To proceed our theory further, we need to study a bit more about presheaves.
Unfortunately, a sheaf of modules
on an affine schemes are “too good”. Namely,
in terms of cohomology (which we study later,) we have always
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e9f8b/e9f8b4110b34156d5507e682eaeb560816179e1f" alt="% latex2html id marker 4979
$\displaystyle H^i (\operatorname{Spec}(A),\tilde {M} )=0 \qquad ($"
if
So to study some important problems on sheaf theory (which we
will sure to encounter when we deal with non-affine schemes,)
we need to study some examples from other mathematical areas.
A first example is a presheaf which satisfies the “locality” of sheaf axiom,
but which fails to obey “gluing lemma”.
EXAMPLE 07.25
Let
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d1ee0/d1ee0e16318b074c9147d3166b6e626eba577d4a" alt="$X=\mathbb{R}$"
be the (usual) real line with the usual Lebesgue measure.
Then we have a presheaf of
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9e819/9e819eaa06132a2673cc0d044a4266be3b550e23" alt="$L^1$"
-functions given by
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c047b/c047b87f03c89a7a181250282a2f10f29729b293" alt="$\displaystyle L^1(U)=\{ f:U\to \mathbb{C}; \vert f\vert$"
is integrable
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9e819/9e819eaa06132a2673cc0d044a4266be3b550e23" alt="$L^1$"
is a presheaf which satisfies the “locality” of sheaf axiom,
but which fails to obey “gluing lemma”.
Indeed, Let
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c11a3/c11a379f5b9b1b83df6b99de035fd84351951eae" alt="$\{U_n=(-n, n)\}$"
be an open covering of
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ac4bb/ac4bb7a2e8266cc704882b53d15b80cf538c0cd4" alt="$\mathbb{R}$"
and define
a section
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/97e9e/97e9e3f84478570fd98996837a5410c22884a4d1" alt="$f_n$"
on
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f845a/f845a66add198eee59d347fa0e505d2b214c53be" alt="$U_n$"
by
Then we see immediately that
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/06aaf/06aaf0a1e6cf21ee853118e77c043becf5de9ed7" alt="$\{f_n\}$"
is a family of sections which satisfies
the assumption of “gluing lemma”. The function which should
appear as the “glued function” is the constant function
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ed23d/ed23d4d92eff8d5eb5abb1c1d674f640d6584bb4" alt="$1$"
, which
fails to be integrable on the whole of
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ac4bb/ac4bb7a2e8266cc704882b53d15b80cf538c0cd4" alt="$\mathbb{R}$"
.
We may “sheaficate” the presheaf
above.
Instead of
-functions we consider functions which are locally
.
Namely, for any open subset
, we consider
The presheaf so defined is a sheaf, which we may call “the sheaf of
locally
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9e819/9e819eaa06132a2673cc0d044a4266be3b550e23" alt="$L^1$"
-functions”.
EXAMPLE 07.26
Similarly, we may consider a presheaf
Bdddata:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eaac8/eaac8757bcf7f815d50978953d56cefefe58562e" alt="$(U)$"
of bounded functions on a topological
space
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5cc26/5cc26cc0bcb1d40cbe08f1cea167b93ecc49be13" alt="$X$"
. We may sheaficate this example and the sheaf so created is
the sheaf of locally bounded functions.
EXAMPLE 07.27
It is psychologically a bit difficult to give an example of
a presheaf which does not satisfy the locality axiom of a sheaf.
But there are in fact a lot of them.
For any differentiable (
) manifold
(students
which are not familiar with the manifolds may take
as an open
subset of
for an example.),
we define a presheaf
on
defined as follows
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3d4a9/3d4a9f07b387908856272312e929c85ef07e2f31" alt="$\displaystyle \mathcal G(U)=C^{\infty}(U\times U)=
\{$"
complex valued $C^&infin#infty;$-functions on $U×U$
The restriction is defined in an obvious manner.
It is an easy exercise to see that the presheaf does not satisfy the
locality axiom of a sheaf.
To sheaficate this, we first need to introduce an equivalence relation on
.
Then we may easily see that
holds.
Then we define
It is now an easy exercise again to verify that
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b9331/b93310598c63e394d843335fe5c0ed18d98cf752" alt="$\mathcal F$"
so defined
is a sheaf.
(Readers who are familiar with the theory of jets may notice that
the sheaf is related to the sheaf of jets. In other words, there is a
sheaf homomorphism from this sheaf to the sheaf of jets.)