Remark 25.12.9. Let \mathcal{C} be a site. Let X \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (\mathcal{C}). Assume \mathcal{C} has fibre products and let K be a hypercovering of X. Write K_ n = \{ U_{n, i}\} _{i \in I_ n}. Suppose that
U_ n = \coprod _{i \in I_ n} U_{n, i} exists,
given morphisms (\alpha , f_ i) : \{ U_ i\} _{i \in I} \to \{ V_ j\} _{j \in J} and (\beta , g_ k) : \{ W_ k\} _{k \in K} \to \{ V_ j\} _{j \in J} in \text{SR}(\mathcal{C}) such that U = \coprod U_ i, V = \coprod V_ j, and W = \coprod W_ j exist, then U \times _ V W = \coprod _{(i, j, k), \alpha (i) = j = \beta (k)} U_ i \times _{V_ j} W_ k,
if (\alpha , f_ i) : \{ U_ i\} _{i \in I} \to \{ V_ j\} _{j \in J} is a covering in the sense of Definition 25.3.1 and U = \coprod U_ i and V = \coprod V_ j exist, then the corresponding morphism U \to V of Remark 25.12.7 is a covering of \mathcal{C}.
Then we get another simplicial object L of \text{SR}(\mathcal{C}) with L_ n = \{ U_ n\} , see Remark 25.12.7. Now we claim that L is a hypercovering of X. To see this we check conditions (1), (2) of Definition 25.3.3. Condition (1) follows from (c) and (1) for K because (1) for K says K_0 = \{ U_{0, i}\} _{i \in I_0} is a covering of \{ X\} in the sense of Definition 25.3.1. Condition (2) follows because \mathcal{C}/X has all finite limits hence \text{SR}(\mathcal{C}/X) has all finite limits, and condition (b) says the construction of “taking disjoint unions” commutes with these fimite limits. Thus the morphism
is a covering as it is the consequence of applying our “taking disjoint unions” functor to the morphism
which is assumed to be a covering in the sense of Definition 25.3.1 by (2) for K. This makes sense because property (b) in particular assures us that if we start with a finite diagram of semi-representable objects over X for which we can take disjoint unions, then the limit of the diagram in \text{SR}(\mathcal{C}/X) still is a semi-representable object over X for which we can take disjoint unions.
Comments (0)