Skip to main content
edited tags
Link
YCor
  • 63.9k
  • 5
  • 187
  • 285
added 47 characters in body
Source Link
Pulcinella
  • 5.7k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 55

Let $f:X\to Y$ be a representable map of finite type (or is finite dimensional enough?) Artin stacks, whose fibres (which are schemes) have dimension at most $n$. Then is it true that $R^qf_*\mathbf{Q}_\ell=0$ for all $q\gg 0$?

Note: by taking atlases, I think it is sufficient to let $X,Y$ be schemes.


Edit: Will Sawin pointed out that the question as stated was obviously false, I've edited it to remove that false statement.

Let $f:X\to Y$ be a representable map of Artin stacks, whose fibres (which are schemes) have dimension at most $n$. Then is it true that $R^qf_*\mathbf{Q}_\ell=0$ for all $q\gg 0$?

Note: by taking atlases, I think it is sufficient to let $X,Y$ be schemes.


Edit: Will Sawin pointed out that the question as stated was obviously false, I've edited it to remove that false statement.

Let $f:X\to Y$ be a representable map of finite type (or is finite dimensional enough?) Artin stacks, whose fibres (which are schemes) have dimension at most $n$. Then is it true that $R^qf_*\mathbf{Q}_\ell=0$ for all $q\gg 0$?

Note: by taking atlases, I think it is sufficient to let $X,Y$ be schemes.


Edit: Will Sawin pointed out that the question as stated was obviously false, I've edited it to remove that false statement.

deleted 482 characters in body
Source Link
Pulcinella
  • 5.7k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 55

Let $f:X\to Y$ be a representable map of Artin stacks, whose fibres (which are schemes) have dimension at most $n$. Then is it true that $R^qf_*\mathbf{Q}_\ell=0$ for all $q\gg 0$?

Note: by taking atlases, I think the we can justit is sufficient to let $X,Y$ be schemes.

Of course the natural thing is to apply base change to $\require{AMScd}$ \begin{CD} F @> \overline{f} >> \text{pt}\\ @V V \overline{i}V @VV i V\\ X @> f> > Y \end{CD} but that gives $i^!f_*\mathbf{Q}_\ell=\overline{f}_*\overline{i}^!\mathbf{Q}_\ell$, which is not quite right. At least to conclude we would need to know that for all dimension $n$ schemes $F$, sheaves of the form $\overline{i}^!\mathbf{Q}_\ell$ have the degree of their cohomology bounded by $N(n)$.


EditEdit: Will Sawin pointed out that the question as stated was obviously false, I've edited it to remove that false statement.

Let $f:X\to Y$ be a representable map of Artin stacks, whose fibres (which are schemes) have dimension at most $n$. Then is it true that $R^qf_*\mathbf{Q}_\ell=0$ for all $q\gg 0$?

Note: by taking atlases, I think the we can just let $X,Y$ be schemes.

Of course the natural thing is to apply base change to $\require{AMScd}$ \begin{CD} F @> \overline{f} >> \text{pt}\\ @V V \overline{i}V @VV i V\\ X @> f> > Y \end{CD} but that gives $i^!f_*\mathbf{Q}_\ell=\overline{f}_*\overline{i}^!\mathbf{Q}_\ell$, which is not quite right. At least to conclude we would need to know that for all dimension $n$ schemes $F$, sheaves of the form $\overline{i}^!\mathbf{Q}_\ell$ have the degree of their cohomology bounded by $N(n)$.


Edit: Will Sawin pointed out that the question as stated was obviously false, I've edited it to remove that false statement.

Let $f:X\to Y$ be a representable map of Artin stacks, whose fibres (which are schemes) have dimension at most $n$. Then is it true that $R^qf_*\mathbf{Q}_\ell=0$ for all $q\gg 0$?

Note: by taking atlases, I think it is sufficient to let $X,Y$ be schemes.


Edit: Will Sawin pointed out that the question as stated was obviously false, I've edited it to remove that false statement.

deleted 31 characters in body; edited title
Source Link
Pulcinella
  • 5.7k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 55
Loading
deleted 31 characters in body; edited title
Source Link
Pulcinella
  • 5.7k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 55
Loading
Source Link
Pulcinella
  • 5.7k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 55
Loading