0
$\begingroup$

There is a theorem in scheme theory due to Gabber which makes our life easier when setting up the theory of cohomology of quasi-coherent sheaves.

I am trying to understand why should I appreciate this result; it is not as geometric as e.g. Zariski's main theorem (I mean, it even has the word "cardinal" in it) so I wonder if there are some geometric/topological contexts in which the natural analogues of Gabber's theorem fail and this causes observable difficulties for the development of the theory. Any examples?

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

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