Datasets:
Tasks:
Text Generation
Modalities:
Text
Sub-tasks:
language-modeling
Languages:
English
Size:
100K - 1M
License:
\input{preamble} | |
% OK, start here. | |
% | |
\begin{document} | |
\title{Injectives} | |
\maketitle | |
\phantomsection | |
\label{section-phantom} | |
\tableofcontents | |
\section{Introduction} | |
\label{section-introduction} | |
\noindent | |
In future chapters we will use the existence of injectives and | |
K-injective complexes to do cohomology of sheaves of modules on | |
ringed sites. In this chapter we explain how to produce injectives | |
and K-injective complexes first for modules on sites and later | |
more generally for Grothendieck abelian categories. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
We observe that we already know that the category of | |
abelian groups and the category of modules over a ring have | |
enough injectives, see More on Algebra, Sections | |
\ref{more-algebra-section-abelian-groups} and | |
\ref{more-algebra-section-injectives-modules} | |
\section{Baer's argument for modules} | |
\label{section-baer} | |
\noindent | |
There is another, more set-theoretic approach to showing that any $R$-module | |
$M$ can be imbedded in an injective module. This approach constructs | |
the injective module by a transfinite colimit of push-outs. While this | |
method is somewhat abstract and more complicated than the one of | |
More on Algebra, Section \ref{more-algebra-section-injectives-modules}, | |
it is also more general. Apparently this method originates with Baer, | |
and was revisited by Cartan and Eilenberg in | |
\cite{Cartan-Eilenberg} and by Grothendieck in \cite{Tohoku}. | |
There Grothendieck uses it to show that | |
many other abelian categories have enough injectives. We will get back to | |
the general case later (Section \ref{section-grothendieck-categories}). | |
\medskip\noindent | |
We begin with a few set theoretic remarks. | |
Let $\{B_{\beta}\}_{\beta \in \alpha}$ be an inductive system of | |
objects in some category $\mathcal{C}$, indexed by | |
an ordinal $\alpha$. Assume that $\colim_{\beta \in \alpha} B_\beta$ | |
exists in $\mathcal{C}$. If $A$ is an object of $\mathcal{C}$, then there is a | |
natural map | |
\begin{equation} | |
\label{equation-compare} | |
\colim_{\beta \in \alpha} \Mor_\mathcal{C}(A, B_\beta) | |
\longrightarrow | |
\Mor_\mathcal{C}(A, \colim_{\beta \in \alpha} B_\beta). | |
\end{equation} | |
because if one is given a map $A \to B_\beta$ for some $\beta$, one | |
naturally gets a map from $A$ into the colimit by composing with | |
$B_\beta \to \colim_{\beta \in \alpha} B_\alpha$. | |
Note that the left colimit is one of sets! In general, (\ref{equation-compare}) | |
is neither injective or surjective. | |
\begin{example} | |
\label{example-not-surjective} | |
Consider the category of sets. Let $A = \mathbf{N}$ and | |
$B_n = \{1, \ldots, n\}$ be the inductive system indexed by the natural numbers | |
where $B_n \to B_m$ for $n \leq m$ is the obvious map. Then | |
$\colim B_n = \mathbf{N}$, so there is a map | |
$A \to \colim B_n$, which does not factor as $A \to B_m$ | |
for any $m$. Consequently, | |
$\colim \Mor(A, B_n) \to \Mor(A, \colim B_n)$ | |
is not surjective. | |
\end{example} | |
\begin{example} | |
\label{example-not-injective} | |
Next we give an example where the map fails to be injective. Let $B_n = | |
\mathbf{N}/\{1, 2, \ldots, n\}$, that is, the quotient set of | |
$\mathbf{N}$ with the first $n$ elements collapsed to one element. | |
There are natural maps $B_n \to B_m$ for $n \leq m$, so the | |
$\{B_n\}$ form a system of sets over $\mathbf{N}$. It is easy to see that | |
$\colim B_n = \{*\}$: it is the one-point set. | |
So it follows that $\Mor(A, \colim B_n)$ is a one-element set | |
for every set $A$. | |
However, $\colim \Mor(A , B_n)$ is {\bf not} a one-element set. | |
Consider the family of maps $A \to B_n$ which are just the natural projections | |
$\mathbf{N} \to \mathbf{N}/\{1, 2, \ldots, n\}$ and the family of | |
maps $A \to B_n$ which map the whole of $A$ to the class of $1$. | |
These two families of maps are distinct at each step and thus are distinct in | |
$\colim \Mor(A, B_n)$, but they induce the same map | |
$A \to \colim B_n$. | |
\end{example} | |
\noindent | |
Nonetheless, if we map out of a finite set then | |
(\ref{equation-compare}) is an isomorphism always. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-out-of-finite} | |
Suppose that, in (\ref{equation-compare}), $\mathcal{C}$ is the category | |
of sets and $A$ is a {\it finite set}, then the map is a bijection. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Let $f : A \to \colim B_\beta$. | |
The range of $f$ is finite, containing say | |
elements $c_1, \ldots, c_r \in \colim B_\beta$. | |
These all come from some elements in $B_\beta$ for $\beta \in \alpha$ | |
large by definition of the colimit. Thus we can define | |
$\widetilde{f} : A \to B_\beta$ lifting $f$ at a finite stage. | |
This proves that (\ref{equation-compare}) is surjective. | |
Next, suppose two maps $f : A \to B_\gamma, f' : A \to B_{\gamma'}$ | |
define the same map $A \to \colim B_\beta$. | |
Then each of the finitely many elements of $A$ gets sent to the same point in | |
the colimit. By definition of the colimit for sets, there is | |
$\beta \geq \gamma, \gamma'$ such that the finitely many elements of | |
$A$ get sent to the same points in $B_\beta$ under $f$ and $f'$. | |
This proves that (\ref{equation-compare}) is injective. | |
\end{proof} | |
\noindent | |
The most interesting case of the lemma is when $\alpha = \omega$, i.e., | |
when the system $\{B_\beta\}$ is a system $\{B_n\}_{n \in \mathbf{N}}$ | |
over the natural numbers as in | |
Examples \ref{example-not-surjective} and | |
\ref{example-not-injective}. | |
The essential idea is that $A$ is ``small'' relative to the long chain of | |
compositions $B_1 \to B_2 \to \ldots$, so that it has to factor through a | |
finite step. A more general version of this lemma can be found in | |
Sets, Lemma \ref{sets-lemma-map-from-set-lifts}. | |
Next, we generalize this to the category of modules. | |
\begin{definition} | |
\label{definition-small} | |
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a category, let $I \subset \text{Arrows}(\mathcal{C})$, | |
and let $\alpha$ be an ordinal. An object $A$ of $\mathcal{C}$ is said to | |
be {\it $\alpha$-small with respect to $I$} if whenever $\{B_\beta\}$ is | |
a system over $\alpha$ with transition maps in $I$, then | |
the map (\ref{equation-compare}) is an isomorphism. | |
\end{definition} | |
\noindent | |
In the rest of this section we shall restrict ourselves | |
to the category of $R$-modules for a fixed commutative ring $R$. | |
We shall also take $I$ to be the collection of injective maps, i.e., the | |
{\it monomorphisms} in the category of modules over $R$. In this case, for | |
any system $\{B_\beta\}$ as in the definition each of the maps | |
$$ | |
B_\beta \to \colim_{\beta \in \alpha} B_\beta | |
$$ | |
is an injection. It follows that the map (\ref{equation-compare}) is an | |
{\it injection}. We can in fact interpret the $B_\beta$'s as submodules | |
of the module $B = \colim_{\beta \in \alpha} B_\beta$, and then we | |
have $B = \bigcup_{\beta \in \alpha} B_\beta$. This is not an abuse of | |
notation if we identify $B_\alpha$ with the image in the colimit. | |
We now want to show that modules are always small for ``large'' ordinals | |
$\alpha$. | |
\begin{proposition} | |
\label{proposition-modules-are-small} | |
Let $R$ be a ring. Let $M$ be an $R$-module. | |
Let $\kappa$ the cardinality of the set of submodules of $M$. | |
If $\alpha$ is an ordinal whose cofinality is bigger than $\kappa$, | |
then $M$ is $\alpha$-small with respect to injections. | |
\end{proposition} | |
\begin{proof} | |
The proof is straightforward, but let us first think about a special case. | |
If $M$ is finite, then the claim is that for any inductive system | |
$\{B_\beta\}$ with injections between them, parametrized by a | |
limit ordinal, any map $M \to \colim B_\beta$ factors through one of | |
the $B_\beta$. And this we proved in | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-out-of-finite}. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Now we start the proof in the general case. | |
We need only show that the map (\ref{equation-compare}) is a surjection. | |
Let $f : M \to \colim B_\beta$ be a map. | |
Consider the subobjects $\{f^{-1}(B_\beta)\}$ of $M$, where $B_\beta$ | |
is considered as a subobject of the colimit $B = \bigcup_\beta B_\beta$. | |
If one of these, say $f^{-1}(B_\beta)$, fills $M$, | |
then the map factors through $B_\beta$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
So suppose to the contrary that all of the $f^{-1}(B_\beta)$ were proper | |
subobjects of $M$. However, we know that | |
$$ | |
\bigcup f^{-1}(B_\beta) = f^{-1}\left(\bigcup B_\beta\right) = M. | |
$$ | |
Now there are at most $\kappa$ different subobjects of $M$ that occur among | |
the $f^{-1}(B_\alpha)$, by hypothesis. | |
Thus we can find a subset $S \subset \alpha$ of cardinality at most | |
$\kappa$ such that as $\beta'$ ranges over $S$, the | |
$f^{-1}(B_{\beta'})$ range over \emph{all} the $f^{-1}(B_\alpha)$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
However, $S$ has an upper bound $\widetilde{\alpha} < \alpha$ as | |
$\alpha$ has cofinality bigger than $\kappa$. In particular, all the | |
$f^{-1}(B_{\beta'})$, $\beta' \in S$ are contained in | |
$f^{-1}(B_{\widetilde{\alpha}})$. | |
It follows that $f^{-1}(B_{\widetilde{\alpha}}) = M$. | |
In particular, the map $f$ factors through $B_{\widetilde{\alpha}}$. | |
\end{proof} | |
\noindent | |
From this lemma we will be able to deduce the existence of lots of injectives. | |
Let us recall Baer's criterion. | |
\begin{lemma}[Baer's criterion] | |
\label{lemma-criterion-baer} | |
\begin{reference} | |
\cite[Theorem 1]{Baer} | |
\end{reference} | |
Let $R$ be a ring. An $R$-module $Q$ is injective if and only if in every | |
commutative diagram | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
\mathfrak{a} \ar[d] \ar[r] & Q \\ | |
R \ar@{-->}[ru] | |
} | |
$$ | |
for $\mathfrak{a} \subset R$ an ideal, the dotted arrow exists. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
This is the equivalence of (1) and (3) in | |
More on Algebra, Lemma \ref{more-algebra-lemma-characterize-injective-bis}; | |
please observe that the proof given there is elementary | |
(and does not use $\text{Ext}$ groups or the existence of injectives | |
or projectives in the category of $R$-modules). | |
\end{proof} | |
\noindent | |
If $M$ is an $R$-module, then in general we may have a semi-complete | |
diagram as in | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-criterion-baer}. | |
In it, we can form the \emph{push-out} | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
\mathfrak{a} \ar[d] \ar[r] & Q \ar[d] \\ | |
R \ar[r] & R \oplus_{\mathfrak{a}} Q. | |
} | |
$$ | |
Here the vertical map is injective, and the diagram commutes. The point is | |
that we can extend $\mathfrak{a} \to Q$ to $R$ \emph{if} we extend $Q$ to the | |
larger module $R \oplus_{\mathfrak{a}} Q$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
The key point of Baer's argument is to repeat this procedure | |
transfinitely many times. To do this we first define, given an $R$-module | |
$M$ the following (huge) pushout | |
\begin{equation} | |
\label{equation-huge-diagram} | |
\vcenter{ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
\bigoplus_{\mathfrak a} | |
\bigoplus_{\varphi \in \Hom_R(\mathfrak a, M)} | |
\mathfrak{a} \ar[r] \ar[d] & M \ar[d] \\ | |
\bigoplus_{\mathfrak a} | |
\bigoplus_{\varphi \in \Hom_R(\mathfrak a, M)} | |
R \ar[r] & \mathbf{M}(M). | |
} | |
} | |
\end{equation} | |
Here the top horizontal arrow maps the element $a \in \mathfrak a$ | |
in the summand corresponding to $\varphi$ to the element $\varphi(a) \in M$. | |
The left vertical arrow maps $a \in \mathfrak a$ in the summand corresponding | |
to $\varphi$ simply to the element $a \in R$ in the summand corresponding | |
to $\varphi$. The fundamental properties of this construction are | |
formulated in the following lemma. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-construction} | |
Let $R$ be a ring. | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item The construction $M \mapsto (M \to \mathbf{M}(M))$ | |
is functorial in $M$. | |
\item The map $M \to \mathbf{M}(M)$ is injective. | |
\item For any ideal $\mathfrak{a}$ and any $R$-module map | |
$\varphi : \mathfrak a \to M$ there is an $R$-module map | |
$\varphi' : R \to \mathbf{M}(M)$ such that | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
\mathfrak{a} \ar[d] \ar[r]_\varphi & M \ar[d] \\ | |
R \ar[r]^{\varphi'} & \mathbf{M}(M) | |
} | |
$$ | |
commutes. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Parts (2) and (3) are immediate from the construction. | |
To see (1), let $\chi : M \to N$ be an $R$-module map. We claim there exists | |
a canonical commutative diagram | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
\bigoplus_{\mathfrak a} | |
\bigoplus_{\varphi \in \Hom_R(\mathfrak a, M)} | |
\mathfrak{a} \ar[r] \ar[d] \ar[rrd] & M \ar[rrd]^\chi \\ | |
\bigoplus_{\mathfrak a} | |
\bigoplus_{\varphi \in \Hom_R(\mathfrak a, M)} | |
R \ar[rrd] & & | |
\bigoplus_{\mathfrak a} | |
\bigoplus_{\psi \in \Hom_R(\mathfrak a, N)} | |
\mathfrak{a} \ar[r] \ar[d] & N \\ | |
& & \bigoplus_{\mathfrak a} | |
\bigoplus_{\psi \in \Hom_R(\mathfrak a, N)} | |
R | |
} | |
$$ | |
which induces the desired map $\mathbf{M}(M) \to \mathbf{M}(N)$. | |
The middle east-south-east arrow maps the summand $\mathfrak a$ | |
corresponding to $\varphi$ via $\text{id}_{\mathfrak a}$ to the | |
summand $\mathfrak a$ corresponding to $\psi = \chi \circ \varphi$. | |
Similarly for the lower east-south-east arrow. Details omitted. | |
\end{proof} | |
\noindent | |
The idea will now be to apply the functor $\mathbf{M}$ a transfinite number | |
of times. We define for each ordinal $\alpha$ a functor $\mathbf{M}_\alpha$ | |
on the category of $R$-modules, together with a natural injection $N \to | |
\mathbf{M}_\alpha(N)$. We do this by transfinite recursion. | |
First, $\mathbf{M}_1 = \mathbf{M}$ is the functor defined above. | |
Now, suppose given an ordinal $\alpha$, and suppose $\mathbf{M}_{\alpha'}$ | |
is defined for $\alpha' < \alpha$. If $\alpha$ has an immediate predecessor | |
$\widetilde{\alpha}$, we let | |
$$ | |
\mathbf{M}_\alpha = \mathbf{M} \circ \mathbf{M}_{\widetilde{\alpha}}. | |
$$ | |
If not, i.e., if $\alpha$ is a limit ordinal, we let | |
$$ | |
\mathbf{M}_{\alpha}(N) = | |
\colim_{\alpha' < \alpha} \mathbf{M}_{\alpha'}(N). | |
$$ | |
It is clear (e.g., inductively) that the $\mathbf{M}_{\alpha}(N)$ | |
form an inductive system over ordinals, so this is reasonable. | |
\begin{theorem} | |
\label{theorem-baer-grothendieck} | |
Let $\kappa$ be the cardinality of the set of ideals in $R$, and | |
