Lemma 13.34.5. Let \mathcal{A} be an abelian category with countable products and enough injectives. Let K^\bullet be a complex. Let I_ n^\bullet be the inverse system of bounded below complexes of injectives produced by Lemma 13.29.3. Then I^\bullet = \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits I_ n^\bullet exists, is K-injective, represents R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits \tau _{\geq -n}K^\bullet in D(\mathcal{A}), and the following are equivalent
the map K^\bullet \to I^\bullet (see proof) is a quasi-isomorphism,
the map K^\bullet \to R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits \tau _{\geq -n}K^\bullet of Remark 13.34.4 is an isomorphism in D(\mathcal{A}).
Proof.
The statement of the lemma makes sense as R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits \tau _{\geq -n}K^\bullet exists by Lemma 13.34.3. Each complex I_ n^\bullet is K-injective by Lemma 13.31.4. Choose direct sum decompositions I_{n + 1}^ p = C_{n + 1}^ p \oplus I_ n^ p for all n \geq 1. Set C_1^ p = I_1^ p. The complex I^\bullet = \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits I_ n^\bullet exists because we can take I^ p = \prod _{n \geq 1} C_ n^ p. Fix p \in \mathbf{Z}. We claim there is a split short exact sequence
0 \to I^ p \to \prod I_ n^ p \to \prod I_ n^ p \to 0
of objects of \mathcal{A}. Here the first map is given by the projection maps I^ p \to I_ n^ p and the second map by (x_ n) \mapsto (x_ n - f^ p_{n + 1}(x_{n + 1})) where f^ p_ n : I_ n^ p \to I_{n - 1}^ p are the transition maps. The splitting comes from the map \prod I_ n^ p \to \prod C_ n^ p = I^ p. We obtain a termwise split short exact sequence of complexes
0 \to I^\bullet \to \prod I_ n^\bullet \to \prod I_ n^\bullet \to 0
Hence a corresponding distinguished triangle in K(\mathcal{A}) and D(\mathcal{A}). By Lemma 13.31.5 the products are K-injective and represent the corresponding products in D(\mathcal{A}). It follows that I^\bullet represents R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits I_ n^\bullet (Definition 13.34.1). Since R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits I_ n^\bullet \cong R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits \tau _{\geq -n}K^\bullet as derived limits are defined on the level of the derived category, we see that I^\bullet represents R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits \tau _{\geq -n}K^\bullet . Moreover, the complex I^\bullet is K-injective by Lemma 13.31.3. By the commutative diagram of Lemma 13.29.3 and since K^ i = (\tau _{\geq -n}K^\bullet )^ i for n \gg 0 we see that we get a unique map \gamma : K^\bullet \to I^\bullet such that the diagrams
\xymatrix{ K^\bullet \ar[r] \ar[d]_\gamma & \tau _{\geq -n} K^\bullet \ar[d] \\ I^\bullet \ar[r] & I_ n^\bullet }
commute. It follows that \gamma is a map of complexes which represents the map c : K^\bullet \to R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits \tau _{\geq -n}K^\bullet of Remark 13.34.4 in D(\mathcal{A}). In other words, the diagram
\xymatrix{ K^\bullet \ar[r]_-c \ar[d]_\gamma & R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits \tau _{\geq -n} K^\bullet \ar[d]^{\cong } \\ I^\bullet \ar[r]^-{\cong } & R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits I_ n^\bullet }
is commutative in D(\mathcal{A}). The lemma follows.
\square
Comments (1)
Comment #2463 by anonymous on
There are also: