4
$\begingroup$

I would never dare posting this here, but the question https://math.stackexchange.com/q/3019853/214353 on math.SE did not receive any feedback (except for 13 views and one upvote) since November 30, so...

I believe I've seen an answer to this somewhere (some Deligne notes?) but cannot recover it.

In the $\mathbb Z/2$-graded formulation, supercommutativity means that two odd degree elements anticommute while all other kinds of homogeneous elements commute.

If 2 is invertible, to name a $\mathbb Z/2$-grading is the same as to name an involution: for $\tau:A\to A$ with $\tau^2$ equal to identity, even elements are those with $\tau e=e$ and the odd ones those with $\tau o=-o$. Then every $a$ is uniquely the sum of the even element $(a+\tau a)/2$ and the odd element $(a-\tau a)/2$.

Now suppose 2 is not invertible, and we still want to formulate supercommutativity in terms of $\tau$ alone, in such a way that it becomes precisely supercommutativity as soon as 2 becomes invertible. How to do it?

My attempts produced ugly and inconclusive things like $$ 2yx=xy+x\tau(y)+\tau(x)y-\tau(x)\tau(y) $$ or $$ yx-\tau(y)x-y\tau(x)+\tau(y)\tau(x)=-xy+x\tau(y)+\tau(x)y-\tau(x)\tau(y). $$

There must be something much better, what is it?

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Why do you expect this to be possible? What if the characteristic is $2$? Note that speaking just in terms of gradings, over any (connected?) base a $\mathbb{Z}/2$-grading is the same as an action of the group scheme $\mu_2$. In characteristic $2$ this group scheme is non-reduced and in particular badly fails to be isomorphic to the constant group scheme $\mathbb{Z}/2$. $\endgroup$ – Qiaochu Yuan Jan 4 at 8:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @QiaochuYuan Well I don't even see any rigorous impossibility statement that could be formulated. $\endgroup$ – მამუკა ჯიბლაძე Jan 4 at 9:55
  • $\begingroup$ Could you explain more about $\mu_2$-actions? Do not they just give $\mathbb Z/2$-graded plainly commutative algebras? Or you mean $\mu_2$-equivariant vector bundles over $\mu_2$-schemes? $\endgroup$ – მამუკა ჯიბლაძე Jan 4 at 10:05
  • $\begingroup$ Btw what are tensor powers of $\mu_2$? $\endgroup$ – მამუკა ჯიბლაძე Jan 4 at 10:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @HarryGindi Actually I now also remember Deligne working with $\mu_2$ there... $\endgroup$ – მამუკა ჯიბლაძე Jan 4 at 10:13

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.