4
$\begingroup$

Localization of commutative rings is a left exact left adjoint, so it behaves nicely with plenty of things. Local-to-global principles are also abundant in commutative algebra, and I thought some of them might actually be reflecting limits in disguise - that some types of limits in localizations must arise from limits in the original ring. Looking at localization as the tensor product of a symmetric monoidal category does not tell me much.

I did not give this much thought and I don't know much commutative algebra, so I hope it's not too stupid/basic to ask here. What inspired it was Nagata's lemma which says an element is prime iff it's either a unit or a prime in some localization. (Thought along the line of prime ideals as regular epis into integral domains.)

So, what kind of (co)limits does localization of commutative rings reflect?

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You can't really expect a single localisation functor to reflect anything. For instance, inverting $0$ is an example of localisation. $\endgroup$
    – Zhen Lin
    Commented Dec 9, 2015 at 14:30
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand what functor you're naming with the phrase "localization of commutative rings." Do you mean the localization functor on modules or what? $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 9, 2015 at 18:11

1 Answer 1

8
$\begingroup$

One of the fundamental results in commutative algebra is the following:

Let $M$ be an $A$-module. Then $M = 0$ if and only if $M_\mathfrak{m} = 0$ for all maximal ideals $\mathfrak{m} \triangleleft A$.

You can think of it as a local-to-global principle if you like. Regardless, it follows that:

The localisation functor $\mathbf{Mod} (A) \to \prod_{\mathfrak{m} \in \operatorname{MaxSpec} A} \mathbf{Mod} (A_\mathfrak{m})$ is conservative/faithful.

In particular, $\mathbf{Mod} (A) \to \prod_{\mathfrak{m} \in \operatorname{MaxSpec} A} \mathbf{Mod} (A_\mathfrak{m})$ reflects finite limits and arbitrary colimits. This should be reminiscent of the fact in sheaf theory that the stalks functor $\mathbf{Sh} (X) \to \prod_{x \in X} \mathbf{Set}$ reflects finite limits and arbitrary colimits.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Do you know anywhere I could read about the fact that the stalk functor reflects finite limits? I've been thinking about it and can't see why it's true (or what's special about the finite case). $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 18, 2020 at 6:44
  • $\begingroup$ The domain category has finite limits, and the functor preserves finite limits and is conservative, so it also reflects finite limits. $\endgroup$
    – Zhen Lin
    Commented Aug 18, 2020 at 6:51
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, that helps! $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 18, 2020 at 7:18

You must log in to answer this question.

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