊆ CPn is open , Z := CPn − U is an algebraic set (or empty) Proof: Note the similarity with Proposition 3.1. The proof is the same, except that Exercise 2.5 should be used in place of Corollary 1.4. Remark: As in x3, the bijection of (b) is \inclusion reversing," i.e. V1 ⊆ V2 , I(V1) ⊇ I(V2) and irreducibility and the features of the Zariski topology are the same. Example: A projective hypersurface is the zero locus: n n V (F )=f(a0 : a1 : ::: : an) 2 CP j F (a0 : a1 : ::: : an)=0}⊂CP whose irreducible components, as in x3, are obtained by factoring F , and the basic open sets of CPn are, as in x3, the complements of hypersurfaces.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Sheaves of Algebras
    Special Sheaves of Algebras Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Sheaves of Tensor Algebras 1 3 Sheaves of Symmetric Algebras 6 4 Sheaves of Exterior Algebras 9 5 Sheaves of Polynomial Algebras 17 6 Sheaves of Ideal Products 21 1 Introduction In this note “ring” means a not necessarily commutative ring. If A is a commutative ring then an A-algebra is a ring morphism A −→ B whose image is contained in the center of B. We allow noncommutative sheaves of rings, but if we say (X, OX ) is a ringed space then we mean OX is a sheaf of commutative rings. Throughout this note (X, OX ) is a ringed space. Associated to this ringed space are the following categories: Mod(X), GrMod(X), Alg(X), nAlg(X), GrAlg(X), GrnAlg(X) We show that the forgetful functors Alg(X) −→ Mod(X) and nAlg(X) −→ Mod(X) have left adjoints. If A is a nonzero commutative ring, the forgetful functors AAlg −→ AMod and AnAlg −→ AMod have left adjoints given by the symmetric algebra and tensor algebra con- structions respectively. 2 Sheaves of Tensor Algebras Let F be a sheaf of OX -modules, and for an open set U let P (U) be the OX (U)-algebra given by the tensor algebra T (F (U)). That is, ⊗2 P (U) = OX (U) ⊕ F (U) ⊕ F (U) ⊕ · · · For an inclusion V ⊆ U let ρ : OX (U) −→ OX (V ) and η : F (U) −→ F (V ) be the morphisms of abelian groups given by restriction. For n ≥ 2 we define a multilinear map F (U) × · · · × F (U) −→ F (V ) ⊗ · · · ⊗ F (V ) (m1, .
    [Show full text]
  • What Is a Generic Point?
    Generic Point. Eric Brussel, Emory University We define and prove the existence of generic points of schemes, and prove that the irreducible components of any scheme correspond bijectively to the scheme's generic points, and every open subset of an irreducible scheme contains that scheme's unique generic point. All of this material is standard, and [Liu] is a great reference. Let X be a scheme. Recall X is irreducible if its underlying topological space is irre- ducible. A (nonempty) topological space is irreducible if it is not the union of two proper distinct closed subsets. Equivalently, if the intersection of any two nonempty open subsets is nonempty. Equivalently, if every nonempty open subset is dense. Since X is a scheme, there can exist points that are not closed. If x 2 X, we write fxg for the closure of x in X. This scheme is irreducible, since an open subset of fxg that doesn't contain x also doesn't contain any point of the closure of x, since the compliment of an open set is closed. Therefore every open subset of fxg contains x, and is (therefore) dense in fxg. Definition. ([Liu, 2.4.10]) A point x of X specializes to a point y of X if y 2 fxg. A point ξ 2 X is a generic point of X if ξ is the only point of X that specializes to ξ. Ring theoretic interpretation. If X = Spec A is an affine scheme for a ring A, so that every point x corresponds to a unique prime ideal px ⊂ A, then x specializes to y if and only if px ⊂ py, and a point ξ is generic if and only if pξ is minimal among prime ideals of A.
