Skip to main content
Jacob Lurie's user avatar
Jacob Lurie's user avatar
Jacob Lurie's user avatar
Jacob Lurie
  • Member for 14 years, 5 months
  • Last seen more than 3 years ago
Loading…
awarded
awarded
awarded
awarded
answered
Loading…
awarded
revised
Loading…
Loading…
awarded
awarded
comment
The etale site of a closed subscheme and its etale Grothendieck subtopology
The original question mentions that given a commutative ring R and an ideal I, two topological spaces (defined using the Zariski topology) are homeomorphic. My answer was addressing the question ``what is an analogous statement for the etale topology?'' (The answer being that you can extract two topoi which are equivalent.) I don't think you can formally deduce anything about defining sites from this. Rather the information would go in the other direction: to write down a proof of my claim, you'll want to think about the problem of lifting etale coverings, as in your earlier reply.
revised
The etale site of a closed subscheme and its etale Grothendieck subtopology
deleted 41 characters in body; added 1 characters in body
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
awarded
awarded
awarded
comment
Model structure of commutative dg-algebras inside all dg-algebras
The homotopy category definitely doesn't embed fully faithfully. Maybe the easiest example (working over a field C) is to take the usual polynomial ring R = C[x,y]. In commutative dgas this is already cofibrant, so [R,A] = H_0(A) x H_0(A) for any cdga A. In associative dgas a cofibrant replacement for R is the free associative algebra on x,y and z in hom. degree 1 with dz=xy-yx. So if A happens to be a cdga you get [R,A] = H_0(A) x H_0(A) x H_1(A).
awarded