let $\alpha$ be an ordinal whose cofinality is greater than | |
$\kappa$. Then $\mathbf{M}_\alpha(N)$ is an injective $R$-module, | |
and $N \to \mathbf{M}_\alpha(N)$ is a functorial injective embedding. | |
\end{theorem} | |
\begin{proof} | |
By Baer's criterion | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-criterion-baer}, | |
it suffices to show that if $\mathfrak{a} \subset R$ is an ideal, then | |
any map $f : \mathfrak{a} \to \mathbf{M}_\alpha(N)$ extends to | |
$R \to \mathbf{M}_\alpha(N)$. However, we know since $\alpha$ is a limit | |
ordinal that | |
$$ | |
\mathbf{M}_{\alpha}(N) = | |
\colim_{\beta < \alpha} \mathbf{M}_{\beta}(N), | |
$$ | |
so by | |
Proposition \ref{proposition-modules-are-small}, | |
we find that | |
$$ | |
\Hom_R(\mathfrak{a}, \mathbf{M}_{\alpha}(N)) = | |
\colim_{\beta < \alpha} \Hom_R(\mathfrak a, \mathbf{M}_{\beta}(N)). | |
$$ | |
This means in particular that there is some $\beta' < \alpha$ | |
such that $f$ factors through the submodule $\mathbf{M}_{\beta'}(N)$, as | |
$$ | |
f : \mathfrak{a} \to \mathbf{M}_{\beta'}(N) \to | |
\mathbf{M}_{\alpha}(N). | |
$$ | |
However, by the fundamental property of the functor $\mathbf{M}$, | |
see Lemma \ref{lemma-construction} part (3), | |
we know that the map $\mathfrak{a} \to \mathbf{M}_{\beta'}(N)$ | |
can be extended to | |
$$ | |
R \to \mathbf{M}( \mathbf{M}_{\beta'}(N)) = | |
\mathbf{M}_{\beta' + 1}(N), | |
$$ | |
and the last object imbeds in $\mathbf{M}_{\alpha}(N)$ (as | |
$\beta' + 1 < \alpha$ since $\alpha$ is a limit ordinal). | |
In particular, $f$ can be extended to $\mathbf{M}_{\alpha}(N)$. | |
\end{proof} | |
\section{G-modules} | |
\label{section-G-modules} | |
\noindent | |
We will see later | |
(Differential Graded Algebra, Section \ref{dga-section-modules-noncommutative}) | |
that the category of modules over an algebra has | |
functorial injective embeddings. The construction is exactly the same | |
as the construction in | |
More on Algebra, Section \ref{more-algebra-section-injectives-modules}. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-G-modules} | |
Let $G$ be a topological group. Let $R$ be a ring. | |
The category $\text{Mod}_{R, G}$ of $R\text{-}G$-modules, see | |
\'Etale Cohomology, Definition | |
\ref{etale-cohomology-definition-G-module-continuous}, | |
has functorial injective hulls. In particular this holds | |
for the category of discrete $G$-modules. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
By the remark above the lemma the category $\text{Mod}_{R[G]}$ | |
has functorial injective embeddings. | |
Consider the forgetful functor | |
$v : \text{Mod}_{R, G} \to \text{Mod}_{R[G]}$. | |
This functor is fully faithful, transforms injective maps into | |
injective maps and has a right adjoint, namely | |
$$ | |
u : M \mapsto u(M) = \{x \in M \mid \text{stabilizer of }x\text{ is open}\} | |
$$ | |
Since $v(M) = 0 \Rightarrow M = 0$ we conclude by | |
Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-adjoint-functorial-injectives}. | |
\end{proof} | |
\section{Abelian sheaves on a space} | |
\label{section-abelian-sheaves-space} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-abelian-sheaves-space} | |
Let $X$ be a topological space. | |
The category of abelian sheaves on $X$ has enough injectives. | |
In fact it has functorial injective embeddings. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
For an abelian group $A$ we denote $j : A \to J(A)$ the functorial | |
injective embedding constructed in | |
More on Algebra, Section \ref{more-algebra-section-injectives-modules}. | |
Let $\mathcal{F}$ be an abelian sheaf on $X$. | |
By Sheaves, Example \ref{sheaves-example-sheaf-product-pointwise} | |
the assignment | |
$$ | |
\mathcal{I} : U \mapsto | |
\mathcal{I}(U) = \prod\nolimits_{x\in U} J(\mathcal{F}_x) | |
$$ | |
is an abelian sheaf. There is a canonical map $\mathcal{F} \to \mathcal{I}$ | |
given by mapping $s \in \mathcal{F}(U)$ to $\prod_{x \in U} j(s_x)$ | |
where $s_x \in \mathcal{F}_x$ denotes the germ of $s$ at $x$. | |
This map is injective, see | |
Sheaves, Lemma \ref{sheaves-lemma-sheaf-subset-stalks} | |
for example. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
It remains to prove the following: Given a rule | |
$x \mapsto I_x$ which assigns to each point $x \in X$ an injective | |
abelian group the sheaf $\mathcal{I} : U \mapsto \prod_{x \in U} I_x$ | |
is injective. Note that | |
$$ | |
\mathcal{I} = \prod\nolimits_{x \in X} i_{x, *}I_x | |
$$ | |
is the product of the skyscraper sheaves $i_{x, *}I_x$ (see | |
Sheaves, Section \ref{sheaves-section-skyscraper-sheaves} for notation.) | |
We have | |
$$ | |
\Mor_{\textit{Ab}}(\mathcal{F}_x, I_x) | |
= | |
\Mor_{\textit{Ab}(X)}(\mathcal{F}, i_{x, *}I_x). | |
$$ | |
see Sheaves, Lemma \ref{sheaves-lemma-stalk-skyscraper-adjoint}. Hence it is | |
clear that each $i_{x, *}I_x$ is injective. Hence the injectivity of | |
$\mathcal{I}$ follows from | |
Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-product-injectives}. | |
\end{proof} | |
\section{Sheaves of modules on a ringed space} | |
\label{section-sheaves-modules-space} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-sheaves-modules-space} | |
Let $(X, \mathcal{O}_X)$ be a ringed space, see | |
Sheaves, Section \ref{sheaves-section-ringed-spaces}. | |
The category of sheaves of $\mathcal{O}_X$-modules on $X$ | |
has enough injectives. In fact it has functorial injective embeddings. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
For any ring $R$ and any $R$-module $M$ we denote | |
$j : M \to J_R(M)$ the functorial | |
injective embedding constructed in | |
More on Algebra, Section \ref{more-algebra-section-injectives-modules}. | |
Let $\mathcal{F}$ be a sheaf of $\mathcal{O}_X$-modules on $X$. | |
By Sheaves, Examples \ref{sheaves-example-sheaf-product-pointwise} | |
and \ref{sheaves-example-sheaf-product-pointwise-algebraic-structure} | |
the assignment | |
$$ | |
\mathcal{I} : U \mapsto | |
\mathcal{I}(U) = \prod\nolimits_{x\in U} J_{\mathcal{O}_{X, x}}(\mathcal{F}_x) | |
$$ | |
is an abelian sheaf. | |
There is a canonical map $\mathcal{F} \to \mathcal{I}$ | |
given by mapping $s \in \mathcal{F}(U)$ to $\prod_{x \in U} j(s_x)$ | |
where $s_x \in \mathcal{F}_x$ denotes the germ of $s$ at $x$. | |
This map is injective, see | |
Sheaves, Lemma \ref{sheaves-lemma-sheaf-subset-stalks} | |
for example. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
It remains to prove the following: Given a rule | |
$x \mapsto I_x$ which assigns to each point $x \in X$ an injective | |
$\mathcal{O}_{X, x}$-module | |
the sheaf $\mathcal{I} : U \mapsto \prod_{x \in U} I_x$ | |
is injective. Note that | |
$$ | |
\mathcal{I} = \prod\nolimits_{x \in X} i_{x, *}I_x | |
$$ | |
is the product of the skyscraper sheaves $i_{x, *}I_x$ (see | |
Sheaves, Section \ref{sheaves-section-skyscraper-sheaves} for notation.) | |
We have | |
$$ | |
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_{X, x}}(\mathcal{F}_x, I_x) | |
= | |
\Hom_{\mathcal{O}_X}(\mathcal{F}, i_{x, *}I_x). | |
$$ | |
see Sheaves, Lemma \ref{sheaves-lemma-stalk-skyscraper-adjoint}. Hence it is | |
clear that each $i_{x, *}I_x$ is an injective $\mathcal{O}_X$-module | |
(see Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-adjoint-preserve-injectives} or argue | |
directly). Hence the injectivity of $\mathcal{I}$ follows from | |
Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-product-injectives}. | |
\end{proof} | |
\section{Abelian presheaves on a category} | |
\label{section-injectives-presheaves} | |
\noindent | |
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a category. Recall that this means that | |
$\Ob(\mathcal{C})$ is a set. On the one hand, consider abelian | |
presheaves on $\mathcal{C}$, see | |
Sites, Section \ref{sites-section-presheaves}. | |
On the other hand, consider families of abelian groups | |
indexed by elements of $\Ob(\mathcal{C})$; in other | |
words presheaves on the discrete category with underlying set | |
of objects $\Ob(\mathcal{C})$. Let us denote this | |
discrete category simply $\Ob(\mathcal{C})$. | |
There is a natural functor | |
$$ | |
i : \Ob(\mathcal{C}) \longrightarrow \mathcal{C} | |
$$ | |
and hence there is a natural restriction or forgetful functor | |
$$ | |
v = i^p : | |
\textit{PAb}(\mathcal{C}) | |
\longrightarrow | |
\textit{PAb}(\Ob(\mathcal{C})) | |
$$ | |
compare Sites, Section \ref{sites-section-functoriality-PSh}. | |
We will denote presheaves | |
on $\mathcal{C}$ by $B$ and presheaves on | |
$\Ob(\mathcal{C})$ by $A$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
There are also two functors, namely $i_p$ and ${}_pi$ | |
which assign an abelian presheaf on $\mathcal{C}$ | |
to an abelian presheaf on $\Ob(\mathcal{C})$, see | |
Sites, Sections \ref{sites-section-functoriality-PSh} and | |
\ref{sites-section-more-functoriality-PSh}. | |
Here we will use $u = {}_pi$ which is defined (in the case at hand) | |
as follows: | |
$$ | |
uA(U) = \prod\nolimits_{U' \to U} A(U'). | |
$$ | |
So an element is a family $(a_\phi)_\phi$ with $\phi$ | |
ranging through all morphisms in $\mathcal{C}$ with target $U$. | |
The restriction map on $uA$ corresponding to $g : V \to U$ | |
maps our element $(a_\phi)_\phi$ to the element | |
$(a_{g \circ \psi})_\psi$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
There is a canonical surjective map $vuA \to A$ and a canonical | |
injective map $B \to uvB$. We leave it to the reader to show that | |
$$ | |
\Mor_{\textit{PAb}(\mathcal{C})}(B, uA) | |
= | |
\Mor_{\textit{PAb}(\Ob(\mathcal{C}))}(vB, A). | |
$$ | |
in this simple case; the general case is in | |
Sites, Section \ref{sites-section-functoriality-PSh}. | |
Thus the pair $(u, v)$ is an example of a pair of adjoint | |
functors, see | |
Categories, Section \ref{categories-section-adjoint}. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
At this point we can list the following facts | |
about the situation above. | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item The functors $u$ and $v$ are exact. This follows from | |
the explicit description of these functors given above. | |
\item In particular the functor $v$ transforms injective maps | |
into injective maps. | |
\item The category $\textit{PAb}(\Ob(\mathcal{C}))$ | |
has enough injectives. | |
\item In fact there is a functorial injective embedding | |
$A \mapsto \big(A \to J(A)\big)$ as in | |
Homology, Definition \ref{homology-definition-functorial-injective-embedding}. | |
Namely, we can take $J(A)$ to be the | |
presheaf $U\mapsto J(A(U))$, where | |
$J(-)$ is the functor constructed in | |
More on Algebra, Section \ref{more-algebra-section-injectives-modules} | |
for the ring $\mathbf{Z}$. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
Putting all of this together gives us the following procedure | |
for embedding objects $B$ of $\textit{PAb}(\mathcal{C}))$ into | |
an injective object: $B \to uJ(vB)$. See | |
Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-adjoint-functorial-injectives}. | |
\begin{proposition} | |
\label{proposition-presheaves-injectives} | |
For abelian presheaves on a category there is a functorial injective | |
embedding. | |
\end{proposition} | |
\begin{proof} | |
See discussion above. | |
\end{proof} | |
\section{Abelian Sheaves on a site} | |
\label{section-injectives-sheaves} | |
\noindent | |
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a site. In this section we prove that there are | |
enough injectives for abelian sheaves on $\mathcal{C}$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Denote | |
$i : \textit{Ab}(\mathcal{C}) \longrightarrow \textit{PAb}(\mathcal{C})$ | |
the forgetful functor from abelian sheaves to abelian presheaves. | |
Let | |
${}^\# : \textit{PAb}(\mathcal{C}) \longrightarrow \textit{Ab}(\mathcal{C})$ | |
denote the sheafification functor. Recall that ${}^\#$ is a left adjoint | |
to $i$, that ${}^\#$ is exact, and that $i\mathcal{F}^\# = \mathcal{F}$ | |
for any abelian sheaf $\mathcal{F}$. Finally, let | |
$\mathcal{G} \to J(\mathcal{G})$ denote the canonical | |
embedding into an injective presheaf we found in | |
Section \ref{section-injectives-presheaves}. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
For any sheaf $\mathcal{F}$ in $\textit{Ab}(\mathcal{C})$ and | |
any ordinal $\beta$ we define a sheaf | |
$J_\beta(\mathcal{F})$ by transfinite recursion. | |
We set $J_0(\mathcal{F}) = \mathcal{F}$. | |
We define $J_1(\mathcal{F}) = J(i\mathcal{F})^\#$. | |
Sheafification of the canonical map $i\mathcal{F} \to J(i\mathcal{F})$ | |
gives a functorial map | |
$$ | |
\mathcal{F} \longrightarrow J_1(\mathcal{F}) | |
$$ | |
which is injective as $\#$ is exact. We set | |
$J_{\alpha + 1}(\mathcal{F}) = J_1(J_\alpha(\mathcal{F}))$. | |
So that there are canonical injective maps | |
$J_\alpha(\mathcal{F}) \to J_{\alpha + 1}(\mathcal{F})$. | |
For a limit ordinal $\beta$, we define | |
$$ | |
J_\beta(\mathcal{F}) = \colim_{\alpha < \beta} J_\alpha(\mathcal{F}). | |
$$ | |
Note that this is a directed colimit. Hence for any ordinals $\alpha < \beta$ | |
we have an injective map $J_\alpha(\mathcal{F}) \to J_\beta(\mathcal{F})$. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-map-into-next-one} | |
With notation as above. | |
Suppose that $\mathcal{G}_1 \to \mathcal{G}_2$ is an injective | |
map of abelian sheaves on $\mathcal{C}$. Let $\alpha$ be an ordinal | |
and let $\mathcal{G}_1 \to J_\alpha(\mathcal{F})$ be a morphism | |
of sheaves. There exists a morphism $\mathcal{G}_2 \to | |
J_{\alpha + 1}(\mathcal{F})$ such that the following diagram commutes | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
\mathcal{G}_1 \ar[d] \ar[r] & \mathcal{G}_2 \ar[d] \\ | |
J_{\alpha}(\mathcal{F}) \ar[r] & J_{\alpha + 1}(\mathcal{F}) } | |
$$ | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
This is because the map $i\mathcal{G}_1 \to i\mathcal{G}_2$ is injective | |
and hence $i\mathcal{G}_1 \to iJ_\alpha(\mathcal{F})$ extends to | |
$i\mathcal{G}_2 \to J(iJ_\alpha(\mathcal{F}))$ which gives the | |
desired map after applying the sheafification functor. | |
\end{proof} | |
\noindent | |
This lemma says that somehow the system $\{J_{\alpha}(\mathcal{F})\}$ | |
is an injective embedding of $\mathcal{F}$. Of course | |
we cannot take the limit over all $\alpha$ because they form a class | |
and not a set. However, the idea is now that you don't have to check | |
injectivity on all injections $\mathcal{G}_1 \to \mathcal{G}_2$, plus | |
the following lemma. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-map-into-smaller} | |
Suppose that $\mathcal{G}_i$, $i\in I$ is set of abelian sheaves | |
on $\mathcal{C}$. There exists an ordinal $\beta$ such that | |
for any sheaf $\mathcal{F}$, any $i\in I$, and any map | |
$\varphi : \mathcal{G}_i \to J_\beta(\mathcal{F})$ there exists an | |
$\alpha < \beta$ such that $ \varphi $ factors through | |
$J_\alpha(\mathcal{F})$. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
