Skip to main content

Timeline for Descent of Morphisms of Sheaves

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

11 events
when toggle format what by license comment
May 27, 2012 at 21:01 comment added cheyne My notation was correct, my statement had a major typo in it: I meant to go from Sh(Y) to Sh(W).
May 27, 2012 at 20:59 history edited cheyne CC BY-SA 3.0
edited body
May 10, 2012 at 20:07 vote accept cheyne
May 10, 2012 at 20:00 comment added Zhen Lin @Cheyne: Your notation is bad. The functor from $\textbf{Sh}(W)$ to $\textbf{Sh}(Z)$ should be denoted $h_*$, etc. The notation $h^{-1}$ (or $h^*$) is reserved for the one going in the opposite direction. And it is true that this "inverse image" functor does not compose strictly: $h^{-1} g^{-1} \ne (g \circ h)^{-1}$. There is, however, a natural isomorphism.
May 10, 2012 at 13:46 answer added Moshe timeline score: 3
May 10, 2012 at 13:05 history edited cheyne CC BY-SA 3.0
Reformulated questions, and more clearly defined my terms in the beginning.
May 10, 2012 at 12:53 comment added cheyne @David Above is the "new" definition for a presheaf, which is all I am concerned about at the moment. I will be more clear now. @Martin: Turns out the book is using all of this exposition to define a stack in this context, hence why I am unfamiliar with it up to this point.
May 9, 2012 at 23:42 comment added David Carchedi If you want anyone to attempt to answer this question, I suggest you say what this "new" definition of a sheaf is.
May 9, 2012 at 22:38 comment added cheyne No, to be honest, I am really trying to do this all without talking about stacks (or schemes, etc). The goal is to define these descent properties in a "hands-on" way so that I can understand the definition of a "gerbe" in a "hands-on" way.
May 9, 2012 at 21:21 comment added Martin Brandenburg First; are you aware of the notions of pseudo-functors and stacks?
May 9, 2012 at 21:12 history asked cheyne CC BY-SA 3.0