Skip to main content
added math.se link
Source Link
András Bátkai
  • 4.7k
  • 6
  • 31
  • 54

I originally posted this on Maths SEposted this on Maths SE, but then realised that the question probably fits MO better, as my objective was to gain different perspectives regarding the matter.

  1. Why are $\delta$-functors between abelian categories $\mathfrak{A}$ and $\mathfrak{B}$ defined as a collection of (right) derived functors, and connecting morphisms $\delta^i: T^i(A'') \rightarrow T^{i+1}(A')$ (given an original short exact sequence $0 \rightarrow A' \rightarrow A \rightarrow A'' \rightarrow 0$ in $\mathfrak{A}$) $$(T^*, \delta^*) := \{(T^i, \delta^i)\}_{i \geq 0}$$ Particularly, in the context of algebraic geometry, what about this definition is geometric ?
  2. What is a geometric interpretation of the universality of $\delta$-functors ?
  3. What is a geometric interpretation of effaceable $\delta$-functors, and by extension, theorem 2.2.2 in Grothendieck's Tohoku paper stating that effaceability implies universality ?

I originally posted this on Maths SE, but then realised that the question probably fits MO better, as my objective was to gain different perspectives regarding the matter.

  1. Why are $\delta$-functors between abelian categories $\mathfrak{A}$ and $\mathfrak{B}$ defined as a collection of (right) derived functors, and connecting morphisms $\delta^i: T^i(A'') \rightarrow T^{i+1}(A')$ (given an original short exact sequence $0 \rightarrow A' \rightarrow A \rightarrow A'' \rightarrow 0$ in $\mathfrak{A}$) $$(T^*, \delta^*) := \{(T^i, \delta^i)\}_{i \geq 0}$$ Particularly, in the context of algebraic geometry, what about this definition is geometric ?
  2. What is a geometric interpretation of the universality of $\delta$-functors ?
  3. What is a geometric interpretation of effaceable $\delta$-functors, and by extension, theorem 2.2.2 in Grothendieck's Tohoku paper stating that effaceability implies universality ?

I originally posted this on Maths SE, but then realised that the question probably fits MO better, as my objective was to gain different perspectives regarding the matter.

  1. Why are $\delta$-functors between abelian categories $\mathfrak{A}$ and $\mathfrak{B}$ defined as a collection of (right) derived functors, and connecting morphisms $\delta^i: T^i(A'') \rightarrow T^{i+1}(A')$ (given an original short exact sequence $0 \rightarrow A' \rightarrow A \rightarrow A'' \rightarrow 0$ in $\mathfrak{A}$) $$(T^*, \delta^*) := \{(T^i, \delta^i)\}_{i \geq 0}$$ Particularly, in the context of algebraic geometry, what about this definition is geometric ?
  2. What is a geometric interpretation of the universality of $\delta$-functors ?
  3. What is a geometric interpretation of effaceable $\delta$-functors, and by extension, theorem 2.2.2 in Grothendieck's Tohoku paper stating that effaceability implies universality ?
Source Link
Dat Minh Ha
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 8
  • 21

Motivation/intuition behind the definition of delta-functors and related concepts

I originally posted this on Maths SE, but then realised that the question probably fits MO better, as my objective was to gain different perspectives regarding the matter.

  1. Why are $\delta$-functors between abelian categories $\mathfrak{A}$ and $\mathfrak{B}$ defined as a collection of (right) derived functors, and connecting morphisms $\delta^i: T^i(A'') \rightarrow T^{i+1}(A')$ (given an original short exact sequence $0 \rightarrow A' \rightarrow A \rightarrow A'' \rightarrow 0$ in $\mathfrak{A}$) $$(T^*, \delta^*) := \{(T^i, \delta^i)\}_{i \geq 0}$$ Particularly, in the context of algebraic geometry, what about this definition is geometric ?
  2. What is a geometric interpretation of the universality of $\delta$-functors ?
  3. What is a geometric interpretation of effaceable $\delta$-functors, and by extension, theorem 2.2.2 in Grothendieck's Tohoku paper stating that effaceability implies universality ?