4
$\begingroup$

Let $k$ be an algebraically closed field of characteristic $p\geq 0$ and $\ell$ a prime different from $p$. For a connected scheme of finite type over $k$ with geometric point $x$, and a lisse $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}_{\ell}$-sheaf $F$ on $X$ one can compute the global sections as follows $$H^0(X,F)=F_x^{\pi_1(X,x)}$$ I don't know where a proof of this is written down, but it seems to me that it works like this: Consider $F$ as projective system $(F_n)$ of $\mathcal{O}_E/\mathbf{m}^n$-sheaves, for $E$ a finite extension of $\mathbb{Q}_{\ell}$, and $\mathbf{m}$ the maximal ideal of $\mathcal{O}_E$. Each $F_n$ corresponds to a étale covering $X_n$ of $X$, and $(F_n)_x$ is the set of geometric points of $X_n$ over $x$. Now the sections of $X_n\rightarrow X$ correspond to points in $(F_n)_x$ which are fixed by the $\pi_1(X,x)$-action. Passing to the limit proves the formula for $H^0$.

My question is: Does this also hold for $k$ not algebraically closed?

I've never seen it stated like this, but my argument doesn't seem to use the fact that $k=\bar{k}$.

I think it is true for smooth curves, because a smooth curve $X\neq \mathbb{P}^1$ over any field of characteristic $p\geq 0$ is even an "étale $K(\pi_1(X,x),1)$ space", i.e. $$H^n(X,\mathbb{Z}_{\ell})=H^n(\pi_1(X,x), \mathbb{Z}_\ell)$$ for all $n\geq 0$.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ You appear to be using the assumption that all the sheaves in your projective system trivialize over a finite etale cover. With this assumption, your argument is correct (without any hypotheses at all on $X$, I should imagine), essentially because you're considering lisse l-adic sheaves over the finite etale site, and the latter is equivalent to the site of finite $\pi_1(X,x)$-sets. $\endgroup$ Oct 11, 2011 at 14:07
  • $\begingroup$ Hi Keerthi, thanks for your comment. I don't understand where I use that all $F_n$ trivialize over a finite covering: By the definition of "lisse" each $F_n$ is represented by an étale covering, and $\pi_1(X,x)$ acts on the finite set $F_{n,x}$ for each $n$. $\endgroup$
    – Lars
    Oct 11, 2011 at 19:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Keerthi, I also don't understand your objection. Lars doesn't assume that there's a finite étale cover that trivializes all the sheaves in the projective system (he takes a different one for each sheaf). Lars, I think that your argument is valid for any connected scheme X. (I've seen that kind of result referred to as "a well-known fact" but I can't find a reference. Maybe it's considered too easy to be stated explicitely.) $\endgroup$
    – Alex
    Oct 11, 2011 at 22:36
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Alex! It seems that it's just unraveling of definitions, but I assumed that Deligne would have written it like this in Weil II if it was true. He explicitly writes the formula for $X\times_k \bar{k}$... $\endgroup$
    – Lars
    Oct 12, 2011 at 9:53
  • $\begingroup$ Well, he only needs the formula for $X\times_k\overline{k}$, and Deligne doesn't usually write what he doesn't need. $\endgroup$
    – Alex
    Oct 12, 2011 at 13:29

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.