Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf sheaves simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
  1. I added a definition-section to formal scheme with the four equivalent definitions of a k-formal scheme from Demazure, lectures on p-divisible groups. There is some overlap with the section on Noetherian formal schemes now.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2012

    Thank you. Nice to have the details of the classical case in the entry.

    I think that the assertion that it is a ringed space is a bit imprecise. The classical cases may be realized as a topological space with a sheaf of topological rings, so not just rings. The fact that in the EGA generality the topological ring has a rather simple I-adic topology does not matter: the I-adic filtration is still part of the definition.

    In greater generality formal schemes are usually defined as some nice subcategory of ind-schemes.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorhilbertthm90
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2012

    Interesting, apparently when I made p-divisible group I never used the term formal scheme to actually link to this page. I do reference Demazure, which I didn’t realize was online.

  2. I think that the assertion that it is a ringed space is a bit imprecise…

    Maybe we could write it is a ”ring-objected space” or the like.

    In greater generality formal schemes are usually defined as some nice subcategory of ind-schemes.

    In maybe even greater generality it is a formally smooth object in a cohesive topos; if I remember this is an example in Rosenberg-Kontsevich, noncommutative spaces.

  3. Interesting, apparently when I made p-divisible group I never used the term formal scheme to actually link to this page.

    You did not indicated this, but is there a generalization of pp-divisibility to other contexts than formal schemes? I guess in principle one can define this by taking an endomorphism with comparable properties instead of the Frobenius morphism.