A Algebraic Varieties

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A Algebraic Varieties A Algebraic Varieties A.1 Basic definitions Let k[X1,X2,...,Xn] be a polynomial algebra over an algebraically closed field k with n indeterminates X1,...,Xn. We sometimes abbreviate it as k[X]= k[X1,X2,...,Xn]. Let us associate to each polynomial f(X)∈ k[X] its zero set n V(f):= {x = (x1,x2,...,xn) ∈ k | f(x)= f(x1,x2,...,xn) = 0} n 2in the n-fold product set k of k. For any subset S ⊂ k[X] we also set V(S) = f ∈S V(f). Then we have the following properties: n (i) 2V(1) =∅,V(0) =k . = (ii) i∈I V(Si) V( i∈I Si). (iii) V(S1) ∪ V(S2) = V(S1S2), where S1S2 := {fg | f ∈ S1,g∈ S2}. The inclusion ⊂ of (iii) is clear. We will prove only the inclusion ⊃. For x ∈ V(S1S2) \ V(S2) there is an element g ∈ S2 such that g(x) = 0. On the other hand, it ∀ ∀ follows from x ∈ V(S1S2) that f(x)g(x) = 0( f ∈ S1). Hence f(x)= 0( f ∈ S1) and x ∈ V(S1). So the part ⊃ was also proved. By (i), (ii), (iii) the set kn is endowed with the structure of a topological space by taking {V(S) | S ⊂ k[X]} to be its closed subsets. We call this topology of kn the Zariski topology. The closed subsets V(S) of kn with respect to it are called algebraic sets in kn. Note that V(S)= V(S), where S denotes the ideal of k[X] generated by S. Hence we may assume from the beginning that S is an ideal of k[X]. Conversely, for a subset W ⊂ kn the set = > ∀ I(W):= f ∈ k[X]|f(x)= 0 ( x ∈ W) is an ideal of k[X]. When W is a (Zariski) closed subset of kn, we have clearly V(I(W))= W. Namely, in the diagram V ideals in k[X] closed subsets in kn I 322 A Algebraic Varieties we have V ◦I = Id. However, for an ideal J ⊂ k[X] the equality I(V(J))= J does not hold in general. We have only I(V(J)) ⊃ J . The difference will be clarified later by Hilbert’s Nullstellensatz. Let V be a Zariski closed subset of kn (i.e., an algebraic set in kn). We regard it as a topological space by the relative topology induced from the Zariski topology of kn. We denote by k[V ] the k-algebra of k-valued functions on V obtained by restricting polynomial functions to V . It is called the coordinate ring of V . The restriction map ρV : k[X]→k[V ] given by ρV (f ) := f |V is a surjective homomorphism of k-algebras with Ker ρV = I(V), and hence we have k[V ]k[X]/I (V ). For each n point x = (x1,x2,...,xn) ∈ k of V define a homomorphism ex : k[V ]→k of k-algebras by ex(f ) = f(x). Then we get a map e : V −→ Homk-alg(k[V ],k) (x−→ ex), where Homk-alg(k[V ],k)denotes the set of the k-algebra homomorphisms from k[V ] to k. Conversely, for a k-algebra homomorphism φ : k[V ]→k define n x = (x1,x2,...,xn) ∈ k by xi = φρV (Xi) (1 ≤ i ≤ n). Then we have x ∈ V and ex = φ. Hence we have an identification V = Homk-alg(k[V ],k)as a set. Moreover, −1 ={ ∈ | = }⊂ the closed subsets of V are of the form V(ρV (J )) x V ex(J ) 0 V for ideals J of k[V ]. Therefore, the topological space V is recovered from the k-algebra k[V ]. It indicates the possibility of defining the notion of algebraic sets starting from certain k-algebras without using the embedding into kn. Note that the coordinate ring A = k[V ] is finitely generated over k, and reduced (i.e., does not contain non-zero nilpotent elements) because k[V ] is a subring of the ring of functions on V with values in the field k. In this chapter we give an account of the classical theory of “algebraic varieties’’ based on reduced finitely generated (commutative) algebras over algebraically closed fields (in the modern language of schemes one allows general commutative rings as “coordinate algebras’’). The following two theorems are fundamental. Theorem A.1.1 (Aweak form of Hilbert’Nullstellensatz). Any maximal ideal of the polynomial ring k[X1,X2,...,Xn] is generated by the elements Xi −xi (1 ≤ i ≤ n) n for a point x = (x1,x2,...,xn) ∈ k . √ √ Theorem A.1.2 (Hilbert’s Nullstellensatz). We have I(V(J)) = J , where J is the radical { f ∈ k[X]|f N ∈ J for some N 0} of J . For the proofs, see, for example, [Mu]. For a finitely generated k-algebra A denote by Specm A the set of the maximal ideals of A. For an algebraic set V ⊂ kn we have a bijection Homk-alg(k[V ],k) Specm k[V ] (e −→ Ker e) byTheoremA.1.1. Under this correspondence, the closed subsets in Specm k[V ]V are the sets V(I)={m ∈ Specm k[V ]|m ⊃ I }, A.2 Affine varieties 323 where I ranges through the ideals of k[V ]. Theorem A.1.2 implies that there is a one- to-one correspondence√ between the closed subsets in Specm k[V ] and the radical ideals I (I = I)ofk[V ]. A.2 Affine varieties Motivated by the arguments in the previous section, we start from a finitely generated reduced commutative k-algebra A to define an algebraic variety. Namely, we set V = Specm A and define its topology so that the closed subsets are given by = > V(I)={m ∈ Specm A | I ⊂ m}|I: ideals of A . By Hilbert’s Nullstellensatz (its weak form), we get the identification V Homk-alg(A, k). We sometimes write a point x ∈ V as mx ∈ Specm A or ex ∈ Homk-alg(A, k). Under this notation we have f(x)= ex(f ) = (f mod mx) ∈ k for f ∈ A. Here, we used the identification k A/mx obtained by the composite of the morphisms k→ A → A/mx. Hence the ring A is regarded as a k-algebra consisting of certain k-valued functions on V . Recall that any open subset of V is of the form D(I) = V \ V(I), where I is an ideal of A. Since A is a noetherian ring (finitely generated over k), the ideal I is generated by a finite subset {f1,f2,...,fr } of I. Then we have r (r D(I) = V \ V(fi) = D(fi), i=1 i=1 where D(f ) ={x ∈ V | f(x) = 0 }=V \ V(f)for f ∈ A. We call an open subset of the form D(f ) for f ∈ A a principal open subset of V . Principal open subsets form a basis of the open subsets of V . Note that we have the equivalence D(f ) ⊂ D(g) ⇐⇒ (f ) ⊂ (g) ⇐⇒ f ∈ (g) by Hilbert’s Nullstellensatz. Assume that we are given an A-module M. We introduce a sheaf M on the topological space V = Specm A as follows. For a multiplicatively closed subset S of A we denote by S−1M the localization of M with respect to S. It consists of the equivalence classes with respect to the equivalence relation ∼ on the set of pairs (s, m) = m/s (s ∈ S, m ∈ M) given by m/s ∼ m/s ⇐⇒ t(sm − sm) = 0 (∃t ∈ S). By the ordinary operation rule of fractional numbers S−1A is endowed with a ring structure and S−1M turns out to be an S−1A-module. For f ∈ A we set 324 A Algebraic Varieties = −1 := { 2 } Mf Sf M, where Sf 1,f,f ,... Note that for two principal open subsets ⊂ g : → D(f ) D(g) a natural homomorphism rf Mg Mf is defined as follows. We n l have f = hg (h ∈ A, n ∈ N), and then the element m/g ∈ Mg is mapped to l l l l l nl m/g = h m/h g = h m/f ∈ Mf . In the case of D(f ) = D(g) we easily see Mf Mg by considering the inverse. Theorem A.2.1. (i) For an A-module M there exists a unique sheaf M on V = Specm A such that for any principal open subset D(f ) we have M(D(f)) = Mf , and the restriction → ⊂ g homomorphism M(D(f)) M(D(g)) for D(f ) D(g) is given by rf . (ii) The sheaf OV := A is naturally a sheaf of k-algebras on V . (iii) For an A-module M the sheaf M is naturally a sheaf of OV -module. The stalk of M at x ∈ V is given by = −1 = Mmx (A mx) M −lim→ Mf . f(x) =0 O := = −1 This is a module over the local ring V,x Amx (A mx) A. The key point of the proof is the fact that the functor D(f ) → Mf on the category of principal open subsets {D(f ) | f ∈ A} satisfies the “axioms of sheaves (for a basis of open subsets),’’ which is assured by the next lemma. Lemma A.2.2. Assume that the condition f1,f2,...,fr 1 is satisfied in the ring A. Then for an A-module M we have an exact sequence Br B −→ −→α −→β 0 M Mfi Mfi fj , i=1 i,j r − ∈ ≤ ≤ where the last arrow maps (si)i=1 to si sj Mfi fj (1 i, j r).
