Search Results
Search type | Search syntax |
---|---|
Tags | [tag] |
Exact | "words here" |
Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
Views | views:250 |
Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
URL | url:"*.example.com" |
Saves | in:saves |
Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
Types |
is:question is:answer |
Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
For more details on advanced search visit our help page |
For questions related to the mathematical notion of site, which among others generalizes the notion of topological space. For questions on internet-sites, use online-resources, but note that these questions need to be very specific to research-level mathematics to be on-topic.
3
votes
Accepted
1st cech cohomology groups on ringed sites
First things first: $\check{H}{}^n(U, \mathscr{F})$ (resp. $H^n(U, \mathscr{F})$) are same whether you regard $\mathscr{F}$ as an $\mathscr{O}$-module or as an abelian sheaf, so we may simplify things …
2
votes
A confusion about covering flatness
Your proof is correct and your "counterexample" is wrong.
Here's how I prefer to think of the definition of "covering-flat": a diagram $F : \mathcal{C} \to \mathcal{D}$ is covering-flat if and only …