Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

$\underline{Background}$ : Suppose $\tau$ is a preadditive category and $R$ a ring. Then one may form a new preadditive category $\tau \otimes R$ in the following way:

$\tau \otimes R$ has the same objects as $\tau$ and for objects $A$ and $B$, set $\tau \otimes R(A,B) := \tau(A,B)\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}} R$. Composition is given by $\tau(A,B)\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}} R\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\tau(B,C)\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}} R \cong \tau(A,B)\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\tau(B,C)\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}R\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}R \rightarrow \tau(A,C) \otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}R$, where the last arrow is given by the composition in $\tau$ and multiplication in $R$.

$\tau \otimes R$ is additve if $\tau$ is additive.

$\underline{Question}$ : Suppose $\tau$ is triangulated, is there a (canonical) structure of a triangulated category for $\tau \otimes R$?

Actually, I only need the case $R := \mathbb{Z}[\frac{1}{n}, \theta] \subset \mathbb{C}$, where $\theta$ is a primitive root of unity of order $n$ for some $n \in \mathbb{N}$, but I would also be interested in a general statement/counterexample to the general case.

Thank you for reading.

share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers 2

up vote 8 down vote accepted

I would imagine it is false in general that given a triangulated category $T$ the category $T\otimes R$ is also triangulated.

The following is a concrete counterexample. Consider $D^b(\mathbb{Z})$ and let $T = D^b(\mathbb{Z})\otimes \mathbb{Z}[x]$. In order for $T$ to be triangulated the morphism $\mathbb{Z} \stackrel{x}{\to} \mathbb{Z}$ would need to be able to be completed to a distinguished triangle $$\mathbb{Z}\stackrel{x}{\to}\mathbb{Z}\to C_x \to \Sigma\mathbb{Z} $$ in $T$. Suppose that such a triangle existed and consider the exact sequence obtained by application of $Hom_T(\mathbb{Z},-)$ $$0 \to Hom_T(\mathbb{Z}, \Sigma^{-1}C_x) \to \mathbb{Z}[x] \stackrel{x}{\to} \mathbb{Z}[x] \to Hom_T(\mathbb{Z}, C_x) \to 0 $$ As multiplication by $x$ has no kernel we have $$Hom_T(\mathbb{Z}, \Sigma^{-1}C_x) = 0$$ and the object $C_x$ would have to satisfy $$\mathbb{Z} \cong Hom_T(\mathbb{Z},C_x) = Hom_{D^b(\mathbb{Z})}(\mathbb{Z}, C_x)\otimes_\mathbb{Z} \mathbb{Z}[x] $$ But decomposing $C_x$ as a sum of suspensions of free groups and torsion groups this is clearly not possible.

One situation in which something like what you ask for works is the following: let $(T,\square,\mathbf{1})$ be a tensor triangulated category (that is we have a symmetric monoidal structure on $T$ which is exact in each variable). Given a multiplicative subset of even elements $S$ of $End^*(\mathbf{1})$ one can localize the hom-sets of $T$ at $S$. This can even be realised as a Verdier quotient by a certain subcategory. This is shown in Balmer's "Spectra, spectra, spectra - Tensor triangular spectra versus Zariski spectra of endomorphism rings" section 3.

share|improve this answer
    
This is a neat counterexample, thanks. The only thing I do not understand is why $C_x$ is decomposable in a free and a torsion part. But one could also argue that the assumption that T is triangulated leads to the contradiction that Z decomposes into a nontrivial direct sum of abelian groups. The situation you mention in the end handles Z[1/n]. I think this even works without the assumption that T is tensor triangulated - the morphisms which become isomorphisms after multiplication with some power of n form a system which arises from a cohomological functor (Weibel, 10.4) –  Manuel Koehler Jun 2 '10 at 10:47
    
I should have made it clear that by $D^b(\mathbb{Z})$ I meant the bounded derived category of finitely generated abelian groups. So in fact one can split $C_x$ as a finite sum of shifts of $\mathbb{Z}$ and $\mathbb{Z}/p^n\mathbb{Z}$ for various primes. This follows from the structure theorem for finitely generated abelian groups together with the fact that $\mathbb{Z}$ has global dimension 1 which can be used to show that complexes are quasi-isomorphic to the direct sum of their cohomology groups. –  Greg Stevenson Jun 2 '10 at 23:37
add comment

It seems unreasonable to expect tensoring the morphisms in a triangulated category by a ring to be a meaningful operation - after all these morphisms are typically cohomology groups of natural complexes, and we know there are universal-coefficient-theorem type corrections to tensoring cohomology with a ring as opposed to the more natural operation of tensoring a complex.

On the other hand, if we enrich our triangulated categories everything works fine. For example on the level of (pretriangulated) differential graded categories or $A_\infty$ categories, or if you prefer, stable $\infty$-categories, there's a perfectly nice operation of tensor product by a ring - in fact one can tensor by another such category (generalizing the case you're asking about, which is tensoring with R-mod). Even more, there's a structure of symmetric monoidal $\infty$-category on such categories (developed in Lurie's Derived Algebraic Geometry series (an exposition and references can be found eg here).

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks for the reference, I will look into that. –  Manuel Koehler Jun 2 '10 at 10:49
1  
Manuel Koehler's example is flat, so he might not need to derive it. Of course, one still need to add cones of new morphisms, as in Greg Stevenson's example. –  Ben Wieland Jun 2 '10 at 17:38
    
Fair enough, I can certainly believe in some contexts one can get away with triangulated constructions, but if it doesn't come easily it seems like an unnatural thing to try to push through. –  David Ben-Zvi Jun 2 '10 at 23:35
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.