Skip to main content
added 8 characters in body
Source Link
Hanano
  • 217
  • 2

In the lecture “Motives and ring stacks” Peter Scholze begins by showingsaying that there are many ‘Weil-type’ cohomology theories for (separable and finite type) schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$ each of which can be realized as coherent cohomology of an associated ring stack defined over the coefficient ring $R$ of the cohomology theory. Examples he gives are Betti, de Rham and crytalline/prismatic. $\DeclareMathOperator{\Mot}{{Mot}}$

He then goes on to construct a presentable symmetrical monoidal $(\infty, 2)$-category $\Mot_{\mathbb{Z}}$ of motives for schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$. Category $\Mot_S$ of motives over any scheme $S$ can be construed as the category of modules over the motive of $S$ in the $(\infty, 2)$-category.

It is not yet clear to me what the relationship between the ring stacks “representing” the cohomology theories and these motives is. So my first question is:

  1. Given an appropriate cohomology theory $H(.,R)$ with coefficients in $R$, what is the precise relationship between $\Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and the ring stack, $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$, associated to $H(.,R)$? Can $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$ somehow be built from $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and $R$ (as an analytic stack?)

Furthermore,

  1. Can there be a ‘universal’ ring stack $\mathcal{H}_{/\mathbb{Z}}$ over $\mathbb{Z}$ from which the ring stacks for various cohomology theories can be constructed?

Also,

  1. If $Sp_H$ is the spectrum representing cohomology theory $H$ in the stable motivic homotopy category, how is $Sp_H$ related to the ring stack $\mathcal{H}$ associated to $H$, and to $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$?

Finally,

  1. DoesHow does this category of motives take us any closerstand in relation to Grothendieck’s dream of an abelianconjectural abelian category of motives than the other existing candidates? Does it give a good definition of the Tannakian motivic Galois group?

In the lecture “Motives and ring stacks” Peter Scholze begins by showing that there are many ‘Weil-type’ cohomology theories for (separable and finite type) schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$ each of which can be realized as coherent cohomology of an associated ring stack defined over the coefficient ring $R$ of the cohomology theory. Examples he gives are Betti, de Rham and crytalline/prismatic. $\DeclareMathOperator{\Mot}{{Mot}}$

He then goes on to construct a presentable symmetrical monoidal $(\infty, 2)$-category $\Mot_{\mathbb{Z}}$ of motives for schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$. Category $\Mot_S$ of motives over any scheme $S$ can be construed as the category of modules over the motive of $S$ in the $(\infty, 2)$-category.

It is not yet clear to me what the relationship between the ring stacks “representing” the cohomology theories and these motives is. So my first question is:

  1. Given an appropriate cohomology theory $H(.,R)$ with coefficients in $R$, what is the precise relationship between $\Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and the ring stack, $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$, associated to $H(.,R)$? Can $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$ somehow be built from $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and $R$ (as an analytic stack?)

Furthermore,

  1. Can there be a ‘universal’ ring stack $\mathcal{H}_{/\mathbb{Z}}$ over $\mathbb{Z}$ from which the ring stacks for various cohomology theories can be constructed?

Also,

  1. If $Sp_H$ is spectrum representing cohomology theory $H$ in the stable motivic homotopy category, how is $Sp_H$ related to the ring stack $\mathcal{H}$ associated to $H$?

Finally,

  1. Does this category of motives take us any closer to Grothendieck’s dream of an abelian category of motives than the other existing candidates? Does it give a good definition of the motivic Galois group?

In the lecture “Motives and ring stacks” Peter Scholze begins by saying that there are many ‘Weil-type’ cohomology theories for (separable and finite type) schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$ each of which can be realized as coherent cohomology of an associated ring stack defined over the coefficient ring $R$ of the cohomology theory. Examples he gives are Betti, de Rham and crytalline/prismatic. $\DeclareMathOperator{\Mot}{{Mot}}$

He then goes on to construct a presentable symmetrical monoidal $(\infty, 2)$-category $\Mot_{\mathbb{Z}}$ of motives for schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$. Category $\Mot_S$ of motives over any scheme $S$ can be construed as the category of modules over the motive of $S$ in the $(\infty, 2)$-category.

