7

I'm trying to solve Exercise 5.1 of Chapter II of Hartshorne - Algebraic Geometry.

I'm fine with the first $3$ parts, but I'm having troubles with the very last part, which asks to prove the projection formula:

Let $f:X\to Y$ be a morphism of ringed spaces, $\mathscr{F}$ an $\mathcal{O}_X$-module and $\mathcal{E}$ a locally free $\mathcal{O}_Y$-module of finite rank. Then there is a natural isomorphism $$ f_*(\mathscr{F}\otimes f^*\mathcal{E}) \;\cong\; f_*(\mathscr{F})\otimes \mathcal{E} $$

After thinking quite a long time about it, I checked on the internet and I found the following solution:

$$ \begin{eqnarray} f_*(\mathscr{F}\otimes f^*\mathcal{E}) &\;\cong\;& f_*(\mathscr{F}\otimes \mathcal{O}_X^{\,n}) \\\\ &\;\cong\;& f_*(\mathscr{F}\otimes \mathcal{O}_X)^{n} \\\\ &\;\cong\;& f_*(\mathscr{F})^{n} \\\\ &\;\cong\;& f_*(\mathscr{F})\otimes \mathcal{O}_Y^{\,n} \\\\ &\;\cong\;& f_*(\mathscr{F})\otimes \mathcal{E} \\\\ \end{eqnarray} $$

Is this correct? If it is, could you explain me why do we have the isomorphism $$ f_*(\mathscr{F}\otimes \mathcal{O}_X^{\,n}) \;\cong\; f_*(\mathscr{F}\otimes \mathcal{O}_X)^{n} \quad ? $$

Abramo
  • 7,155
  • 5
    This solution is not correct. First, you have to find a homomorphism (Hint: use adjunctions). In order to check that it is an isomorphism, you may assume that $E$ is free (since everything commutes with open restrictions), and then the cited calculation works (but of course one also has to check that the constructed isomorphism coincides with the global homomorphism!). Ad your question: Every functor here is additive, hence commutes with finite direct sums. – Martin Brandenburg Jan 14 '14 at 20:20

5 Answers5

9

Consider the morphism $$ f^*(f_* \mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathscr{O}_Y} \mathscr{E}) \simeq f^* f_* \mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathscr{O}_X} f^* \mathscr{E} \to \mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathscr{O}_X} f^* \mathscr{E} $$ obtained by tensoring the morphism $f^* f_* \mathscr{F} \to \mathscr{F}$ with $f^* \mathscr{E}$ over $\mathscr{O}_X$. By the push-pull adjunction, this corresponds to a morphism $$ f_* \mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathscr{O}_Y} \mathscr{E} \to f_*(\mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathscr{O}_X} f^* \mathscr{E}). $$ Note that it is defined by "doing nothing to sections", e.g. if $U \subseteq X$ is an open subset, $s \in \mathscr F(f^{-1}(U))$ and $t \in \mathscr E(U)$, then the morphism of presheaves associated to the tensor product sends $s \otimes t$ to the section $s \otimes (1 \otimes [(U,t)])$ of $\mathscr F \otimes_{\mathscr O_X} f^* \mathscr E$ over $f^{-1}(U)$ (recall that $f^*\mathscr E = \mathscr O_X \otimes_{f^{-1} \mathscr O_Y} f^{-1} \mathscr E$, hence the direct limit of sheaves notation $[(U,t)]$). If you are curious as to why, look at what the push-pull adjunction does to morphisms and the isomorphism of $f^*$ commuting with tensor products.

To check that it is an isomorphism when $\mathscr{E}$ is locally free, we may work locally, which means we may assume $\mathscr{E}$ is free of finite rank. Because both sides commute with direct sums (they are all compositions of additive functors), we may assume $\mathscr{E} = \mathscr{O}_Y$. We have isomorphisms $$ f_* \mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathscr{O}_Y} \mathscr{O}_Y \simeq f_* \mathscr{F} \simeq f_*(\mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathscr{O}_X} \mathscr{O}_X) \simeq f_* (\mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathscr{O}_X} f^* \mathscr{O}_Y). $$ Since this morphism corresponds to the morphism $f^*(f_* \mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathscr{O}_Y} \mathscr{O}_Y) \to \mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathscr{O}_X} f^* \mathscr{O}_Y$ (because it also "does nothing to sections" as above), we see that our morphism is an isomorphism by the pull-push adjunction.

Hope that helps,

4

As said by Martin, first you have to find a morphism between the two sheaves, then you can use that solution locally. So, here is the morphism.

Consider on $Y$ the presheaf $P$ with sections $V\mapsto \mathscr{F}(f^{-1}(V))\otimes\mathcal{E}(V)$ for all $V\subseteq Y$ open. The sheafification of $P$ is $f_*(\mathscr{F})\otimes\mathcal{E}$.

