Serres gives the following definition of a sheaf in the paper FAC:

Let $X$ be a topological space. A sheaf of abelian groups on $X$ (or simply a sheaf ) consists of:

(a) A function $x \to \mathscr{F}_x$, giving for all $x \in X$ an abelian group $\mathscr{F}_x$,

(b) A topology on the set $\mathscr{F}$, the sum of the sets $\mathscr{F}_x$.

If $f$ is an element of $\mathscr{F}_x$, we put $\pi(f) = x$; we call the mapping of $\pi$ the projection of $\mathscr{F}$ onto $X$; the family in $\mathscr{F} \times \mathscr{F}$ consisting of pairs $(f,g)$ such that $\pi(f) = \pi(g)$ is denoted by $\mathscr{F}+\mathscr{F}$.

(I) For all $f \in \mathscr{F}$ there exist open neighborhoods $V$ of $f$ and $U$ of $\pi(f)$ such that the restriction of $\pi$ to $V$ is a homeomorphism of $V$ and $U$.(In other words, is a local homeomorphism).

(II) The mapping $f \mapsto -f$ is a continuous mapping from $\mathscr{F}$ to $\mathscr{F}$, and the mapping $(f, g) \mapsto f + g$ is a continuous mapping from $\mathscr{F}+\mathscr{F}$ to $\mathscr{F}$.

If $U$ is an open subset of $X$ then a map $s: U \to \mathscr{F}$ is called a section over $U$ if $s$ is continuous and $\pi \circ s =$ id$_U$.

It is asserted that the set of all sections over a fixed subset $U$ form an abelian group with the operation of pointwise addition. I would like to like to verify this. I see that if there is at least one section $s$ on $U$, the abelian group structure will follow from (2). But how do I know there is at least one section, say $s$, for each $U$?

I tried to prove that for a given $U$, the map that takes $x \in U$ to the identity element of the corresponding stalk, $(x,e)$ is continuous, by invoking 1, but was unsuccessful.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think something is missing from your definition. What are (1) and (2)? $\endgroup$ – Alex Kruckman May 8 '18 at 6:21
  • $\begingroup$ Rats. You are correct. Sorry, this is the first time trying to ask from my phone. I’ll edit $\endgroup$ – Prince M May 8 '18 at 6:35
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, it should be all there now. Sorry for the low quality typesetting, I just walked off an airplane and really want to get this figured out. $\endgroup$ – Prince M May 8 '18 at 6:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @TobiasKildetoft : if you have a functor $\mathcal{F}$, that is a sheaf according to the "usual definition", then taking $\mathcal{F}_x = \varinjlim_{U\ni x}\mathcal{F}(U)$ yields a sheaf as defined here (you have to topologise it well enough). Conversely, given a sheaf as defined here, the (functor) sheaf of sections will be a sheaf as you know them $\endgroup$ – Max May 8 '18 at 10:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @TobiasKildetoft: In modern terms, this is defining the "étale space" of a sheaf. There is an equivalence of categories between the category of sheaves on a space $X$ and the slice category $LH/X$, where $LH$ is the subcategory of Top consisting of all spaces, but with local homeomorphisms as the maps. $\endgroup$ – Hurkyl May 8 '18 at 10:21

Consider the mapping you gave, that is $x\mapsto (x,e_x)$ where $e_x$ is the identity element of $\mathscr{F}_x$.

You want to show that it is continuous, but continuity is a local property so you can look locally; and then invoke (I) :

Let $x\in X$ and let $V$ be a neighbourhood of $(x,e_x)\in \mathscr{F}$ and $U$ a neighbourhood of $x$ such that $\pi: V\to U$ is a homeomorphism. Let $s:U\to V$ be its converse.

Denote $V\times_X V = \{(z,y) \in V, \pi(z) = \pi(y)\}$ (this is the more common notation for $V+V$). By (II), $m:V\times_X V \to V$ defined by $m(z,y) = z-y$ is continuous.

Consider now $\varphi: V\to V\times_X V$, $y\mapsto (y,y)$ which is also continuous.

Finally, let $d: U\to V$ be defined as $m\circ \varphi \circ s$. $d$ is continuous, $\pi\circ d = id_U$ is also clear from the definitions.

Moreover, unravelling the definition yields that $d:U\to V$ is precisely $d(y)= (y,e_y)$: hence $x\mapsto (x,e_x)$ is locally continuous, hence continuous.

So this gives us a global section $X\to \mathscr{F}$ which is a neutral element in the set of sections of $X$, and clearly its restriction to any open set has the same property.

Passing remark: In the functorial definition, a sheaf of groups is a functor $O(X)^{op}\to \mathbf{Grp}$ satisfying certain "gluing conditions". But it's actually easy to see that it's the same thing as a group object in the category $\mathbf{Sh}(X)$, the category of sheaves of sets on $X$. So with this definition, the continuity of the aforementioned map is automatic, because in the definition of a group object you have a map from the terminal object to the group $G$, but this essentially means a map $X\to G$ "over $X$" (seeing $\mathbf{Sh}(X)$ as $Etale(X)$)

  • $\begingroup$ This is excellent, very helpful. I am happy that my approaches at least started similar, but I didn't think to define the maps $\phi$ and $m$ and reroute through $V \times_{X} V$ so I could take advantage of property (2). I was also trying to use the topological definition of pointwise continuity. Local continuity is clearly the better approach here. $\endgroup$ – Prince M May 9 '18 at 0:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The idea of using $(x,y)\mapsto x-y$ is indeed a very classical one whenever topology and groups are involved : for instance it's what allows you to prove that a $T_1$ topological group is $T_2$ ! You're welcome ! $\endgroup$ – Max May 9 '18 at 6:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, that's exactly it ! Well a constant sheaf from the functorial point of view would be $\mathcal{F}(U) = A$ (for a fixed $A$) hence the restriction maps would be the identity, hence indeed from the etale space point of view this implies that the stalks are all the same (and in fact they're $A$) . So you get that the constant sheaf would be $\displaystyle\bigsqcup_{x\in X} A$ suitably topologised $\endgroup$ – Max May 9 '18 at 22:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes I seem to have made a mistake earlier, it's not $\mathcal{F}(U)$ that is constantly $A$, it's really the stalks (hence the etale space point of view makes it easier to see why we say constant sheaf) that are constantly $A$. In particular, you are right, the (functorial) sheaf of sections associated to it takes the value $0$ when evaluated at $\emptyset$. $\endgroup$ – Max May 10 '18 at 9:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ And as of course every restriction map sends any map to this map $\emptyset \to \mathscr{F}$, they are indeed homomorphisms. But for the purposes of this technicality, it may be interesting to note that the correct definition of a section should thus be "the corestriction of $\pi\circ s$ onto its image is $id_U$" $\endgroup$ – Max May 10 '18 at 9:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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