It is not yet clear to me what the relationship between the ring stacks “representing” the cohomology theories and these motives is. So my first question is:

  1. Given an appropriate cohomology theory $H(.,R)$ with coefficients in $R$, what is the precise relationship between $\Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and the ring stack, $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$, associated to $H(.,R)$? Can $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$ somehow be built from $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and $R$ (as an analytic stack?)

Furthermore,

  1. Can there be a ‘universal’ ring stack $\mathcal{H}_{/\mathbb{Z}}$ over $\mathbb{Z}$ from which the ring stacks for various cohomology theories can be constructed?

Also,

  1. If $Sp_H$ is the spectrum representing cohomology theory $H$ in the stable motivic homotopy category, how is $Sp_H$ related to the ring stack $\mathcal{H}$ associated to $H$, and to $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$?

Finally,

  1. How does this category of motives stand in relation to Grothendieck’s conjectural abelian category of motives? Does it give a good definition of the Tannakian motivic Galois group?
Minor Math Jaxing
Source Link
Daniele Tampieri
  • 6.4k
  • 7
  • 30
  • 45

In the lecture “Motives and ring stacks” Peter Scholze begins by showing that there are many ‘Weil-type’ cohomology theories for (separable and finite type) schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$ each of which can be realized as coherent cohomology of an associated ring stack defined over the coefficient ring $R$ of the cohomology theory. Examples he gives are Betti, de Rham and crytalline/prismatic. $\DeclareMathOperator{\Mot}{{Mot}}$

He then goes on to construct a presentable symmetrical monoidal $(\infty, 2)$-category $Mot_{\mathbb{Z}}$$\Mot_{\mathbb{Z}}$ of motives for schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$. Category $Mot_S$$\Mot_S$ of motives over any scheme $S$ can be construed as the category of modules over the motive of $S$ in the $(\infty, 2)$-category.

It is not yet clear to me what the relationship between the ring stacks “representing” the cohomology theories and these motives is. So my first question is:

(1) Given an appropriate cohomology theory $H(.,R)$ with coefficients in $R$, what is the precise relationship between $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and the ring stack, $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$, associated to $H(.,R)$? Can $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$ somehow be built from $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and $R$ (as an analytic stack?)

  1. Given an appropriate cohomology theory $H(.,R)$ with coefficients in $R$, what is the precise relationship between $\Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and the ring stack, $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$, associated to $H(.,R)$? Can $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$ somehow be built from $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and $R$ (as an analytic stack?)

Furthermore,

(2) Can there be a ‘universal’ ring stack $\mathcal{H}_{/\mathbb{Z}}$ over $\mathbb{Z}$ from which the ring stacks for various cohomology theories can be constructed?

  1. Can there be a ‘universal’ ring stack $\mathcal{H}_{/\mathbb{Z}}$ over $\mathbb{Z}$ from which the ring stacks for various cohomology theories can be constructed?

Also,

(3) If $Sp_H$ is spectrum representing cohomology theory $H$ in the stable motivic homotopy category, how is $Sp_H$ related to the ring stack $\mathcal{H}$ associated to $H$?

  1. If $Sp_H$ is spectrum representing cohomology theory $H$ in the stable motivic homotopy category, how is $Sp_H$ related to the ring stack $\mathcal{H}$ associated to $H$?

Finally,

(4) Does this category of motives take us any closer to Grothendieck’s dream of an abelian category of motives than the other existing candidates? Does it give a good definition of the motivic Galois group?

  1. Does this category of motives take us any closer to Grothendieck’s dream of an abelian category of motives than the other existing candidates? Does it give a good definition of the motivic Galois group?

In the lecture “Motives and ring stacks” Peter Scholze begins by showing that there are many ‘Weil-type’ cohomology theories for (separable and finite type) schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$ each of which can be realized as coherent cohomology of an associated ring stack defined over the coefficient ring $R$ of the cohomology theory. Examples he gives are Betti, de Rham and crytalline/prismatic.

He then goes on to construct a presentable symmetrical monoidal $(\infty, 2)$-category $Mot_{\mathbb{Z}}$ of motives for schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$. Category $Mot_S$ of motives over any scheme $S$ can be construed as the category of modules over the motive of $S$ in the $(\infty, 2)$-category.

