3
$\begingroup$

What is the least restrictive finiteness assumptions guaranteeing that for a formally smooth morphism of schemes $f:X\rightarrow Y$, the sheaf of relative differentials $\Omega _{X/Y}$ would be locally free? What is the least restrictive finiteness assumptions under which one can give a relatively easy/short proof of this fact? What changes (if anything) in the answers to these questions if we assume $X$ and $Y$ to be affine and test formal smoothness only against affine schemes?

I'm asking these questions for two reasons:

(1) I can not read french, nor do I have a copy of EGA $0_\text{IV}$, and:

(2) About 50 years have passed since the writing of EGA $0_\text{IV}$ and I'm sure that some results have been generalized and easier proofs have been found.

Anything (especially readable texts) on this matter would be great.

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ One can read EGA without being able to read a French menu or book for French 3-year-olds ("math French" requires no knowledge of French grammar or spelling and almost no vocabulary if one knows English). Without finiteness hypotheses on $f$, a more apt property than "locally free" is "projective on an affine open cover" (see 3.1.4(3) in Raynaud-Gruson for deep results on this notion), which holds for $\Omega^1_{X/Y}$ for formally smooth $f$ by EGA 0$_{\rm{IV}}$ 20.4.9 with discrete topologies (whose proof is very easy!): math.harvard.edu/~gaitsgde/Schemes_2009/EGA-IVa.pdf $\endgroup$ – nfdc23 Aug 1 '17 at 3:34
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the digital copy of EGA which I didn't know the existence of! $\endgroup$ – Anonymous Coward Aug 1 '17 at 4:13
  • $\begingroup$ Regarding EGA $0_IV$ 20.4.9: the proof seems to rely on theorem 19.5.3, which in itself seems just as nontrivial. I will try to read this tomorrow. About finiteness: just to make sure I understand, from the above it follows that for a smooth morphism (i.e.: formally smooth + essentially finite type) $f:X\rightarrow Y$ with $Y$ Noetherian $\Omega _{X/Y}$ is locally free of finite rank? (because then $\Omega _{X/Y}$ will be coherent and projective on an affine open cover which since $X$ is Noetherian implies locally free?) $\endgroup$ – Anonymous Coward Aug 1 '17 at 4:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The real technical headaches in the proof of 19.5.3 have to do with the topological aspects when $(0)$ isn't an ideal of definition. I shouldn't have written "very easy", but for the discrete topology the proof of 19.5.3 is an ordinary long proof, not ultimately so overwhelming. For $Y$ noetherian and $f$ smooth, the fact that $\Omega^1_{X/Y}$ is a vector bundle can be proved without going through this: you can assume $Y$ is artin local with algebraically closed residue field, and then enough to prove completed local rings at closed points are power series rings, which really is not hard. $\endgroup$ – nfdc23 Aug 1 '17 at 4:45

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.