Similarly, consider $P'$ the presheaf on $X$ with sections $U\mapsto\mathscr{F}(U)\otimes f^*\mathcal{E}(U)$. The sheafification of $P'$ is $\mathscr{F}\otimes f^*\mathcal{E}$.

Now, for all open $V\subseteq Y$, we have a moprhism $\mathcal{E}(V)\to f^*\mathcal{E}(f^{-1}(V))$, this gives a morphism

$$P(V)=\mathscr{F}(f^{-1}(V))\otimes\mathcal{E}(V)\to\mathscr{F}(f^{-1}(V))\otimes f^*\mathcal{E}(f^{-1}(V))=f_*P'(V)$$

Hence I have a natural morphism $\phi:P\to f_*P'$. Now, I have the sheafication morphism $P'\to P'^{sh}=\mathscr{F}\otimes f^*\mathcal{E}$, hence a morphism $f_*P'\to f_*(\mathscr{F}\otimes f^*\mathcal{E})$ that, composed with $\phi$, gives a natural morphism $P\to f_*(\mathscr{F}\otimes f^*\mathcal{E})$. Finally, passing to the sheafification of $P$, I get a morphism

$$\psi:f_*(\mathscr{F})\otimes\mathcal{E}\to f_*(\mathscr{F}\otimes f^*\mathcal{E})$$

What a mess! Fortunately, when we restrict to an open set where $\mathcal{E}$ is free, everything looks nicer.

So, restrict to an open set $W\subseteq Y$ where $\mathcal{E}$ is free. Now, $\mathcal{E}$ and $f^*\mathcal{E}$ are free, hence you can easily check that $P$ and $P'$ are already sheaves, so $\psi=\phi=\operatorname{id}\otimes\gamma$ where we have $\gamma:\mathcal{E}\to f_*f^*\mathcal{E}$. But, for $\mathcal{E}$ free, you can easily check that this is an isomorphism.

p.s: the passage in the proof you have found not clear maybe it's simpler if viewed in this way: $f_*(\mathscr{F}\otimes \mathcal{O}_X^{\,n})\;\cong\; f_*(\mathscr{F}^{n})\cong f_*(\mathscr{F})^n$, and you can "take the $n$ out" just applying the definition of $f_*$.

  • 2
    This more or less works, if I understand correctly, but one should also be careful which ring is being tensored over. – A. S. May 10 '17 at 18:46
  • @GiulioBresciani If $\gamma: \mathcal E\to f_f^\mathcal E$ is an iso for $\mathcal E$ free then $\mathcal f_*O_X\cong \mathcal O_Y$ for any morphism of ringed spaces by taking $\mathcal E=\mathcal O_Y$. Is this true ? – raisinsec Oct 03 '23 at 19:37
0

$\newcommand{\H}{\operatorname{Hom}{}}$ $\newcommand{\HH}{\mathscr{H}}$ The crucial part is finding a natural morphism $f_*F\otimes E \to f_*(F\otimes f^* E)$, then it's easy to check that affine-locally this is an isomorphism. To find the map we will use $3$ facts (We denote by $\HH$ the Hom sheaf):

  1. Exercise 5.1.c of [HAG] : $$ \H_X(A\otimes B,\; C) \cong \H_X(A,\; \HH_X(B,C)) $$

  2. Well known adjunction isomorphism : $$\H_Y(f_* F,\; E ) \cong \H_X (F,\; f^*E)$$

  3. Identity which follows from the definitions of the $\HH$ sheaf and of pushforward : $$f_* \mathscr{H}om_X(A,\;B) \cong \mathscr{H}om_Y(f_* A,\; f_* B)$$

So, the isomorphism we are looking for is an element of $\H_Y(f_*F\otimes E,\; f_*(F\otimes f^* E))$, and using the above facts we find $$ \begin{eqnarray} \H_Y(f_*F\otimes E,\; f_*(F\otimes f^* E)) &\overset{(1)}\cong& \H_Y(E,\; \HH_Y(f_*F,\;f_*(F\otimes f^* E))) \\ &\overset{(3)}\cong& \H_Y(E,\; f_*\HH_X(F,\;(F\otimes f^* E))) \\ &\overset{(2)}\cong& \H_X(f^*E,\; \HH_X(F,\;(F\otimes f^* E))) \\ &\overset{(1)}\cong& \H_X(F \otimes f^*E,\; F\otimes f^* E) \end{eqnarray} $$ Therefore the identity does the job and we get the natural map we desired.

