12

It's well known that the restricted Yoneda functor $よ : \mathsf{Schemes} \to \operatorname{Fun}(\mathsf{CommRing},\mathsf{Set})$ is an embedding, so that (in particular) if $X$ and $Y$ are schemes such that $よ(X) \cong よ(Y)$, then $X \cong Y$. This is the key idea of the "functor of points approach" to algebraic geometry (which then proceeds to classify precisely which co-presheaves on commutative rings are in the essential image of $よ$).

It's my understanding that the restricted Yoneda $よ : \mathsf{LRS} \to \operatorname{Fun}(\mathsf{CommRing},\mathsf{Set})$ is no longer an embedding, where $\mathsf{LRS}$ is the category of locally ringed spaces. Moreover, I expect there to exist non-isomorphic locally ringed spaces $X$ and $Y$ such that $よ(X) \cong よ(Y)$.

Does anyone know a simple example of this failure of essential injectivity?

Edit: Just realized I messed up the variance at first, hopefully I got it right now.

  • 1
    Isn't conservativity the condition that "$F(f)$ is an iso" implies "$f$ is an iso"? Conservativity clearly implies essential injectivity if $F$ is full, but that's the only obvious relationship I see between these conditions. – diracdeltafunk Mar 10 '21 at 21:12
  • 1
    (For context: a now-deleted comment claimed that essential injectivity is usually called conservativity, but my understanding is that these are different conditions) – diracdeltafunk Mar 10 '21 at 21:18
  • 2
    (I deleted my comment because I realize I had misread what you were asking for; I thought you were implicitly actually asking about conservativity.) – Eric Wofsey Mar 10 '21 at 21:18
  • 1
    Cheers, no worries there -- I just prefer to keep my comment up with context in case others have the same question :) – diracdeltafunk Mar 10 '21 at 21:21
  • 3
    Why does it feel like people are using よ now for the Yoneda embedding? I've seen Barwick and his collaborators use this, but I'm not sure why it's been popularized. – Alex Youcis Mar 11 '21 at 00:24
  • 2
    As for why I use it, it's fun and cool-looking :)

    (For anyone reading who's unaware, I should mention that よ is a Japanese character which represents the sound "yo", as in "Yoneda")

    – diracdeltafunk Mar 11 '21 at 00:26
  • What is that Japanese word ? –  Mar 11 '21 at 00:38
  • 1
    It is not a word -- it is a character in the hiragana syllabary. Similarly to a letter like "y" in the english alphabet, it is used to compose words, but has no meaning on its own. For example, the word "ようこそ" (which would be romanized as "youkoso") means something like "welcome!" Hiragana is just one of three aspects to japanese writing -- there are also characters (called kanji) that have intrinsic meaning and can form entire words (or just parts of them), and another syllabary called katakana which is used to write loanwords from other languages (among other things). – diracdeltafunk Mar 11 '21 at 00:41
  • 1
    If your question was about the word "Yoneda", this is the surname of the Japanese mathematician Nobuo Yoneda. – diracdeltafunk Mar 11 '21 at 00:46
  • @diracdeltafunk, wow, I think it's the most creative math symbol. –  Mar 11 '21 at 00:51
  • 1
    +1 for using よ. (Fun Fact: My advisor in my undergrad was one of the two who first introduced よ for the Yoneda Embedding.) – Qi Zhu Mar 11 '21 at 13:17

1 Answers1

12

If $A$ is a local ring, let $X_A$ denote the locally ringed space with one point with $\mathcal{O}_{X_A}(X_A)=A$. If $B$ is a ring, then a morphism of ringed spaces $\operatorname{Spec} B\to X$ is just given by a homomorphism $f:A\to B$. In order for this to be a morphism of locally ringed spaces, $f(m)$ must be contained in every prime ideal of $B$, where $m$ is the maximal ideal of $A$. That is, $f(m)$ must be contained in the nilradical of $B$. If $m$ is finitely generated, this means $f$ must factor through the quotient $A/m^n$ for sufficiently large $n$.

