Timeline for Subsheaves of Spec K, K a field
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dec 14, 2022 at 21:02 | comment | added | Nico | Really nice! :) | |
Dec 10, 2022 at 23:08 | history | edited | Zhen Lin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 345 characters in body
|
Dec 9, 2022 at 7:52 | history | edited | Zhen Lin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 24 characters in body
|
Dec 8, 2022 at 23:05 | history | edited | Zhen Lin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 162 characters in body
|
Dec 8, 2022 at 22:06 | comment | added | Zhen Lin | Oops. I was confused about what local rings in these topologies were. Let me fix that... | |
Dec 8, 2022 at 17:47 | vote | accept | Nico | ||
Dec 8, 2022 at 16:35 | comment | added | R. van Dobben de Bruyn | Sorry, isn't $\phi\colon\operatorname{Spec}A\to\operatorname{Spec}K$ itself an fpqc cover for any nonzero $K$-algebra $A$? Then $h_{\operatorname{Spec}\phi}\colon h_{\operatorname{Spec}A}\to h_{\operatorname{Spec}K}$ is surjective as sheaves. In the Zariski, étale, or fppf cases I agree with you: take $K\to L$ a field extension that is not an isomorphism, not étale, or not finitely presented, respectively. Then $K\to B_i$ cannot factor through $K\to L$ since this forces an injection $L\to B_i$, so if $K\to B_i$ is an isomorphism, étale, or finitely presented, the same goes for $K\to L$. | |
Dec 8, 2022 at 16:03 | history | edited | Zhen Lin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 22 characters in body
|
Dec 8, 2022 at 15:51 | history | answered | Zhen Lin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |