Restriction of sheaf on a closed subscheme is in general not quasi-coherent?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
In Hartshorne 5.2.4, we have
If $Y$ is a closed subscheme of a scheme $X$, then the sheaf $mathcalO_Y$ is not in general quasi-coherent in $Y$.
I'm having a hard time believing this, mainly because I can't think of any examples. Would any affine $X$ make an example? Say we have the closed subscheme $Y = textSpec A/mathfraka$ embedded in $X = textSpec A$.
Thanks!
algebraic-geometry sheaf-theory
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
In Hartshorne 5.2.4, we have
If $Y$ is a closed subscheme of a scheme $X$, then the sheaf $mathcalO_Y$ is not in general quasi-coherent in $Y$.
I'm having a hard time believing this, mainly because I can't think of any examples. Would any affine $X$ make an example? Say we have the closed subscheme $Y = textSpec A/mathfraka$ embedded in $X = textSpec A$.
Thanks!
algebraic-geometry sheaf-theory
3
As Hartshorne points out, it isn't even an $mathcal O_Y$-module in general: $A$ is typically not an $A/mathfrak a$-module
â John Brevik
Aug 27 at 20:10
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
In Hartshorne 5.2.4, we have
If $Y$ is a closed subscheme of a scheme $X$, then the sheaf $mathcalO_Y$ is not in general quasi-coherent in $Y$.
I'm having a hard time believing this, mainly because I can't think of any examples. Would any affine $X$ make an example? Say we have the closed subscheme $Y = textSpec A/mathfraka$ embedded in $X = textSpec A$.
Thanks!
algebraic-geometry sheaf-theory
In Hartshorne 5.2.4, we have
If $Y$ is a closed subscheme of a scheme $X$, then the sheaf $mathcalO_Y$ is not in general quasi-coherent in $Y$.
I'm having a hard time believing this, mainly because I can't think of any examples. Would any affine $X$ make an example? Say we have the closed subscheme $Y = textSpec A/mathfraka$ embedded in $X = textSpec A$.
Thanks!
algebraic-geometry sheaf-theory
asked Aug 27 at 14:46
nekodesu
999518
999518
3
As Hartshorne points out, it isn't even an $mathcal O_Y$-module in general: $A$ is typically not an $A/mathfrak a$-module
â John Brevik
Aug 27 at 20:10
add a comment |Â
3
As Hartshorne points out, it isn't even an $mathcal O_Y$-module in general: $A$ is typically not an $A/mathfrak a$-module
â John Brevik
Aug 27 at 20:10
3
3
As Hartshorne points out, it isn't even an $mathcal O_Y$-module in general: $A$ is typically not an $A/mathfrak a$-module
â John Brevik
Aug 27 at 20:10
As Hartshorne points out, it isn't even an $mathcal O_Y$-module in general: $A$ is typically not an $A/mathfrak a$-module
â John Brevik
Aug 27 at 20:10
add a comment |Â
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2896255%2frestriction-of-sheaf-on-a-closed-subscheme-is-in-general-not-quasi-coherent%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
3
As Hartshorne points out, it isn't even an $mathcal O_Y$-module in general: $A$ is typically not an $A/mathfrak a$-module
â John Brevik
Aug 27 at 20:10