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

Let $A=k[[x,y]]$, with say $k=\mathbb{C}$ and $X = \operatorname{Spec}(A)$. Let $B$ denote a free $A$-algebra of rank $e^2$; actually, we have $B=A[u,v]$ with $u^e=x$, $v^e=y$ and $uv = \xi_e vu$, where $\xi_e$ is an $e$-th root of unity. Now we have $M_n(B)$ and the subalgebra $D$, where entries under the diagonal are in $uB$ and otherwise in $B$.

This gives us an exact sequence of noncommutative groups, where $i: \lbrace x=0 \rbrace \hookrightarrow X$: $$ 1\rightarrow D^{\times} \rightarrow Gl_n(B) \rightarrow i_{\ast}F \rightarrow 1 \, .$$ Why is this an exact sequence of sheaves in the Zariski topology on $X$? That is: why can i look at the induced exact sequence in Zariski cohomology?

This is stated on page 3 of http://www.math.lsa.umich.edu/courses/711/ordpages60-85.ps, around the $3\times 3$ diagram. Or do we need the whole diagram to see this?

I mean even in the simple example $1\rightarrow \mu_n \rightarrow \mathbb{G}_m \rightarrow \mathbb{G}_m \rightarrow 1$, where $\mathbb{G}_m \rightarrow \mathbb{G}_m$ is $x \mapsto x^n$, this sequence is not exact when we use the Zariski topology.

If it is easier, one can replace $B$ with $A$ and $uB$ with $xA$. The goal is to see that $H^1(U,D^{\times})=0$, i.e. every fractional reflexive left $D$-ideal is free. Here $U = X\backslash \lbrace \mathfrak{m} \rbrace$. Maybe there is an easier way to see this?

share|improve this question
1  
$D^\times$-torsors over some $X$-scheme $Y$ correspond to locally free (formally local in the flat topology) $D_Y$-modules of rank $1$. Such modules are locally free already in the Zeriski topology. Now, the obstruction to lifting a section of $i_\ast F$ is such a torsor and hence the section is liftable Zariski-locally. –  Torsten Ekedahl Jul 7 '11 at 16:57
    
I'm not so well-read in the area of torsors: Why is the obstruction to lifting a section Zariski-locally such a torsor (and in what topology)? And why correspond such torsors to locally free modules of rank 1? Since X is local and the modules are locally free, there is in fact only the trivial $D$-module, so there is no obstruction. Or is this fact not needed? Maybe you know a good book or some literature, where i can just read and learn that by myself. –  TonyS Jul 7 '11 at 17:59

1 Answer 1

up vote 3 down vote accepted

Let me elaborate on Torstens comment.

The map $GL_n(B) \to i_*F$ in your example is an fppf $D^\times$-torsor over $i_*F$, a fact which can be checked easily directly from the definition of torsor which you can find in any of the referenced texts. A priori it is a torsor for the fppf topology, but it can be shown that any $D^\times$-torsor for the fppf topology is also a torsor for the Zariski-topology.

There are only a few groups with this property. They were studied by Serre and Grothendieck [GS58] who classified all such groups over algebraically closed fields. They called them "special groups" (probably because of the joy of saying things like: "the general linear group is special" or better still: "the special orthogonal group is not special"). If I recall correctly, the complete list is $SL_n$, $Sp_{2n}$, all connected affine solvable groups and extensions thereof (in particular, $GL_n$ is special). Your group is defined over a more general base, so the result doesn't apply directly. However, specialness for $D^\times$ can be proven with exactly the same methods as for instance for $GL_n$.

This seems to be a folklore result, and I don't know of any reference for a proof (although it is mentioned for instance in [Joy07, Definition 2.1]), but the idea is as follows. The key is to use flat descent for quasi-coherent sheaves. The group $D^\times$ is the automorphism group for $D$ viewed as a module over itself. Given any module $M$ which is fppf-locally isomorphic to $D$, which is the same as locally free of rank 1 by flat descent, you get a corresponding $D^\times$-torsor by taking the sheaf of $D$-module isomorphisms $Isom(M, D)$. Note that this sheaf has a natural action on the right by $Aut(D) \simeq D^\times$. This establishes a one-to-one correspondance between isomorphism classes of locally free $D$-modules of rank 1 and isomorphism classes of torsors [Gir70 III 2.5]. Since any locally free $D$-module allows a Zariski-trivialisation, so does any $D^\times$-torsor.

[GS58] Séminaire C. Chevalley; 2e année: 1958. Anneaux de Chow et applications

[Gir70] J. Giraud, Cohomologie non abélienne

[Vis05] Fantechi et al. FGA explained, Part 1

[Mil80] Milne, Étale cohomology

[Joy07] D. Joyce, Motivic invariants of Artin stacks and 'stack functions'. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/math.AG/0509722

share|improve this answer
    
Oh, thanks a lot. That is very helpful. Just to clarify: The map $Gl_n(B) \rightarrow i_{\*}F$ is a torsor in the Zarski-topology, that's why the sequence i'm interested in is exact in the Zariksi-topology? Is was confused because of the word obstruction. I thought this word implied that some group has to vanish for this to be true. –  TonyS Jul 8 '11 at 10:48
    
Yes it is. And by definition this just means that it is a pseudo-torsor which is an epimorphism as a morphism of sheaves in the Zariski-topology. That is, it has a section Zariski locally. –  Daniel Bergh Jul 8 '11 at 15:04
    
Okay. Thanks for your help. Now i have enough to read for the weekend :-). –  TonyS Jul 8 '11 at 16:06

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.