DOCSLIB.ORG

Notes on Math 511 (Algebraic Geometry)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Notes on Math 511 (Algebraic Geometry) Notes on Math 511 (Algebraic Geometry) Li Li April 27, 2009 2 (Week 1, two classes.) 0.1 Goal of the lecture. Alexander Grothendieck (born March 28, 1928 in Berlin, Germany) is considered to be one of the greatest mathematicians of the 20th century. He is the chief designer of modern algebraic geometry. Now he is almost 81, and it is my great honor to present here an introduction to modern algebraic geometry which has been greatly influence by his work. Some textbook on introduction of algebraic geometry (or any ¯eld of mathematics) tries to minimize or erase the trace of history. This is some sense is reasonable: a science should be coherent and be independent of who have discovered it. Calculus is a typical example. We barely remember who have contributed to the development of it. Calculus has been born for more than 300 years if we count from Newton and Leibniz, and it becomes so mature and standard that it is easily accessed by a high school student. But algebraic geometry, on the other hand, is not old enough to forget about how it was created by force, and in my point of view, is not yet mature. (One evidence is that we are still stuck in curve, surface and dimension 3 manifold and barely know anything in higher dimensional; the other evidence is that the new objects kept born: manifolds, varieties, schemes, algebraic spaces, stacks, etc; third evidence, I did not successfully explained to my wife what is algebraic geometry, and I believe that algebraic geometry is far from accessible to general audience.) So in this class we follow instead the order of history, and that is roughly what Hartshorne did in his book. Start from varieties, and when we are familiar with their properties, we proceed to schemes. My suggestion for the class: be skeptical to the material, always ask me or yourself, if it is necessary, is there a better approach? On the other hand, you should be open minded, do not refuse to accept a concept simply because it is complicated or ugly. You might appreciate it when you are used to it :-) This class is not complex algebraic geometry, hence almost no transcendental method will be introduced, and I believe you have learned or will learn something like Hodge theory in other classes. Exercise are essential to understand the material. Some exercises you should do it at least once in your lifetime instead of simply believe it. Asking the following: a±ne varieties and projective varieties, Zariski topology, rational maps, birational equivalence, blow-up, valuation rings, Hilbert polynomials, sheaves, schemes, coherent sheaves, divisors, invertible sheaves, ample line bundles(invertible sheaves), linear system, derived functors, cohomology of a sheaf, Cech cohomology, Ext functor and Serre duality, higher direct images. Chapter 1 Varieties 1.1 A±ne varieties It is simply the set of points that is de¯ned by one or several polynomial equations. For example, let k be your favorite ¯eld, consider a parabola in k2 de¯ned by y ¡ x2 = 0. The polynomial y ¡ x2 is in k[x; y]. We should expected that to study the zero locus of a polynomial is closely related to the study of the polynomial in the ring k[x; y]. Indeed, to understand the interplay between the geometry and algebra is the central goal of algebraic geometry. We will see today such a relation. n Let k be an algebraic closed ¯eld, the most common choice is C. We call it the base ¯eld. Ak (or n n n A ) is the a±ne n-space, or k if you like. The polynomials on A form a ring, say A = k[x1; : : : ; xn], n it is called the coordinate ring of A , xi are called coordinates. Given any subset T of A, we de¯ne the zero set of T to be the common zeros of all elements in T , i.e. Z(T ) = fP 2 Anjf(P ) = 0; 8f 2 T g It is obvious that if a is the ideal generated by T , then Z(a) = Z(T ). Example 1.1.1. (1) x2 + y2 = 0. (2) x and x2. (3) the de¯ning equations for (t3; t4; t5). De¯nition 1.1.2. A subset Y of An is an algebraic set if Y = Z(T ) for some subset T ⊆ A. Remark 1.1.3. T = ;, T = (1), etc. Proposition 1.1.4. The union of ¯nite many algebraic set is an algebraic set. The intersection of any family of algebraic set is algebraic set. Example 1.1.5. The union of a point (0; 0) and the line x = 1. Now notice each algebraic set is determined by not necessarily unique subset T . For example, (x; y) and (x; y2) and (x2; xy; y2) in k[x; y]. Can one specify a canonical subset? The answer is yes by the following. Theorem 1.1.6. There is a one-one correspondence between algebraic sets in An and radical ideals in A, given by Y 7! I(Y ) := ff 2 Ajf(P ) = 0; 8P 2 Y g and a 7! Z(a). 3 4 CHAPTER 1. VARIETIES p Proof. Enough to show that (1) for any ideal a, I(Z(a) = a and (2) for any algebraic set Y , Z(I(Y )) = Y . For (2), if not equal, then 9f 2 I(Y ); z 2 Z(I(Y )), s.t. f(z) 6= 0, this is impossible. (1) is the famous Hilbert's Nullstellensatz. Theorem 1.1.7 (Hilbert's Nullstellensatz (German: \theorem of zeros")). Let k be an algebraically closed ¯eld, a be an ideal in A = k[x1; : : : ; xn], then p I(Z(a)) = a: A special case: when a is maximal, hence proper, Z(a) is not empty, suppose (a1; : : : ; an) 2 Z(a), then (x1 ¡ a1; : : : ; xn ¡ an) ¶ a, by the maximality of a, equality holds. Theorem 1.1.8 (Weak Nullstellensatz). Let k be an algebraically closed ¯eld, the maximal ideal in A = k[x1; : : : ; xn] are the ideals (x1 ¡ a1; : : : ; xn ¡ an). Remark 1.1.9. Note it is not true when k is not algebraically closed, say R, the nullstellensatz is not true. Eg. (x2 + 1) is maximal in R[x]. On the other hand, thep weak Nullstellensatz implies the strong one, by the following proof. It is easy to see I(Z(a)) ¶ a, so we need to show the inclusion in the other direction. If we take a ¯nite set of generators f1; : : : ; fm of a, then we need to show that, if g 2 k[x1; : : : ; xn] vanishes at ` P the zero locus f1 = ¢ ¢ ¢ = fm = 0, then g = hifi. Here is the lifting trick of Zariski: consider k[x1; : : : ; xn+1]. De¯ne ideal b = ak[x1; : : : ; xn+1] + (1 ¡ gxn+1): We ¯rst show that b must be (1). Otherwise it is proper, by weak Nullstellensatz it is in a maximal ideal m = (x1 ¡ a1; : : : ; xn+1 ¡ an+1). Then 1 ¡ gxn+1 is in the maximal ideal m, so are f1; : : : ; fm. But this is impossible since f1 = ¢ ¢ ¢ = fm = 0 at (a1; : : : ; an) implies g(a1; : : : ; an) = 0. Now since 1 2 b, 1 = h1f1 +¢ ¢ ¢+hmfm +hm+1(1¡gxn+1). Plug in xn+1 = 1=g, then eliminate ` P 0 the denominator, we will obtain g = hifi. Now we need to prove Theorem 1.1.8, we need Noether's Normalization Lemma: let k be any ¯eld. R be an integral domain ¯nitely generated over k. There are algebraically independent elements x1; : : : ; xn in R, such that R is an integral extension of k[x1; : : : ; xn]. (I am not suppose to say it now, but geometrically, the Lemma says that any variety is a branched covering of an a±ne space.) Proof of Theorem 1.1.8. Let m be a maximal ideal. Then R = k[x1; : : : ; xn]=m is a ¯eld. Let d be its transcendental degree over k. Then S = k[y1; : : : ; yd] ½ R such that R is integral over S and is a ¯eld. This easily implies S itself is a ¯eld (check it!), which is only possible if d = 0. Then R is integral over k, but k is algebraically closed (!), so R = k, hence k+m = k[x1; : : : ; xn], in particular ai + mi = xi for each i = 1; : : : ; n. So m ¶ (m1; : : : ; mn) = (x1 ¡ a1; : : : ; xn ¡ an), but the right hand side is already maximal, so equality holds. 