2
$\begingroup$

My question is vague and general, and, if you want, naive.

$\bullet$ Given $X/S$ a scheme. We denote by $X_{red}$ the reduced scheme associated to $X$.

Grothendieck defines in EGA 4 (16.5.12.1) the tangent bundle $T_{X/S}$ of $X$ relatively to $S$. Is there any relation between $T_{X_{red}/S}$ and $T_{X/S}$ ? More precisely, we know that there is a morphism $$ f : T_{X_{red}/S} \to T_{X/S}\times_{X} X_{red} ; $$ what can be said of $f$ ? I am interested, in particular, in the case when $S=Spec \ k$, with $k$ a field.

$\bullet$ A related question (but in which I am less interested) is the comparison of the Zariski tangent space at one point (as defined in Hartshorne p. 80) of $X$ and $X_{red}$. In general, if $\pi : X_{red} \to X$ denotes the canonical morphism, and if $x\in X_{red}$, the linear map $$ T_x \ \pi : T_x \ X_{red} \to T_{\pi(x)} \ X $$ is injective, since $\pi$ is a closed immersion. Is it an isomorphism ?

$\bullet$ Finally, a related question is the comparison of $\Omega^1_{X/S}$ and $\Omega^1_{X_{red}/S}$.

$\bullet$ Ideally, I would like to transport sections of $T_{X_{red}/S}$ to sections of $T_{X/S}$.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't think you mean "surjective" in your second bullet point. For example, consider $S = \operatorname{Spec}({\mathbb C})$ and $X = \operatorname{Spec}({\mathbb C}[t]/(t^2))$ (i.e. Spec of the dual numbers), where $x\in X_{red} \cong \operatorname{Spec}({\mathbb C})$ is the point. $\endgroup$ Apr 16, 2010 at 14:18
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ this is just intuition: tangent spaces should detect singularities, and reducing a scheme can destroy them. thus there won't be a good comparison. $\endgroup$ Apr 16, 2010 at 14:47
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I meant injective ! I've changed it in the question. Hence, with your example, we see that $T_x \ \pi$ is not surjective in general. $\endgroup$
    – user2330
    Apr 16, 2010 at 14:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The headline for the question is odd: one shouldn't say "tangent bundle" unless the sheaf is locally free, and it usually is not when $X$ is not $S$-smooth. The premise of the question seems a bit naive, especially killing nilpotents on X without doing the same for $S$. Probably the only interesting thing to say is that if $X$ is $S$-smooth then $X_ {\rm{red}} = X \times_S S_ {\rm{red}}$ and tangent/cotangent bundles for $X_ {\rm{red}}$ over $S_ {\rm{red}}$ are pullback of those for $X$ over $S$. $\endgroup$
    – BCnrd
    Apr 16, 2010 at 15:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Although in general one doesn't expect much to come out of linear dual $T_ {X/S}$ when $\Omega^1_ {X/S}$ not locally free (of finite rank), as it generally fails to commute with base change, there is (at least) one situation where it has some interest beyond the smooth case: group schemes (not nec. smooth). For finite flat comm. group schemes is this useful (cf. papers of Fontaine), and in general get Lie alg. structure even w/o smoothness (see sga3 or Appendix A.7 of "Pseudo-reductive groups"). Beware: without smoothness, the notion of "adjoint repn" on Lie algebra is somewhat delicate. $\endgroup$
    – BCnrd
    Apr 16, 2010 at 15:52

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.