0
$\begingroup$

Let $X$ and $Y$ be varieties, $\varphi:X\to Y$ a morphism, and $\mathcal{G}$ a sheaf on $Y$. Let $s$ denote the sheafification functor. If $\mathcal{F}$ is a sheaf on $X$, let $\varphi_*\mathcal{F}$ denote the direct image.

We define the inverse image $\varphi^{-1}\mathcal{G}$ by sheafifying the presheaf $\varphi_0^{-1}\mathcal{G}$ given by taking the direct limit of $\mathcal{G}$ on the open subsets of $Y$ containing $\varphi(U)$ for each $U\subseteq X$. This operation is functorial.

My question is, do we have that $$s(\varphi_*\varphi_0^{-1}\mathcal{G})=\varphi_*s(\varphi_0^{-1}\mathcal{G})=\varphi_*\varphi^{-1}\mathcal{G}$$ In other words, does the order in which we do the sheafification matter?

I think that $$s(\varphi_0^{-1}\varphi_*\mathcal{F})=\varphi^{-1}\varphi_*\mathcal{F}$$ since here we are composing the functors in order. I feel like the other case should be true as well, but I've tried using the universal property of sheafification and haven't really got anywhere, I can't find arrows both ways to show an isomorphism.

Any help would be much appreciated.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

There is always a natural map in one direction: Take the sheafification map $\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G} \to s(\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G})$ on $X$, push forward to get a map $\varphi_{\ast}\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G} \to \varphi_{\ast}s(\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G})$ of presheaves on $Y$, then this map factors through a map $s(\varphi_{\ast}\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G}) \to \varphi_{\ast}s(\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G})$ since $\varphi_{\ast}s(\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G})$ is a sheaf.

This map doesn't have to be an isomorphism: Take $X := \operatorname{Spec} k \sqcup \operatorname{Spec} k$ and $Y := \operatorname{Spec} k$, let $\varphi : X \to Y$ be the unique $k$-morphism, and let $\mathcal{G} := \mathbb{Z}$; then $\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G}$ is the constant presheaf associated to $\mathbb{Z}$ on $X$, so $\Gamma(Y,s(\varphi_{\ast}\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G})) = \Gamma(Y,\varphi_{\ast}\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G}) = \mathbb{Z}$ but $\Gamma(Y,\varphi_{\ast}s(\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G})) = \Gamma(X,s(\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G})) = \mathbb{Z} \times \mathbb{Z}$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This is false, since $\Gamma(X,s(\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G})) = \mathbb{Z} $. $\endgroup$ – Parthiv Basu Jul 29 '19 at 7:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Here $s(\varphi_{0}^{-1}\mathcal{G})$ is the constant sheaf on $X$ associated to $\mathbb{Z}$, so its global sections is the direct product of $n$ copies of $\mathbb{Z}$ where $n$ is the number of connected components of $X$. $\endgroup$ – Minseon Shin Jul 29 '19 at 8:06
  • $\begingroup$ You are right. I deleted my answer, where my argument was inccorect. $\endgroup$ – Parthiv Basu Jul 29 '19 at 8:09

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.