1.1. AFFINE VARIETIES 5 Now we introduce Zariski topology and irreducibility, and de¯ne variety. De¯nition 1.1.10. The Zariski topology on An is de¯ned as follows: a closed set in An is to be a algebraic set. The Zariski topology on an algebraic set in An is induced from the Zariski topology of An. (Check it is a topology.) De¯nition 1.1.11. A nonempty subset Y of a topological space X is irreducible if it cannot be expressed as the union Y = Y1 [ Y2 where Y1 and Y2 are closed proper subsets of Y . The empty set is not considered to be irreducible. Example 1.1.12. Open subset of an irreducible space. Closure of a irreducible subset. De¯nition 1.1.13. An a±ne (algebraic) variety is an irreducible closed subset of An. An open subset of an a±ne variety is a quasi-a±ne variety. Proposition 1.1.14. An algebraic set Y on An is a variety i® I(Y ) is prime. Now is more about topology: De¯nition 1.1.15. A topological space X is noetherian if it satis¯es descending chain condition for closed subsets.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Calabi Complex and Killing Sheaf Cohomology
    The Calabi complex and Killing sheaf cohomology Igor Khavkine Department of Mathematics, University of Trento, and TIFPA-INFN, Trento, I{38123 Povo (TN) Italy [email protected] September 26, 2014 Abstract It has recently been noticed that the degeneracies of the Poisson bra- cket of linearized gravity on constant curvature Lorentzian manifold can be described in terms of the cohomologies of a certain complex of dif- ferential operators. This complex was first introduced by Calabi and its cohomology is known to be isomorphic to that of the (locally constant) sheaf of Killing vectors. We review the structure of the Calabi complex in a novel way, with explicit calculations based on representation theory of GL(n), and also some tools for studying its cohomology in terms of of lo- cally constant sheaves. We also conjecture how these tools would adapt to linearized gravity on other backgrounds and to other gauge theories. The presentation includes explicit formulas for the differential operators in the Calabi complex, arguments for its local exactness, discussion of general- ized Poincar´eduality, methods of computing the cohomology of locally constant sheaves, and example calculations of Killing sheaf cohomologies of some black hole and cosmological Lorentzian manifolds. Contents 1 Introduction2 2 The Calabi complex4 2.1 Tensor bundles and Young symmetrizers..............5 2.2 Differential operators.........................7 2.3 Formal adjoint complex....................... 11 2.4 Equations of finite type, twisted de Rham complex........ 14 3 Cohomology of locally constant sheaves 16 3.1 Locally constant sheaves....................... 16 3.2 Acyclic resolution by a differential complex............ 18 3.3 Generalized Poincar´eduality...................
    [Show full text]
  • Sheaf Theory
    Sheaf Theory Anne Vaugon December 20, 2013 The goals of this talk are • to define a generalization denoted by RΓ(F) of de Rham cohomology; • to explain the notation RΓ(F) (here F is a sheaf and RΓ is a derived functor). 1 Presheaves and sheaves 1.1 Definitions and examples Let X be a topological space. Definition 1.1. A presheaf of k-modules F on X is defined by the following data: • a k-module F(U) for each open set U of X; • a map rUV : F(U) → F(V ) for each pair V ⊂ U of open subsets such that – rWV ◦ rVU = rWU for all open subsets W ⊂ V ⊂ U; – rUU = Id for all open subsets U. Therefore, a presheaf is a functor from the opposite category of open sets to the category of k-modules. If F is a presheaf, F(U) is called the set of sections of U and rVU the restriction from U to V . Definition 1.2. A presheaf F is a sheaf if • for any family (Ui)i∈I of open subsets of X • for any family of elements si ∈ F(Ui) such that rUi∩Uj ,Ui (si) = rUi∩Uj ,Uj (sj) for all i, j ∈ I there exists a unique s ∈ F(U) where U = ∪i∈I Ui such that rUi,U (s) = si for all i ∈ I. This means that we can extend a locally defined section. Definition 1.3. A morphism of presheaves f : F → G is a natural trans- formation between the functors F and G: for each open set U, there exists a morphism f(U): F(U) → G(U) such that the following diagram is commutative for V ⊂ U.
