Wednesday, 9 November 2011

ag.algebraic geometry - When is the base change morphism an isomorphism?

This is a rewrite of a previous question, which was in turn a follow up question to Leray-Hirsch principle for étale cohomology The motivation is to clarify some points in Torsten Ekedahl's answer there. (Some time ago I also posted a brief version as a comment there.)



Let XtoY be a surjective morphism of connected algebraic varieties over an algebraically closed field k and let F be a constructible sheaf on X whose stalks are of order prime to char(k). For any closed geometric point yinY we have the natural base change map (RifF)ytoHi(Xy,F) where Xy is the fiber over y.




Can one deduce that all RifastF,i>0 are zero assuming that for each closed y we have Hi(Xy,F)=0,i>0? If the answer is yes, I would be interested in knowing whether there is an analog of this for the l-adic cohomology with mathbfQl coefficients.




[upd: nope, as per Dustin's comment below.]



Note that in the 'etale case Proposition 4.12, Chapter VI in Milne, 'Etale cohomology gives a stronger conclusion (Hast(X,F)toHast(Y,f1F) is an iso for any F) under a stronger hypothesis that the Hast(Xy,F) vanishes in positive degrees for any geometric point y, which may or may not be closed, and for all F.




So here is a side-question: does it suffice to check the vanishing for closed points?




At first I thought the answer would be yes, which is why I accepted Torsten's answer to the above question, but then I realized I don't know how to prove this.



[upd: .. and for a good reason since it's false.]



Remark: if f is proper, the statement is true by the proper base change theorem, but as pointed out by Dustin Clausen in the above thread, assuming f smooth does not help. In fact, if f:mathbfA2setminus0tomathbfA1 is the projection to one of the coordinate axes, then (unless I'm mistaken) R3funderlineA is non-zero at the origin (where A is a finite group of order prime to char(k)), but the cohomology of the preimage of the origin vanishes in degrees >1.



Here is some more motivation and one more question. If G is a Lie group that acts on a sufficiently nice topological space X, then the stack cohomology of the quotient is simply the cohomology of the Borel construction XtimesEG/G where EG is the universal G-bundle and the action is diagonal. The Borel construction is mapped to X/G (assuming the topological quotient is reasonable) and the fiber over [x]inX/G,xinX is the classifying space of the stabilizer of x. So if the action is with finite stabilizers, Hast(X/G,mathbfQ) is isomorphic to the cohomology of the Borel quotient. One can try to mimick this in the 'etale setting, but there are some technical difficulties: in the topological case there are some tools (maximal compact subgroup, the existence of slices for compact group actions, ...) which don't seem to have easy analogs.



However, I would still guess that if G is an algebraic group that acts with finite stabilizers on an algebraic variety X (I'd be willing to assume it smooth but not affine), the cohomology of the quotient with mathbfQl coefficients should be the same as the cohomology of the Borel construction and it seems plausible that someone has looked into this before.




So I would like to ask: is there a reference for that?




(Note that although EG does not exist as an algebraic variety, it can be approximated by algebraic varieties: e.g. if G=GLn(k), one can take the spaces of n-frame bundles in kN,Ntoinfty.)

No comments:

Post a Comment