MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The following lemma in commutative algebra is important for the foundations of algebraic geometry:

If $A$ is a commutative ring, $U \subseteq A$ is a finite subset generating the unit ideal, then for every $A$-module $M$ the sequence $M \to \prod_{u \in U} M_u \rightrightarrows \prod_{u,v \in U} M_{u \cdot v}$ is an equalizer.

Namely it implies $M \cong \Gamma(\mathrm{Spec}(A),\widetilde{M})$. The usual proofs I know of are fiddly computations with fractions (e.g. Theorem 1.3.7 in EGA I, or Theorem 2.33 in Görtz-Wedhorn). I have found two more conceptual proofs on my own (which actually work in a more general setting), which probably are not new at all. Therefore I would like to ask if they appear in the literature. Any comments are appreciated.

Both proofs use that $M_u$ is the colimit of the sequence $M \xrightarrow{u} M \xrightarrow{u} \dotsc$.

A. First observe that if $M_w=0$ for all $w \in U$, then $M=0$ (if $m \in M$, then $w^k m = 0$ for some $k$, hence $m=0$ since the $w^k$ generate the unit ideal). By exactness of localizations, it suffices to prove that each $M_w \to \prod_{u \in U} M_{uw} \rightrightarrows \prod_{u,v \in U} M_{uvw}$ is an equalizer. But in fact it is a split equalizer via the maps $\mathrm{pr}_w : \prod_{u \in U} M_{uw} \to M_w$ and $(\mathrm{pr}_{u,w})_u : \prod_{u,v} M_{uvw} \to \prod_{u} M_{uw}$. $\square$

B. Consider the category $I$ with objects $U \sqcup U^2$ and morphisms $u \to (u,v) \leftarrow v$. Define a diagram $D : I \times \mathbb{N} \to \mathsf{Mod}(A)$ as follows: It is constant $M$ on objects, and on morphisms $D(u,k \to k+1)=(u : M \to M)$, $D(u \to (u,v),k) = (v^k : M \to M)$ (similarily with $v \to (u,v)$). Now we use that finite limits commute with filtered colimits (Mac Lane, IX.2). $\mathrm{lim}_{i \in I} \mathrm{colim}_{k \in \mathbb{N}} D(u,v)$ is the equalizer of the two maps $\prod_{u \in U} M_u \rightrightarrows \prod_{u,v \in U} M_{uv}$, whereas $\mathrm{colim}_{k \in \mathbb{N}} \mathrm{lim}_{i \in I} D(u,v)$ is the colimit of the modules $M[k] := \{a \in M^U : u^k a(v) = v^k a(u)\}$. The diagonal is an isomorphism $M \cong M[0]$ and the composite $M \to M[k]$ is given by $m \mapsto (u^k m)_u$, which is injective, but also surjective: If $a \in M[k]$, choose $\lambda \in A^U$ with $\sum_u \lambda(u) u^k=1$, then $a(v)=\sum_u \lambda(u) u^k a(v) = \sum_u \lambda(u) v^k a(u)$ shows that $\sum_u \lambda(u) a(u)$ is a preimage. Hence the colimit is just $M$. $\square$

share|cite|improve this question
3  
Just a comment: your first proof is an unwinding of the simple proof "apply faithfully flat descent to the map A --> \prod_{u\in U} A_u". – Dustin Clausen Jan 26 '13 at 19:32
    
@Dustin: You are right, this is just the usual proof that faithfully flat maps are descent. I wonder if this has been observed in this context. – Martin Brandenburg Jan 26 '13 at 19:49
    
@Martin: I heard this argument via descent over a decade ago, and had the impression that it was folklore for quite some time. – user30379 Jan 26 '13 at 21:32
    
More simply, isn't this a special case of the fact that the sheafified Cech complex is exact ? (Hartshorne, III, 4, Lemma 4.2, p. 220) – Damian Rössler Jan 28 '13 at 10:08
    
@Damian: Yes, and this can be generalized to arbitrary Grothendieck topologies. This is actually the most general setting for the method of A. – Martin Brandenburg Jan 28 '13 at 11:27

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.