    [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]
  • Intersection Theory on Regular Schemes Via Alterations and Deformation to the Normal Cone Dissertation
    Intersection Theory on Regular Schemes via Alterations and Deformation to the Normal Cone Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Naturwissenschaften (Dr. rer. nat.) der Fakultat¨ fur¨ Mathematik der Universitat¨ Regensburg vorgelegt von Andreas Weber aus Regensburg im Jahr 2015 Promotionsgesuch eingereicht am 13. April 2015. Die Arbeit wurde angeleitet von Prof. Dr. Klaus K¨unnemann. Pr¨ufungsausschuss: Vorsitzender: Prof. Dr. Harald Garcke 1. Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Klaus K¨unnemann 2. Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Walter Gubler weiterer Pr¨ufer: Prof. Dr. Uwe Jannsen Contents Contents 3 1 Introduction 5 2 Chow Groups of S-schemes 11 2.1 The S-Dimension . 11 2.2 Chow Groups . 14 3 Resolution of Singularities and Alterations 17 3.1 Assumption on Alterations . 17 3.2 State of the Art . 18 4 Intersection Theory with Supports on Regular Schemes 21 4.1 Bivariant Classes and Orientations . 21 4.2 Alterations and BQ-Orientations . 37 4.3 Intersection Theory with Supports on BQ-orienting Schemes . 39 5 Comparison to other Approaches to Intersection Theory 47 5.1 Intersection with Divisors . 47 5.2 Smooth Schemes over a Dedekind scheme . 49 A Fulton's Theory for S-schemes 53 A.1 Proper push-forward and flat pull-back . 53 A.2 Intersection with Divisors . 56 A.3 Cones, Chern and Segre classes . 56 A.4 Deformation to the Normal bundle . 63 A.5 Refined Gysin homomorphisms . 65 A.6 Intersection theory for smooth schemes over a one-dimensional base . 69 Bibliography 71 Chapter 1 Introduction k For a Noetherian separated regular scheme X, the Chow group CHY (X) of algebraic cycles of codimension k with supports in a closed subset Y of X is given as k k k CHY (X) := ZY (X) = RatY (X); k i.e.
    [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]
  • Waring-Type Problems for Polynomials Algebra Meets Geometry Alessandro Oneto
    Waring-type problems for polynomials Algebra meets Geometry Alessandro Oneto Waring-type problems for polynomials Algebra meets Geometry Alessandro Oneto ©Alessandro Oneto, Stockholm University 2016 e-mail: [email protected] ISBN: 978-91-7649-424-0 Printed by Holmbergs, Malmö 2016 Distributor: Department of Mathematics, Stockholm University CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 ADDITIVE DECOMPOSITIONS OF INTEGERS ............ 3 1.2 ADDITIVE DECOMPOSITIONS OF POLYNOMIALS .......... 4 1.2.1 CLASSICAL WARING DECOMPOSITIONS .......... 5 1.2.2 d-TH WARING DECOMPOSITIONS .............. 7 1.2.3 WARING-LIKE DECOMPOSITIONS .............. 8 1.2.4 REAL WARING DECOMPOSITIONS ............. 9 1.3 GEOMETRIC INTERPRETATION ................... 10 1.3.1 SECANT VARIETIES ..................... 10 1.3.2 CLASSICAL WARING PROBLEM:VERONESE VARIETIES . 12 1.3.3 d-TH WARING PROBLEM: VARIETIES OF POWERS . 14 1.3.4 WARING-LIKE PROBLEMS: VARIETIES OF µ-POWERS . 17 1.3.5 TERRACINI’S LEMMA .................... 18 2 APOLARITY THEORY AND POINTS CONFIGURATIONS 23 2.1 APOLARITY THEORY ......................... 23 2.2 HILBERT FUNCTIONS OF CONFIGURATIONS OF REDUCED POINTS 27 2.3 WARING LOCI OF HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS . 29 2.3.1 QUADRICS .......................... 31 2.3.2 MONOMIALS ......................... 32 2.3.3 BINARY FORMS ....................... 34 2.3.4 PLANE CUBICS ....................... 37 2.4 WARING LOCI AND THE STRASSEN CONJECTURE . 43 2.5 APOLARITY LEMMA: POWER IDEALS AND FAT POINTS . 49 2.5.1 IDEALS OF FAT POINTS ................... 49 2.5.2 INVERSE SYSTEMS OF IDEALS FAT POINTS. 51 2.6 HILBERT FUNCTIONS OF CONFIGURATIONS OF FAT POINTS . 53 2.6.1 DOUBLE POINTS: THE ALEXANDER–HIRSCHOWITZ THEO- REM ............................. 55 2.7 SPECIAL CONFIGURATIONS OF FAT POINTS .