Recommended publications
  • Lecture 3. Resolutions and Derived Functors (GL)
    Lecture 3. Resolutions and derived functors (GL) This lecture is intended to be a whirlwind introduction to, or review of, reso- lutions and derived functors { with tunnel vision. That is, we'll give unabashed preference to topics relevant to local cohomology, and do our best to draw a straight line between the topics we cover and our ¯nal goals. At a few points along the way, we'll be able to point generally in the direction of other topics of interest, but other than that we will do our best to be single-minded. Appendix A contains some preparatory material on injective modules and Matlis theory. In this lecture, we will cover roughly the same ground on the projective/flat side of the fence, followed by basics on projective and injective resolutions, and de¯nitions and basic properties of derived functors. Throughout this lecture, let us work over an unspeci¯ed commutative ring R with identity. Nearly everything said will apply equally well to noncommutative rings (and some statements need even less!). In terms of module theory, ¯elds are the simple objects in commutative algebra, for all their modules are free. The point of resolving a module is to measure its complexity against this standard. De¯nition 3.1. A module F over a ring R is free if it has a basis, that is, a subset B ⊆ F such that B generates F as an R-module and is linearly independent over R. It is easy to prove that a module is free if and only if it is isomorphic to a direct sum of copies of the ring.
    [Show full text]
  • Arithmetic Duality Theorems
    Arithmetic Duality Theorems Second Edition J.S. Milne Copyright c 2004, 2006 J.S. Milne. The electronic version of this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Li- cense: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ Briefly, you are free to copy the electronic version of the work for noncommercial purposes under certain conditions (see the link for a precise statement). Single paper copies for noncommercial personal use may be made without ex- plicit permission from the copyright holder. All other rights reserved. First edition published by Academic Press 1986. A paperback version of this work is available from booksellers worldwide and from the publisher: BookSurge, LLC, www.booksurge.com, 1-866-308-6235, [email protected] BibTeX information @book{milne2006, author={J.S. Milne}, title={Arithmetic Duality Theorems}, year={2006}, publisher={BookSurge, LLC}, edition={Second}, pages={viii+339}, isbn={1-4196-4274-X} } QA247 .M554 Contents Contents iii I Galois Cohomology 1 0 Preliminaries............................ 2 1 Duality relative to a class formation . ............. 17 2 Localfields............................. 26 3 Abelianvarietiesoverlocalfields.................. 40 4 Globalfields............................. 48 5 Global Euler-Poincar´echaracteristics................ 66 6 Abelianvarietiesoverglobalfields................. 72 7 An application to the conjecture of Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer . 93 8 Abelianclassfieldtheory......................101 9 Otherapplications..........................116 AppendixA:Classfieldtheoryforfunctionfields............126
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2008.10677V3 [Math.CT] 9 Jul 2021 Space Ha Hoyepiil Ea Ihtewr Fj Ea N194 in Leray J
    On sheaf cohomology and natural expansions ∗ Ana Luiza Tenório, IME-USP, [email protected] Hugo Luiz Mariano, IME-USP, [email protected] July 12, 2021 Abstract In this survey paper, we present Čech and sheaf cohomologies – themes that were presented by Koszul in University of São Paulo ([42]) during his visit in the late 1950s – we present expansions for categories of generalized sheaves (i.e, Grothendieck toposes), with examples of applications in other cohomology theories and other areas of mathematics, besides providing motivations and historical notes. We conclude explaining the difficulties in establishing a cohomology theory for elementary toposes, presenting alternative approaches by considering constructions over quantales, that provide structures similar to sheaves, and indicating researches related to logic: constructive (intuitionistic and linear) logic for toposes, sheaves over quantales, and homological algebra. 1 Introduction Sheaf Theory explicitly began with the work of J. Leray in 1945 [46]. The nomenclature “sheaf” over a space X, in terms of closed subsets of a topological space X, first appeared in 1946, also in one of Leray’s works, according to [21]. He was interested in solving partial differential equations and build up a strong tool to pass local properties to global ones. Currently, the definition of a sheaf over X is given by a “coherent family” of structures indexed on the lattice of open subsets of X or as étale maps (= local homeomorphisms) into X. Both arXiv:2008.10677v3 [math.CT] 9 Jul 2021 formulations emerged in the late 1940s and early 1950s in Cartan’s seminars and, in modern terms, they are intimately related by an equivalence of categories.
