“Algebra is but written geometry and geometry is but figured algebra.”

Sophie Germain

Recall that for a topological space \(X\), a fibre bundle of fibres \(F\), where \(F\) is a topological space, is a topological space \(E\), with a surjective map \(\pi: E\rightarrow X\) such that for all \(x\in X\), exists an open nbhd \(x\in U\subseteq X\) such that there is a homeomorphism \(\varphi: \pi^{-1}(U)\rightarrow U\times F\) such that \(\mathrm{pr}_U\circ \varphi=\pi|_{\pi^{-1}(U)}\) where \(\mathrm{pr}_U:U\times F\rightarrow U\) is the projection onto \(U\). Fibre bundles generalize vector bundles and covering spaces. In this post, we interpret this algebraically and generalize this notion to schemes.

Read More

“I am not saying that I believe in the law of the excluded middle, I am just saying that it isn’t not true. ”

Kavin Satheeskumar

Recently, I’ve been reading Cisinski’s Higher Categories and Homotopical Algebra. I wanted to write down some of the things I’ve learned. In this post, we start from a review of presheaves of sets and simplicial sets, and then build towards the definition of an \(\infty\)-category. Let \(A\) be a category, recall a presheaf on \(A\) is a contravariant functor \(X:A^{\mathrm{op}}\rightarrow \mathbf{Set}\), where we denote \(X_a=X(a)\) and \(u^*:b\rightarrow a\) the induced morphism for each \(u:a\rightarrow b\). And the category of presheaves on \(A\) is denoted as \(\widehat{A}\). The category of elements \(\int_AX\) (or \(\int X\)) is the category where objects are \((a,s)\) where \(a\in A\) and \(s\in X_a\), and a morphisms \(u:(a,s)\rightarrow (b,t)\) is a morphism \(u:a\rightarrow b\) where \(u^*(t)=s\). It comes equipped with a faithful functor \(\varphi_X:\int_A X\rightarrow \widehat{A}\) given by \((a,s)\mapsto \mathscr{H}_a\) on objects and \(u\mapsto \mathscr{H}(u)\) on morphisms, where \(\mathscr{H}:A\rightarrow \widehat{A}\) is the Yoneda embedding. In this post, we ignore all set-theoretic size issues.

Read More

“Algebraic geometry seems to have acquired the reputation of being esoteric, exclusive, and very abstract, with adherents who are secretly plotting to take over all the rest of mathematics. In one respect this last point is accurate.”

David Mumford

Continuing last week, we are finally going to define the derived category \(D(\mathcal A)\) for an abelian category \(\mathcal A\). Before we actually do that, we need to introduce localization of categories, and we will define the derived category in terms of a localization of the homotopy category of complexes. Localization of categories is very analogous to localization of rings or modules. Given any category (with no assumption of abelian, additive, triangulated, etc), we formally invert a class of morphisms. We will give one definition in terms of a localization construction and show that it is unsatisfactory in that it does not have a lot of useful and desirable properties. We will then develop a better description of derived categories in terms of roofs.

Read More

“It is impossible to be a mathematician without being a poet in soul.”

Sofia Kovalevskaya

Continuing last week where we defined the homotopy category of complexes, we will take a look at triangulated categories. This will help us build towards the definition of derived categories. In some sense, triangulated categories are approximations of abelian categories. They are not strictly speaking a weaker version of abelian categories, and they don’t really imply each other. Triangulated categories takes a different approach to abelian categories. Instead of kernels, cokernels, and strict morphisms, triangulated categories bypass these notions and start out with “distinguished triangles”, which are similar to exact sequences.

Read More

“A mathematician is a person who can find analogies between theorems; a better mathematician is one who can see analogies between proofs and the best mathematician can notice analogies between theories. One can imagine that the ultimate mathematician is one who can see analogies between analogies.”

Stefan Banach

I have always been curious about derived categories. In particular, I read from the wikipedia page on homological mirror symmetry that the derived category of coherent sheaves is a popular research topic in algebraic geometry. Also, I’ve been told by a professor that derived categories are related to something called geometric Satake correspondance, which is also something I totally don’t understand but it sounds very cool. Therefore, I decided to study a little about derived categories, and write about my progress here. I want this post to be the first part in several parts of my notes. In this first part, we will focus on abelian categoires, derived functors, and homotopy category of complexes. We begin by reviewing abelian categories and their properties. In particular, the (co)chain complexes in an abelian category and their related notions. After that, we define derived functors. Eventually, we finish by defining the homotopy category of complexes \(K(\mathcal A)\).

Read More

“Mathematics requires a small dose, not of genius, but of an imaginative freedom which, in a larger dose, would be insanity. And if mathematicians tend to burn out early in their careers, it is probably because life has forced them to acquire too much common sense, thereby rendering them too sane to work. But by then they are sane enough to teach, so a use can still be found for them.”

