Not signed in

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

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

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 internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology 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 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

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorMarc Hoyois
   • CommentTimeJul 21st 2013
   • PermaLink
   Author: Marc Hoyois
   Format: MarkdownItexI decided to add some content to the motivic pages here on the nLab. I started with [[Nisnevich site]]. More to come soon…

   I decided to add some content to the motivic pages here on the nLab.

   I started with Nisnevich site. More to come soon…

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthoradeelkh
   • CommentTimeJul 21st 2013
   • PermaLink
   Author: adeelkh
   Format: MarkdownItexGreat!

   Great!

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorhilbertthm90
   • CommentTimeJul 21st 2013
   • PermaLink
   Author: hilbertthm90
   Format: MarkdownItexWhere it says the Nisnevich site over a Noetherian scheme "usually refers to ..." is this really what people mean? I don't know anything about this topic, but I do use the etale site and the usual terminology there is different, so I find this inconsistency a little scary. By the etale site on $S$, people usually mean the category of all schemes over $S$ with etale coverings as the topology (and similarly for Zariski if I'm not mistaken). Is it the case that for Nisnevich people only take the smooth schemes over $S$ rather than all schemes over $S$?

   Where it says the Nisnevich site over a Noetherian scheme “usually refers to …” is this really what people mean? I don’t know anything about this topic, but I do use the etale site and the usual terminology there is different, so I find this inconsistency a little scary.

   By the etale site on $S$, people usually mean the category of all schemes over $S$ with etale coverings as the topology (and similarly for Zariski if I’m not mistaken). Is it the case that for Nisnevich people only take the smooth schemes over $S$ rather than all schemes over $S$?

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorZhen Lin
   • CommentTimeJul 21st 2013
   • PermaLink
   Author: Zhen Lin
   Format: MarkdownItexThere's a _petit_ étale site whose objects are (some of the) schemes that are étale over the base; what you describe is the _gros_ étale site.

   There’s a petit étale site whose objects are (some of the) schemes that are étale over the base; what you describe is the gros étale site.

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorMarc Hoyois
   • CommentTimeJul 21st 2013
   • (edited Jul 21st 2013)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Marc Hoyois
   Format: MarkdownItex@hilbertthm90 It's certainly very common to consider the Nisnevich topology only on smooth schemes. When non-smooth schemes are thrown in, the Nisnevich topology becomes too coarse for ``motivic purposes'' and one usually uses a finer topology such as the cdh topology. I guess the idea is that motives of smooth schemes generate all motives. ETA: but as far as I know, no one ever says "Nisnevich site" by itself without precisely defining the underlying category first.

   @hilbertthm90

   It’s certainly very common to consider the Nisnevich topology only on smooth schemes. When non-smooth schemes are thrown in, the Nisnevich topology becomes too coarse for “motivic purposes” and one usually uses a finer topology such as the cdh topology. I guess the idea is that motives of smooth schemes generate all motives.

   ETA: but as far as I know, no one ever says “Nisnevich site” by itself without precisely defining the underlying category first.