AG-Week Four: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| (8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
= Week | = Week Four = | ||
This is the page with specific information for Week | This is the page with specific information for Week 4 of our [[Algebraic Geometry Graduate Reading Course]] | ||
'''Discussion Leader''': | '''Discussion Leader''': Amanda | ||
== Schedule == | == Schedule == | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
** Hand in 6 written up problems | ** Hand in 6 written up problems | ||
* For 9/24: Read & be prepared to discuss 3.5 | * For 9/24: Read & be prepared to discuss 3.5 | ||
* For 9/27: Read & be prepared to discuss 3.6 | * For 9/27: Read & be prepared to discuss 3.5, 3.6, 3.7. | ||
** Meeting with faculty: Bring questions from all of Chapter 3 | ** Meeting with faculty: Bring questions from all of Chapter 3. | ||
== Homework == | == Homework == | ||
6 problems due 9/22 | *6 problems due 9/22 | ||
== Questions == | == Questions == | ||
* Why does sheafification being left-adjoint to the forgetful functor "explain" why you don't need to sheafify when taking kernel, and why you need to sheafify when taking cokernel (see 3.4.K)? | |||
** If $f:A \to B$ is a morphism of sheaves, then we really have a morphism of presheaves $F(f): F(A) \to F(B)$, where $F$ denotes the forgetful functor. Since $F$ is right-adjoint to sheafification, it commutes with kernels, so we "should" have, $ker_{pre} F(f) = F(ker_{sheaf} f)$. Since $F$ is just the forgetful functor, it doesn't really do anything. So taking the kernel in presheaves "should" actually be a kernel in sheaves. So (sh, F) being adjoint explains why we don't need to sheafify with kernels. | |||
== Comments == | == Comments == | ||
Latest revision as of 17:07, 24 September 2010
Week Four
This is the page with specific information for Week 4 of our Algebraic Geometry Graduate Reading Course
Discussion Leader: Amanda
Schedule
- For 9/22: Be prepared to discuss 3.4
- Hand in 6 written up problems
- For 9/24: Read & be prepared to discuss 3.5
- For 9/27: Read & be prepared to discuss 3.5, 3.6, 3.7.
- Meeting with faculty: Bring questions from all of Chapter 3.
Homework
- 6 problems due 9/22
Questions
- Why does sheafification being left-adjoint to the forgetful functor "explain" why you don't need to sheafify when taking kernel, and why you need to sheafify when taking cokernel (see 3.4.K)?
- If $f:A \to B$ is a morphism of sheaves, then we really have a morphism of presheaves $F(f): F(A) \to F(B)$, where $F$ denotes the forgetful functor. Since $F$ is right-adjoint to sheafification, it commutes with kernels, so we "should" have, $ker_{pre} F(f) = F(ker_{sheaf} f)$. Since $F$ is just the forgetful functor, it doesn't really do anything. So taking the kernel in presheaves "should" actually be a kernel in sheaves. So (sh, F) being adjoint explains why we don't need to sheafify with kernels.