    [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]
  • On Sheaf Theory
    Lectures on Sheaf Theory by C.H. Dowker Tata Institute of Fundamental Research Bombay 1957 Lectures on Sheaf Theory by C.H. Dowker Notes by S.V. Adavi and N. Ramabhadran Tata Institute of Fundamental Research Bombay 1956 Contents 1 Lecture 1 1 2 Lecture 2 5 3 Lecture 3 9 4 Lecture 4 15 5 Lecture 5 21 6 Lecture 6 27 7 Lecture 7 31 8 Lecture 8 35 9 Lecture 9 41 10 Lecture 10 47 11 Lecture 11 55 12 Lecture 12 59 13 Lecture 13 65 14 Lecture 14 73 iii iv Contents 15 Lecture 15 81 16 Lecture 16 87 17 Lecture 17 93 18 Lecture 18 101 19 Lecture 19 107 20 Lecture 20 113 21 Lecture 21 123 22 Lecture 22 129 23 Lecture 23 135 24 Lecture 24 139 25 Lecture 25 143 26 Lecture 26 147 27 Lecture 27 155 28 Lecture 28 161 29 Lecture 29 167 30 Lecture 30 171 31 Lecture 31 177 32 Lecture 32 183 33 Lecture 33 189 Lecture 1 Sheaves. 1 onto Definition. A sheaf S = (S, τ, X) of abelian groups is a map π : S −−−→ X, where S and X are topological spaces, such that 1. π is a local homeomorphism, 2. for each x ∈ X, π−1(x) is an abelian group, 3. addition is continuous. That π is a local homeomorphism means that for each point p ∈ S , there is an open set G with p ∈ G such that π|G maps G homeomorphi- cally onto some open set π(G).
    [Show full text]
  • An Estimate of Canonical Dimension of Groups Based on Schubert Calculus
    An estimate of canonical dimension of groups based on Schubert calculus Rostislav Devyatov∗ November 3, 2020 Abstract We sketch the proof of a connection between the canonical (0-)dimension of semisimple split simply connected groups and cohomology of their full flag varieties. Using this connection, we get a new estimate of the canonical (0-)dimension of simply connected split exceptional groups of type E understood as a group. A full proof will be published later. 1 Introduction To define the canonical (0-)dimension of an algebraic group understood as a group, we first need to define the canonical (0-)dimension of a scheme understood as a scheme (which is a different definition). Roughly speaking, the canonical (0-)dimension of a scheme is a number indicating how hard it is to get a rational point in the scheme. The canonical (0-)dimension of an algebraic group shows how hard it is to get rational points in torsors related to the group. To be more precise, let us fix some conventions and give some definitions. We speak of algebraic schemes and use stacks project as the source of basic definitions. All schemes in the present text are of finite type over a field and separated. The base field is arbitrary. Speaking of canonical dimension of schemes, there are two closely related notions in the literature: the canonical 0-dimension of a scheme defined in [14] and the canonical dimension of a scheme defined in [9]. These two definitions are not known to be always equivalent, but they are equivalent for two particular classes of schemes: for smooth complete schemes and for torsors of split reductive groups (see [13, Theorem 1.16, Remark 1.17, and Example 1.18]).
