Skip to main content
Improved formatting, corrected some typos, corrected uncompiled LaTeX.
Source Link

For a topological space X$X$, the category of sheaves on X$X$ with its values in (Ab)$Ab$ will form an Abelian Category.

Q1: Is it difficult to prove this?

Q1: Is it difficult to prove this?

Next, for the short exact sequence 0 ---> F ---> G ---> H ---> 0$0 \to F \to G \to H \to 0$, its exactness is usually stated in terms of their stalks at each point x on X$x$ in $X$.

However, somebody told me that this is a ``theorem""theorem" rather than definition. Namely, once I know that the category of sheaves on X$X$ with values in (Ab)$Ab$ (we call this (Sh$Sh_X$)_X makes an Abelian category, automatically the notion of exact sequence exists.

Hence, it only turns out that the short exact sequence defined via the characteristic of (Sh)_X$Sh_X$ being Abelian category is equivalent to the exactness of the given short exact sequence after taking stalk at an arbitrary point x on X$x$ in $X$.

Q2. I cannot see at all what this will mean. Please explain more plainly.

Q2. I cannot see at all what this will mean. Please explain more plainly.

I heartily wish somebody's explanation. Sincerely, Pierre MATSUMI

For a topological space X, the category of sheaves on X with its values in (Ab) will form an Abelian Category.

Q1: Is it difficult to prove this?

Next, for the short exact sequence 0 ---> F ---> G ---> H ---> 0, its exactness is usually stated in terms of their stalks at each point x on X.

However, somebody told me that this is a ``theorem" rather than definition. Namely, once I know that the category of sheaves on X with values in (Ab) (we call this (Sh)_X makes an Abelian category, automatically the notion of exact sequence exists.

Hence, it only turns out that the short exact sequence defined via the characteristic of (Sh)_X being Abelian category is equivalent to the exactness of the given short exact sequence after taking stalk at an arbitrary point x on X.

Q2. I cannot see at all what this will mean. Please explain more plainly.

I heartily wish somebody's explanation. Sincerely, Pierre MATSUMI

For a topological space $X$, the category of sheaves on $X$ with its values in $Ab$ will form an Abelian Category.

Q1: Is it difficult to prove this?

Next, for the short exact sequence $0 \to F \to G \to H \to 0$, its exactness is usually stated in terms of their stalks at each point $x$ in $X$.

However, somebody told me that this is a "theorem" rather than definition. Namely, once I know that the category of sheaves on $X$ with values in $Ab$ (we call this $Sh_X$) makes an Abelian category, automatically the notion of exact sequence exists.

Hence, it only turns out that the short exact sequence defined via the characteristic of $Sh_X$ being Abelian category is equivalent to the exactness of the given short exact sequence after taking stalk at an arbitrary point $x$ in $X$.

Q2. I cannot see at all what this will mean. Please explain more plainly.

I heartily wish somebody's explanation.

Post Locked by CommunityBot
Post Unlocked by CommunityBot
Post Closed as "Not suitable for this site" by Fernando Muro, Steven Landsburg, Sasha, Benjamin Steinberg, Andrey Rekalo
Source Link

Category of sheaves on the topological space X

For a topological space X, the category of sheaves on X with its values in (Ab) will form an Abelian Category.

Q1: Is it difficult to prove this?

Next, for the short exact sequence 0 ---> F ---> G ---> H ---> 0, its exactness is usually stated in terms of their stalks at each point x on X.

However, somebody told me that this is a ``theorem" rather than definition. Namely, once I know that the category of sheaves on X with values in (Ab) (we call this (Sh)_X makes an Abelian category, automatically the notion of exact sequence exists.

Hence, it only turns out that the short exact sequence defined via the characteristic of (Sh)_X being Abelian category is equivalent to the exactness of the given short exact sequence after taking stalk at an arbitrary point x on X.

Q2. I cannot see at all what this will mean. Please explain more plainly.

I heartily wish somebody's explanation. Sincerely, Pierre MATSUMI