To conclude, we just need to show that, in fact, this is an isomorphism. Since all the functors involved commute with open restrictions, we can reduce to the affine case and assume $E$ is free. One can check that the above global map agrees with the chain of isomorphisms \begin{eqnarray*} f_*(F\otimes f^*E) &\;\cong\;& f_*(F\otimes \mathcal{O}_X^{\,n}) \\ &\;\cong\;& f_*(F\otimes \mathcal{O}_X)^{n} \\ &\;\cong\;& f_*(F)^{n} \\ &\;\cong\;& f_*(F)\otimes \mathcal{O}_Y^{\,n} \\ &\;\cong\;& f_*(F)\otimes E \end{eqnarray*} where we used multiple times the fact that the functors involved are additive and thus commute with finite direct sums.

Abramo
  • 7,155
  • There are some technicalities that are being glossed over in the grey box. In points 1,2 by Hom you mean *global hom. In 3, you have sheaf hom*. One is an abelian group the other a sheaf! Be careful! –  Jan 21 '14 at 15:24
  • Hi Benja. I agree with your comments, I should make my notation show that difference. Anyway, do you agree on my solution? – Abramo Jan 21 '14 at 15:27
  • @Benja: I edited my solution to reflect, in the notation, the difference you underlined. – Abramo Jan 21 '14 at 15:33
  • I posted my solution above. –  Jan 21 '14 at 16:33
  • 2
    Thanks, I like your solution. By the way, do you think mine is ok as well, or are there any mistakes? I'm learning, and these kind of comments are very important for me! – Abramo Jan 21 '14 at 17:01
  • 2
    Your adjunction formula is wrong. – Mathstudent Dec 21 '21 at 09:44
-1

The adjunction formula in Hartshorne, and the one I proved myself, is that $$ \hom_X(f^*E,F) \simeq \hom_Y(E,f_*F)$$ How does the one used here follow from this one? Is it general non-sense?

-3

Here's the slickest way I know to do this problem. Let $\mathscr{G}$ be any $\mathcal{O}_Y$-module. I will use the following facts in my answer.

  1. Adjointness of $f_\ast$ and $f^\ast$.

  2. Tensor-Hom adjunction

  3. Part (b) of exercise 5.1.

  4. Tensor product commutes with pullback.

In view of these, we have

$$\begin{eqnarray*} \operatorname{Hom}_Y(f_\ast(\mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathcal{O}_X} f^\ast \mathcal{E}),\mathscr{G}) &\stackrel{(1)}{=}& \operatorname{Hom}_X(\mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathcal{O}_X} f^\ast \mathcal{E},f^\ast \mathscr{G}) \\ &\stackrel{(2)}{=}& \operatorname{Hom}_X(\mathscr{F},\mathscr{H}om_{\mathcal{O}_X}(f^\ast \mathcal{E},f^\ast \mathscr{G})) \\ &\stackrel{(3)}{=}& \operatorname{Hom}_X(\mathscr{F},(f^\ast \mathcal{E})^\vee \otimes_{\mathcal{O}_X} f^\ast \mathscr{G}) \\ &\stackrel{(4)}{=}&\operatorname{Hom}_X(\mathscr{F},f^\ast (\mathcal{E}^\vee )\otimes_{\mathcal{O}_X} f^\ast \mathscr{G}) \\ &\stackrel{(4)}{=}& \operatorname{Hom}_X(\mathscr{F},f^\ast (\mathcal{E}^\vee \otimes_{\mathcal{O}_Y} \mathscr{G}) ) \\ &\stackrel{(1)}{=}& \operatorname{Hom}_Y(f_\ast\mathscr{F},\mathcal{E}^\vee \otimes_{\mathcal{O}_Y} \mathscr{G} ) \\ &\stackrel{(3)}{=}&\operatorname{Hom}_Y(f_\ast\mathscr{F},\mathscr{H}om_{\mathcal{O}_Y}(\mathcal{E},\mathscr{G}))\\ &\stackrel{(2)}{=}& \mathrm{Hom}_Y(f_\ast\mathscr{F}\otimes_{\mathcal{O}_Y} \mathcal{E},\mathscr{G})) \end{eqnarray*}$$

and so the Yoneda lemma implies $f_\ast(\mathscr{F} \otimes_{\mathcal{O}_X} f^\ast \mathcal{E}) \cong f_\ast\mathcal{F}\otimes_{\mathcal{O}_Y} \mathcal{E}$.

  • 4
    The adjointness of $f^$ and $f_$ goes the other way (pullback is left-adjoint to pushforward, see Hartshorne page 110), so it seems that this doesn't actually work. – A. S. May 10 '17 at 18:44
  • 2
    How is this answer incorrect and still getting the bounty? Haha... – Patrick Da Silva Aug 11 '17 at 22:23
  • $(f^{\ast},f_{\ast}) $ is an adjoint pair. The adjoint property used in your argument is not correct . – Jiabin Du Oct 31 '20 at 02:50