Angus K. Rodgers

For this week, I’ll write about the theory of root systems, especially things related to Weyl groups, weight spaces and etc, for the purpose of my URA. This is because one of the objectives of my URA is to generalise my previous blog post about a fraction of an \(S_n\)-orbit on a hyperplane to Weyl groups. First, a Lie algebra is simple if it is of degree greater than \(1\) (so we are excluding the one dimensional abelian Lie algebras) and has no proper ideals, and a semisimple Lie algebra is a direct sum of simple Lie algebras. Equivalently, a Lie algebra \(\mathfrak{g}\) is semisimple if \(\mathrm{rad}(\mathfrak{g})\), the sum of all solvable ideals (or the maximal solvable ideal), is trivial. Any semisimple Lie algebra \(\mathfrak{g}\) is the Lie algebra of an algebraic group \(G\). Let \(\mathrm{ad}:\mathfrak{g}\rightarrow \mathfrak{gl}(\mathfrak{g})\) by \((\mathrm{ad} X)(Z)=[X,Z]\) be the adjoint representation. Let \(B:\mathfrak{g}\times \mathfrak{g}\rightarrow \mathbf C\) be the symmetric bilinear form defined by \(B(X,Y)=\mathrm{tr}(\mathrm{ad}X\mathrm{ad} Y)\), called the Killing form which is invariant in the sense of \(B([X,Y],Z)=B(X,[Y,Z])\). Cartan’s criterion for semisimplicity says that a Lie algebra is semisimple iff the associated Killing form is nondegenerate. From now on, we let \(\mathfrak{g}\) be a semisimple Lie algebra over \(\mathbf C\). We start by discussing the root–space decomposition \(\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{h}\oplus \bigoplus_{\alpha\in\Phi}\mathfrak{g}_{\alpha}\) of semisimple Lie algebras.

Read More

“Mathematics is the music of reason.”

James J. Sylvester

This week is the first week of the spring term and also my first week of undergraduate research with Prof. Satriano, so I decided to write about a research paper I’ve given to read, this one. In a nutshell, the paper proves a combinatorical conjecture posed by McKinnon, Satriano and Huang, about orbits on a hyperplane under permutation. Specifically, suppose that \(\sigma\in S_n\) acts on \(v\in\mathbf R^n\) by permutation, and let \(\mathcal{O}(v, w)=\{\sigma\in S_n: w\cdot \sigma v=0\}\). We prove a best bound for the number of vectors obtained by permutation of coordinates that are contained in a hyperplane through the origin except for \(\sum_ix_i=0\), where \(n\ge 3\). In notations, we have the following theorem.

Read More

“Serious mathematics (contrary to a popular misconception) is not ‘about’ proofs and logic any more than serious literature is ‘about’ grammar, or music is ‘about’ notes.”

Ethan D. Bloch

In this week we discuss fppf sites (recall that we defined \((\mathbf{Sch}/X)_{\mathrm{fppf}}\) in last week) and faithfully flat descent. This will help us to build our way to the definition of a stack. The idea of faifully flat descent is that a certain property of schemes can be descended via a cartesian square with a fppf side. The important result we are building towards is that for any scheme \(X\), the functor of points \(\mathscr{H}_X\) is a sheaf on the fppf site of \(X\). After this, we can talk about fibred categories. Fibred categories plus descents is categorical stacks, plus geometry is algebraic stacks.

Read More

“Complex analysis is the good twin and real analysis the evil one: beautiful formulas and elegant theorems seem to blossom spontaneously in the complex domain, while toil and pathology rule the reals.”

Charles Pugh

This week I plan to start writing about what I’ve learned in PMATH 965 on algebraic stacks. In the end of this semaster hopefully I will have written enough about them in this blog so that I can compile them into actual typesetted notes. We start by revisiting étale morphisms and introducing Grothendieck topologies and sites, and we define presheaves and sheaves on sites and show that they work almost the same as the usual presheaves and sheaves we are accostomed to. Then, we will define important sites such as the big and small Zariski sites and étale sites as well as the fppf site.

Read More

“In mathematics the art of proposing a question must be held of higher value than solving it.”

George Cantor

This week I finally finished my final project for my PMATH 499 reading course in arithmetic geometry. My project is called “Galois cohomology and weak Mordell–Weil theorem”, which is available here. Galois cohomology is the application of group cohomology to Galois groups. In particular, we know that for a perfect field \(k\) with an algebraic closure \(K\), the Galois group \(\mathrm{Gal}(K/k)\) is isomorphic to an inverse limit of topological Galois groups \(\mathrm{Gal}(L/k)\) ranging over the finite Galois extensions \(L/k\) with the natural projections. This fact makes \(G\) a profinite group, and the Krull topology, the topology of \(G\) endowed by the inverse limit process by viewing each finite Galois group as a topological group with the discrete topology, is a topology where a basis for the neighborhood at the identity is the collection of normal subgroups having finite index in \(G\). This is a motivation to use homological algebra in such situation.

Read More