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 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

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeMar 19th 2010
   • (edited Mar 19th 2010)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownZoran, concerning your paper with Durov and the sheaf category defined on <a href="http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/math/pdf/0604/0604096v4.pdf#page=22">p. 22</a>, I am wondering: it would almost seem as if something essentially equivalent is obtained if we would very slightly change the definition of the site (Rings with a chosen nilpotent ideal) and think of it as the tangent category of the category of rings, i.e. of [[Mod]], thought of as being the category of square-0-extensions of rings. So I am suggesting that we look at sheaves on (the opposite of) [[Mod]] Do you see what I mean?

   Zoran,

   concerning your paper with Durov and the sheaf category defined on p. 22, I am wondering:

   it would almost seem as if something essentially equivalent is obtained if we would very slightly change the definition of the site (Rings with a chosen nilpotent ideal) and think of it as the tangent category of the category of rings, i.e. of Mod, thought of as being the category of square-0-extensions of rings.

   So I am suggesting that we look at sheaves on (the opposite of) Mod

   Do you see what I mean?

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorzskoda
   • CommentTimeMar 19th 2010
   • (edited Mar 19th 2010)
   • PermaLink
   Author: zskoda
   Format: MarkdownIntuitively this is kind of obvious, however I never produced a formal statement. It would be also very good to compare this to the method of Pareigis and Morris, [doi](http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1996930), who also study formal schemes over an arbitrary base, not necessarily pseudocompact or noetherian local ring. A neat thing is that they can extend the Yoneda to kind of topological Yoneda, it is like considering some ind-objects as topological rings and then reflecting this in some sort of enriched Yoneda way. The ringed object O over the site becomes topological ringed object. Durov is considering just presheaves, so the category is bigger than the true category of formal schemes. Pareigis tries to find the appropriate subcategory of formal schemes. If you can not access the find I can send it to you (though I did long time ago).

   Intuitively this is kind of obvious, however I never produced a formal statement. It would be also very good to compare this to the method of Pareigis and Morris, doi, who also study formal schemes over an arbitrary base, not necessarily pseudocompact or noetherian local ring. A neat thing is that they can extend the Yoneda to kind of topological Yoneda, it is like considering some ind-objects as topological rings and then reflecting this in some sort of enriched Yoneda way. The ringed object O over the site becomes topological ringed object.

   Durov is considering just presheaves, so the category is bigger than the true category of formal schemes. Pareigis tries to find the appropriate subcategory of formal schemes. If you can not access the find I can send it to you (though I did long time ago).

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeMar 19th 2010
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownThanks, Zoran. Right this moment I am on the train and cannot access the article. If you could send it, that would be nice.

   Thanks, Zoran.

   Right this moment I am on the train and cannot access the article. If you could send it, that would be nice.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorzskoda
   • CommentTimeMar 19th 2010
   • (edited Mar 19th 2010)
   • PermaLink
   Author: zskoda
   Format: MarkdownI sent it to you. Maybe we should put it as a file on the nlab. I wrote a stub [[Morris-Pareigis formal scheme]] with redirect [[Morris-Pareigis formal group]]. In any approach the formal schemes make a subcategory of the category of ind-schemes. Now the question is how to neatly characterize the diagrams corresponding to the objects in the subcategory. Thickening devices are a tool to do that. Edit: yet another question is how to see the thickenings from the point of view of the category of qoch sheaves and the structure of its subcategories. In Abelian case this leads to the study of certain filtrations of subcategories for which the only known reference is Lunts-Rosenberg Max Planck [preprint](http://www.mpim-bonn.mpg.de/preprints/send?bid=3894)

   I sent it to you. Maybe we should put it as a file on the nlab. I wrote a stub Morris-Pareigis formal scheme with redirect Morris-Pareigis formal group.

   In any approach the formal schemes make a subcategory of the category of ind-schemes. Now the question is how to neatly characterize the diagrams corresponding to the objects in the subcategory. Thickening devices are a tool to do that.

   Edit: yet another question is how to see the thickenings from the point of view of the category of qoch sheaves and the structure of its subcategories. In Abelian case this leads to the study of certain filtrations of subcategories for which the only known reference is Lunts-Rosenberg Max Planck preprint