    [Show full text]
  • NOTES on CARTIER and WEIL DIVISORS Recall: Definition 0.1. A
    NOTES ON CARTIER AND WEIL DIVISORS AKHIL MATHEW Abstract. These are notes on divisors from Ravi Vakil's book [2] on scheme theory that I prepared for the Foundations of Algebraic Geometry seminar at Harvard. Most of it is a rewrite of chapter 15 in Vakil's book, and the originality of these notes lies in the mistakes. I learned some of this from [1] though. Recall: Definition 0.1. A line bundle on a ringed space X (e.g. a scheme) is a locally free sheaf of rank one. The group of isomorphism classes of line bundles is called the Picard group and is denoted Pic(X). Here is a standard source of line bundles. 1. The twisting sheaf 1.1. Twisting in general. Let R be a graded ring, R = R0 ⊕ R1 ⊕ ::: . We have discussed the construction of the scheme ProjR. Let us now briefly explain the following additional construction (which will be covered in more detail tomorrow). L Let M = Mn be a graded R-module. Definition 1.1. We define the sheaf Mf on ProjR as follows. On the basic open set D(f) = SpecR(f) ⊂ ProjR, we consider the sheaf associated to the R(f)-module M(f). It can be checked easily that these sheaves glue on D(f) \ D(g) = D(fg) and become a quasi-coherent sheaf Mf on ProjR. Clearly, the association M ! Mf is a functor from graded R-modules to quasi- coherent sheaves on ProjR. (For R reasonable, it is in fact essentially an equiva- lence, though we shall not need this.) We now set a bit of notation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Riemann-Roch Theorem
    The Riemann-Roch Theorem by Carmen Anthony Bruni A project presented to the University of Waterloo in fulfillment of the project requirement for the degree of Master of Mathematics in Pure Mathematics Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2010 c Carmen Anthony Bruni 2010 Declaration I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this project. This is a true copy of the project, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I understand that my project may be made electronically available to the public. ii Abstract In this paper, I present varied topics in algebraic geometry with a motivation towards the Riemann-Roch theorem. I start by introducing basic notions in algebraic geometry. Then I proceed to the topic of divisors, specifically Weil divisors, Cartier divisors and examples of both. Linear systems which are also associated with divisors are introduced in the next chapter. These systems are the primary motivation for the Riemann-Roch theorem. Next, I introduce sheaves, a mathematical object that encompasses a lot of the useful features of the ring of regular functions and generalizes it. Cohomology plays a crucial role in the final steps before the Riemann-Roch theorem which encompasses all the previously developed tools. I then finish by describing some of the applications of the Riemann-Roch theorem to other problems in algebraic geometry. iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank all the people who made this project possible. I would like to thank Professor David McKinnon for his support and help to make this project a reality. I would also like to thank all my friends who offered a hand with the creation of this project.
    [Show full text]
  • SHEAVES of MODULES 01AC Contents 1. Introduction 1 2
    SHEAVES OF MODULES 01AC Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Pathology 2 3. The abelian category of sheaves of modules 2 4. Sections of sheaves of modules 4 5. Supports of modules and sections 6 6. Closed immersions and abelian sheaves 6 7. A canonical exact sequence 7 8. Modules locally generated by sections 8 9. Modules of finite type 9 10. Quasi-coherent modules 10 11. Modules of finite presentation 13 12. Coherent modules 15 13. Closed immersions of ringed spaces 18 14. Locally free sheaves 20 15. Bilinear maps 21 16. Tensor product 22 17. Flat modules 24 18. Duals 26 19. Constructible sheaves of sets 27 20. Flat morphisms of ringed spaces 29 21. Symmetric and exterior powers 29 22. Internal Hom 31 23. Koszul complexes 33 24. Invertible modules 33 25. Rank and determinant 36 26. Localizing sheaves of rings 38 27. Modules of differentials 39 28. Finite order differential operators 43 29. The de Rham complex 46 30. The naive cotangent complex 47 31. Other chapters 50 References 52 1. Introduction 01AD This is a chapter of the Stacks Project, version 77243390, compiled on Sep 28, 2021. 1 SHEAVES OF MODULES 2 In this chapter we work out basic notions of sheaves of modules. This in particular includes the case of abelian sheaves, since these may be viewed as sheaves of Z- modules. Basic references are [Ser55], [DG67] and [AGV71]. We work out what happens for sheaves of modules on ringed topoi in another chap- ter (see Modules on Sites, Section 1), although there we will mostly just duplicate the discussion from this chapter.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1307.5568V2 [Math.AG]
