That is a pretty terse proof! Let me give an outline of a proof that I know. First, one could deduce the statement from a more general:
Theorem 1: Let R be a regular local ring, E be a reflexive R-module locally free on UR, the punctured spectrum such that E has no free direct summand. Then one can find a free module T and a filtration:
EoplusT=F0supseteqF1supseteqcdotsFN=0
with Fi/Fi+1 a syzygy of k=R/m.
Why is this local statement implies what you want?
Let A=k[x0,cdots,xn],m=(x0,cdots,xn),X=Proj(A)=mathbbPn,R=Am. There is natural functor from the category of vector bundles on X to that of vector bundles on UR, which is the same as the category of reflexive R-modules which are locally free on UR. This is used by Horrocks all the time and is explained in Section 9 of his paper: "Vector bundles on punctured spectrum of a regular local ring".
A proof of Theorem 1 can be found in Chapter 5 (theorem 5.2) of the book "Syzygy" by Evans-Griffith. A brief outline in case you can't find the book:
As suggested in the paper you quoted, one starts with a minimal resolution of E∗. Then dualizing gives a complex (remember that E∗∗congE as E is reflexive):
0toEtoL0toL1cdots
whose cohomologies are Exti(E∗,R). Let i>0 be the smallest number such that X=Exti(E∗,R)neq0 Break the l.e.s in to the exact sequences:
0toEtoL0toL1cdotstoLitoNto0(∗)
and 0toXtoNtoN/Xto0. Now build free resolutions for X and N/X and map them onto (∗) as in Horseshoe Lemma, stopping at the spot E, one gets a s.e.s:
0toBtoEoplusTtoCto0
here T is free and C is a syzygy of X=Exti(E∗,R). Repeat if necessary and you have a filtration whose quotient are syzygies of various Exti(E∗,R). But each of this Ext modules has finite length (as E is locally free on UR), so they can be filtered by copies of k. Now use the same trick to build a finer filtration whose quotients are syzygies of k. Since R is regular, the resolution of k is the Koszul complex, answering your second question.
No comments:
Post a Comment