Ideal Sheaf - Algebraic Geometry

Algebraic Geometry

In the context of schemes, the importance of ideal sheaves lies mainly in the correspondence between closed subschemes and quasi-coherent ideal sheaves. Consider a scheme X and a quasi-coherent ideal sheaf J in OX. Then, the support Z of OX/J is a closed subspace of X, and (Z, OX/J) is a scheme (both assertions can be checked locally). It is called the closed subscheme of X defined by J. Conversely, let i: ZX be a closed immersion, i.e., a morphism which is a homeomorphism onto a closed subspace such that the associated map

i#: OXiOZ

is surjective on the stalks. Then, the kernel J of i# is a quasi-coherent ideal sheaf, and i induces an isomorphism from Z onto the closed subscheme defined by J.

A particular case of this correspondence is the unique reduced subscheme Xred of X having the same underlying space, which is defined by the nilradical of OX (defined stalk-wise, or on open affine charts).

For a morphism f: XY and a closed subscheme Y′Y defined by an ideal sheaf J, the preimage Y′ ×Y X is defined by the ideal sheaf

f⋆(J)OX = im(fJ → OX).

The pull-back of an ideal sheaf J to the subscheme Z defined by J contains important information, it is called the conormal bundle of Z. For example, the sheaf of Kähler differentials may be defined as the pull-back of the ideal sheaf defining the diagonal XX × X to X. (Assume for simplicity that X is separated so that the diagonal is a closed immersion.)

Read more about this topic:  Ideal Sheaf

Famous quotes containing the words algebraic and/or geometry:

    I have no scheme about it,—no designs on men at all; and, if I had, my mode would be to tempt them with the fruit, and not with the manure. To what end do I lead a simple life at all, pray? That I may teach others to simplify their lives?—and so all our lives be simplified merely, like an algebraic formula? Or not, rather, that I may make use of the ground I have cleared, to live more worthily and profitably?
    Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)

    ... geometry became a symbol for human relations, except that it was better, because in geometry things never go bad. If certain things occur, if certain lines meet, an angle is born. You cannot fail. It’s not going to fail; it is eternal. I found in rules of mathematics a peace and a trust that I could not place in human beings. This sublimation was total and remained total. Thus, I’m able to avoid or manipulate or process pain.
    Louise Bourgeois (b. 1911)