## 61.14 Weakly contractible hypercoverings

The results of Section 61.13 leads to the existence of hypercoverings made up out weakly contractible objects.

Lemma 61.14.1. Let $X$ be a scheme.

1. For every object $U$ of $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$ there exists a hypercovering $K$ of $U$ in $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$ such that each term $K_ n$ consists of a single weakly contractible object of $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$ covering $U$.

2. For every quasi-compact and quasi-separated object $U$ of $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$ there exists a hypercovering $K$ of $U$ in $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$ such that each term $K_ n$ consists of a single affine and weakly contractible object of $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$ covering $U$.

Proof. Let $\mathcal{B} \subset \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale})$ be the set of weakly contractible objects of $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$. Every object $T$ of $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$ has a covering $\{ T_ i \to T\} _{i \in I}$ with $I$ finite and $T_ i \in \mathcal{B}$ by Lemma 61.13.5. By Hypercoverings, Lemma 25.12.6 we get a hypercovering $K$ of $U$ such that $K_ n = \{ U_{n, i}\} _{i \in I_ n}$ with $I_ n$ finite and $U_{n, i}$ weakly contractible. Then we can replace $K$ by the hypercovering of $U$ given by $\{ U_ n\}$ in degree $n$ where $U_ n = \coprod _{i \in I_ n} U_{n, i}$ This is allowed by Hypercoverings, Remark 25.12.9.

Let $X_{qcqs, {pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}} \subset X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$ be the full subcategory consisting of quasi-compact and quasi-separated objects. A covering of $X_{qcqs, {pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}}$ will be a finite pro-étale covering. Then $X_{qcqs, {pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}}$ is a site, has fibre products, and the inclusion functor $X_{qcqs, {pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}} \to X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$ is continuous and commutes with fibre products. In particular, if $K$ is a hypercovering of an object $U$ in $X_{qcqs, {pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}}$ then $K$ is a hypercovering of $U$ in $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$ by Hypercoverings, Lemma 25.12.5. Let $\mathcal{B} \subset \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (X_{qcqs, {pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}})$ be the set of affine and weakly contractible objects. By Lemma 61.13.3 and the fact that finite unions of affines are affine, for every object $U$ of $X_{qcqs, {pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}}$ there exists a covering $\{ V \to U\}$ of $X_{qcqs, {pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}}$ with $V \in \mathcal{B}$. By Hypercoverings, Lemma 25.12.6 we get a hypercovering $K$ of $U$ such that $K_ n = \{ U_{n, i}\} _{i \in I_ n}$ with $I_ n$ finite and $U_{n, i}$ affine and weakly contractible. Then we can replace $K$ by the hypercovering of $U$ given by $\{ U_ n\}$ in degree $n$ where $U_ n = \coprod _{i \in I_ n} U_{n, i}$. This is allowed by Hypercoverings, Remark 25.12.9. $\square$

In the following lemma we use the Čech complex $s(\mathcal{F}(K))$ associated to a hypercovering $K$ in a site. See Hypercoverings, Section 25.5. If $K$ is a hypercovering of $U$ and $K_ n = \{ U_ n \to U\}$, then the Čech complex looks like this:

$s(\mathcal{F}(K)) = \left( \mathcal{F}(U_0) \to \mathcal{F}(U_1) \to \mathcal{F}(U_2) \to \ldots \right)$

where $s(\mathcal{F}(U_ n))$ is placed in cohomological degree $n$.

Lemma 61.14.2. Let $X$ be a scheme. Let $E \in D^+(X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale})$ be represented by a bounded below complex $\mathcal{E}^\bullet$ of abelian sheaves. Let $K$ be a hypercovering of $U \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale})$ with $K_ n = \{ U_ n \to U\}$ where $U_ n$ is a weakly contractible object of $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$. Then

$R\Gamma (U, E) = \text{Tot}(s(\mathcal{E}^\bullet (K)))$

in $D(\textit{Ab})$.