In particular, this means that morphisms of locally ringed spaces $\operatorname{Spec} B\to X$ actually depend only on the completion $\hat{A}$ of $A$ with respect to $m$, since $\hat{A}/(m\hat{A})^n\cong A/m^n$ for all $n$. So, the morphism $X_{\hat{A}}\to X_A$ becomes an isomorphism after applying the functor $よ : \mathsf{LRS} \to \operatorname{Fun}(\mathsf{CommRing},\mathsf{Set})$.

Or, let $A$ be a valuation ring whose value group $\Gamma$ is strongly nonarchimedean in the sense that for each positive $x\in\Gamma$, there is a positive $y\in\Gamma$ such that $ny<x$ for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$. (For instance, $\Gamma$ could be the ordered ring $\mathbb{Z}[x]$ where $x$ is infinitesimal.) Note that then if $I\subset A$ is any ideal whose radical is the maximal ideal $m$, then $I$ must be equal to $m$, since $I$ must contain elements of arbitrarily small positive valuation. This means that if $f:A\to B$ is any homomorphism such that $f(m)$ is nilpotent, $f(m)$ must actually be $0$. By the first paragraph above, this means that morphisms $\operatorname{Spec} B\to X$ are just in bijection with homomorphisms $A/m\to B$. In other words, the natural morphism $\operatorname{Spec} A/m\to X_A$ becomes an isomorphism after applying $よ$.


Here is a rather different sort of example, inspired by a now-deleted answer by Aragogh. Let $X$ be a $T_1$ locally ringed space with the following property: for each $x\in X$, there is a neighborhood $U$ of $x$ and a section $a\in \mathcal{O}_X(U)$ that vanishes at $x$ but at no other point of $U$ (where by "vanishing at a point" I mean its image in the stalk at that point is in the maximal ideal). For instance, $X$ could be a nice (say, metrizable) topological space equipped with the sheaf of continuous real-valued functions. I claim that if $Y$ is an affine scheme and $f:Y\to X$ is a morphism of locally ringed spaces, then the underling map of topological spaces is locally constant.

To prove this, suppose $y\in Y$ and $f$ is not locally constant at $y$. We know that $f$ induces a local homomorphism $\mathcal{O}_{X,f(y)}\to\mathcal{O}_{Y,y}$. Moreover, each prime ideal $p$ of $\mathcal{O}_{Y,y}$ corresponds to a generization of $y$ which $f$ must map to the same point (since $X$ is $T_1$), and the corresponding homomorphism $\mathcal{O}_{X,f(y)}\to\mathcal{O}_{Y,p}$ is just obtained by composing with the localization map $\mathcal{O}_{Y,y}\to \mathcal{O}_{Y,p}$. Since all of these compositions with localizations are local homomorphisms, our homomorphism $\mathcal{O}_{X,f(y)}\to\mathcal{O}_{Y,y}$ must actually map the maximal ideal of $\mathcal{O}_{X,f(y)}$ into the nilradical of $\mathcal{O}_{Y,y}$ (since its image must be contained in every prime ideal).

Now take a neighborhood $U$ of $f(y)$ and a section $a\in \mathcal{O}_X(U)$ that vanishes at $f(y)$ and nowhere else. Since the image of $a$ in $\mathcal{O}_{Y,y}$ is nilpotent, we may replace $a$ with a power of itself and assume there is some neighborhood $V\subseteq f^{-1}(U)$ of $y$ such that the image of $a$ in $\mathcal{O}_Y(V)$ is $0$. Since $f$ is not locally constant at $y$, there exists some $z\in V$ such that $f(z)\neq f(y)$. But then $a$ is invertible in a neighborhood of $f(z)$, so the image of $a$ in $\mathcal{O}_{Y,z}$ is invertible. This is a contradiction, since the map $\mathcal{O}_X(U)\to\mathcal{O}_{Y,z}$ factors through the map $\mathcal{O}_X(U)\to\mathcal{O}_Y(V)$ that maps $a$ to $0$.

So, every morphism from an affine scheme to $X$ is locally constant. Now let $D(X)$ be $X$ with the discrete topology, equipped with the sheaf of local rings that has the same stalks as $X$. The identity function $i:D(X)\to X$ has an obvious structure of a morphism of locally ringed spaces, and a locally constant morphism to $X$ is just one that factors (uniquely) through $i$. So, $よ(i)$ is an isomorphism.