    [Show full text]
  • 2 Sheaves and Cohomology
    2 Sheaves and Cohomology 2.1 Sheaves and Presheaves We fix a topological space X. Later we will include assumptions that are satisfied by smooth manifolds. 2.1.1 Definitions and Examples Definition 2.1. A presheaf of abelian groups F on X assigns to each open U ⊆ X an abelian group F (U) = Γ(U; F ) and for every inclusion of open sets V ⊆ U a homomorphism of abelian groups F ρUV : F (U) ! F (V ), often called the restriction map, satisfying F 1 [P1] ρUU = F(U) F F F [P2] for W ⊆ V ⊆ U, we have ρVW ◦ ρUV = ρUW . If F and G are two presheaves (of abelian groups) on X, then a morphism ' : F ! G consists of the data of a morphism 'U : F (U) ! G (U) for each open set U ⊆ X such that if V ⊆ U is an inclusion, then we have commutative diagrams 'U F (U) / G (U) F G ρUV ρUV (V ) / (V ): F 'V G Remark 2.2. We may form a category TopX whose objects are open sets in X and whose mor- phisms are simply inclusions of open sets. Then the above definition says that a presheaf is a ◦ contravariant functor TopX ! Ab, and that a morphism of presheaves is a natural transforma- tion of the associated functors. Definition 2.3. A sheaf F of abelian groups on X is a presheaf which, for any open set U ⊆ X and any open covering fUigi2I of U, satisfies the two additional properties: [S1] if s 2 F (U) is such that sjUi = 0 for all i 2 I, then s = 0; [S2] if si 2 F (Ui) such that sijUi\Uj = sjjUi\Uj for all i; j 2 I, then there exists s 2 F (U) such that sjUi = si for each i.
    [Show full text]
  • Differential Geometry of Complex Vector Bundles
    DIFFERENTIAL GEOMETRY OF COMPLEX VECTOR BUNDLES by Shoshichi Kobayashi This is re-typesetting of the book first published as PUBLICATIONS OF THE MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY OF JAPAN 15 DIFFERENTIAL GEOMETRY OF COMPLEX VECTOR BUNDLES by Shoshichi Kobayashi Kan^oMemorial Lectures 5 Iwanami Shoten, Publishers and Princeton University Press 1987 The present work was typeset by AMS-LATEX, the TEX macro systems of the American Mathematical Society. TEX is the trademark of the American Mathematical Society. ⃝c 2013 by the Mathematical Society of Japan. All rights reserved. The Mathematical Society of Japan retains the copyright of the present work. No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copy- right owner. Dedicated to Professor Kentaro Yano It was some 35 years ago that I learned from him Bochner's method of proving vanishing theorems, which plays a central role in this book. Preface In order to construct good moduli spaces for vector bundles over algebraic curves, Mumford introduced the concept of a stable vector bundle. This concept has been generalized to vector bundles and, more generally, coherent sheaves over algebraic manifolds by Takemoto, Bogomolov and Gieseker. As the dif- ferential geometric counterpart to the stability, I introduced the concept of an Einstein{Hermitian vector bundle. The main purpose of this book is to lay a foundation for the theory of Einstein{Hermitian vector bundles. We shall not give a detailed introduction here in this preface since the table of contents is fairly self-explanatory and, furthermore, each chapter is headed by a brief introduction.