This reduces to the case of a single sheaf $\mathcal{G}$ | |
by taking the direct sum of all the $\mathcal{G}_i$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Consider the sets | |
$$ | |
S = \coprod\nolimits_{U \in \Ob(\mathcal{C})} \mathcal{G}(U). | |
$$ | |
and | |
$$ | |
T_\beta | |
= | |
\coprod\nolimits_{U \in \Ob(\mathcal{C})} J_\beta(\mathcal{F})(U) | |
$$ | |
The transition maps between the sets $T_\beta$ are injective. | |
If the cofinality of $\beta$ is large enough, then | |
$T_\beta = \colim_{\alpha < \beta} T_\alpha$, see | |
Sites, Lemma \ref{sites-lemma-colimit-over-ordinal-sections}. | |
A morphism $\mathcal{G} \to J_\beta(\mathcal{F})$ factors | |
through $J_\alpha(\mathcal{F})$ if and only if | |
the associated map $S \to T_\beta$ factors through $T_\alpha$. | |
By | |
Sets, Lemma \ref{sets-lemma-map-from-set-lifts} | |
if the cofinality of $\beta$ is bigger than the cardinality | |
of $S$, then the result of the lemma is true. Hence the lemma | |
follows from the fact that there are ordinals with arbitrarily | |
large cofinality, see | |
Sets, Proposition \ref{sets-proposition-exist-ordinals-large-cofinality}. | |
\end{proof} | |
\noindent | |
Recall that for an object $X$ of $\mathcal{C}$ we denote $\mathbf{Z}_X$ | |
the presheaf of abelian groups $\Gamma(U, \mathbf{Z}_X) = | |
\oplus_{U \to X} \mathbf{Z}$, see | |
Modules on Sites, Section \ref{sites-modules-section-free-abelian-presheaf}. | |
The sheaf associated to this presheaf | |
is denoted $\mathbf{Z}_X^\#$, see | |
Modules on Sites, Section \ref{sites-modules-section-free-abelian-sheaf}. | |
It can be characterized by | |
the property | |
\begin{equation} | |
\label{equation-free-sheaf-on} | |
\Mor_{\textit{Ab}(\mathcal{C})}(\mathbf{Z}_X^\#, \mathcal{G}) | |
= | |
\mathcal{G}(X) | |
\end{equation} | |
where the element $\varphi$ of the left hand side is mapped | |
to $\varphi(1 \cdot \text{id}_X)$ in the right hand side. We can use these | |
sheaves to characterize injective abelian sheaves. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-characterize-injectives} | |
Suppose $\mathcal{J}$ is a sheaf of abelian groups with the following | |
property: For all $X\in \Ob(\mathcal{C})$, for any abelian subsheaf | |
$\mathcal{S} \subset \mathbf{Z}_X^\#$ and any morphism | |
$\varphi : \mathcal{S} \to \mathcal{J}$, there exists a morphism | |
$\mathbf{Z}_X^\# \to \mathcal{J}$ extending $\varphi$. | |
Then $\mathcal{J}$ is an injective sheaf of abelian groups. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Let $\mathcal{F} \to \mathcal{G}$ be an injective map | |
of abelian sheaves. Suppose $\varphi : \mathcal{F} \to \mathcal{J}$ | |
is a morphism. Arguing as in the proof of | |
More on Algebra, Lemma \ref{more-algebra-lemma-injective-abelian} | |
we see that it suffices | |
to prove that if $\mathcal{F} \not = \mathcal{G}$, then we | |
can find an abelian sheaf $\mathcal{F}'$, | |
$\mathcal{F} \subset \mathcal{F}' \subset \mathcal{G}$ | |
such that (a) the inclusion $\mathcal{F} \subset \mathcal{F}'$ is strict, | |
and (b) $\varphi$ can be extended to $\mathcal{F}'$. | |
To find $\mathcal{F}'$, let $X$ be an object of $\mathcal{C}$ such | |
that the inclusion $\mathcal{F}(X) \subset \mathcal{G}(X)$ | |
is strict. Pick $s \in \mathcal{G}(X)$, $s \not \in \mathcal{F}(X)$. | |
Let $\psi : \mathbf{Z}_X^\# \to \mathcal{G}$ be the morphism corresponding | |
to the section $s$ via (\ref{equation-free-sheaf-on}). Set | |
$\mathcal{S} = \psi^{-1}(\mathcal{F})$. By assumption the morphism | |
$$ | |
\mathcal{S} \xrightarrow{\psi} \mathcal{F} \xrightarrow{\varphi} \mathcal{J} | |
$$ | |
can be extended to a morphism $\varphi' : \mathbf{Z}_X^\# \to \mathcal{J}$. | |
Note that $\varphi'$ annihilates the kernel of $\psi$ (as this is true | |
for $\varphi$). Thus $\varphi'$ gives rise to a morphism | |
$\varphi'' : \Im(\psi) \to \mathcal{J}$ | |
which agrees with $\varphi$ on the intersection | |
$\mathcal{F} \cap \Im(\psi)$ by construction. | |
Thus $\varphi$ and $\varphi''$ glue to give an extension | |
of $\varphi$ to the strictly bigger subsheaf | |
$\mathcal{F}' = \mathcal{F} + \Im(\psi)$. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{theorem} | |
\label{theorem-sheaves-injectives} | |
The category of sheaves of abelian groups on a | |
site has enough injectives. In fact there exists | |
a functorial injective embedding, see | |
Homology, Definition \ref{homology-definition-functorial-injective-embedding}. | |
\end{theorem} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Let $\mathcal{G}_i$, $i \in I$ be a set of abelian | |
sheaves such that every subsheaf of every $\mathbf{Z}_X^\#$ | |
occurs as one of the $\mathcal{G}_i$. Apply | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-map-into-smaller} to this collection to | |
get an ordinal $\beta$. We claim that for any sheaf of abelian | |
groups $\mathcal{F}$ the map $\mathcal{F} \to J_\beta(\mathcal{F})$ | |
is an injection of $\mathcal{F}$ into an injective. | |
Note that by construction the assignment | |
$\mathcal{F} \mapsto \big(\mathcal{F} \to J_\beta(\mathcal{F})\big)$ | |
is indeed functorial. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
The proof of the claim comes from the fact that by | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-characterize-injectives} it suffices to extend any | |
morphism $\gamma : \mathcal{G} \to J_\beta(\mathcal{F})$ | |
from a subsheaf $\mathcal{G}$ of some $\mathbf{Z}_X^\#$ to all of | |
$\mathbf{Z}_X^\#$. Then by Lemma \ref{lemma-map-into-smaller} the | |
map $\gamma$ lifts into $J_\alpha(\mathcal{F})$ for some | |
$\alpha < \beta$. Finally, we apply Lemma \ref{lemma-map-into-next-one} | |
to get the desired extension of $\gamma$ to a morphism | |
into $J_{\alpha + 1}(\mathcal{F}) \to J_\beta(\mathcal{F})$. | |
\end{proof} | |
\section{Modules on a ringed site} | |
\label{section-sheaves-modules} | |
\noindent | |
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a site. | |
Let $\mathcal{O}$ be a sheaf of rings on $\mathcal{C}$. | |
By analogy with | |
More on Algebra, Section \ref{more-algebra-section-injectives-modules} | |
let us try to prove that there are enough injective | |
$\mathcal{O}$-modules. First of all, we pick an injective | |
embedding | |
$$ | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{U, \mathcal{I}} | |
j_{U!}\mathcal{O}_U/\mathcal{I} | |
\longrightarrow | |
\mathcal{J} | |
$$ | |
where $\mathcal{J}$ is an injective abelian sheaf (which | |
exists by the previous section). Here the direct sum is | |
over all objects $U$ of $\mathcal{C}$ and over all | |
$\mathcal{O}$-submodules $\mathcal{I} \subset j_{U!}\mathcal{O}_U$. | |
Please see | |
Modules on Sites, Section \ref{sites-modules-section-localize} | |
to read about the functors restriction and | |
extension by $0$ for the localization functor | |
$j_U : \mathcal{C}/U \to \mathcal{C}$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
For any sheaf of $\mathcal{O}$-modules $\mathcal{F}$ denote | |
$$ | |
\mathcal{F}^\vee | |
= | |
\SheafHom(\mathcal{F}, \mathcal{J}) | |
$$ | |
with its natural $\mathcal{O}$-module structure. | |
Insert here future reference to internal hom. | |
We will also need | |
a canonical flat resolution of a sheaf of $\mathcal{O}$-modules. | |
This we can do as follows: For any $\mathcal{O}$-module | |
$\mathcal{F}$ we denote | |
$$ | |
F(\mathcal{F}) | |
= | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{U \in \Ob(\mathcal{C}), s \in \mathcal{F}(U)} | |
j_{U!}\mathcal{O}_U. | |
$$ | |
This is a flat sheaf of $\mathcal{O}$-modules which comes equipped | |
with a canonical surjection $F(\mathcal{F}) \to \mathcal{F}$, see | |
Modules on Sites, Lemma \ref{sites-modules-lemma-module-quotient-flat}. | |
Moreover the construction $\mathcal{F} \mapsto F(\mathcal{F})$ | |
is functorial in $\mathcal{F}$. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-vee-exact-sheaves} | |
The functor $\mathcal{F} \mapsto \mathcal{F}^\vee$ is exact. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
This because $\mathcal{J}$ is an injective abelian sheaf. | |
\end{proof} | |
\noindent | |
There is a canonical map $ev : \mathcal{F} \to (\mathcal{F}^\vee)^\vee$ | |
given by evaluation: given $x \in \mathcal{F}(U)$ we let | |
$ev(x) \in (\mathcal{F}^\vee)^\vee = | |
\SheafHom(\mathcal{F}^\vee, \mathcal{J})$ | |
be the map $\varphi \mapsto \varphi(x)$. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-ev-injective-sheaves} | |
For any $\mathcal{O}$-module $\mathcal{F}$ the evaluation map | |
$ev : \mathcal{F} \to (\mathcal{F}^\vee)^\vee$ is injective. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
You can check this using the definition of $\mathcal{J}$. | |
Namely, if $s \in \mathcal{F}(U)$ is not zero, then let | |
$j_{U!}\mathcal{O}_U \to \mathcal{F}$ be the map of | |
$\mathcal{O}$-modules it corresponds to via adjunction. | |
Let $\mathcal{I}$ be the kernel of this map. There exists | |
a nonzero map $\mathcal{F} \supset j_{U!}\mathcal{O}_U/\mathcal{I} | |
\to \mathcal{J}$ which does not annihilate $s$. As $\mathcal{J}$ is | |
an injective $\mathcal{O}$-module, this extends to a map | |
$\varphi : \mathcal{F} \to \mathcal{J}$. | |
Then $ev(s)(\varphi) = \varphi(s) \not = 0$ which is what we had to prove. | |
\end{proof} | |
\noindent | |
The canonical surjection | |
$F(\mathcal{F}) \to \mathcal{F}$ of $\mathcal{O}$-modules turns into a | |
canonical injection, see above, of $\mathcal{O}$-modules | |
$$ | |
(\mathcal{F}^\vee)^\vee \longrightarrow (F(\mathcal{F}^\vee))^\vee. | |
$$ | |
Set $J(\mathcal{F}) = (F(\mathcal{F}^\vee))^\vee$. | |
The composition of $ev$ with this | |
the displayed map gives | |
$\mathcal{F} \to J(\mathcal{F})$ functorially in $\mathcal{F}$. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-JM-injective-sheaves} | |
Let $\mathcal{O}$ be a sheaf of rings. | |
For every $\mathcal{O}$-module $\mathcal{F}$ the | |
$\mathcal{O}$-module $J(\mathcal{F})$ is injective. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
We have to show that the functor | |
$\Hom_\mathcal{O}(\mathcal{G}, J(\mathcal{F}))$ | |
is exact. Note that | |
\begin{eqnarray*} | |
\Hom_\mathcal{O}(\mathcal{G}, J(\mathcal{F})) | |
& = & | |
\Hom_\mathcal{O}(\mathcal{G}, (F(\mathcal{F}^\vee))^\vee) \\ | |
& = & | |
\Hom_\mathcal{O} | |
(\mathcal{G}, \SheafHom(F(\mathcal{F}^\vee), \mathcal{J})) \\ | |
& = & | |
\Hom(\mathcal{G} \otimes_\mathcal{O} F(\mathcal{F}^\vee), \mathcal{J}) | |
\end{eqnarray*} | |
Thus what we want follows from the fact that $F(\mathcal{F}^\vee)$ | |
is flat and $\mathcal{J}$ is injective. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{theorem} | |
\label{theorem-sheaves-modules-injectives} | |
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a site. | |
Let $\mathcal{O}$ be a sheaf of rings on $\mathcal{C}$. | |
The category of sheaves of $\mathcal{O}$-modules on a | |
site has enough injectives. In fact there exists | |
a functorial injective embedding, see | |
Homology, Definition \ref{homology-definition-functorial-injective-embedding}. | |
\end{theorem} | |
\begin{proof} | |
From the discussion in this section. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{proposition} | |
\label{proposition-presheaves-modules} | |
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a category. | |
Let $\mathcal{O}$ be a presheaf of rings on $\mathcal{C}$. | |
The category $\textit{PMod}(\mathcal{O})$ of presheaves of | |
$\mathcal{O}$-modules has functorial injective embeddings. | |
\end{proposition} | |
\begin{proof} | |
We could prove this along the lines of the discussion in | |
Section \ref{section-injectives-presheaves}. But instead we argue using the | |
theorem above. Endow $\mathcal{C}$ with the structure of a site by letting the | |
set of coverings of an object $U$ consist of all singletons $\{f : V \to U\}$ | |
where $f$ is an isomorphism. We omit the verification that this defines a site. | |
A sheaf for this topology is the same as a presheaf (proof omitted). Hence the | |
theorem applies. | |
\end{proof} | |
\section{Embedding abelian categories} | |
\label{section-embedding} | |
\noindent | |
In this section we show that an abelian category embeds in the | |
category of abelian sheaves on a site having enough points. | |
The site will be the one described in the following lemma. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-site-abelian-category} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an abelian category. | |
Let | |
$$ | |
\text{Cov} = \{\{f : V \to U\} \mid f\text{ is surjective}\}. | |
$$ | |
Then $(\mathcal{A}, \text{Cov})$ is a site, see | |
Sites, Definition \ref{sites-definition-site}. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Note that $\Ob(\mathcal{A})$ is a set by our conventions | |
about categories. An isomorphism is a surjective morphism. | |
The composition of surjective morphisms is surjective. | |
And the base change of a surjective morphism in $\mathcal{A}$ | |
is surjective, see | |
Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-epimorphism-universal-abelian-category}. | |
\end{proof} | |
\noindent | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a pre-additive category. In this case the | |
Yoneda embedding $\mathcal{A} \to \textit{PSh}(\mathcal{A})$, $X \mapsto h_X$ | |
factors through a functor $\mathcal{A} \to \textit{PAb}(\mathcal{A})$. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-embedding} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an abelian category. | |
Let $\mathcal{C} = (\mathcal{A}, \text{Cov})$ be the | |
site defined in | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-site-abelian-category}. | |
Then $X \mapsto h_X$ defines a fully faithful, exact functor | |
$$ | |
\mathcal{A} \longrightarrow \textit{Ab}(\mathcal{C}). | |
$$ | |
Moreover, the site $\mathcal{C}$ has enough points. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Suppose that $f : V \to U$ is a surjective morphism of $\mathcal{A}$. | |
Let $K = \Ker(f)$. Recall that | |
$V \times_U V = \Ker((f, -f) : V \oplus V \to U)$, see | |
Homology, Example \ref{homology-example-fibre-product-pushouts}. | |
In particular there exists an injection $K \oplus K \to V \times_U V$. | |
Let $p, q : V \times_U V \to V$ be the two projection morphisms. | |
Note that $p - q : V \times_U V \to V$ is a morphism such that | |
$f \circ (p - q) = 0$. Hence $p - q$ factors through $K \to V$. | |
Let us denote this morphism by $c : V \times_U V \to K$. | |
And since the composition $K \oplus K \to V \times_U V \to K$ | |
is surjective, we conclude that $c$ is surjective. It follows that | |
$$ | |
V \times_U V \xrightarrow{p - q} V \to U \to 0 | |
$$ | |
is an exact sequence of $\mathcal{A}$. | |
Hence for an object $X$ of $\mathcal{A}$ the sequence | |
$$ | |
0 \to | |
\Hom_\mathcal{A}(U, X) \to | |
\Hom_\mathcal{A}(V, X) \to | |
\Hom_\mathcal{A}(V \times_U V, X) | |
$$ | |
is an exact sequence of abelian groups, see | |
Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-check-exactness}. | |
This means that $h_X$ satisfies the sheaf condition | |
on $\mathcal{C}$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
The functor is fully faithful by | |
Categories, Lemma \ref{categories-lemma-yoneda}. | |
The functor is a left exact functor between abelian categories by | |
Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-check-exactness}. | |
To show that it is right exact, let $X \to Y$ be a surjective morphism | |
of $\mathcal{A}$. Let $U$ be an object of $\mathcal{A}$, and let | |
$s \in h_Y(U) = \Mor_\mathcal{A}(U, Y)$ be a section of $h_Y$ | |
over $U$. By | |
Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-epimorphism-universal-abelian-category} | |
the projection $U \times_Y X \to U$ is surjective. | |
Hence $\{V = U \times_Y X \to U\}$ is a covering of $U$ such that | |
$s|_V$ lifts to a section of $h_X$. This proves that | |
$h_X \to h_Y$ is a surjection of abelian sheaves, see | |
Sites, Lemma \ref{sites-lemma-mono-epi-sheaves}. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
The site $\mathcal{C}$ has enough points by | |
Sites, Proposition \ref{sites-proposition-criterion-points}. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{remark} | |
\label{remark-embedding} | |
The Freyd-Mitchell embedding theorem says there exists a fully faithful | |
exact functor from any abelian category $\mathcal{A}$ | |
to the category of modules over a ring. | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-embedding} | |
is not quite as strong. But the result is suitable for the | |
Stacks project as we have to understand sheaves of abelian groups on | |
sites in detail anyway. Moreover, ``diagram chasing'' works in the category | |
of abelian sheaves on $\mathcal{C}$, for example by working with sections over | |
objects, or by working on the level of stalks using that $\mathcal{C}$ has | |
enough points. To see how to deduce the Freyd-Mitchell embedding theorem from | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-embedding} | |
see | |
Remark \ref{remark-embedding-freyd}. | |
\end{remark} | |
\begin{remark} | |
\label{remark-embedding-big} | |
If $\mathcal{A}$ is a ``big'' abelian category, i.e., if $\mathcal{A}$ | |
has a class of objects, then | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-embedding} | |
does not work. In this case, given any set of objects | |
$E \subset \Ob(\mathcal{A})$ there exists an abelian full subcategory | |
$\mathcal{A}' \subset \mathcal{A}$ such that | |
$\Ob(\mathcal{A}')$ is a set and $E \subset \Ob(\mathcal{A}')$. | |
Then one can apply | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-embedding} | |
to $\mathcal{A}'$. One can use this to prove that results depending on | |
a diagram chase hold in $\mathcal{A}$. | |
\end{remark} | |
\begin{remark} | |
\label{remark-embedding-freyd} | |
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a site. | |
Note that $\textit{Ab}(\mathcal{C})$ has enough injectives, see | |
Theorem \ref{theorem-sheaves-injectives}. | |
(In the case that $\mathcal{C}$ has enough points this is straightforward | |
because $p_*I$ is an injective sheaf if $I$ is an injective | |
$\mathbf{Z}$-module and $p$ is a point.) | |
Also, $\textit{Ab}(\mathcal{C})$ has a cogenerator (details omitted). | |
Hence | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-embedding} | |
proves that we have a fully faithful, exact embedding | |
$\mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{B}$ where $\mathcal{B}$ has a | |
cogenerator and enough injectives. | |
We can apply this to $\mathcal{A}^{opp}$ and we get a | |
fully faithful exact functor | |
$i : \mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{D} = \mathcal{B}^{opp}$ | |
where $\mathcal{D}$ has enough projectives and a generator. Hence | |
$\mathcal{D}$ has a projective generator $P$. | |
Set $R = \Mor_\mathcal{D}(P, P)$. Then | |
$$ | |
\mathcal{A} \longrightarrow \text{Mod}_R, \quad | |
X \longmapsto \Hom_\mathcal{D}(P, X). | |
$$ | |
One can check this is a fully faithful, exact functor. | |
In other words, one retrieves the | |
Freyd-Mitchell theorem mentioned in | |
Remark \ref{remark-embedding} | |
above. | |
\end{remark} | |
\begin{remark} | |
\label{remark-embed-exact-category} | |
The arguments proving | |
Lemmas \ref{lemma-site-abelian-category} and | |
\ref{lemma-embedding} | |
work also for {\it exact categories}, see | |
\cite[Appendix A]{Buhler} and | |
\cite[1.1.4]{BBD}. | |
We quickly review this here and we add more details if we ever | |
need it in the Stacks project. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an additive category. | |
A {\it kernel-cokernel} pair is a pair $(i, p)$ | |
of morphisms of $\mathcal{A}$ with | |
$i : A \to B$, $p : B \to C$ such that $i$ is the kernel of | |
$p$ and $p$ is the cokernel of $i$. | |
Given a set $\mathcal{E}$ of kernel-cokernel pairs we say | |
$i : A \to B$ is an {\it admissible monomorphism} | |
if $(i, p) \in \mathcal{E}$ for some morphism $p$. | |
Similarly we say a morphism $p : B \to C$ is an {\it admissible epimorphism} | |
if $(i, p) \in \mathcal{E}$ for some morphism $i$. | |
The pair $(\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{E})$ is said to be an | |
{\it exact category} if the following axioms hold | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item $\mathcal{E}$ is closed under isomorphisms of kernel-cokernel | |
pairs, | |
\item for any object $A$ the morphism $1_A$ is both an admissible epimorphism | |
and an admissible monomorphism, | |
\item admissible monomorphisms are stable under composition, | |
\item admissible epimorphisms are stable under composition, | |
\item the push-out of an admissible monomorphism $i : A \to B$ via | |
any morphism $A \to A'$ exist and the induced morphism $i' : A' \to B'$ | |
is an admissible monomorphism, and | |
\item the base change of an admissible epimorphism $p : B \to C$ via | |
any morphism $C' \to C$ exist and the induced morphism $p' : B' \to C'$ | |
is an admissible epimorphism. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
Given such a structure let $\mathcal{C} = (\mathcal{A}, \text{Cov})$ | |
where coverings (i.e., elements of $\text{Cov}$) are given by | |
admissible epimorphisms. The axioms listed above | |
immediately imply that this is a site. Consider the functor | |
$$ | |
F : \mathcal{A} \longrightarrow \textit{Ab}(\mathcal{C}), \quad | |
X \longmapsto h_X | |
$$ | |
exactly as in | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-embedding}. | |
It turns out that this functor is fully faithful, exact, and reflects | |
exactness. Moreover, any extension of objects in the essential image | |
of $F$ is in the essential image of $F$. | |
\end{remark} | |
\section{Grothendieck's AB conditions} | |
\label{section-grothendieck-conditions} | |
\noindent | |
This and the next few sections are mostly interesting for ``big'' abelian | |
categories, i.e., those categories listed in | |
Categories, Remark \ref{categories-remark-big-categories}. | |
A good case to keep in mind is the category of sheaves of modules | |
on a ringed site. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Grothendieck proved the existence of injectives in great generality | |
in the paper \cite{Tohoku}. He used the following conditions to single | |
out abelian categories with special properties. | |
\begin{definition} | |
\label{definition-grothendieck-conditions} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an abelian category. We name some conditions | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item[AB3] $\mathcal{A}$ has direct sums, | |
\item[AB4] $\mathcal{A}$ has AB3 and direct sums are exact, | |
\item[AB5] $\mathcal{A}$ has AB3 and filtered colimits are exact. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
Here are the dual notions | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item[AB3*] $\mathcal{A}$ has products, | |
\item[AB4*] $\mathcal{A}$ has AB3* and products are exact, | |
\item[AB5*] $\mathcal{A}$ has AB3* and filtered limits are exact. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
We say an object $U$ of $\mathcal{A}$ is a {\it generator} if | |
for every $N \subset M$, $N \not = M$ in $\mathcal{A}$ there exists a morphism | |
$U \to M$ which does not factor through $N$. | |
We say $\mathcal{A}$ is a {\it Grothendieck abelian category} if | |
it has AB5 and a generator. | |
\end{definition} | |
\noindent | |
Discussion: A direct sum in an abelian category is a coproduct. | |
If an abelian category has direct sums (i.e., AB3), then it has colimits, see | |
Categories, Lemma \ref{categories-lemma-colimits-coproducts-coequalizers}. | |
Similarly if $\mathcal{A}$ has AB3* then it has limits, see | |
Categories, Lemma \ref{categories-lemma-limits-products-equalizers}. | |
Exactness of direct sums means the following: given an index set $I$ | |
and short exact sequences | |
$$ | |
0 \to A_i \to B_i \to C_i \to 0,\quad i \in I | |
$$ | |
in $\mathcal{A}$ then the sequence | |
$$ | |
0 \to | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I} A_i \to | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I} B_i \to | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I} C_i \to 0 | |
$$ | |
is exact as well. Without assuming AB4 it is only true in general that | |
the sequence is exact on the right (i.e., taking direct sums is a right | |
exact functor if direct sums exist). Similarly, exactness of filtered | |
colimits means the following: given a directed set $I$ | |
and a system of short exact sequences | |
$$ | |
0 \to A_i \to B_i \to C_i \to 0 | |
$$ | |
over $I$ in $\mathcal{A}$ then the sequence | |
$$ | |
0 \to | |
\colim_{i \in I} A_i \to | |
\colim_{i \in I} B_i \to | |
\colim_{i \in I} C_i \to 0 | |
$$ | |
is exact as well. Without assuming AB5 it is only true in general that | |
the sequence is exact on the right (i.e., taking colimits is a right | |
exact functor if colimits exist). A similar explanation holds for | |
AB4* and AB5*. | |
\section{Injectives in Grothendieck categories} | |
\label{section-grothendieck-categories} | |
\noindent | |
The existence of a generator implies that given an object $M$ of a | |
Grothendieck abelian category $\mathcal{A}$ there is a set of subobjects. | |
(This may not be true for a general ``big'' abelian category.) | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-set-of-subobjects} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an abelian category with a generator $U$ and | |
$X$ and object of $\mathcal{A}$. If $\kappa$ is the cardinality of | |
$\Mor(U, X)$ then | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item There does not exist a strictly increasing | |
(or strictly decreasing) chain of subobjects | |
of $X$ indexed by a cardinal bigger than $\kappa$. | |
\item If $\alpha$ is an ordinal of cofinality $> \kappa$ | |
then any increasing (or decreasing) sequence of subobjects | |
of $X$ indexed by $\alpha$ is eventually constant. | |
\item The cardinality of the set of subobjects of $X$ | |
is $\leq 2^\kappa$. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
For (1) assume $\kappa' > \kappa$ is a cardinal and assume | |
$X_i$, $i \in \kappa'$ is strictly increasing. Then take for | |
each $i$ a $\phi_i \in \Mor(U, X)$ such that $\phi_i$ factors through | |
$X_{i + 1}$ but not through $X_i$. Then the morphisms $\phi_i$ | |
are distinct, which contradicts the definition of $\kappa$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Part (2) follows from the definition of cofinality and (1). | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Proof of (3). For any subobject $Y \subset X$ | |
define $S_Y \in \mathcal{P}(\Mor(U, X))$ (power set) as | |
$S_Y = \{\phi \in \Mor(U,X) : \phi)\text{ factors through }Y\}$. | |
Then $Y = Y'$ if and only if $S_Y = S_{Y'}$. Hence the cardinality | |
of the set of subobjects is at most the cardinality of this power set. | |
\end{proof} | |
\noindent | |
By Lemma \ref{lemma-set-of-subobjects} the following definition makes sense. | |
\begin{definition} | |
\label{definition-size} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
Let $M$ be an object of $\mathcal{A}$. | |
The {\it size} $|M|$ of $M$ is the cardinality of the set of subobjects | |
of $M$. | |
\end{definition} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-size-goes-down} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
If $0 \to M' \to M \to M'' \to 0$ is a short exact sequence of | |
$\mathcal{A}$, then $|M'|, |M''| \leq |M|$. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Immediate from the definitions. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-set-iso-classes-bounded-size} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category with generator $U$. | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item If $|M| \leq \kappa$, then $M$ is the quotient of a direct | |
sum of at most $\kappa$ copies of $U$. | |
\item For every cardinal $\kappa$ there exists a set of isomorphism classes | |
of objects $M$ with $|M| \leq \kappa$. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
For (1) choose for every proper subobject $M' \subset M$ a morphism | |
$\varphi_{M'} : U \to M$ whose image is not contained in $M'$. Then | |
$\bigoplus_{M' \subset M} \varphi_{M'} : \bigoplus_{M' \subset M} U \to M$ | |
is surjective. It is clear that (1) implies (2). | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{proposition} | |
\label{proposition-objects-are-small} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. Let $M$ be an | |
object of $\mathcal{A}$. Let $\kappa = |M|$. | |
If $\alpha$ is an ordinal whose cofinality is bigger than $\kappa$, | |
then $M$ is $\alpha$-small with respect to injections. | |
\end{proposition} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Please compare with Proposition \ref{proposition-modules-are-small}. | |
We need only show that the map (\ref{equation-compare}) is a surjection. | |
Let $f : M \to \colim B_\beta$ be a map. | |
Consider the subobjects $\{f^{-1}(B_\beta)\}$ of $M$, where $B_\beta$ | |
is considered as a subobject of the colimit $B = \bigcup_\beta B_\beta$. | |
If one of these, say $f^{-1}(B_\beta)$, fills $M$, | |
then the map factors through $B_\beta$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
So suppose to the contrary that all of the $f^{-1}(B_\beta)$ were proper | |
subobjects of $M$. However, because $\mathcal{A}$ has | |
AB5 we have | |
$$ | |
\colim f^{-1}(B_\beta) = f^{-1}\left(\colim B_\beta\right) = M. | |
$$ | |
Now there are at most $\kappa$ different subobjects of $M$ that occur among | |
the $f^{-1}(B_\alpha)$, by hypothesis. | |
Thus we can find a subset $S \subset \alpha$ of cardinality at most | |
$\kappa$ such that as $\beta'$ ranges over $S$, the | |
$f^{-1}(B_{\beta'})$ range over \emph{all} the $f^{-1}(B_\alpha)$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
However, $S$ has an upper bound $\widetilde{\alpha} < \alpha$ as | |