It is not yet clear to me what the relationship between the ring stacks “representing” the cohomology theories and these motives is. So my first question is:

(1) Given an appropriate cohomology theory $H(.,R)$ with coefficients in $R$, what is the precise relationship between $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and the ring stack, $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$, associated to $H(.,R)$? Can $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$ somehow be built from $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and $R$ (as an analytic stack?)

Furthermore,

(2) Can there be a ‘universal’ ring stack $\mathcal{H}_{/\mathbb{Z}}$ over $\mathbb{Z}$ from which the ring stacks for various cohomology theories can be constructed?

Also,

(3) If $Sp_H$ is spectrum representing cohomology theory $H$ in the stable motivic homotopy category, how is $Sp_H$ related to the ring stack $\mathcal{H}$ associated to $H$?

Finally,

(4) Does this category of motives take us any closer to Grothendieck’s dream of an abelian category of motives than the other existing candidates? Does it give a good definition of the motivic Galois group?

In the lecture “Motives and ring stacks” Peter Scholze begins by showing that there are many ‘Weil-type’ cohomology theories for (separable and finite type) schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$ each of which can be realized as coherent cohomology of an associated ring stack defined over the coefficient ring $R$ of the cohomology theory. Examples he gives are Betti, de Rham and crytalline/prismatic. $\DeclareMathOperator{\Mot}{{Mot}}$

He then goes on to construct a presentable symmetrical monoidal $(\infty, 2)$-category $\Mot_{\mathbb{Z}}$ of motives for schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$. Category $\Mot_S$ of motives over any scheme $S$ can be construed as the category of modules over the motive of $S$ in the $(\infty, 2)$-category.

It is not yet clear to me what the relationship between the ring stacks “representing” the cohomology theories and these motives is. So my first question is:

  1. Given an appropriate cohomology theory $H(.,R)$ with coefficients in $R$, what is the precise relationship between $\Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and the ring stack, $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$, associated to $H(.,R)$? Can $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$ somehow be built from $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and $R$ (as an analytic stack?)

Furthermore,

  1. Can there be a ‘universal’ ring stack $\mathcal{H}_{/\mathbb{Z}}$ over $\mathbb{Z}$ from which the ring stacks for various cohomology theories can be constructed?

Also,

  1. If $Sp_H$ is spectrum representing cohomology theory $H$ in the stable motivic homotopy category, how is $Sp_H$ related to the ring stack $\mathcal{H}$ associated to $H$?

Finally,

  1. Does this category of motives take us any closer to Grothendieck’s dream of an abelian category of motives than the other existing candidates? Does it give a good definition of the motivic Galois group?
Source Link
Hanano
  • 217
  • 2

Motives and ring stacks

In the lecture “Motives and ring stacks” Peter Scholze begins by showing that there are many ‘Weil-type’ cohomology theories for (separable and finite type) schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$ each of which can be realized as coherent cohomology of an associated ring stack defined over the coefficient ring $R$ of the cohomology theory. Examples he gives are Betti, de Rham and crytalline/prismatic.

He then goes on to construct a presentable symmetrical monoidal $(\infty, 2)$-category $Mot_{\mathbb{Z}}$ of motives for schemes over $\mathbb{Z}$. Category $Mot_S$ of motives over any scheme $S$ can be construed as the category of modules over the motive of $S$ in the $(\infty, 2)$-category.

It is not yet clear to me what the relationship between the ring stacks “representing” the cohomology theories and these motives is. So my first question is:

(1) Given an appropriate cohomology theory $H(.,R)$ with coefficients in $R$, what is the precise relationship between $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and the ring stack, $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$, associated to $H(.,R)$? Can $\mathcal{H}_{/R}$ somehow be built from $Mot_\mathbb{Z}$ and $R$ (as an analytic stack?)

Furthermore,

(2) Can there be a ‘universal’ ring stack $\mathcal{H}_{/\mathbb{Z}}$ over $\mathbb{Z}$ from which the ring stacks for various cohomology theories can be constructed?

Also,

(3) If $Sp_H$ is spectrum representing cohomology theory $H$ in the stable motivic homotopy category, how is $Sp_H$ related to the ring stack $\mathcal{H}$ associated to $H$?

Finally,

(4) Does this category of motives take us any closer to Grothendieck’s dream of an abelian category of motives than the other existing candidates? Does it give a good definition of the motivic Galois group?