    [Show full text]
  • Perverse Sheaves Learning Seminar: Derived Categories and Its Applications to Sheaves
    Perverse Sheaves Learning Seminar: Derived Categories and its Applications to Sheaves Yuguang (Roger) Bai October 6, 2018 1 Derived Categories Unless otherwise stated, let A be an abelian category. Denition 1.1. Let Ch(A ) be the category of chain complexes in A . Objects in this category are chain complexes A•, which is a sequence of objects and morphisms in A of the form i−1 i · · · −! Ai−1 d−! Ai −!d Ai+1 −! · · · satisfying di ◦ di−1 = 0 for every i 2 Z. A morphism • • between two complexes is a collection of morphisms i i i in f : A ! B f = (f : A ! B )i2Z such that i+1 i i i for every . A f ◦ dA = dB ◦ f i 2 Z Denition 1.2. A chain complex A• is said to be bounded above if there is an integer N such that Ai = 0 for all i > N. Similarly, A• is said to be bounded below if there is an integer N such that Ai = 0 for all i < N. A• is said to be bounded if it is bounded above and bounded below. Let Ch−(A ) (resp. Ch+(A ), Chb(A )) denote the full subcategory of Ch(A ) consisting of bounded- above (resp. bounded-below, bounded) complexes. Let Ch◦(A ) denote any of the four categories above. For a complex A•, let [1] : Ch(A ) ! Ch(A ) denote the shift functor where A[1]i = Ai−1. Denition 1.3. A quasi-isomorphism in Ch(A ) is a chain map f : A• ! B• such that the induced maps Hn(f): Hn(A) ! Hn(B) are isomorphisms for all n.
    [Show full text]
  • Spectral Sequences Means of the Isomorphism of the Previous Step K to the Sub- C 2000 M
    p;q p;q Geometria Superiore Reference Cards for k > 3 we can choose Bk+1(E2 ) and Zk+1(E2 ) as the p;q p;q subobjects of Zk(E2 ) containing Bk(E2 ) and identified by Spectral Sequences means of the isomorphism of the previous step k to the sub- c 2000 M. Cailotto, Permissions on last. v0.0 objects im(dp−k;q+k−1) and ker(dp;q) of Ep;q respectively; in Send comments and corrections to [email protected] k k k this way we have Z (Ep;q)B (Ep;q) ' Ep;q : Generalities. k+1 2 k+1 2 k+1 Definitions Let A be an abelian category. Define Af the So we have a long chain of inclusions: quasi-abelian category of filtered objects of A: objects are ob- p;q p;q p;q p;q E = Z2(E ) ⊇ ··· ⊇ Zk(E ) ⊇ Zk+1(E ) ⊇ ··· ⊇ jects A of A with a (decreasing) filtration, i.e. a family of 2 2 2 2 subobjects (F p(A)) of A s.t. F p+1(A) ⊆ F p(A) for every ··· ⊇ B (Ep;q) ⊇ B (Ep;q) ⊇ ··· ⊇ B (Ep;q) = 0 p2Z k+1 2 k 2 2 2 p 2 Z; morphisms ' : A−!B are morphisms of A respecting the filtrations, i.e. '(F p(A)) ⊆ F p(B). and the definition continues with: p;q p;q p (d) for every p;q 2 Z two subobjects B1(E2 ) and Z1(E2 ) of The filtration (F (A)) of A is: p;q p;q p;q p2Z E2 such that Z1(E2 ) ⊇ B1(E2 ) and for every k T p (i) separated if p2 F (A) = 0, p;q p;q p;q p;q Z Zk(E2 ) ⊇ Z1(E2 ) ⊇ B1(E2 ) ⊇ Bk(E2 ) (ii) coseparated (or exhaustive) if S F p(A) = A, p2 p;q p;q p;q Z and define: E = Z1(E ) B1(E ); p q 1 2 2 (iii) discrete if there exists p 2 Z s.t.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Abelian Sheaf Cohomology
    An introduction to abelian sheaf cohomology Jesse Han April 7, 2018 Contents 1 Basic definitions 1 1.1 Notation and conventions . .1 1.2 Sheaves and presheaves on a topological space . .2 1.3 Sheaves of groups and sheaves of abelian groups . .4 2 Sheaf cohomology via injective resolutions 7 2.1 AbpShpXqq has enough injectives . .7 2.2 Defining sheaf cohomology . .9 3 Acyclic resolutions 10 1 Basic definitions 1.1 Notation and conventions • If C is a category, and X and Y are objects of C, we will write CpX; Y q for the set of morphisms X Ñ Y in C. • If X is a topological space, we will write OpXq for its poset of open subsets, viewed as a category. • If V is an open subset of X, by an open covering of V we mean a family of open subsets Ui Ď V Ui Ď X such that i I Ui “ V . open P " *iPI ˇ • We will say thatˇ a poset is filtered if itŤ is a directed set: for any finite number of elements x1; : : : ; xn in the poset, there is an x such that for all i “ 1; : : : ; n, x ¥ xi.A poset which satisfies the dual condition will be called cofiltered. 