This gives rise to a bunch of other related examples. For instance, if $M$ and $N$ are two nonempty manifolds of the same dimension $d>0$, equipped with the sheaves of continuous (or smooth) real-valued functions, note that $D(M)$ and $D(N)$ are isomorphic: they are each just a disjoint union of $2^{\aleph_0}$ singletons whose local ring is the ring of germs of real-valued functions at a point of $\mathbb{R}^d$. It follows that $よ(M)$ and $よ(N)$ are isomorphic (though this isomorphism does not come from a map between $M$ and $N$).

In fact, we can go further. If $X$ is a topological space, $x\in X$, and $(A,m)$ is the local ring of germs of real-valued continuous functions at $x$, then $A$ has the following property. For each nonzero $a\in m$, there exists a nonzero $b\in m$ such that $a$ is divisible by $b^n$ for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$. Indeed, you can take $b=g(a)$ where $g:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function such that $g(0)=0$ and as $t\to 0$, $g(t)$ approaches $0$ more slowly than $|t|^{1/n}$ for each $n$. This property means that the only ideal of $A$ whose radical is $m$ is $m$ itself. As in the third paragraph above, this means the canonical morphism $\operatorname{Spec} \mathbb{R}\to X_A$ becomes an isomorphism after applying $よ$. It follows that if $X$ is a nice space as above equipped with its sheaf of continuous real-valued functions, then actually the canonical morphism $\coprod_{x\in X}\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{R}\to X$ becomes an isomorphism after applying $よ$, since $よ$ can't see the difference between the points of $D(X)$ and copies of $\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{R}$. In particular, this means that if $X$ and $Y$ are two metrizable spaces of the spaces of the same cardinality equipped with their sheaves of continuous real-valued functions, then $よ(X)\cong よ(Y)$.

(In fact, you can generalize this a bit further: all of this applies to spaces on which real-valued continuous functions separate points, not just metrizable spaces. To sketch the proof, the argument above shows that if $Y$ is an affine scheme and $f:Y\to X$ is a morphism of locally ringed spaces, then every continuous real-valued function on $X$ actually pulls back to a locally constant real-valued function on $Y$. If $f$ were not locally constant, then its image would be infinite, and then since functions separate points on $X$, you can conclude that the functions on $X$ pull back to an infinite-dimensional algebra of locally constant functions on $Y$, which must come from an infinite subalgebra of the Boolean algebra of clopen subsets of $Y$. But then you can construct a uniformly convergent infinite sum of such functions which is not locally constant, and this sum will still come from a continuous function on $X$, giving a contradiction.)

Eric Wofsey
  • 342,377
  • Thank you! I'll take a careful look at this in a few hours. – diracdeltafunk Mar 10 '21 at 21:13
  • 1
    What I was about to write (surprisingly with the notation $X_A$ too !), +1. This is actually better than the question asked for, because it shows that it's not even conservative. Do you know an example where one of the two is a scheme ? – Maxime Ramzi Mar 10 '21 at 21:14
  • 1
    I knew there was a counterexample based on $X_A,$ but I was too hasty! +1 – Stahl Mar 10 '21 at 21:17
  • @MaximeRamzi: Not off the top of my head. My vague intuition is that it shouldn't be possible if one of the spaces is a scheme but I wouldn't be very surprised if I'm wrong. – Eric Wofsey Mar 10 '21 at 21:42
  • I have an idea where one of the spaces is a scheme! I'm not currently in an environment where I can work out the details and verify it, but I'll update in a few hours. – diracdeltafunk Mar 10 '21 at 21:53
  • 3
    @diracdeltafunk: I've now added an example where one of the spaces is a scheme (in fact, Spec of a field)! – Eric Wofsey Mar 11 '21 at 00:12
  • Thank you for these fascinating examples! My idea didn't quite work on the nose, but I'll think about some modifications. Anyway, I really appreciate all the effort you put into this answer. – diracdeltafunk Mar 11 '21 at 00:29
  • 3
    The overall moral that I seem to take from all of these examples is that because schemes are so full of generic points, it is very hard to map them to $T_1$ locally ringed spaces. The locality condition on morphisms at generic points becomes really restrictive when mapping to a $T_1$ space. – Eric Wofsey Mar 11 '21 at 02:47