bio  website  

location  New York, United States  
age  21  
visits  member for  1 year, 10 months 
seen  9 mins ago  
stats  profile views  35 
Senior at Columbia University, studying mathematics.
5h

comment 
BeilinsonBernstein localization: $\mathfrak{g}$ action on $G$equivariant sheaf
More generally, looking at "A proof of Jantzen conjectures" (section 1.8), BB mention that for equivariant $\mathcal{L}$ one obtains a lifting of the map $\alpha:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathcal{T}_X$ to $\alpha_\mathcal{L}:\mathfrak{g}\to\text{End}_\mathbb{C}\mathcal{L}$ such that $\alpha_\mathcal{L}(a)(fs)=f\alpha_\mathcal{L}(a)(s)+\alpha(a)(f)\cdot s$, for $f\in\mathcal{O}_X, s\in\mathcal{L}$. Is there a construction that BB are referring to that is not HTT's formula? Or how can we see that they agree? (Note that here $\mathcal{L}$ is only assumed to be quasicoherent, not necessarily locally free.) 
5h

comment 
BeilinsonBernstein localization: $\mathfrak{g}$ action on $G$equivariant sheaf
Sorry, I don't quite follow  in the algebraic case, we don't have an exponential map, right? So "calculus" doesn't apply? Instead, one looks at the expression $\varphi^{1}(\sigma^*(f\Phi(a)s))\varphi^{1}(\sigma^*(\Phi(a)(fs)))$. How does this simplify such that $a$ differentiates $f$? I'm also confused because $a$ is viewed as a vector field on $G$, not $X$. 
2d

comment 
BeilinsonBernstein localization: $\mathfrak{g}$ action on $G$equivariant sheaf
Thanks, I think I see how $\varphi$ captures these notions now. Actually, I was having trouble seeing that $\Phi(\mathfrak{g})\subset F^1\mathscr{D}(\mathcal{L})$... intuitively this is clear, due to how the action is defined. But how does one show that given $f\in\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X)$, we have $\Phi(a)(fs)f\Phi(a)s=gs$ for some $g\in\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X)$, without an explicit expression for, say, $\varphi^{1}$ from $\mathbb{C}[G]\otimes_\mathbb{C}\Gamma(X,\mathcal{L})$ to itself? 
2d

revised 
BeilinsonBernstein localization: $\mathfrak{g}$ action on $G$equivariant sheaf
added an edit and made the question clearer 
2d

comment 
BeilinsonBernstein localization: $\mathfrak{g}$ action on $G$equivariant sheaf
Sorry, is HTT just working with the vector bundle associated to $\mathcal{L}$? In that case, I understand what the pullbacks mean, but then it seems to me that then there should be a much more straightforward way of formulating the action, without mentioning $\varphi$. Does that make sense? If we stick with the sheaf language, I'm unsure about how to compute anything with this definition. 
2d

comment 
BeilinsonBernstein localization: $\mathfrak{g}$ action on $G$equivariant sheaf
Dumb question: how is $\sigma^*s$ defined, exactly? 
2d

comment 
BeilinsonBernstein localization: $\mathfrak{g}$ action on $G$equivariant sheaf
Just a typo  fixed, thanks. 
2d

awarded  Editor 
2d

revised 
BeilinsonBernstein localization: $\mathfrak{g}$ action on $G$equivariant sheaf
fixed inverse definition of equivariant structure; added 30 characters in body 
2d

asked  BeilinsonBernstein localization: $\mathfrak{g}$ action on $G$equivariant sheaf 
Mar 24 
comment 
Closed orbits of complete flags in $\mathbb{C}^n$
Thanks a bunch for the references  glad to see there's a nice way to do this in general. 
Mar 24 
awarded  Scholar 
Mar 24 
awarded  Supporter 
Mar 24 
accepted  Closed orbits of complete flags in $\mathbb{C}^n$ 
Mar 23 
awarded  Student 
Mar 23 
asked  Closed orbits of complete flags in $\mathbb{C}^n$ 
Aug 15 
awarded  Autobiographer 
Aug 4 
awarded  Informed 
Jul 28 
awarded  Enthusiast 