Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

On the Wikipedia page Sheaf, under the section "The etale space of a sheaf," the author claims that the etale space of the sheaf of (continuous) sections of a continuous map $Y \to X$ is (homeomorphic to) $Y$ if and only if $Y \to X$ is a covering map. This doesn't seem quite right to me. Isn't the appropriate condition weaker? I think that it should be something like a local homeomorphism with discrete fibers, unless I misunderstood the Wikipedia article. Am I correct?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

You are right. The condition is that $Y\to X$ is an etale map, i.e. a local homeomorphism. (it is the standard equivalence between sheaves and etale maps)

share|cite|improve this answer
So covering map $\Leftrightarrow$ étale map? This is a surprise to me. I think my attempts to locally trivialize an arbitrary étale map rely on tacit assumptions. – Eivind Dahl Jun 13 '11 at 10:59
@Eivin Dahl: no, there are many more etale maps that coverings (typically, $Y$ is very non-Hausdorff in the etale maps corresponding to sheaves). I just believe the statement in the Wikipedia article is wrong; in place of covering it should say etale. – user8268 Jun 13 '11 at 12:43
I see. I was somewhat bothered by the fact that the etale space of a sheaf has discrete fibers, but I see now that the local homeomorphism condition actually implies this. – Justin Campbell Jun 13 '11 at 17:37

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.