2

1

Suppose that we have a mixed motif $M$ with only two (subsequent) weights, and have a subobject for each weight factor. How we can control whether there exists a submotif of $M$ with these two factors? It seems that here the existence of a mixed Hodge substructure with the corresponding weight factors in the singular cohomology of $M$ is not sufficient, since the corresponding mixed motivic $Ext^1$ does not inject into its Hodge 'realization'. Is this correct? What happens here if the base field is a number field? Are there any examples here that are well understood (certainly, the matter is very conjectural)?

flag
Dear Mikhail, Could you explain in more detail what you mean by having "a subobject for each weight factor"? Based on the question in your second sentence, I guess you don't mean submotives. By the way, are you sure the $Ext^1$s don't inject? (The Hodge conjecture says something like the realization map induces an isomorphism on Hom's, and then perhaps general nonsense implies that you have an injection on $Ext^1$s? At least in the case of $Ext^1$ of the trivial motive by the $H^1$ of an abelian variety, the realization map sends the Mordell--Weil group into the $\mathbb C$ points of ... – Emerton Nov 17 2010 at 22:55
... the abelian variety, and this is an injection. Might the more general case be similar?) – Emerton Nov 17 2010 at 22:55
Sorry, it may be that what I suggested above about being an injection in general is nonsense; if so, ignore it. Hopefully I can get my thoughts straight and try to say something with more confidence (and more chance of being correct). – Emerton Nov 17 2010 at 23:02
If you assume that the Hodge realization is fully faithful and its image is stable by subojects, then the injectivity of $Ext^1_{MM(F)}(\mathbb{Q},M) \to Ext^1_{MHS}(\mathbb{Q}^H,M^H)$ for $M$ simple follows by the tannakian formalism. Indeed the assumption is equivalent to saying that you have a surjective map between the tannakian fundamental groups $MHS$ and $MM(F)$. – YBL Nov 17 2010 at 23:38
So you also have a surjection $Gr^W H_1(\mathfrak{u}_{MHS}) \to Gr^W H_1(\mathfrak{u}_{MM(F)})$ between abelianizations of their pro-unipotent radicals. And this induces the dual to the map between $Ext^1$'s as $\mathfrak{u}_{MM(F)} = \bigoplus_M Ext^1(\mathbb{Q},M)^\vee \otimes M$ where $M$ ranges over a class of representative of simple objects. – YBL Nov 17 2010 at 23:38

Your Answer

Get an OpenID
or

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.