Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
created localization of a module
You have “interpretation of modules as generalized vector bundles” pointing back to the same page.
By the way, does localization cover all types of localization? I ask since the term cropped up in the context of the codensity monad, as idempotent completion.
You have “interpretation of modules as generalized vector bundles” pointing back to the same page.
Thanks, fixed.
If we have a localization functor $Q$ from some category $C$, then applying $Q$ on some object $m\in M$ is the localization of that object $m$< for any of the very many kind of categories and many kinds of localizations. If $M$ is a category of modules then it is a localization of a module. From that standard perspective I do not see why to separate into a separate entry.
Surely the motivating statements in the entry localization should explain intuition from covering classical special cases like the localization of categories of quasicoherent sheaves of modules (as well in future entries on spectra and modules over them) a la Pierre Gabriel’s thesis.
From that standard perspective I do not see why to separate into a separate entry.
There is no harm in having entries on special cases of other entries with more explicit details. I think that’s a good thing to have.
In this case: hm, what is the localization of the category of modules that you have in mind?
But you wrote it in the flat case
$Q(M) = Q R\otimes_R M$is the localization functor for the left modules, the morphism part being obvious and $R$ the ground ring.
By localization one also means the localization map, what is the components of the unit of the corresponding adjunction between the localization and its right adjoint.,
Okay, thanks. I guess I see. I never thought of it that way, to be frank. Maybe you have a sec to spell it out in the entry?
Yes, later today or tomorrow. Now I have an urgent errant to do first.
Major changes at localization of a module.
Thanks! I have edited a bit further, adding some half-sentences with further remarks and pointers here and there. Also formatted a bit (of course :-)
I like your point of view here:
here R may be the structure sheaf of some ringed topos and accordingly the modules may be sheaves of modules.
which generalizes my earlier explicit listing of $\mathcal{O}$-modules. There are however two caveats: first of all we want that ringed topos is taken in the sense or topos with possibly noncommutative ring object, what was rarely a convention in the topos setup of $n$Lab (?), and more importantly, we would like in fact to mean a localization of the category of quasicoherent sheaves of modules, rather than a localization of the whole category of $\mathcal{O}$-modules. I do not know how to include this emphasis in noncommutative ringed topos language.
P.S. new stub Martindale quotient aka Martindale localization. Note also the related entry (to localization circle) in my personal $n$Lab: gluing categories from localizations (zoranskoda).
1 to 11 of 11