2
$\begingroup$

I am (still) working through the paper Singular semipositive metrics in non-Archimedean geometry by Sebastien Boucksom, Charles Favre and Mattias Jonsson (J. Algebraic Geom. 25 (2016), 77-139, doi:10.1090/jag/656, arXiv:1201.0187).

Here are some other questions i have: In subsection 2.5 they define a model function as a continous $\varphi$ on $X^{\text{an}}$ s.t. there is a vertical Cartier Divisor $D \in \text{Div}_{\mathbb{Q}}(\mathcal{X})$, where $\mathcal{X}$ is a model of $X^{\text{an}}$, with $\varphi_D = \log \vert \mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}}(D) \vert = \varphi$. The set of these functions is denoted by $\mathcal{D}(X) = \mathcal{D}(X) _{\mathbb{Q}}$. In Prop. 2.2 they then show, among other things, that $\mathcal{D}(X) _{\mathbb{Z}}$ is stable under max. and seperates points. (I am assuming in the definition of $\mathcal{D}(X) _{\mathbb{Z}}$ one just considers $D \in \text{Div}_{\mathbb{Z}}(\mathcal{X})$?)

Is it clear, that if $\mathcal{D}(X) _{\mathbb{Z}}$ seperates Points and is stable under max. (see Prop.2.2), that this is also true for $\mathcal{D}(X) _{\mathbb{Q}}$?

Is there an isomorphism from $\mathcal{D}(X) _{\mathbb{Q}}$ to $\mathcal{D}(X) _{\mathbb{Z}}\underset{\mathbb{Z}}{\otimes}\mathbb{Q}$?

Is it immediate that the $\mathbb{Q}$-VS $\mathcal{D}(X) _{\mathbb{Q}}$ fulfills the conditions of the Stone-Weierstraß Theorem(see Cor.2.3) and is thus dense in $C^0(X^{\text{an}})$? From my understanding one would require that $\mathbb{Q}$-VS $\mathcal{D}(X) _{\mathbb{Q}}$ is closed under multiplication with elements from $\mathbb{R}$?

Thanks a lot guys.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

As alluded to in the question, the space $\mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Z}}$ is indeed the space of model functions arising from integral divisors. Now, in order to deduce that $\mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Q}}$ separates points and is closed under max from the corresponding fact for $\mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Z}}$, you can proceed directly (or use the isomorphism with the tensor product later in the post): $\varphi \in \mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Z}}$ is contained in $\mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Q}}$, so the latter clearly separates points if the former does. If $\varphi_1,\varphi_2 \in \mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Q}}$, then there exists $m \in \mathbb{Z}$ such that $m\varphi_1, m\varphi_2 \in \mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Z}}$ and $m \max\{ \varphi_1,\varphi_2 \} \in \mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Z}}$ by hypothesis, so $$ \max\{ \varphi_1,\varphi_2 \} = \frac{1}{m} \left( m \max\{ \varphi_1,\varphi_2\}\right) \in \mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Q}}. $$

If you prefer, this can also be done by establishing that the natural map $\mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Z}} \otimes_{\mathbb{Z}} \mathbb{Q} \to \mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Q}}$ is an isomorphism. To do so, note that for any model $\mathcal{X}$ of $X$, the map $$ \mathrm{Div}_0(\mathcal{X}) \otimes_{\mathbb{Z}} \mathbb{Q} \to \mathrm{Div}_0(\mathcal{X})_{\mathbb{Q}} $$ is an isomorphism (by the definition of the target). Taking the direct limit over all models $\mathcal{X}$ (and using the commutativity of the tensor product with the direct limit), we get that $\mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Z}} \otimes_{\mathbb{Z}} \mathbb{Q} \simeq \mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Q}}$.

For Corollary 2.3, note that the authors are not using the "usual" Stone-Weierstrass theorem but the "boolean" version, which only requires that the $\mathbb{Q}$-vector space contains a constant function, separates points, and is closed under max (for example, see this MSE question for a statement of the theorem). The space $\mathcal{D}(X)_{\mathbb{Q}}$ certainly contains a constant function: take any model $\mathcal{X}$ of $X$ and $D = \mathcal{X}_0$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Very well explained, thank you msteve! $\endgroup$ – Riquelme Dec 29 '18 at 17:04

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.