$\alpha$ has cofinality bigger than $\kappa$. In particular, all the | |
$f^{-1}(B_{\beta'})$, $\beta' \in S$ are contained in | |
$f^{-1}(B_{\widetilde{\alpha}})$. | |
It follows that $f^{-1}(B_{\widetilde{\alpha}}) = M$. | |
In particular, the map $f$ factors through $B_{\widetilde{\alpha}}$. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-characterize-injective} | |
\begin{slogan} | |
To check that an object is injective, one only needs to check that lifting | |
holds for subobjects of a generator. | |
\end{slogan} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category with generator $U$. | |
An object $I$ of $\mathcal{A}$ is injective if and only if in every | |
commutative diagram | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
M \ar[d] \ar[r] & I \\ | |
U \ar@{-->}[ru] | |
} | |
$$ | |
for $M \subset U$ a subobject, the dotted arrow exists. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Please see Lemma \ref{lemma-criterion-baer} for the case of modules. | |
Choose an injection $A \subset B$ and a morphism $\varphi : A \to I$. | |
Consider the set $S$ of pairs $(A', \varphi')$ consisting of | |
subobjects $A \subset A' \subset B$ and a morphism $\varphi' : A' \to I$ | |
extending $\varphi$. Define a partial ordering on this set in the obvious | |
manner. Choose a totally ordered subset $T \subset S$. Then | |
$$ | |
A' = \colim_{t \in T} A_t \xrightarrow{\colim_{t \in T} \varphi_t} I | |
$$ | |
is an upper bound. Hence by Zorn's lemma the set $S$ has a maximal element | |
$(A', \varphi')$. We claim that $A' = B$. If not, then choose a morphism | |
$\psi : U \to B$ which does not factor through $A'$. Set | |
$N = A' \cap \psi(U)$. Set $M = \psi^{-1}(N)$. Then the map | |
$$ | |
M \to N \to A' \xrightarrow{\varphi'} I | |
$$ | |
can be extended to a morphism $\chi : U \to I$. Since | |
$\chi|_{\Ker(\psi)} = 0$ we see that $\chi$ factors as | |
$$ | |
U \to \Im(\psi) \xrightarrow{\varphi''} I | |
$$ | |
Since $\varphi'$ and $\varphi''$ agree on $N = A' \cap \Im(\psi)$ | |
we see that combined the define a morphism $A' + \Im(\psi) \to I$ | |
contradicting the assumed maximality of $A'$. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{theorem} | |
\label{theorem-injective-embedding-grothendieck} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
Then $\mathcal{A}$ has functorial injective embeddings. | |
\end{theorem} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Please compare with the proof of | |
Theorem \ref{theorem-baer-grothendieck}. | |
Choose a generator $U$ of $\mathcal{A}$. For an object $M$ we define | |
$\mathbf{M}(M)$ by the following pushout diagram | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
\bigoplus_{N \subset U} | |
\bigoplus_{\varphi \in \Hom(N, M)} | |
N \ar[r] \ar[d] & M \ar[d] \\ | |
\bigoplus_{N \subset U} | |
\bigoplus_{\varphi \in \Hom(N, M)} | |
U \ar[r] & \mathbf{M}(M). | |
} | |
$$ | |
Note that $M \to \mathbf{M}(N)$ is a functor and that there | |
exist functorial injective maps $M \to \mathbf{M}(M)$. By transfinite | |
induction we define functors $\mathbf{M}_\alpha(M)$ for every | |
ordinal $\alpha$. Namely, set $\mathbf{M}_0(M) = M$. Given | |
$\mathbf{M}_\alpha(M)$ set | |
$\mathbf{M}_{\alpha + 1}(M) = \mathbf{M}(\mathbf{M}_\alpha(M))$. | |
For a limit ordinal $\beta$ set | |
$$ | |
\mathbf{M}_\beta(M) = \colim_{\alpha < \beta} \mathbf{M}_\alpha(M). | |
$$ | |
Finally, pick any ordinal $\alpha$ whose cofinality is greater than $|U|$. | |
Such an ordinal exists by | |
Sets, Proposition \ref{sets-proposition-exist-ordinals-large-cofinality}. | |
We claim that $M \to \mathbf{M}_\alpha(M)$ is the desired functorial | |
injective embedding. Namely, if $N \subset U$ is a subobject and | |
$\varphi : N \to \mathbf{M}_\alpha(M)$ is a morphism, then we see that | |
$\varphi$ factors through $\mathbf{M}_{\alpha'}(M)$ for some | |
$\alpha' < \alpha$ by | |
Proposition \ref{proposition-objects-are-small}. | |
By construction of $\mathbf{M}(-)$ we see that $\varphi$ extends to | |
a morphism from $U$ into $\mathbf{M}_{\alpha' + 1}(M)$ and hence into | |
$\mathbf{M}_\alpha(M)$. By | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-characterize-injective} | |
we conclude that $\mathbf{M}_\alpha(M)$ is injective. | |
\end{proof} | |
\section{K-injectives in Grothendieck categories} | |
\label{section-K-injective} | |
\noindent | |
The material in this section is taken from the paper \cite{serpe} | |
authored by Serp\'e. This paper generalizes some of the results | |
of \cite{Spaltenstein} by Spaltenstein to general Grothendieck abelian | |
categories. Our Lemma \ref{lemma-characterize-K-injective} | |
is only implicit in the paper by Serp\'e. Our approach is to mimic | |
Grothendieck's proof of | |
Theorem \ref{theorem-injective-embedding-grothendieck}. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-surjection-bounded-size} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category with generator $U$. | |
Let $c$ be the function on cardinals defined by | |
$c(\kappa) = |\bigoplus_{\alpha \in \kappa} U|$. If $\pi : M \to N$ is a | |
surjection then there exists a subobject $M' \subset M$ which surjects | |
onto $N$ with $|N'| \leq c(|N|)$. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
For every proper subobject $N' \subset N$ choose a morphism | |
$\varphi_{N'} : U \to M$ such that $U \to M \to N$ does not factor | |
through $N'$. Set | |
$$ | |
N' = \Im\left( | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{N' \subset N} \varphi_{N'} : | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{N' \subset N} U \longrightarrow M\right) | |
$$ | |
Then $N'$ works. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-acyclic-quotient-complexes-bounded-size} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. There exists a cardinal | |
$\kappa$ such that given any acyclic complex $M^\bullet$ we have | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item if $M^\bullet$ is nonzero, there is a nonzero subcomplex | |
$N^\bullet$ which is bounded above, acyclic, and $|N^n| \leq \kappa$, | |
\item there exists a surjection of complexes | |
$$ | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I} M_i^\bullet \longrightarrow M^\bullet | |
$$ | |
where $M_i^\bullet$ is bounded above, acyclic, and $|M_i^n| \leq \kappa$. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Choose a generator $U$ of $\mathcal{A}$. Denote $c$ the function of | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-surjection-bounded-size}. | |
Set $\kappa = \sup \{c^n(|U|), n = 1, 2, 3, \ldots\}$. | |
Let $n \in \mathbf{Z}$ and let $\psi : U \to M^n$ be a morphism. | |
In order to prove (1) and (2) it suffices to prove there exists a subcomplex | |
$N^\bullet \subset M^\bullet$ which is bounded above, acyclic, and | |
$|N^m| \leq \kappa$, such that $\psi$ factors through $N^n$. | |
To do this set $N^n = \Im(\psi)$, $N^{n + 1} = \Im(U \to M^n \to M^{n + 1})$, | |
and $N^m = 0$ for $m \geq n + 2$. | |
Suppose we have constructed $N^m \subset M^m$ for all $m \geq k$ such that | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item $\text{d}(N^m) \subset N^{m + 1}$, $m \geq k$, | |
\item $\Im(N^{m - 1} \to N^m) = \Ker(N^m \to N^{m + 1})$ for | |
all $m \geq k + 1$, and | |
\item $|N^m| \leq c^{\max\{n - m, 0\}}(|U|)$. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
for some $k \leq n$. Because $M^\bullet$ is acyclic, we see that the subobject | |
$\text{d}^{-1}(\Ker(N^k \to N^{k + 1})) \subset M^{k - 1}$ surjects onto | |
$\Ker(N^k \to N^{k + 1})$. Thus we can choose $N^{k - 1} \subset M^{k - 1}$ | |
surjecting onto $\Ker(N^k \to N^{k + 1})$ with | |
$|N^{k - 1}| \leq c^{n - k + 1}(|U|)$ by | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-surjection-bounded-size}. The proof is finished by | |
induction on $k$. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-characterize-K-injective} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
Let $\kappa$ be a cardinal as in | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-acyclic-quotient-complexes-bounded-size}. | |
Suppose that $I^\bullet$ is a complex such that | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item each $I^j$ is injective, and | |
\item for every bounded above acyclic complex $M^\bullet$ | |
such that $|M^n| \leq \kappa$ | |
we have $\Hom_{K(\mathcal{A})}(M^\bullet, I^\bullet) = 0$. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
Then $I^\bullet$ is an $K$-injective complex. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Let $M^\bullet$ be an acyclic complex. We are going to construct by | |
induction on the ordinal $\alpha$ an acyclic subcomplex | |
$K_\alpha^\bullet \subset M^\bullet$ as follows. | |
For $\alpha = 0$ we set $K_0^\bullet = 0$. For $\alpha > 0$ | |
we proceed as follows: | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item If $\alpha = \beta + 1$ and $K_\beta^\bullet = M^\bullet$ | |
then we choose $K_\alpha^\bullet = K_\beta^\bullet$. | |
\item If $\alpha = \beta + 1$ and $K_\beta^\bullet \not = M^\bullet$ | |
then $M^\bullet/K_\beta^\bullet$ is a nonzero acyclic complex. | |
We choose a subcomplex $N_\alpha^\bullet \subset M^\bullet/K_\beta^\bullet$ | |
as in Lemma \ref{lemma-acyclic-quotient-complexes-bounded-size}. | |
Finally, we let $K_\alpha^\bullet \subset M^\bullet$ | |
be the inverse image of $N_\alpha^\bullet$. | |
\item If $\alpha$ is a limit ordinal we set | |
$K_\beta^\bullet = \colim K_\alpha^\bullet$. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
It is clear that $M^\bullet = K_\alpha^\bullet$ for a suitably large | |
ordinal $\alpha$. We will prove that | |
$$ | |
\Hom_{K(\mathcal{A})}(K_\alpha^\bullet, I^\bullet) | |
$$ | |
is zero by transfinite induction on $\alpha$. It holds for $\alpha = 0$ | |
since $K_0^\bullet$ is zero. Suppose it holds for $\beta$ and | |
$\alpha = \beta + 1$. In case (1) of the list above the result is clear. | |
In case (2) there is a short exact sequence of complexes | |
$$ | |
0 \to K_\beta^\bullet \to K_\alpha^\bullet \to N_\alpha^\bullet \to 0 | |
$$ | |
Since each component of $I^\bullet$ is injective we see that we obtain | |
an exact sequence | |
$$ | |
\Hom_{K(\mathcal{A})}(K_\beta^\bullet, I^\bullet) \to | |
\Hom_{K(\mathcal{A})}(K_\alpha^\bullet, I^\bullet) \to | |
\Hom_{K(\mathcal{A})}(N_\alpha^\bullet, I^\bullet) | |
$$ | |
By induction the term on the left is zero and by assumption on $I^\bullet$ | |
the term on the right is zero. Thus the middle group is zero too. | |
Finally, suppose that $\alpha$ is a limit ordinal. Then we see that | |
$$ | |
\Hom^\bullet(K_\alpha^\bullet, I^\bullet) = | |
\lim_{\beta < \alpha} \Hom^\bullet(K_\beta^\bullet, I^\bullet) | |
$$ | |
with notation as in | |
More on Algebra, Section \ref{more-algebra-section-hom-complexes}. | |
These complexes compute morphisms in $K(\mathcal{A})$ by | |
More on Algebra, Equation | |
(\ref{more-algebra-equation-cohomology-hom-complex}). | |
Note that the transition maps in the system are surjective | |
because $I^j$ is surjective for each $j$. Moreover, for a limit | |
ordinal $\alpha$ we have equality of limit and value | |
(see displayed formula above). Thus we may apply | |
Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-ML-over-ordinals} | |
to conclude. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-functorial-homotopies} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
Let $(K_i^\bullet)_{i \in I}$ be a set of acyclic complexes. | |
There exists a functor $M^\bullet \mapsto \mathbf{M}^\bullet(M^\bullet)$ | |
and a natural transformation | |
$j_{M^\bullet} : M^\bullet \to \mathbf{M}^\bullet(M^\bullet)$ | |
such | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item $j_{M^\bullet}$ is a (termwise) injective quasi-isomorphism, and | |
\item for every $i \in I$ and $w : K_i^\bullet \to M^\bullet$ | |
the morphism $j_{M^\bullet} \circ w$ is homotopic to zero. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
For every $i \in I$ choose a (termwise) injective map of complexes | |
$K_i^\bullet \to L_i^\bullet$ which is homotopic to zero with | |
$L_i^\bullet$ quasi-isomorphic to zero. For example, take $L_i^\bullet$ | |
to be the cone on the identity of $K_i^\bullet$. | |
We define $\mathbf{M}^\bullet(M^\bullet)$ by the following pushout diagram | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
\bigoplus_{i \in I} | |
\bigoplus_{w : K_i^\bullet \to M^\bullet} | |
K_i^\bullet \ar[r] \ar[d] & M^\bullet \ar[d] \\ | |
\bigoplus_{i \in I} | |
\bigoplus_{w : K_i^\bullet \to M^\bullet} | |
L_i^\bullet \ar[r] & \mathbf{M}^\bullet(M^\bullet). | |
} | |
$$ | |
Then $M^\bullet \to \mathbf{M}^\bullet(M^\bullet)$ is a functor. The right | |
vertical arrow defines the functorial injective map $j_{M^\bullet}$. | |
The cokernel of $j_{M^\bullet}$ is isomorphic to the direct sum of | |
the cokernels of the maps $K_i^\bullet \to L_i^\bullet$ hence acyclic. | |
Thus $j_{M^\bullet}$ is a quasi-isomorphism. Part (2) holds by construction. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-functorial-injective} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
There exists a functor $M^\bullet \mapsto \mathbf{N}^\bullet(M^\bullet)$ | |
and a natural transformation | |
$j_{M^\bullet} : M^\bullet \to \mathbf{N}^\bullet(M^\bullet)$ | |
such | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item $j_{M^\bullet}$ is a (termwise) injective quasi-isomorphism, and | |
\item for every $n \in \mathbf{Z}$ the map $M^n \to \mathbf{N}^n(M^\bullet)$ | |
factors through a subobject $I^n \subset \mathbf{N}^n(M^\bullet)$ where $I^n$ | |
is an injective object of $\mathcal{A}$. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Choose a functorial injective embeddings $i_M : M \to I(M)$, see | |
Theorem \ref{theorem-injective-embedding-grothendieck}. | |
For every complex $M^\bullet$ denote $J^\bullet(M^\bullet)$ the complex | |
with terms $J^n(M^\bullet) = I(M^n) \oplus I(M^{n + 1})$ and differential | |
$$ | |
d_{J^\bullet(M^\bullet)} = | |
\left( | |
\begin{matrix} | |
0 & 1 \\ | |
0 & 0 | |
\end{matrix} | |
\right) | |
$$ | |
There exists a canonical injective map of complexes | |
$u_{M^\bullet} : M^\bullet \to J^\bullet(M^\bullet)$ by mapping $M^n$ to | |
$I(M^n) \oplus I(M^{n + 1})$ via the maps $i_{M^n} : M^n \to I(M^n)$ and | |
$i_{M^{n + 1}} \circ d : M^n \to M^{n + 1} \to I(M^{n + 1})$. Hence a | |
short exact sequence of complexes | |
$$ | |
0 \to M^\bullet \xrightarrow{u_{M^\bullet}} | |
J^\bullet(M^\bullet) \xrightarrow{v_{M^\bullet}} | |
Q^\bullet(M^\bullet) \to 0 | |
$$ | |
functorial in $M^\bullet$. Set | |
$$ | |
\mathbf{N}^\bullet(M^\bullet) = C(v_{M^\bullet})^\bullet[-1]. | |
$$ | |
Note that | |
$$ | |
\mathbf{N}^n(M^\bullet) = Q^{n - 1}(M^\bullet) \oplus J^n(M^\bullet) | |
$$ | |
with differential | |
$$ | |
\left( | |
\begin{matrix} | |
- d^{n - 1}_{Q^\bullet(M^\bullet)} & - v^n_{M^\bullet} \\ | |
0 & d^n_{J^\bullet(M)} | |
\end{matrix} | |
\right) | |
$$ | |
Hence we see that there is a map of complexes | |
$j_{M^\bullet} : M^\bullet \to \mathbf{N}^\bullet(M^\bullet)$ | |