    [Show full text]
  • Intersection Theory
    APPENDIX A Intersection Theory In this appendix we will outline the generalization of intersection theory and the Riemann-Roch theorem to nonsingular projective varieties of any dimension. To motivate the discussion, let us look at the case of curves and surfaces, and then see what needs to be generalized. For a divisor D on a curve X, leaving out the contribution of Serre duality, we can write the Riemann-Roch theorem (IV, 1.3) as x(.!Z'(D)) = deg D + 1 - g, where xis the Euler characteristic (III, Ex. 5.1). On a surface, we can write the Riemann-Roch theorem (V, 1.6) as 1 x(!l'(D)) = 2 D.(D - K) + 1 + Pa· In each case, on the left-hand side we have something involving cohomol­ ogy groups of the sheaf !l'(D), while on the right-hand side we have some numerical data involving the divisor D, the canonical divisor K, and some invariants of the variety X. Of course the ultimate aim of a Riemann-Roch type theorem is to compute the dimension of the linear system IDI or of lnDI for large n (II, Ex. 7.6). This is achieved by combining a formula for x(!l'(D)) with some vanishing theorems for Hi(X,!l'(D)) fori > 0, such as the theorems of Serre (III, 5.2) or Kodaira (III, 7.15). We will now generalize these results so as to give an expression for x(!l'(D)) on a nonsingular projective variety X of any dimension. And while we are at it, with no extra effort we get a formula for x(t&"), where @" is any coherent locally free sheaf.
    [Show full text]
  • 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009
    MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry (K.S. Kedlaya, MIT, Spring 2009) More properties of schemes (updated 9 Mar 09) I’ve now spent a fair bit of time discussing properties of morphisms of schemes. How­ ever, there are a few properties of individual schemes themselves that merit some discussion (especially for those of you interested in arithmetic applications); here are some of them. 1 Reduced schemes I already mentioned the notion of a reduced scheme. An affine scheme X = Spec(A) is reduced if A is a reduced ring (i.e., A has no nonzero nilpotent elements). This occurs if and only if each stalk Ap is reduced. We say X is reduced if it is covered by reduced affine schemes. Lemma. Let X be a scheme. The following are equivalent. (a) X is reduced. (b) For every open affine subsheme U = Spec(R) of X, R is reduced. (c) For each x 2 X, OX;x is reduced. Proof. A previous exercise. Recall that any closed subset Z of a scheme X supports a unique reduced closed sub- scheme, defined by the ideal sheaf I which on an open affine U = Spec(A) is defined by the intersection of the prime ideals p 2 Z \ U. See Hartshorne, Example 3.2.6. 2 Connected schemes A nonempty scheme is connected if its underlying topological space is connected, i.e., cannot be written as a disjoint union of two open sets.
    [Show full text]
  • DUALITY for SCHEMES 0DWE Contents 1. Introduction 2 2
    DUALITY FOR SCHEMES 0DWE Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Dualizing complexes on schemes 2 3. Right adjoint of pushforward 5 4. Right adjoint of pushforward and restriction to opens 8 5. Right adjoint of pushforward and base change, I 11 6. Right adjoint of pushforward and base change, II 16 7. Right adjoint of pushforward and trace maps 19 8. Right adjoint of pushforward and pullback 21 9. Right adjoint of pushforward for closed immersions 23 10. Right adjoint of pushforward for closed immersions and base change 26 11. Right adjoint of pushforward for finite morphisms 27 12. Right adjoint of pushforward for proper flat morphisms 29 13. Right adjoint of pushforward for perfect proper morphisms 33 14. Right adjoint of pushforward for effective Cartier divisors 34 15. Right adjoint of pushforward in examples 35 16. Upper shriek functors 39 17. Properties of upper shriek functors 46 18. Base change for upper shriek 50 19. A duality theory 52 20. Glueing dualizing complexes 52 21. Dimension functions 58 22. Dualizing modules 60 23. Cohen-Macaulay schemes 62 24. Gorenstein schemes 63 25. Gorenstein morphisms 64 26. More on dualizing complexes 69 27. Duality for proper schemes over fields 69 28. Relative dualizing complexes 72 29. The fundamental class of an lci morphism 77 30. Extension by zero for coherent modules 78 31. Preliminaries to compactly supported cohomology 84 32. Compactly supported cohomology for coherent modules 87 33. Duality for compactly supported cohomology 91 34. Lichtenbaum’s theorem 94 35. Other chapters 95 References 96 This is a chapter of the Stacks Project, version fac02ecd, compiled on Sep 14, 2021.
    [Show full text]