Can someone me say if this (perhaps obvious!) claim is true:

let $f:X\rightarrow S$ be an open, surjective morphism of complex spaces reduced or without embedded components and with $n$-pure dimensional fibers. Let $F$, $G$ be a coherent sheaves with $S$-depth bigger than $2$ and s.t:

1) $G$ is $S$-flat

2) there is a canonical injective morphism $F\rightarrow G$

3) $F$ and $G$ are locally isomorphics.

Question: Is $F$ $S$-flat too?

Rk: Of course, the answer is yes if the Coker of 2) is $S$-flat.


  • 6
    $\begingroup$ $S$-flatness is a local property, so 1) and 3) imply that $F$ is $S$-flat, without any further assumptions. Or am I missing something? $\endgroup$ – Laurent Moret-Bailly Nov 22 '10 at 8:55
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @Harry: Locally isomorphic does not mean that there is a global morphism that gives the local isomorphism. For instance, any two line bundles are locally isomorphic, but there may not be a morphism between them. Or there may be one, say one could be a subsheaf of the other, but the local isomorphism is not given by the global morphism. $\endgroup$ – Sándor Kovács Nov 22 '10 at 9:31
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Actually I cannot think any example where one requires locally isomorphic objects to have a global morphism. For instance, differentiable manifolds are locally diffeomorphic to $\mathbb{R}^n$, regardless of their global morphisms to or from $\mathbb{R}^n$. $\endgroup$ – Andrea Ferretti Nov 22 '10 at 10:22
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Then as you said, flatness is local on $X$ and so is $S$-flatness. I still don't see the problem. $\endgroup$ – Laurent Moret-Bailly Nov 22 '10 at 15:39
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @Harry: I don't know where this is a "standard" definition. How about locally free? Do you need a morphism to or from a free sheaf for that? $\endgroup$ – Sándor Kovács Nov 23 '10 at 8:54

For a flat map $f$, we can see the $S$-flatness of $F$ as follow:

Let $x\in X$ and denote by: $A:=O_{S,f(x)}$, $B:=O_{X,x}$, ${\rm F}:=F_{x}$ and ${\rm G}:=G_{x}$. The $S$-flatness of the coherent sheaf $F$ in $x$ is, by definition, the $A$-flatness of the module (of finite type) ${\rm F}$ or, equivalently, the left exactness of the functor $K\rightarrow {\rm F}\otimes_{A} K$ where $K$ is $A$-module of finite type. Take a left exact sequenz of $A$-modules $$0\rightarrow K\rightarrow L$$ which give us a morphism ${\rm F}\otimes_{A}K\rightarrow {\rm F}\otimes _{A} L$ or equivalently a morphism

$${\rm F}{\otimes_{B}}(B\otimes_{A} K)\rightarrow {\rm F}\otimes_{B}(B\otimes_{A} L)$$

We can replace ${\rm F}$ by ${\rm G}$ at this moment and see that the injectivity of the desired map is obtained if we assume $B$ is $A$-flat module because $B\otimes_{A} K\rightarrow B\otimes_{A} L$ is injective and ${\rm G}$ is $A$-flat.


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.