induced by $u$. It is injective and factors through an injective subobject | |
by construction. The map $j_{M^\bullet}$ is a quasi-isomorphism as one | |
can prove by looking at the long exact sequence of cohomology associated | |
to the short exact sequences of complexes above. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{theorem} | |
\label{theorem-K-injective-embedding-grothendieck} | |
\begin{slogan} | |
Existence of K-injective complexes for Grothendieck abelian categories. | |
\end{slogan} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
For every complex $M^\bullet$ there exists a quasi-isomorphism | |
$M^\bullet \to I^\bullet$ such that $M^n \to I^n$ is injective and $I^n$ | |
is an injective object of $\mathcal{A}$ for all $n$ and $I^\bullet$ | |
is a K-injective complex. Moreover, the construction is functorial in | |
$M^\bullet$. | |
\end{theorem} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Please compare with the proof of | |
Theorem \ref{theorem-baer-grothendieck} | |
and | |
Theorem \ref{theorem-injective-embedding-grothendieck}. | |
Choose a cardinal $\kappa$ as in | |
Lemmas \ref{lemma-acyclic-quotient-complexes-bounded-size} and | |
\ref{lemma-characterize-K-injective}. | |
Choose a set $(K_i^\bullet)_{i \in I}$ | |
of bounded above, acyclic complexes | |
such that every bounded above acyclic complex $K^\bullet$ | |
such that $|K^n| \leq \kappa$ is isomorphic to $K_i^\bullet$ for some | |
$i \in I$. This is possible by | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-set-iso-classes-bounded-size}. | |
Denote $\mathbf{M}^\bullet(-)$ the functor constructed in | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-functorial-homotopies}. | |
Denote $\mathbf{N}^\bullet(-)$ the functor constructed in | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-functorial-injective}. | |
Both of these functors come with injective transformations | |
$\text{id} \to \mathbf{M}$ and $\text{id} \to \mathbf{N}$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Using transfinite recursion we define a sequence of functors | |
$\mathbf{T}_\alpha(-)$ and corresponding transformations | |
$\text{id} \to \mathbf{T}_\alpha$. Namely we set | |
$\mathbf{T}_0(M^\bullet) = M^\bullet$. If $\mathbf{T}_\alpha$ is | |
given then we set | |
$$ | |
\mathbf{T}_{\alpha + 1}(M^\bullet) = | |
\mathbf{N}^\bullet(\mathbf{M}^\bullet(\mathbf{T}_\alpha(M^\bullet))) | |
$$ | |
If $\beta$ is a limit ordinal we set | |
$$ | |
\mathbf{T}_\beta(M^\bullet) = | |
\colim_{\alpha < \beta} \mathbf{T}_\alpha(M^\bullet) | |
$$ | |
The transition maps of the system are injective quasi-isomorphisms. | |
By AB5 we see that the colimit is still quasi-isomorphic to $M^\bullet$. | |
We claim that $M^\bullet \to \mathbf{T}_\alpha(M^\bullet)$ | |
does the job if the cofinality of $\alpha$ is larger than | |
$\max(\kappa, |U|)$ where $U$ is a generator of $\mathcal{A}$. | |
Namely, it suffices to check conditions (1) and (2) of | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-characterize-K-injective}. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
For (1) we use the criterion of | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-characterize-injective}. | |
Suppose that $M \subset U$ and $\varphi : M \to \mathbf{T}^n_\alpha(M^\bullet)$ | |
is a morphism for some $n \in \mathbf{Z}$. By | |
Proposition \ref{proposition-objects-are-small} | |
we see that $\varphi$ factor through | |
$\mathbf{T}^n_{\alpha'}(M^\bullet)$ for some $\alpha' < \alpha$. | |
In particular, by the construction of the functor | |
$\mathbf{N}^\bullet(-)$ we see that $\varphi$ factors through | |
an injective object of $\mathcal{A}$ which shows that $\varphi$ | |
lifts to a morphism on $U$. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
For (2) let $w : K^\bullet \to \mathbf{T}_\alpha(M^\bullet)$ | |
be a morphism of complexes where $K^\bullet$ is a bounded above acyclic | |
complex such that $|K^n| \leq \kappa$. Then $K^\bullet \cong K_i^\bullet$ | |
for some $i \in I$. Moreover, by | |
Proposition \ref{proposition-objects-are-small} | |
once again we see that $w$ factor through | |
$\mathbf{T}^n_{\alpha'}(M^\bullet)$ for some $\alpha' < \alpha$. | |
In particular, by the construction of the functor | |
$\mathbf{M}^\bullet(-)$ we see that $w$ is homotopic to zero. | |
This finishes the proof. | |
\end{proof} | |
\section{Additional remarks on Grothendieck abelian categories} | |
\label{section-additional-Grothendieck} | |
\noindent | |
In this section we put some results on Grothendieck abelian categories | |
which are folklore. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-grothendieck-brown} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
Let $F : \mathcal{A}^{opp} \to \textit{Sets}$ be a functor. | |
Then $F$ is representable if and only if $F$ commutes with colimits, i.e., | |
$$ | |
F(\colim_i N_i) = \lim F(N_i) | |
$$ | |
for any diagram $\mathcal{I} \to \mathcal{A}$, $i \in \mathcal{I}$. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
If $F$ is representable, then it commutes with colimits by definition | |
of colimits. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Assume that $F$ commutes with colimits. Then $F(M \oplus N) = F(M) \times F(N)$ | |
and we can use this to define a group structure on $F(M)$. Hence we get | |
$F : \mathcal{A} \to \textit{Ab}$ which is additive and right exact, i.e., | |
transforms a short exact sequence $0 \to K \to L \to M \to 0$ into an exact | |
sequence $F(K) \leftarrow F(L) \leftarrow F(M) \leftarrow 0$ (compare with | |
Homology, Section \ref{homology-section-functors}). | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Let $U$ be a generator for $\mathcal{A}$. Set $A = \bigoplus_{s \in F(U)} U$. | |
Let $s_{univ} = (s)_{s \in F(U)} \in F(A) = \prod_{s \in F(U)} F(U)$. Let | |
$A' \subset A$ be the largest subobject such that $s_{univ}$ restricts to | |
zero on $A'$. This exists because $\mathcal{A}$ is a Grothendieck category | |
and because $F$ commutes with colimits. Because $F$ commutes with colimits | |
there exists a unique element $\overline{s}_{univ} \in F(A/A')$ which | |
maps to $s_{univ}$ in $F(A)$. We claim that $A/A'$ represents $F$, in | |
other words, the Yoneda map | |
$$ | |
\overline{s}_{univ} : h_{A/A'} \longrightarrow F | |
$$ | |
is an isomorphism. Let $M \in \Ob(\mathcal{A})$ and $s \in F(M)$. Consider | |
the surjection | |
$$ | |
c_M : | |
A_M = \bigoplus\nolimits_{\varphi \in \Hom_\mathcal{A}(U, M)} U | |
\longrightarrow | |
M. | |
$$ | |
This gives $F(c_M)(s) = (s_\varphi) \in \prod_\varphi F(U)$. | |
Consider the map | |
$$ | |
\psi : | |
A_M = \bigoplus\nolimits_{\varphi \in \Hom_\mathcal{A}(U, M)} U | |
\longrightarrow | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{s \in F(U)} U = A | |
$$ | |
which maps the summand corresponding to $\varphi$ to the summand | |
corresponding to $s_\varphi$ by the identity map on $U$. Then $s_{univ}$ | |
maps to $(s_\varphi)_\varphi$ by construction. | |
in other words the right square in the diagram | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
A' \ar[r] & | |
A \ar@{..>}[r]_{s_{univ}} & F \\ | |
K \ar[r] \ar[u]^{?} & A_M \ar[u]^\psi \ar[r] & | |
M \ar@{..>}[u]_s | |
} | |
$$ | |
commutes. Let $K = \Ker(A_M \to M)$. Since $s$ restricts to zero | |
on $K$ we see that $\psi(K) \subset A'$ by definition of $A'$. Hence there | |
is an induced morphism $M \to A/A'$. This construction gives an inverse | |
to the map $h_{A/A'}(M) \to F(M)$ (details omitted). | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-grothendieck-products} | |
A Grothendieck abelian category has Ab3*. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Let $M_i$, $i \in I$ be a family of objects of $\mathcal{A}$ indexed | |
by a set $I$. The functor $F = \prod_{i \in I} h_{M_i}$ | |
commutes with colimits. Hence | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-grothendieck-brown} | |
applies. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{remark} | |
\label{remark-existence-D} | |
In the chapter on derived categories we consistently work with | |
``small'' abelian categories (as is the convention in the Stacks | |
project). For a ``big'' abelian category $\mathcal{A}$ it isn't clear | |
that the derived category $D(\mathcal{A})$ exists because it isn't | |
clear that morphisms in the derived category are sets. In general this | |
isn't true, see | |
Examples, Lemma \ref{examples-lemma-big-abelian-category}. | |
However, if $\mathcal{A}$ is a Grothendieck abelian category, and given | |
$K^\bullet, L^\bullet$ in $K(\mathcal{A})$, then by | |
Theorem \ref{theorem-K-injective-embedding-grothendieck} | |
there exists a quasi-isomorphism $L^\bullet \to I^\bullet$ to a | |
K-injective complex $I^\bullet$ and | |
Derived Categories, Lemma \ref{derived-lemma-K-injective} shows that | |
$$ | |
\Hom_{D(\mathcal{A})}(K^\bullet, L^\bullet) = | |
\Hom_{K(\mathcal{A})}(K^\bullet, I^\bullet) | |
$$ | |
which is a set. Some examples of Grothendieck abelian categories | |
are the category of modules over a ring, or more generally | |
the category of sheaves of modules on a ringed site. | |
\end{remark} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-derived-products} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
Then | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item $D(\mathcal{A})$ has both direct sums and products, | |
\item direct sums are obtained by taking termwise direct sums of | |
any complexes, | |
\item products are obtained by taking termwise products of | |
K-injective complexes. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Let $K^\bullet_i$, $i \in I$ be a family of objects of $D(\mathcal{A})$ | |
indexed by a set $I$. We claim that the termwise direct sum | |
$\bigoplus_{i \in I} K^\bullet_i$ is a direct sum in $D(\mathcal{A})$. | |
Namely, let $I^\bullet$ be a K-injective complex. Then we have | |
\begin{align*} | |
\Hom_{D(\mathcal{A})}(\bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I} K^\bullet_i, I^\bullet) | |
& = | |
\Hom_{K(\mathcal{A})}(\bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I} K^\bullet_i, I^\bullet) \\ | |
& = | |
\prod\nolimits_{i \in I} \Hom_{K(\mathcal{A})}(K^\bullet_i, I^\bullet) \\ | |
& = | |
\prod\nolimits_{i \in I} \Hom_{D(\mathcal{A})}(K^\bullet_i, I^\bullet) | |
\end{align*} | |
as desired. This is sufficient since any complex can be represented | |
by a K-injective complex by | |
Theorem \ref{theorem-K-injective-embedding-grothendieck}. | |
To construct the product, choose a K-injective resolution | |
$K_i^\bullet \to I_i^\bullet$ for each $i$. Then we claim that | |
$\prod_{i \in I} I_i^\bullet$ is a product in $D(\mathcal{A})$. | |
This follows from | |
Derived Categories, Lemma \ref{derived-lemma-product-K-injective}. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{remark} | |
\label{remark-direct-sum-product-derived} | |
Let $R$ be a ring. Suppose that $M_n$, $n \in \mathbf{Z}$ are $R$-modules. | |
Denote $E_n = M_n[-n] \in D(R)$. We claim that $E = \bigoplus M_n[-n]$ is | |
{\it both} the direct sum and the product of the objects $E_n$ in $D(R)$. | |
To see that it is the direct sum, take a look at the proof of | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-derived-products}. | |
To see that it is the direct product, take injective resolutions | |
$M_n \to I_n^\bullet$. By the proof of | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-derived-products} | |
we have | |
$$ | |
\prod E_n = \prod I_n^\bullet[-n] | |
$$ | |
in $D(R)$. Since products in $\text{Mod}_R$ are exact, we see that | |
$\prod I_n^\bullet$ is quasi-isomorphic to $E$. This works more generally | |
in $D(\mathcal{A})$ where $\mathcal{A}$ is a Grothendieck abelian | |
category with Ab4*. | |
\end{remark} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-RF-commutes-with-Rlim} | |
Let $F : \mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{B}$ be an additive functor of | |
abelian categories. Assume | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item $\mathcal{A}$ is a Grothendieck abelian category, | |
\item $\mathcal{B}$ has exact countable products, and | |
\item $F$ commutes with countable products. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
Then | |
$RF : D(\mathcal{A}) \to D(\mathcal{B})$ commutes with derived limits. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Observe that $RF$ exists as $\mathcal{A}$ has enough K-injectives | |
(Theorem \ref{theorem-K-injective-embedding-grothendieck} | |
and | |
Derived Categories, Lemma \ref{derived-lemma-K-injective-defined}). | |
The statement means that if $K = R\lim K_n$, then | |
$RF(K) = R\lim RF(K_n)$. See | |
Derived Categories, Definition \ref{derived-definition-derived-limit} | |
for notation. Since $RF$ is an exact functor of triangulated | |
categories it suffices to see that $RF$ commutes with countable | |
products of objects of $D(\mathcal{A})$. In the proof of | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-derived-products} | |
we have seen that products in $D(\mathcal{A})$ are computed by | |
taking products of K-injective complexes and moreover that a | |
product of K-injective complexes is K-injective. | |
Moreover, in Derived Categories, Lemma | |
\ref{derived-lemma-products} | |
we have seen that products in $D(\mathcal{B})$ are computed | |
by taking termwise products. | |
Since $RF$ is computed by applying $F$ to a K-injective | |
representative and since we've assumed $F$ commutes with | |
countable products, the lemma follows. | |
\end{proof} | |
\noindent | |
The following lemma is some kind of generalization of | |
the existence of Cartan-Eilenberg resolutions | |
(Derived Categories, Section \ref{derived-section-cartan-eilenberg}). | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-K-injective-embedding-filtration} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
Let $K^\bullet$ be a filtered complex of $\mathcal{A}$, see | |
Homology, Definition \ref{homology-definition-filtered-complex}. | |
Then there exists a morphism $j : K^\bullet \to J^\bullet$ | |
of filtered complexes of $\mathcal{A}$ such that | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item $J^n$, $F^pJ^n$, $J^n/F^pJ^n$ and $F^pJ^n/F^{p'}J^n$ are injective | |
objects of $\mathcal{A}$, | |
\item $J^\bullet$, $F^pJ^\bullet$, $J^\bullet/F^pJ^\bullet$, and | |
$F^pJ^\bullet/F^{p'}J^\bullet$ are K-injective complexes, | |
\item $j$ induces quasi-isomorphisms | |
$K^\bullet \to J^\bullet$, | |
$F^pK^\bullet \to F^pJ^\bullet$, | |
$K^\bullet/F^pK^\bullet \to J^\bullet/F^pJ^\bullet$, and | |
$F^pK^\bullet/F^{p'}K^\bullet \to F^pJ^\bullet/F^{p'}J^\bullet$. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
By Theorem \ref{theorem-K-injective-embedding-grothendieck} | |
we obtain quasi-isomorphisms $i : K^\bullet \to I^\bullet$ and | |
$i^p : F^pK^\bullet \to I^{p, \bullet}$ as well as commutative diagrams | |
$$ | |
\vcenter{ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