1 • To us, \left-exact" and \right-exact" mean \preserves finite limits" and \preserves finite colimits", and \continuous" and \cocontinuous" mean \preserves small limits" and \preserves small colimits". When we are working in the context of functors between abelian categories, \left-exact" and \right-exact" will also stipulate additivity. 1.2 Sheaves and presheaves on a topological space Let X be a topological space.
    [Show full text]
  • Homological Algebra
    Homological Algebra Andrew Kobin Fall 2014 / Spring 2017 Contents Contents Contents 0 Introduction 1 1 Preliminaries 4 1.1 Categories and Functors . .4 1.2 Exactness of Sequences and Functors . 10 1.3 Tensor Products . 17 2 Special Modules 24 2.1 Projective Modules . 24 2.2 Modules Over Noetherian Rings . 28 2.3 Injective Modules . 31 2.4 Flat Modules . 38 3 Categorical Constructions 47 3.1 Products and Coproducts . 47 3.2 Limits and Colimits . 49 3.3 Abelian Categories . 54 3.4 Projective and Injective Resolutions . 56 4 Homology 60 4.1 Chain Complexes and Homology . 60 4.2 Derived Functors . 65 4.3 Derived Categories . 70 4.4 Tor and Ext . 79 4.5 Universal Coefficient Theorems . 90 5 Ring Homology 93 5.1 Dimensions of Rings . 93 5.2 Hilbert's Syzygy Theorem . 97 5.3 Regular Local Rings . 101 5.4 Differential Graded Algebras . 103 6 Spectral Sequences 110 6.1 Bicomplexes and Exact Couples . 110 6.2 Spectral Sequences . 113 6.3 Applications of Spectral Sequences . 119 7 Group Cohomology 128 7.1 G-Modules . 128 7.2 Cohomology of Groups . 130 7.3 Some Results for the First Group Cohomology . 133 7.4 Group Extensions . 136 7.5 Central Simple Algebras . 139 7.6 Classifying Space . 142 i Contents Contents 8 Sheaf Theory 144 8.1 Sheaves and Sections . 144 8.2 The Category of Sheaves . 150 8.3 Sheaf Cohomology . 156 8.4 Cechˇ Cohomology . 161 8.5 Direct and Inverse Image . 170 ii 0 Introduction 0 Introduction These notes are taken from a reading course on homological algebra led by Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • A Finite Order Arithmetic Foundation for Cohomology
    A FINITE ORDER ARITHMETIC FOUNDATION FOR COHOMOLOGY COLIN MCLARTY I affirm the principal force in all my work has been the quest for the \general." In truth I prefer to accent \unity" rather than \generality." But for me these are two aspects of one quest. Unity represents the profound aspect, and generality the superficial aspect. (Grothendieck, 87, p. PU 25) Abstract: Large-structure tools like toposes and derived categories in cohomol- ogy never go far from arithmetic in practice, yet existing formalizations are stronger than ZFC. We formalize the practical insight by grounding the entire toolkit of EGA and SGA at the level of finite order arithmetic. Grothendieck pre-empted many set theoretic issues in cohomology by positing a universe: \a set `large enough' that the habitual operations of set theory do not go outside it" (SGA 1 VI.1 p. 146). His universes prove Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory with choice (ZFC) is consistent, so ZFC cannot prove they exist. This paper founds the EGA and SGA on