    PARTIAL POSITIVITY: GEOMETRY AND COHOMOLOGY OF q-AMPLE LINE BUNDLES DANIEL GREB AND ALEX KURONYA¨ To Rob Lazarsfeld on the occasion of his 60th birthday Abstract. We give an overview of partial positivity conditions for line bundles, mostly from a cohomological point of view. Although the current work is to a large extent of expository nature, we present some minor improvements over the existing literature and a new result: a Kodaira-type vanishing theorem for effective q-ample Du Bois divisors and log canonical pairs. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Overview of the theory of q-ample line bundles 4 2.1. Vanishing of cohomology groups and partial ampleness 4 2.2. Basic properties of q-ampleness 7 2.3. Sommese’s geometric q-ampleness 15 2.4. Ample subschemes, and a Lefschetz hyperplane theorem for q-ample divisors 17 3. q-Kodaira vanishing for Du Bois divisors and log canonical pairs 19 References 23 1. Introduction Ampleness is one of the central notions of algebraic geometry, possessing the extremely useful feature that it has geometric, numerical, and cohomological characterizations. Here we will concentrate on its cohomological side. The fundamental result in this direction is the theorem of Cartan–Serre–Grothendieck (see [Laz04, Theorem 1.2.6]): for a complete arXiv:1307.5568v2 [math.AG] 23 Jan 2014 projective scheme X, and a line bundle L on X, the following are equivalent to L being ample: ⊗m (1) There exists a positive integer m0 = m0(X, L) such that L is very ample for all m ≥ m0. (2) For every coherent sheaf F on X, there exists a positive integer m1 = m1(X, F, L) ⊗m for which F ⊗ L is globally generated for all m ≥ m1.
    [Show full text]
  • 8. Grassmannians
    66 Andreas Gathmann 8. Grassmannians After having introduced (projective) varieties — the main objects of study in algebraic geometry — let us now take a break in our discussion of the general theory to construct an interesting and useful class of examples of projective varieties. The idea behind this construction is simple: since the definition of projective spaces as the sets of 1-dimensional linear subspaces of Kn turned out to be a very useful concept, let us now generalize this and consider instead the sets of k-dimensional linear subspaces of Kn for an arbitrary k = 0;:::;n. Definition 8.1 (Grassmannians). Let n 2 N>0, and let k 2 N with 0 ≤ k ≤ n. We denote by G(k;n) the set of all k-dimensional linear subspaces of Kn. It is called the Grassmannian of k-planes in Kn. Remark 8.2. By Example 6.12 (b) and Exercise 6.32 (a), the correspondence of Remark 6.17 shows that k-dimensional linear subspaces of Kn are in natural one-to-one correspondence with (k − 1)- n− dimensional linear subspaces of P 1. We can therefore consider G(k;n) alternatively as the set of such projective linear subspaces. As the dimensions k and n are reduced by 1 in this way, our Grassmannian G(k;n) of Definition 8.1 is sometimes written in the literature as G(k − 1;n − 1) instead. Of course, as in the case of projective spaces our goal must again be to make the Grassmannian G(k;n) into a variety — in fact, we will see that it is even a projective variety in a natural way.
    [Show full text]
  • 4. Coherent Sheaves Definition 4.1. If (X,O X) Is a Locally Ringed Space
    4. Coherent Sheaves Definition 4.1. If (X; OX ) is a locally ringed space, then we say that an OX -module F is locally free if there is an open affine cover fUig of X such that FjUi is isomorphic to a direct sum of copies of OUi . If the number of copies r is finite and constant, then F is called locally free of rank r (aka a vector bundle). If F is locally free of rank one then we way say that F is invertible (aka a line bundle). The group of all invertible sheaves under tensor product, denoted Pic(X), is called the Picard group of X. A sheaf of ideals I is any OX -submodule of OX . Definition 4.2. Let X = Spec A be an affine scheme and let M be an A-module. M~ is the sheaf which assigns to every open subset U ⊂ X, the set of functions a s: U −! Mp; p2U which can be locally represented at p as a=g, a 2 M, g 2 R, p 2= Ug ⊂ U. Lemma 4.3. Let A be a ring and let M be an A-module. Let X = Spec A. ~ (1) M is a OX -module. ~ (2) If p 2 X then Mp is isomorphic to Mp. ~ (3) If f 2 A then M(Uf ) is isomorphic to Mf . Proof. (1) is clear and the rest is proved mutatis mutandis as for the structure sheaf. Definition 4.4. An OX -module F on a scheme X is called quasi- coherent if there is an open cover fUi = Spec Aig by affines and ~ isomorphisms FjUi ' Mi, where Mi is an Ai-module.
    [Show full text]