blog:2023-04-17
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
blog:2023-04-17 [2023/04/18 05:54] – pzhou | blog:2023-04-17 [2023/06/25 15:53] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
===== Two adjoints ===== | ===== Two adjoints ===== | ||
Say $X = \C$ and $U = \C^*$, $j: U \to \C$. Do you know what is $j^*$ and $j^!$ of $O_X$? | Say $X = \C$ and $U = \C^*$, $j: U \to \C$. Do you know what is $j^*$ and $j^!$ of $O_X$? | ||
+ | |||
+ | Actually, I don't really care about the $j^!$ (since it is a right-adjoint). | ||
https:// | https:// | ||
Line 10: | Line 12: | ||
We define $Z^L$ and $Z^R$ as subcategory of $X$. $Z^L = Z^\vee$, is something $\Hom(Z^L, U) = 0$. Similarly, $Z^R = Z^\wedge$ satisfies $\Hom(U, Z^R)=0$. | We define $Z^L$ and $Z^R$ as subcategory of $X$. $Z^L = Z^\vee$, is something $\Hom(Z^L, U) = 0$. Similarly, $Z^R = Z^\wedge$ satisfies $\Hom(U, Z^R)=0$. | ||
- | Consider the original example. Consider $\C[x]/(x) = O_0$. Does $U$ map to it? | + | Consider the original example. Consider $\C[x]/(x) = O_0$. Does $U$ map to it? This module $\C[x][1/ |
+ | |||
+ | Does this map to $U$? I don't think so, this would give $Hom(\C[x]/ | ||
+ | $$ j_!j^! \to id \to i_\wedge i^\wedge $$ | ||
+ | where $i^\wedge -| i_\wedge$, so $i_\wedge$ only admit left-adjoint, | ||
+ | |||
+ | Similarly, we get | ||
+ | $$ i_\vee i^\vee \to id \to j_* j^* $$ | ||
+ | consist of things set theoretically supported on $Z$. | ||
+ | |||
+ | I don't know the difference. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== A-torision and A-completion ===== | ||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | Let $R$ be a ring (maybe not commutative). Let $A$ be a chain complex of $R$-module. Define | ||
+ | * A-nil objects, as the right-orthogonal of $A$. Call this subcategory as $C$. This is like | ||
+ | $$ L: R-mod \to C = R-mod / \langle A \rangle $$ then use the right-adjoint $\iota: C \to R$ to embed it back. | ||
+ | * The left-orthogonal of $C$, is called A-torsion objects, they can be built by cobble up $A$ and its suspension. We use $\langle A \rangle$ to denote it. For example $\C[x, | ||
+ | * The right-orthogonal of $C$. There are the $A$-completion objects. For example, $C = \Z[1/p]$, $A = \Z/p$. What do I mean by $A$-completion? | ||
+ | * Q: is it true that $Hom(\Z_p^\wedge, | ||
+ | * Q: is it true that $Hom(C, \langle A \rangle)$ may not be zero? well, you are mapping to the colimit, even though each term you get zero, but the colimit is something large, and we have the tautological map $$ \C[x,1/x] \to \C[x, | ||
+ | |||
+ | Now that we know these are different stuff. Torsion is left-orthogonal, | ||
+ | |||
+ | The next thing we say is that, both categories are equivalent to $E-mod$, where $E = End(A)$. Say $A=\C[x]/ | ||
+ | |||
+ | There is a mysterious duality functor. We define $A^\vee = Hom_R(A, R)$. We know $A$ is a left R-mod. This has used up all things we can put on $A$. But we can act on $R$ from the right. Given a function $f \in Hom(A, R)$, we can act on it by an element $r \in R$. By $(rf)(a)= r(f(a))$, but this is equal to $f(ra)$. However, this $(rf)$ is no longer a left R-morphism, since for any $s \in R$, we need $s(rf)(a) = (rf)(sa)$, which is saying $sr=rs$. Not always true! | ||
+ | |||
+ | The better way is to act on the right, using $(fr) (a) := (f(a))r$. This ways, when we check $s(fr)(a) = (fr)(sa)$, we just need to unpack both side as $s f(a) r = f(sa) r $. | ||
+ | |||
+ | About $A$ as an $End(A)$-mod, | ||
+ | |||
+ | So, what should I say, $Hom(A, -)$, because $A$ is compact, preserves both colimit and limit. So, there are two adjoints $Mod-End(A)$ back to $R-mod$. This is like $i^*$, for a closed guy. There is the $- \otimes_E A$ (since $R$-action commute with $E$-action on $A$, so we have a left $R$-mod). There is the $Hom_{mod-E}(A^\vee, | ||
+ | |||
+ | So, what is a $mod-E$? suppose $E$ is this cdga, $A \oplus A[-1]$. How to compute $Hom_E(A, | ||
+ | $$ \cdots E[-2] \to E[-1] \to E \to A \to 0 $$ | ||
+ | Then, when we hom this free resolution to $A$, we get back $A \oplus A \oplus A \cdots $. Somehow, this infinty should be a projective limit, we should map out of a colimit, and if we truncate the resolution, it should map to the longer resolution. So, function on a fatter point (meaning longer resolution), | ||
+ | |||
+ | Now, What is $A^\vee = Hom(A, R)$? It is somehow $A$ shifted up by $1$. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
blog/2023-04-17.1681797259.txt.gz · Last modified: 2023/06/25 15:53 (external edit)