axioms with the proof theoretic strength of finite order arithmetic. Even Zermelo set theory (Z) proves these axioms consistent. So functors from all modules on a scheme to all Abelian groups achieve unity by generality indeed, but with little generality in the set theoretic sense. Outline. Section 1 introduces the issues by formalizing EGA and SGA with weaker universes within ZFC. Section 2 opens the serious reduction to Mac Lane set the- ory (MC) a fragment of ZFC with the strength of finite order arithmetic. Section 3 develops category theory in MC, with special care for injective resolutions.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Sheaves: the Lightning Tour 1.1
    1. Sheaves: the lightning tour 1.1. Let R be a commutative ring (with 1). Let X be a topological space. A presheaf of R modules on X is a contravariant functor S : category of open sets and inclusions ! category of R-modules: This is a fancy way to say that V ⊂ U gives S(U) ! S(V ) and W ⊂ V ⊂ U gives a commutative diagram S(U) - S(V ) - S(W ) Also, U ⊂ U gives S(U) ! S(U) identity and S(ϕ) = 0. Elements s 2 S(U) are called sections of S over U (for reasons that will become clear shortly). If V ⊂ U and s 2 S(U), its image in S(V ) is denoted sjV and is called the restriction of the section s to V . A morphism S ! T of presheaves is a natural transformation of functors, that is, a collection of homomorphisms S(U) ! T (U) (for every open set U ⊂ X) which commute with the restriction maps. This defines a category of presheaves of R-modules, and it is an abelian category with kernels and cokernels defined in the obvious manner, for example, the kernel presheaf of a morphism f : S ! T assigns to each open set U ⊂ X the R-module ker(S(U) ! T (U)). More generally, for any category C one may define, in a similar manner, the category of presheaves on X with coefficients in C. If C is abelian then so is the category of presheaves with coefficients in C. A presheaf S is a sheaf if the following sheaf axiom holds: Let fUαgα2I be any collection of open subsets of X, let U = [α2I Uα and let sα 2 S(Uα) be a collection of sections such that sαj(Uα \ Uβ) = sβj(Uα \ Uβ) for all α; β 2 I.
    [Show full text]
  • We Can Immediately Check the Following Properties, Hence, We Will Skip the Proof
    We can immediately check the following properties, hence, we will skip the proof. Proposition 133. Let A be an abelian category with enough injectives, and let F : A ! B be a covariant left exact functor to another abelian category B. Then (1) For each i 0, the functor RiF is an additive functor from A to B. It is independent ≥ of the choices of injective resolutions. (2) There is a natural isomorphism R0F F . ' (3) For each short exact sequence 0 A A A 0 and for each i 0, there ! 0 ! ! 00 ! ≥ is a natural morphism δi : RiF (A ) Ri+1F (A ), such that we have a long exact 00 ! 0 sequence i i i i δ i+1 R F (A0) R F (A) R F (A00) R F (A0) . ···! ! ! ! !··· (4) Given a morphism of the exact sequence of (c) to another 0 B B B 0, ! 0 ! ! 00 ! the δ’s give a commutative diagram i i δ i+1 R F (A00) / R F (A0) ✏ i ✏ i δ i+1 R F (B00) / R F (B0) (5) For each injective object I of A, we have RiF (I)=0for every i>0. Definition 134. Let F : A B be as above. An object J A is acyclic if RiF (J)=0 ! 2 for every i>0. We may use an acyclic resolution instead of an injective resolution to compute the derived functor: Proposition 135. Let F : A B be as above. Let A A be an object such that it ! 2 admits a resolution 0 A J 0 J 1 ! ! ! !··· i where each J is acyclic for F (we say J • is an F -acyclic resolution of A).
    [Show full text]