4
$\begingroup$

Let $X$ be a normal scheme with quotient singularities and $Y\subset X$ its singular locus. The first order deformations of $X$ are parametrized by $\mathcal{E}xt^{1}(\Omega_{X},\mathcal{O}_{X})$. This sheaf is supported on $Y$.

I would like to relate $\mathcal{E}xt^{1}(\Omega_{X},\mathcal{O}_{X})$ and $\mathcal{E}xt^{1}(\Omega_{Y},\mathcal{O}_{Y})$ (here I am considering first order deformations of $Y$ as an abstract scheme not its embedded deformations as a subscheme of $X$). To do this I am thinking to consider the conormal exact sequence $$\mathcal{I}_{Y}/\mathcal{I}_{Y}^{2}\rightarrow \Omega_{X|Y}\rightarrow\Omega_{Y}\mapsto 0$$ Applying $\mathcal{H}om(-,\mathcal{O}_{Y})$ we get $$0\mapsto \mathcal{H}om(\Omega_{Y},\mathcal{O}_{Y})\rightarrow \mathcal{H}om(\Omega_{X|Y},\mathcal{O}_{Y})\rightarrow \mathcal{H}om(\mathcal{I}_{Y}/\mathcal{I}_{Y}^{2},\mathcal{O}_{Y})\rightarrow \mathcal{E}xt^{1}(\Omega_{Y},\mathcal{O}_{Y})\rightarrow \mathcal{E}xt^{1}(\Omega_{X|Y},\mathcal{O}_{Y})\rightarrow \mathcal{E}xt^{1}(\mathcal{I}_{Y}/\mathcal{I}_{Y}^{2},\mathcal{O}_{Y})\rightarrow ....$$ Is there any reason why one should have $\mathcal{E}xt^{1}(\mathcal{I}_{Y}/\mathcal{I}_{Y}^{2},\mathcal{O}_{Y}) = 0$ or $\mathcal{H}om(\mathcal{I}_{Y}/\mathcal{I}_{Y}^{2},\mathcal{O}_{Y}) = 0$ ?

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ What scheme structure are you giving the singular locus? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 13, 2014 at 14:25
  • $\begingroup$ Its reduced induced structure as a subscheme of $X$. $\endgroup$
    – Puzzled
    Commented Jan 13, 2014 at 15:36
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, I would then say that you cannot expect that the $\mathcal{H}om(I_Y/I_Y^2, O_Y) = 0$. In fact, I think it's basically never zero (think about the generic point of $Y$). In terms of the $\mathcal{E}xt^1$, if $Y$ is Gorenstein, this might help as at least you could dualize the problem perhaps? But $X$ just having quotient singularities probably won't help you. Do you need general quotient singularities or do you have a particular variety in mind? Are there any examples worth trying (say even in a computer?) $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 13, 2014 at 16:53
  • $\begingroup$ I need quotient singularities coming from the action of a finite group on a smooth scheme. Thank yuo very much. $\endgroup$
    – Puzzled
    Commented Jan 18, 2014 at 14:53
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, what do you think the first interesting examples of such singularities might be for you? (ie, which ones have you already done). $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 18, 2014 at 21:00

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

Here is a partial answer.

Let $Y$ be a smooth variety over a field $k$ of characteristic zero. Let $G$ be a finite group acting on $Y$, and let $X = Y/G$ be the quotient. Assume that the set of points where the isotropy is not trivial is in codimension greater or equal than three, that is the singular locus of $X$ is in codimension greater or equal than three. Then $Ext^1(\omega_X,\mathcal{O}_X) = 0$, that is $X$ is rigid.

One can find this in:

  • M. Schlessinger, "Rigidity of quotient singularities", Inventiones mathematicae, 1971, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp. 17-26.

This could fail is $X$ is singular in codimension two. For instance, we may consider the a singular point of type $\frac{1}{6}(2,4)$. Then, étale locally, in a neighborhood of $p$ the surface $X$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{A}^{2}/\mu_{6}$ where the action is given by $$ \begin{array}{ccc} \mu_{6}\times\mathbb{A}^{2} & \longrightarrow & \mathbb{A}^{2}\\ (\epsilon,x_{1},x_{2}) & \longmapsto & (\epsilon^{2}x_{1},\epsilon^{4}x_{2}) \end{array} $$ The invariant polynomials with respect to this action are clearly $x_{1}^{3},x_{2}^{3},x_{1}x_{2}$. Therefore, étale locally, in a neighborhood of $p$ the surface $X$ is isomorphic to an étale neighborhood of singularity $$S = \{f(x,y,z) = z^{3}-xy = 0\}\subset\mathbb{A}^{3}.$$ Now, we have $$Ext^{1}(\Omega_{S},\mathcal{O}_{S})\cong K[x,y,z]/(f,\frac{\partial f}{\partial x},\frac{\partial f}{\partial y},\frac{\partial f}{\partial z}) = K[x,y,z]/(z^{3}-xy,-y,-x,3z^{2})\cong K[z]/(z^{2}).$$

Therefore $X$ is not rigid.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .