Loading web-font TeX/Math/Italic

The Stacks project

110.75 Affine formal algebraic spaces

Let K be a field and let (V_ i)_{i \in I} be a directed inverse system of nonzero vector spaces over K with surjective transition maps and with \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits V_ i = 0, see Section 110.3. Let R_ i = K \oplus V_ i as K-algebra where V_ i is an ideal of square zero. Then R_ i is an inverse system of K-algebras with surjective transition maps with nilpotent kernels and with \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits R_ i = K. The affine formal algebraic space X = \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R_ i) is an example of an affine formal algebraic space which is not McQuillan.

Lemma 110.75.1. There exists an affine formal algebraic space which is not McQuillan.

Proof. See discussion above. \square

Let 0 \to W_ i \to V_ i \to K \to 0 be a system of exact sequences as in Section 110.3. Let A_ i = K[V_ i]/(ww'; w, w' \in W_ i). Then there is a compatible system of surjections A_ i \to K[t] with nilpotent kernels and the transition maps A_ i \to A_ j are surjective with nilpotent kernels as well. Recall that V_ i is free over K with basis given by s \in S_ i. Then, if the characteristic of K is zero, the degree d part of A_ i is free over K with basis given by s^ d, s \in S_ i each of which map to t^ d. Hence the inverse system of the degree d parts of the A_ i is isomorphic to the inverse system of the vector spaces V_ i. As \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits V_ i = 0 we conclude that \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits A_ i = K, at least when the characteristic of K is zero. This gives an example of an affine formal algebraic space whose “regular functions” do not separate points.

Lemma 110.75.2. There exists an affine formal algebraic space X whose regular functions do not separate points, in the following sense: If we write X = \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits X_\lambda as in Formal Spaces, Definition 87.9.1 then \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits \Gamma (X_\lambda , \mathcal{O}_{X_\lambda }) is a field, but X_{red} has infinitely many points.

Proof. See discussion above. \square

Let K, I, and (V_ i) be as above. Consider systems

\Phi = (\Lambda , J_ i \subset \Lambda , (M_ i) \to (V_ i))

where \Lambda is an augmented K-algebra, J_ i \subset \Lambda for i \in I is an ideal of square zero, (M_ i) \to (V_ i) is a map of inverse systems of K-vector spaces such that M_ i \to V_ i is surjective for each i, such that M_ i has a \Lambda -module structure, such that the transition maps M_ i \to M_ j, i > j are \Lambda -linear, and such that J_ j M_ i \subset \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(M_ i \to M_ j) for i > j. Claim: There exists a system as above such that M_ j = M_ i/J_ j M_ i for all i > j.

If the claim is true, then we obtain a representable morphism

\mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _{i \in I} \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(\Lambda /J_ i \oplus M_ i) \longrightarrow \text{Spf}(\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits \Lambda /J_ i)

of affine formal algebraic spaces whose source is not McQuillan but the target is. Here \Lambda /J_ i \oplus M_ i has the usual \Lambda /J_ i-algebra structure where M_ i is an ideal of square zero. Representability translates exactly into the condition that M_ i/J_ jM_ i = M_ j for i > j. The source of the morphism is not McQuillan as the projections \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits _{i \in I} M_ i \to M_ i are not be surjective. This is true because the maps \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits V_ i \to V_ i are not surjective and we have the surjection M_ i \to V_ i. Some details omitted.

Proof of the claim. First, note that there exists at least one system, namely

\Phi _0 = (K, J_ i = (0), (V_ i) \xrightarrow {\text{id}} (V_ i))

Given a system \Phi we will prove there exists a morphism of systems \Phi \to \Phi ' (morphisms of systems defined in the obvious manner) such that \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(M_ i/J_ j M_ i \to M_ j) maps to zero in M'_ i/J'_ j M'_ i. Once this is done we can do the usual trick of setting \Phi _ n = (\Phi _{n - 1})' inductively for n \geq 1 and taking \Phi = \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits \Phi _ n to get a system with the desired properties. Details omitted.

Construction of \Phi ' given \Phi . Consider the set U of triples u = (i, j, \xi ) where i > j and \xi \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(M_ i \to M_ j). We will let s, t : U \to I denote the maps s(i, j, \xi ) = i and t(i, j, \xi ) = j. Then we set \xi _ u \in M_{s(u)} the third component of u. We take

\Lambda ' = \Lambda [x_ u; u \in U]/(x_ u x_{u'}; u, u' \in U)

with augmentation \Lambda ' \to K given by the augmentation of \Lambda and sending x_ u to zero. We take J'_ k = J_ k \Lambda ' + (x_{u,\ t(u) \geq k}). We set

M'_ i = M_ i \oplus \bigoplus \nolimits _{s(u) \geq i} K\epsilon _{i, u}

As transition maps M'_ i \to M'_ j for i > j we use the given map M_ i \to M_ j and we send \epsilon _{i, u} to \epsilon _{j, u}. The map M'_ i \to V_ i induces the given map M_ i \to V_ i and sends \epsilon _{i, u} to zero. Finally, we let \Lambda ' act on M'_ i as follows: for \lambda \in \Lambda we act by the \Lambda -module structure on M_ i and via the augmentation \Lambda \to K on \epsilon _{i, u}. The element x_ u acts as 0 on M_ i for all i. Finally, we define

x_ u \epsilon _{i, u} = \text{image of }\xi _ u\text{ in }M_ i

and we set all other products x_{u'} \epsilon _{i, u} equal to zero. The displayed formula makes sense because s(u) \geq i and \xi _ u \in M_{s(u)}. The main things the check are J'_ j M'_ i \subset M'_ i maps to zero in M'_ j for i > j and that \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(M_ i \to M_ j) maps to zero in M'_ i/J_ j M'_ i. The reason for the last fact is that \xi = x_{(i, j, \xi )} \epsilon _{i, (i, j, \xi )} \in J'_ j M'_ i for any \xi \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(M_ i \to M_ j). We omit the details.

Lemma 110.75.3. There exists a representable morphism f : X \to Y of affine formal algebraic spaces with Y McQuillan, but X not McQuillan.

Proof. See discussion above. \square


Comments (2)

Comment #1557 by Matthew Emerton on

In line 3 from bottom, "characteris'' should be "characteristic''.


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

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.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.