K^\bullet \ar[d]_i & F^pK^\bullet \ar[l] \ar[d]_{i^p} \\ | |
I^\bullet & I^{p, \bullet} \ar[l]_{\alpha^p} | |
} | |
} | |
\quad\text{and}\quad | |
\vcenter{ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
F^{p'}K^\bullet \ar[d]_{i^{p'}} & | |
F^pK^\bullet \ar[l] \ar[d]_{i^p} \\ | |
I^{p', \bullet} & | |
I^{p, \bullet} \ar[l]_{\alpha^{p p'}} | |
} | |
} | |
\quad\text{for }p' \leq p | |
$$ | |
such that $\alpha^p \circ \alpha^{p' p} = \alpha^{p'}$ | |
and $\alpha^{p'p''} \circ \alpha^{pp'} = \alpha^{pp''}$. | |
The problem is that the maps $\alpha^p : I^{p, \bullet} \to I^\bullet$ | |
need not be injective. For each $p$ we choose an injection | |
$t^p : I^{p, \bullet} \to J^{p, \bullet}$ into an acyclic K-injective | |
complex $J^{p, \bullet}$ whose terms are injective objects of $\mathcal{A}$ | |
(first map to the cone on the identity and then use the theorem). | |
Choose a map of complexes $s^p : I^\bullet \to J^{p, \bullet}$ | |
such that the following diagram commutes | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
K^\bullet \ar[d]_i & F^pK^\bullet \ar[l] \ar[d]_{i^p} \\ | |
I^\bullet \ar[rd]_{s^p} & I^{p, \bullet} \ar[d]^{t^p} \\ | |
& J^{p, \bullet} | |
} | |
$$ | |
This is possible: the composition $F^pK^\bullet \to J^{p, \bullet}$ | |
is homotopic to zero because $J^{p, \bullet}$ is acyclic and K-injective | |
(Derived Categories, Lemma \ref{derived-lemma-K-injective}). | |
Since the objects $J^{p, n - 1}$ are injective and since | |
$F^pK^n \to K^n \to I^n$ are injective morphisms, we | |
can lift the maps $F^pK^n \to J^{p, n - 1}$ giving the homotopy | |
to a map $h^n : I^n \to J^{p, n - 1}$. Then we set $s^p$ | |
equal to $h \circ \text{d} + \text{d} \circ h$. | |
(Warning: It will not be the case that $t^p = s^p \circ \alpha^p$, | |
so we have to be careful not to use this below.) | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Consider | |
$$ | |
J^\bullet = I^\bullet \times \prod\nolimits_p J^{p, \bullet} | |
$$ | |
Because products in $D(\mathcal{A})$ are given by taking | |
products of K-injective complexes | |
(Lemma \ref{lemma-derived-products}) | |
and since $J^{p, \bullet}$ | |
is isomorphic to $0$ in $D(\mathcal{A})$ we see that | |
$J^\bullet \to I^\bullet$ is an isomorphism in $D(\mathcal{A})$. | |
Consider the map | |
$$ | |
j = i \times (s^p \circ i)_{p \in \mathbf{Z}} : | |
K^\bullet | |
\longrightarrow | |
I^\bullet \times \prod\nolimits_p J^{p, \bullet} = J^\bullet | |
$$ | |
By our remarks above this is a quasi-isomorphism. It is also injective. | |
For $p \in \mathbf{Z}$ we let $F^pJ^\bullet \subset J^\bullet$ be | |
$$ | |
\Im\left( | |
\alpha^p \times (t^{p'} \circ \alpha^{pp'})_{p' \leq p} : | |
I^{p, \bullet} | |
\to | |
I^\bullet \times \prod\nolimits_{p' \leq p} J^{p', \bullet} | |
\right) | |
\times \prod\nolimits_{p' > p} J^{p', \bullet} | |
$$ | |
This complex is isomorphic to the complex | |
$I^{p, \bullet} \times \prod_{p' > p} J^{p, \bullet}$ | |
as $\alpha^{pp} = \text{id}$ and $t^p$ is injective. | |
Hence $F^pJ^\bullet$ is quasi-isomorphic to $I^{p, \bullet}$ (argue | |
as above). We have $j(F^pK^\bullet) \subset F^pJ^\bullet$ because | |
of the commutativity of the diagram above. The corresponding | |
map of complexes $F^pK^\bullet \to F^pJ^\bullet$ is a quasi-isomorphism | |
by what we just said. Finally, to see that | |
$F^{p + 1}J^\bullet \subset F^pJ^\bullet$ | |
use that $\alpha^{p + 1p} \circ \alpha^{pp'} = \alpha^{p + 1p'}$ | |
and the commutativity of the first displayed diagram | |
in the first paragraph of the proof. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
We claim that $j : K^\bullet \to J^\bullet$ is a solution to the | |
problem posed by the lemma. Namely, $F^pJ^n$ is an injective object | |
of $\mathcal{A}$ because it is isomorphic to | |
$I^{p, n} \times \prod_{p' > p} J^{p', n}$ and products of | |
injectives are injective. Then the injective map $F^pJ^n \to J^n$ | |
splits and hence the quotient $J^n/F^pJ^n$ is injective as well | |
as a direct summand of the injective object $J^n$. | |
Similarly for $F^pJ^n/F^{p'}J^n$. This in particular means | |
that $0 \to F^pJ^\bullet \to J^\bullet \to J^\bullet/F^pJ^\bullet \to 0$ | |
is a termwise split short exact sequence of complexes, hence defines | |
a distinguished triangle in $K(\mathcal{A})$ by fiat. | |
Since $J^\bullet$ and $F^pJ^\bullet$ are K-injective complexes | |
we see that the same is true for $J^\bullet/F^pJ^\bullet$ | |
by Derived Categories, Lemma \ref{derived-lemma-triangle-K-injective}. | |
A similar argument shows that $F^pJ^\bullet/F^{p'}J^\bullet$ | |
is K-injective. By construction $j : K^\bullet \to J^\bullet$ | |
and the induced maps $F^pK^\bullet \to F^pJ^\bullet$ are | |
quasi-isomorphisms. Using the long exact cohomology sequences | |
of the complexes in play we find that the same holds for | |
$K^\bullet/F^pK^\bullet \to J^\bullet/F^pJ^\bullet$ and | |
$F^pK^\bullet/F^{p'}K^\bullet \to F^pJ^\bullet/F^{p'}J^\bullet$. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{remark} | |
\label{remark-ext-into-filtered-complex} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
Let $K^\bullet$ be a filtered complex of $\mathcal{A}$, see | |
Homology, Definition \ref{homology-definition-filtered-complex}. | |
For ease of notation denote $K$, $F^pK$, $\text{gr}^pK$ the | |
object of $D(\mathcal{A})$ represented by $K^\bullet$, | |
$F^pK^\bullet$, $\text{gr}^pK^\bullet$. Let $M \in D(\mathcal{A})$. | |
Using Lemma \ref{lemma-K-injective-embedding-filtration} | |
we can construct a spectral sequence $(E_r, d_r)_{r \geq 1}$ | |
of bigraded objects of $\mathcal{A}$ with $d_r$ of bidgree | |
$(r, -r + 1)$ and | |
with | |
$$ | |
E_1^{p, q} = \Ext^{p + q}(M, \text{gr}^pK) | |
$$ | |
If for every $n$ we have | |
$$ | |
\Ext^n(M, F^pK) = 0 \text{ for } p \gg 0 | |
\quad\text{and}\quad | |
\Ext^n(M, F^pK) = \Ext^n(M, K) \text{ for } p \ll 0 | |
$$ | |
then the spectral sequence is bounded and converges to $\Ext^{p + q}(M, K)$. | |
Namely, choose any complex $M^\bullet$ representing $M$, choose | |
$j : K^\bullet \to J^\bullet$ as in the lemma, and consider the complex | |
$$ | |
\Hom^\bullet(M^\bullet, I^\bullet) | |
$$ | |
defined exactly as in | |
More on Algebra, Section \ref{more-algebra-section-hom-complexes}. | |
Setting $F^p\Hom^\bullet(M^\bullet, I^\bullet) = | |
\Hom^\bullet(M^\bullet, F^pI^\bullet)$ we obtain a filtered complex. | |
The spectral sequence of | |
Homology, Section \ref{homology-section-filtered-complex} | |
has differentials and terms as described above; details omitted. | |
The boundedness and convergence follows from | |
Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-ss-converges-trivial}. | |
\end{remark} | |
\begin{remark} | |
\label{remark-spectral-sequences-ext} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
Let $M, K$ be objects of $D(\mathcal{A})$. | |
For any choice of complex $K^\bullet$ representing $K$ we | |
can use the filtration $F^pK^\bullet = \tau_{\leq -p}K^\bullet$ | |
and the discussion in Remark \ref{remark-ext-into-filtered-complex} | |
to get a spectral sequence with | |
$$ | |
E_1^{p, q} = \Ext^{2p + q}(M, H^{-p}(K)) | |
$$ | |
This spectral sequence is independent of the choice of | |
complex $K^\bullet$ representing $K$. After renumbering | |
$p = -j$ and $q = i + 2j$ we find a spectral sequence | |
$(E'_r, d'_r)_{r \geq 2}$ with $d'_r$ of bidegree $(r, -r + 1)$, with | |
$$ | |
(E'_2)^{i, j} = \Ext^i(M, H^j(K)) | |
$$ | |
If $M \in D^-(\mathcal{A})$ and $K \in D^+(\mathcal{A})$ then | |
both $E_r$ and $E'_r$ are bounded and converge to $\Ext^{p + q}(M, K)$. | |
If we use the filtration $F^pK^\bullet = \sigma_{\geq p}K^\bullet$ | |
then we get | |
$$ | |
E_1^{p, q} = \Ext^q(M, K^p) | |
$$ | |
If $M \in D^-(\mathcal{A})$ and $K^\bullet$ is bounded below, then | |
this spectral sequence is bounded and converges to $\Ext^{p + q}(M, K)$. | |
\end{remark} | |
\begin{remark} | |
\label{remark-ext-from-filtered-complex} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. Let | |
$K \in D(\mathcal{A})$. Let $M^\bullet$ be a filtered complex of | |
$\mathcal{A}$, see Homology, Definition | |
\ref{homology-definition-filtered-complex}. | |
For ease of notation denote $M$, $M/F^pM$, $\text{gr}^pM$ the | |
object of $D(\mathcal{A})$ represented by $M^\bullet$, | |
$M^\bullet/F^pM^\bullet$, $\text{gr}^pM^\bullet$. | |
Dually to Remark \ref{remark-ext-into-filtered-complex} | |
we can construct a spectral sequence $(E_r, d_r)_{r \geq 1}$ | |
of bigraded objects of $\mathcal{A}$ with $d_r$ of bidgree | |
$(r, -r + 1)$ and | |
with | |
$$ | |
E_1^{p, q} = \Ext^{p + q}(\text{gr}^{-p}M, K) | |
$$ | |
If for every $n$ we have | |
$$ | |
\Ext^n(M/F^pM, K) = 0 \text{ for } p \ll 0 | |
\quad\text{and}\quad | |
\Ext^n(M/F^pM, K) = \Ext^n(M, K) \text{ for } p \gg 0 | |
$$ | |
then the spectral sequence is bounded and converges to $\Ext^{p + q}(M, K)$. | |
Namely, choose a K-injective complex $I^\bullet$ with injective terms | |
representing $K$, see Theorem \ref{theorem-K-injective-embedding-grothendieck}. | |
Consider the complex | |
$$ | |
\Hom^\bullet(M^\bullet, I^\bullet) | |
$$ | |
defined exactly as in | |
More on Algebra, Section \ref{more-algebra-section-hom-complexes}. | |
Setting | |
$$ | |
F^p\Hom^\bullet(M^\bullet, I^\bullet) = | |
\Hom^\bullet(M^\bullet/F^{-p + 1}M^\bullet, I^\bullet) | |
$$ | |
we obtain a filtered complex (note sign and shift in filtration). | |
The spectral sequence of | |
Homology, Section \ref{homology-section-filtered-complex} | |
has differentials and terms as described above; details omitted. | |
The boundedness and convergence follows from | |
Homology, Lemma \ref{homology-lemma-ss-converges-trivial}. | |
\end{remark} | |
\begin{remark} | |
\label{remark-spectral-sequences-ext-variant} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
Let $M, K$ be objects of $D(\mathcal{A})$. | |
For any choice of complex $M^\bullet$ representing $M$ we | |
can use the filtration $F^pM^\bullet = \tau_{\leq -p}M^\bullet$ | |
and the discussion in Remark \ref{remark-ext-into-filtered-complex} | |
to get a spectral sequence with | |
$$ | |
E_1^{p, q} = \Ext^{2p + q}(H^p(M), K) | |
$$ | |
This spectral sequence is independent of the choice of complex $M^\bullet$ | |
representing $M$. After renumbering $p = -j$ and $q = i + 2j$ we find a | |
spectral sequence $(E'_r, d'_r)_{r \geq 2}$ with $d'_r$ of bidegree | |
$(r, -r + 1)$, with | |
$$ | |
(E'_2)^{i, j} = \Ext^i(H^{-j}(M), K) | |
$$ | |
If $M \in D^-(\mathcal{A})$ and $K \in D^+(\mathcal{A})$ | |
then $E_r$ and $E'_r$ are bounded and converge to $\Ext^{p + q}(M, K)$. | |
If we use the filtration $F^pM^\bullet = \sigma_{\geq p}M^\bullet$ | |
then we get | |
$$ | |
E_1^{p, q} = \Ext^q(M^{-p}, K) | |
$$ | |
If $K \in D^+(\mathcal{A})$ and $M^\bullet$ is bounded above, then | |
this spectral sequence is bounded and converges to $\Ext^{p + q}(M, K)$. | |
\end{remark} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-represent-by-filtered-complex} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. Suppose given an object | |
$E \in D(\mathcal{A})$ and an inverse system $\{E^i\}_{i \in \mathbf{Z}}$ | |
of objects of $D(\mathcal{A})$ over $\mathbf{Z}$ together with | |
a compatible system of maps $E^i \to E$. Picture: | |
$$ | |
\ldots \to E^{i + 1} \to E^i \to E^{i - 1} \to \ldots \to E | |
$$ | |
Then there exists a filtered complex $K^\bullet$ of $\mathcal{A}$ | |
(Homology, Definition \ref{homology-definition-filtered-complex}) | |
such that $K^\bullet$ represents $E$ | |
and $F^iK^\bullet$ represents $E^i$ compatibly with the given maps. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
By Theorem \ref{theorem-K-injective-embedding-grothendieck} | |
we can choose a K-injective complex $I^\bullet$ | |
representing $E$ all of whose terms $I^n$ are injective | |
objects of $\mathcal{A}$. | |
Choose a complex $G^{0, \bullet}$ representing $E^0$. | |
Choose a map of complexes $\varphi^0 : G^{0, \bullet} \to I^\bullet$ | |
representing $E^0 \to E$. | |
For $i > 0$ we inductively represent $E^i \to E^{i - 1}$ | |
by a map of complexes | |
$\delta : G^{i, \bullet} \to G^{i - 1, \bullet}$ | |
and we set $\varphi^i = \delta \circ \varphi^{i - 1}$. | |
For $i < 0$ we inductively represent $E^{i + 1} \to E^i$ | |
by a termwise injective map of complexes | |
$\delta : G^{i + 1, \bullet} \to G^{i, \bullet}$ | |
(for example you can use | |
Derived Categories, Lemma \ref{derived-lemma-make-injective}). | |
Claim: we can find a map of complexes | |
$\varphi^i : G^{i, \bullet} \to I^\bullet$ | |
representing the map $E^i \to E$ and | |
fitting into the commutative diagram | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
G^{i + 1, \bullet} \ar[r]_\delta \ar[d]_{\varphi^{i + 1}} & | |
G^{i, \bullet} \ar[ld]^{\varphi^i} \\ | |
I^\bullet | |
} | |
$$ | |
Namely, we first choose any map of complexes | |
$\varphi : G^{i, \bullet} \to I^\bullet$ | |
representing the map | |
$E^i \to E$. Then we see that $\varphi \circ \delta$ | |
and $\varphi^{i + 1}$ are homotopic by some homotopy | |
$h^p : G^{i + 1, p} \to I^{p - 1}$. | |
Since the terms of | |
$I^\bullet$ are injective and since $\delta$ | |
is termwise injective, we can lift $h^p$ to | |
$(h')^p : G^{i, p} \to I^{p - 1}$. | |
Then we set $\varphi^i = \varphi + h' \circ d + d \circ h'$ | |
and we get what we claimed. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Next, we choose for every $i$ a termwise injective map of complexes | |
$a^i : G^{i, \bullet} \to J^{i, \bullet}$ with $J^{i, \bullet}$ | |
acyclic, K-injective, with $J^{i, p}$ injective objects of $\mathcal{A}$. | |
To do this first map $G^{i, \bullet}$ to the cone on the identity | |
and then apply the theorem cited above. | |
Arguing as above we can find maps of complexes | |
$\delta' : J^{i, \bullet} \to J^{i - 1, \bullet}$ such that the diagrams | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
G^{i, \bullet} \ar[r]_\delta \ar[d]_{a^i} & | |
G^{i - 1, \bullet} \ar[d]^{a^{i - 1}} \\ | |
J^{i, \bullet} \ar[r]^{\delta'} & | |
J^{i - 1, \bullet} | |
} | |
$$ | |
commute. (You could also use the functoriality of cones plus the | |
functoriality in the theorem to get this.) | |
Then we consider the maps | |
$$ | |
\xymatrix{ | |
G^{i + 1, \bullet} \times \prod\nolimits_{p > i + 1} J^{p, \bullet} | |
\ar[r] \ar[rd] & | |
G^{i, \bullet} \times \prod\nolimits_{p > i} J^{p, \bullet} | |
\ar[r] \ar[d] & | |
G^{i - 1, \bullet} \times \prod\nolimits_{p > i - 1} J^{p, \bullet} | |
\ar[ld] \\ | |
& I^\bullet \times \prod\nolimits_p J^{p, \bullet} | |
} | |
$$ | |
Here the arrows on $J^{p, \bullet}$ are the obvious ones | |
(identity or zero). On the factor $G^{i, \bullet}$ we use | |
$\delta : G^{i, \bullet} \to G^{i - 1, \bullet}$, the map | |
$\varphi^i : G^{i, \bullet} \to I^\bullet$, the zero map | |
$0 : G^{i, \bullet} \to J^{p, \bullet}$ for $p > i$, the map | |
$a^i : G^{i, \bullet} \to J^{p, \bullet}$ for $p = i$, and | |
$(\delta')^{i - p} \circ a^i = a^p \circ \delta^{i - p} : | |