Proof. If $\mathcal{E}$ is an abelian sheaf on $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$, then the spectral sequence of Hypercoverings, Lemma 25.5.3 implies that

$R\Gamma (X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}, \mathcal{E}) = s(\mathcal{E}(K))$

because the higher cohomology groups of any sheaf over $U_ n$ vanish, see Cohomology on Sites, Lemma 21.51.1.

If $\mathcal{E}^\bullet$ is bounded below, then we can choose an injective resolution $\mathcal{E}^\bullet \to \mathcal{I}^\bullet$ and consider the map of complexes

$\text{Tot}(s(\mathcal{E}^\bullet (K))) \longrightarrow \text{Tot}(s(\mathcal{I}^\bullet (K)))$

For every $n$ the map $\mathcal{E}^\bullet (U_ n) \to \mathcal{I}^\bullet (U_ n)$ is a quasi-isomorphism because taking sections over $U_ n$ is exact. Hence the displayed map is a quasi-isomorphism by one of the spectral sequences of Homology, Lemma 12.25.3. Using the result of the first paragraph we see that for every $p$ the complex $s(\mathcal{I}^ p(K))$ is acyclic in degrees $n > 0$ and computes $\mathcal{I}^ p(U)$ in degree $0$. Thus the other spectral sequence of Homology, Lemma 12.25.3 shows $\text{Tot}(s(\mathcal{I}^\bullet (K)))$ computes $R\Gamma (U, E) = \mathcal{I}^\bullet (U)$. $\square$

Lemma 61.14.3. Let $X$ be a quasi-compact and quasi-separated scheme. The functor $R\Gamma (X, -) : D^+(X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}) \to D(\textit{Ab})$ commutes with direct sums and homotopy colimits.

Proof. The statement means the following: Suppose we have a family of objects $E_ i$ of $D^+(X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale})$ such that $\bigoplus E_ i$ is an object of $D^+(X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale})$. Then $R\Gamma (X, \bigoplus E_ i) = \bigoplus R\Gamma (X, E_ i)$. To see this choose a hypercovering $K$ of $X$ with $K_ n = \{ U_ n \to X\}$ where $U_ n$ is an affine and weakly contractible scheme, see Lemma 61.14.1. Let $N$ be an integer such that $H^ p(E_ i) = 0$ for $p < N$. Choose a complex of abelian sheaves $\mathcal{E}_ i^\bullet$ representing $E_ i$ with $\mathcal{E}_ i^ p = 0$ for $p < N$. The termwise direct sum $\bigoplus \mathcal{E}_ i^\bullet$ represents $\bigoplus E_ i$ in $D(X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale})$, see Injectives, Lemma 19.13.4. By Lemma 61.14.2 we have

$R\Gamma (X, \bigoplus E_ i) = \text{Tot}(s((\bigoplus \mathcal{E}^\bullet _ i)(K)))$

and

$R\Gamma (X, E_ i) = \text{Tot}(s(\mathcal{E}^\bullet _ i(K)))$

Since each $U_ n$ is quasi-compact we see that

$\text{Tot}(s((\bigoplus \mathcal{E}^\bullet _ i)(K))) = \bigoplus \text{Tot}(s(\mathcal{E}^\bullet _ i(K)))$

by Modules on Sites, Lemma 18.30.3. The statement on homotopy colimits is a formal consequence of the fact that $R\Gamma$ is an exact functor of triangulated categories and the fact (just proved) that it commutes with direct sums. $\square$

Remark 61.14.4. Let $X$ be a scheme. Because $X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale}$ has enough weakly contractible objects for all $K$ in $D(X_{pro\text{-}\acute{e}tale})$ we have $K = R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits \tau _{\geq -n}K$ by Cohomology on Sites, Proposition 21.51.2. Since $R\Gamma$ commutes with $R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits$ by Injectives, Lemma 19.13.6 we see that

$R\Gamma (X, K) = R\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits R\Gamma (X, \tau _{\geq -n}K)$

in $D(\textit{Ab})$. This will sometimes allow us to extend results from bounded below complexes to all complexes.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

In order to prevent bots from posting comments, we would like you to prove that you are human. You can do this by filling in the name of the current tag in the following input field. As a reminder, this is tag 09A0. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.