G^{i, \bullet} \to J^{p, \bullet}$ for $p < i$. | |
We omit the verification that all the arrows | |
in the diagram are termwise injective. Thus we obtain a filtered | |
complex. Because products in $D(\mathcal{A})$ are given by | |
taking products of K-injective complexes | |
(Lemma \ref{lemma-derived-products}) | |
and because $J^{p, \bullet}$ is zero in $D(\mathcal{A})$ | |
we conclude this diagram represents the given diagram in the derived | |
category. This finishes the proof. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-represent-by-filtered-complex-bis} | |
In the situation of Lemma \ref{lemma-represent-by-filtered-complex} | |
assume we have a second inverse system $\{(E')^i\}_{i \in \mathbf{Z}}$ | |
and a compatible system of maps $(E')^i \to E$. | |
Then there exists a bi-filtered complex $K^\bullet$ of $\mathcal{A}$ | |
such that $K^\bullet$ represents $E$, $F^iK^\bullet$ represents $E^i$, | |
and $(F')^iK^\bullet$ represents $(E')^i$ compatibly with the given maps. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Using the lemma we can first choose $K^\bullet$ and $F$. | |
Then we can choose $(K')^\bullet$ and $F'$ which work for | |
$\{(E')^i\}_{i \in \mathbf{Z}}$ and the maps $(E')^i \to E$. | |
Using Lemma \ref{lemma-K-injective-embedding-filtration} | |
we can assume $K^\bullet$ is a K-injective complex. | |
Then we can choose a map of complexes | |
$(K')^\bullet \to K^\bullet$ corresponding to | |
the given identifications | |
$(K')^\bullet \cong E \cong K^\bullet$. | |
We can additionally choose a termwise injective | |
map $(K')^\bullet \to J^\bullet$ with | |
$J^\bullet$ acyclic and K-injective. | |
(To do this first map $(K')^\bullet$ to the cone on the identity | |
and then apply Theorem \ref{theorem-K-injective-embedding-grothendieck}.) | |
Then $(K')^\bullet \to K^\bullet \times J^\bullet$ and | |
$K^\bullet \to K^\bullet \times J^\bullet$ | |
are both termwise injective and quasi-isomorphisms | |
(as the product represents $E$ by Lemma \ref{lemma-derived-products}). | |
Then we can simply take the images of the filtrations | |
on $K^\bullet$ and $(K')^\bullet$ under these maps to conclude. | |
\end{proof} | |
\section{The Gabriel-Popescu theorem} | |
\label{section-gabriel-popescu} | |
\noindent | |
In this section we discuss the main theorem of \cite{GP}. The method of | |
proof follows a write-up by Jacob Lurie and another by Akhil Mathew | |
who in turn follow the presentation by Kuhn in \cite{Kuhn}. | |
See also \cite{Takeuchi}. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category and let $U$ be a | |
generator for $\mathcal{A}$, see | |
Definition \ref{definition-grothendieck-conditions}. | |
Let $R = \Hom_\mathcal{A}(U, U)$. Consider the functor | |
$G : \mathcal{A} \to \text{Mod}_R$ given by | |
$$ | |
G(A) = \Hom_\mathcal{A}(U, A) | |
$$ | |
endowed with its canonical right $R$-module structure. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-gabriel-popescu-left-adjoint} | |
The functor $G$ above has a left adjoint | |
$F : \text{Mod}_R \to \mathcal{A}$. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
We will give two proofs of this lemma. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
The first proof will use the adjoint functor theorem, see | |
Categories, Theorem \ref{categories-theorem-adjoint-functor}. | |
Observe that that $G : \mathcal{A} \to \text{Mod}_R$ is left exact and sends | |
products to products. Hence $G$ commutes with limits. To check the set | |
theoretical condition in the theorem, suppose that $M$ is an object of | |
$\text{Mod}_R$. Choose a suitably large cardinal $\kappa$ and denote $E$ | |
a set of objects of $\mathcal{A}$ such that every object $A$ with | |
$|A| \leq \kappa$ is isomorphic to an element of $E$. This is possible | |
by Lemma \ref{lemma-set-iso-classes-bounded-size}. Set | |
$I = \coprod_{A \in E} \Hom_R(M, G(A))$. | |
We think of an element $i \in I$ as a pair $(A_i, f_i)$. | |
Finally, let $A$ be an arbitrary object of $\mathcal{A}$ | |
and $f : M \to G(A)$ arbitrary. We are going to think of | |
elements of $\Im(f) \subset G(A) = \Hom_\mathcal{A}(U, A)$ | |
as maps $u : U \to A$. Set | |
$$ | |
A' = \Im(\bigoplus\nolimits_{u \in \Im(f)} U \xrightarrow{u} A) | |
$$ | |
Since $G$ is left exact, we see that $G(A') \subset G(A)$ | |
contains $\Im(f)$ and we get $f' : M \to G(A')$ factoring $f$. | |
On the other hand, the object $A'$ is | |
the quotient of a direct sum of at most $|M|$ copies of $U$. | |
Hence if $\kappa = |\bigoplus_{|M|} U|$, then we see that $(A', f')$ | |
is isomorphic to an element $(A_i, f_i)$ of $E$ and we conclude that $f$ | |
factors as $M \xrightarrow{f_i} G(A_i) \to G(A)$ as desired. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
The second proof will give a construction of $F$ which will show | |
that ``$F(M) = M \otimes_R U$'' in some sense. Namely, for any | |
$R$-module $M$ we can choose a resolution | |
$$ | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{j \in J} R \to | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I} R \to | |
M \to 0 | |
$$ | |
Then we define $F(M)$ by the corresponding exact sequence | |
$$ | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{j \in J} U \to | |
\bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I} U \to | |
F(M) \to 0 | |
$$ | |
This construction is independent of the choice of the resolution | |
and is functorial; we omit the details. | |
For any $A$ in $\mathcal{A}$ we obtain an exact sequence | |
$$ | |
0 \to \Hom_\mathcal{A}(F(M), A) \to | |
\prod\nolimits_{i \in I} G(A) \to | |
\prod\nolimits_{j \in J} G(A) | |
$$ | |
which is isomorphic to the sequence | |
$$ | |
0 \to \Hom_R(M, G(A)) \to | |
\Hom_R(\bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I} R, G(A)) \to | |
\Hom_R(\bigoplus\nolimits_{j \in J} R, G(A)) | |
$$ | |
which shows that $F$ is the left adjoint to $G$. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-F-G-monos} | |
Let $f : M \to G(A)$ be an injective map in $\text{Mod}_R$. | |
Then the adjoint map $f' : F(M) \to A$ is injective too. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Choose a map $R^{\oplus n} \to M$ and consider the corresponding map | |
$U^{\oplus n} \to F(M)$. Consider a map $v : U \to U^{\oplus n}$ | |
such that the composition $U \to U^{\oplus n} \to F(M) \to A$ is $0$. | |
Then this arrow $v : U \to U^{\oplus n}$ is an element | |
$v$ of $R^{\oplus n}$ mapping to zero in $G(A)$. Since $f$ is injective, | |
we conclude that $v$ maps to zero in $M$ which means that | |
$U \to U^{\oplus n} \to F(M)$ is zero by construction of $F(M)$ | |
in the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma-gabriel-popescu-left-adjoint}. | |
Since $U$ is a generator we conclude that | |
$$ | |
\Ker(U^{\oplus n} \to F(M) \to A) = \Ker(U^{\oplus n} \to F(M)) | |
$$ | |
To finish the proof we choose a surjection $\bigoplus_{i \in I} R \to M$ | |
and we consider the corresponding surjection | |
$$ | |
\pi : \bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I} U \longrightarrow F(M) | |
$$ | |
To prove $f'$ is injective it suffices to show that | |
$\Ker(\pi) = \Ker(f' \circ \pi)$ as subobjects of $\bigoplus_{i \in I} U$. | |
However, now we can write $\bigoplus_{i \in I} U$ as the filtered colimit | |
of its subobjects $\bigoplus_{i \in I'} U$ where $I' \subset I$ | |
ranges over the finite subsets. Since filtered colimits are | |
exact by AB5 for $\mathcal{A}$, we see that | |
$$ | |
\Ker(\pi) = | |
\colim_{I' \subset I\text{ finite}} | |
\left(\bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I'} U\right) | |
\bigcap \Ker(\pi) | |
$$ | |
and | |
$$ | |
\Ker(f' \circ \pi) = | |
\colim_{I' \subset I\text{ finite}} | |
\left(\bigoplus\nolimits_{i \in I'} U\right) | |
\bigcap \Ker(f' \circ \pi) | |
$$ | |
and we get equality because the same is true for each $I'$ by | |
the first displayed equality above. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{theorem} | |
\label{theorem-gabriel-popescu} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. Then there exists | |
a (noncommutative) ring $R$ and functors $G : \mathcal{A} \to \text{Mod}_R$ | |
and $F : \text{Mod}_R \to \mathcal{A}$ such that | |
\begin{enumerate} | |
\item $F$ is the left adjoint to $G$, | |
\item $G$ is fully faithful, and | |
\item $F$ is exact. | |
\end{enumerate} | |
Moreover, the functors are the ones constructed above. | |
\end{theorem} | |
\begin{proof} | |
We first prove $G$ is fully faithful, or equivalently that | |
$F \circ G \to \text{id}$ is an isomorphism, see | |
Categories, Lemma \ref{categories-lemma-adjoint-fully-faithful}. | |
First, given an object $A$ the map $F(G(A)) \to A$ is surjective, | |
because every map of $U \to A$ factors through $F(G(A))$ by construction. | |
On the other hand, the map $F(G(A)) \to A$ is the adjoint of the | |
map $\text{id} : G(A) \to G(A)$ and hence injective by | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-F-G-monos}. | |
\medskip\noindent | |
The functor $F$ is right exact as it is a left adjoint. | |
Since $\text{Mod}_R$ has enough projectives, to show that | |
$F$ is exact, it is enough to show that the first left derived | |
functor $L_1F$ is zero. To prove $L_1F(M) = 0$ for some $R$-module $M$ | |
choose an exact sequence $0 \to K \to P \to M \to 0$ | |
of $R$-modules with $P$ free. It suffices to show $F(K) \to F(P)$ | |
is injective. Now we can write this sequence as a filtered | |
colimit of sequences $0 \to K_i \to P_i \to M_i \to 0$ | |
with $P_i$ a finite free $R$-module: just write $P$ in this | |
manner and set $K_i = K \cap P_i$ and $M_i = \Im(P_i \to M)$. | |
Because $F$ is a left adjoint it commutes | |
with colimits and because $\mathcal{A}$ is a Grothendieck | |
abelian category, we find that $F(K) \to F(P)$ | |
is injective if each $F(K_i) \to F(P_i)$ is injective. | |
Thus it suffices to check $F(K) \to F(P)$ | |
is injective when $K \subset P = R^{\oplus n}$. | |
Thus $F(K) \to U^{\oplus n}$ is injective by an application | |
of Lemma \ref{lemma-F-G-monos}. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-gabriel-popescu} | |
\begin{reference} | |
\cite[Corollary 4.1]{serpe} | |
\end{reference} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. Let | |
$R$, $F$, $G$ be as in the Gabriel-Popescu theorem | |
(Theorem \ref{theorem-gabriel-popescu}). Then we obtain | |
derived functors | |
$$ | |
RG : D(\mathcal{A}) \to D(\text{Mod}_R) | |
\quad\text{and}\quad | |
F : D(\text{Mod}_R) \to D(\mathcal{A}) | |
$$ | |
such that $F$ is left adjoint to $RG$, $RG$ is fully faithful, | |
and $F \circ RG = \text{id}$. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
The existence and adjointness of the functors follows from | |
Theorems \ref{theorem-gabriel-popescu} and | |
\ref{theorem-K-injective-embedding-grothendieck} | |
and | |
Derived Categories, Lemmas \ref{derived-lemma-K-injective-defined}, | |
\ref{derived-lemma-right-derived-exact-functor}, and | |
\ref{derived-lemma-derived-adjoint-functors}. | |
The statement $F \circ RG = \text{id}$ follows because we can | |
compute $RG$ on an object of $D(\mathcal{A})$ by applying $G$ | |
to a suitable representative complex $I^\bullet$ (for example | |
a K-injective one) and then $F(G(I^\bullet)) = I^\bullet$ | |
because $F \circ G = \text{id}$. Fully faithfulness of $RG$ | |
follows from this by | |
Categories, Lemma \ref{categories-lemma-adjoint-fully-faithful}. | |
\end{proof} | |
\section{Brown representability and Grothendieck abelian categories} | |
\label{section-brown} | |
\noindent | |
In this section we quickly prove a representability theorem for | |
derived categories of Grothendieck abelian categories. The reader should | |
first read the case of compactly generated triangulated categories in | |
Derived Categories, Section \ref{derived-section-brown}. | |
After that, instead of reading this section, | |
it makes sense to consult the literature for more | |
general results of this nature, for example see | |
\cite{Franke}, \cite{Neeman}, \cite{Krause}, or take | |
a look at Derived Categories, Section \ref{derived-section-brown-bis}. | |
\begin{lemma} | |
\label{lemma-brown} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. | |
Let $H : D(\mathcal{A}) \to \textit{Ab}$ be a contravariant | |
cohomological functor which transforms direct sums into products. | |
Then $H$ is representable. | |
\end{lemma} | |
\begin{proof} | |
Let $R, F, G, RG$ be as in Lemma \ref{lemma-gabriel-popescu} | |
and consider the functor $H \circ F : D(\text{Mod}_R) \to \textit{Ab}$. | |
Observe that since $F$ is a left adjoint it sends direct sums to | |
direct sums and hence $H \circ F$ transforms direct sums into products. | |
On the other hand, the derived category $D(\text{Mod}_R)$ is | |
generated by a single compact object, namely $R$. | |
By Derived Categories, Lemma \ref{derived-lemma-brown} | |
we see that $H \circ F$ is representable, say by $L \in D(\text{Mod}_R)$. | |
Choose a distinguished triangle | |
$$ | |
M \to L \to RG(F(L)) \to M[1] | |
$$ | |
in $D(\text{Mod}_R)$. Then $F(M) = 0$ because $F \circ RG = \text{id}$. | |
Hence $H(F(M)) = 0$ hence $\Hom(M, L) = 0$. | |
It follows that $L \to RG(F(L))$ is the inclusion of a direct summand, see | |
Derived Categories, Lemma \ref{derived-lemma-split}. | |
For $A$ in $D(\mathcal{A})$ we obtain | |
\begin{align*} | |
H(A) | |
& = | |
H(F(RG(A)) \\ | |
& = | |
\Hom(RG(A), L) \\ | |
& \to | |
\Hom(RG(A), RG(F(L))) \\ | |
& = | |
\Hom(F(RG(A)), F(L)) \\ | |
& = | |
\Hom(A, F(L)) | |
\end{align*} | |
where the arrow has a left inverse functorial in $A$. In other words, we find | |
that $H$ is the direct summand of a representable functor. | |
Since $D(\mathcal{A})$ is Karoubian | |
(Derived Categories, Lemma | |
\ref{derived-lemma-projectors-have-images-triangulated}) we conclude. | |
\end{proof} | |
\begin{proposition} | |
\label{proposition-brown} | |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a Grothendieck abelian category. Let $\mathcal{D}$ | |
be a triangulated category. Let $F : D(\mathcal{A}) \to \mathcal{D}$ be an | |
exact functor of triangulated categories which transforms direct sums | |
into direct sums. Then $F$ has an exact right adjoint. | |
\end{proposition} | |
\begin{proof} | |
For an object $Y$ of $\mathcal{D}$ consider the contravariant functor | |
$$ | |
D(\mathcal{A}) \to \textit{Ab},\quad | |
W \mapsto \Hom_\mathcal{D}(F(W), Y) | |
$$ | |
This is a cohomological functor as $F$ is exact and transforms direct sums | |
into products as $F$ transforms direct sums into direct sums. Thus by | |
Lemma \ref{lemma-brown} we find an object $X$ of $D(\mathcal{A})$ such that | |
$\Hom_{D(\mathcal{A})}(W, X) = \Hom_\mathcal{D}(F(W), Y)$. | |
The existence of the adjoint follows from | |
Categories, Lemma \ref{categories-lemma-adjoint-exists}. | |
Exactness follows from | |
Derived Categories, Lemma \ref{derived-lemma-adjoint-is-exact}. | |
\end{proof} | |
\input{chapters} | |
\bibliography{my} | |
\bibliographystyle{amsalpha} | |
\end{document} | |