Torsor (algebraic geometry)

In algebraic geometry, a torsor or a principal bundle is an analogue of a principal bundle in algebraic topology. Because there are few open sets in Zariski topology, it is more common to consider torsors in étale topology or some other flat topologies. The notion also generalizes a Galois extension in abstract algebra. Though other notions of torsors are known in more general context (e.g. over stacks) this article will focus on torsors over schemes, the original setting where torsors have been thought for. The word torsor comes from the French torseur. They are indeed widely discussed, for instance, in Michel Demazure's and Pierre Gabriel's famous book Groupes algébriques, Tome I.[1]

Definition edit

Let   be a Grothendieck topology and   a scheme. Moreover let   be a group scheme over  , a  -torsor (or principal  -bundle) over   for the topology   (or simply a  -torsor when the topology is clear from the context) is the data of a scheme   and a morphism   with a  -invariant action on   that is locally trivial in   i.e. there exists a covering   such that the base change   over   is isomorphic to the trivial torsor   [2]

Notations edit

When   is the étale topology (resp. fpqc, etc.) instead of a torsor for the étale topology we can also say an étale-torsor (resp. fpqc-torsor etc.).

Étale, fpqc and fppf topologies edit

Unlike in the Zariski topology in many Grothendieck topologies a torsor can be itself a covering. This happens in some of the most common Grothendieck topologies, such as the fpqc-topology the fppf-topology but also the étale topology (and many less famous ones). So let   be any of those topologies (étale, fpqc, fppf). Let   be a scheme and   a group scheme over  . Then   is a  -torsor if and only if   over   is isomorphic to the trivial torsor   over  . In this case we often say that a torsor trivializes itself (as it becomes a trivial torsor when pulled back over itself).

Correspondence vector bundles--torsors edit

Over a given scheme   there is a bijection, between vector bundles over   (i.e. locally free sheaves) and  -torsors, where  , the rank of  . Given   one can take the (representable) sheaf of local isomorphisms   which has a structure of a  -torsor. It is easy to prove that  .

Trivial torsors and sections edit

A  -torsor   is isomorphic to a trivial torsor if and only if   is nonempty, i.e. the morphism   admits at least a section  . Indeed, if there exists a section  , then   is an isomorphism. On the other hand if   is isomorphic to a trivial  -torsor, then  ; the identity lement   gives the required section  .

Examples and basic properties edit

  • If   is a finite Galois extension, then   is a  -torsor (roughly because the Galois group acts simply transitively on the roots.) By abuse of notation we have still denoted by   the finite constant group scheme over   associated to the abstract group  . This fact is a basis for Galois descent. See integral extension for a generalization.
  • If   is an abelian variety over a field   then the multiplication by  ,   is a torsor for the fpqc-topology under the action of the finite  -group scheme  . That happens for instance when   is an elliptic curve.

Torsors and cohomology edit

Let   be a  -torsor for the étale topology and let   be a covering trivializing  , as in the definition. A trivial torsor admits a section: thus, there are elements  . Fixing such sections  , we can write uniquely   on   with  . Different choices of   amount to 1-coboundaries in cohomology; that is, the   define a cohomology class in the sheaf cohomology (more precisely Čech cohomology with sheaf coefficient) group  .[3] A trivial torsor corresponds to the identity element. Conversely, it is easy to see any class in   defines a  -torsor over  , unique up to a unique isomorphism.

The universal torsor of a scheme X and the fundamental group scheme edit

In this context torsors have to be taken in the fpqc topology. Let   be a Dedekind scheme (e.g. the spectrum of a field) and   a faithfully flat morphism, locally of finite type. Assume   has a section  . We say that   has a fundamental group scheme   if there exist a pro-finite and flat  -torsor  , called the universal torsor of  , with a section   such that for any finite  -torsor   with a section   there is a unique morphism of torsors   sending   to  . Its existence has been proved by Madhav V. Nori[4][5][6] for   the spectrum of a field and by Marco Antei, Michel Emsalem and Carlo Gasbarri when   is a Dedekind scheme of dimension 1.[7][8]

The contracted product edit

The contracted product is an operation allowing to build a new torsor from a given one, inflating or deflating its structure with some particular procedure also known as push forward. Though the construction can be presented in a wider generality we are only presenting here the following, easier and very common situation: we are given a right  -torsor   and a group scheme morphism  . Then   acts to the left on   via left multiplication:  . We say that two elements   and   are equivalent if there exists   such that  . The space of orbits   is called the contracted product of   through  . Elements are denoted as  . The contracted product is a scheme and has a structure of a right  -torsor when provided with the action  . Of course all the operations have to be intended functorially and not set theoretically. The name contracted product comes from the French produit contracté and in algebraic geometry it is preferred to its topological equivalent push forward.

Morphisms of torsors and reduction of structure group scheme edit

Let   and   be respectively a (right)  -torsor and a (right)  -torsor in some Grothendieck topology   where   and   are  -group schemes. A morphism (of torsors) from   to   is a pair of morphisms   where   is a  -morphism and   is group-scheme morphism such that   where   and   are respectively the action of   on   and of   on  .

In this way   can be proved to be isomorphic to the contracted product  . If the morpshims   is a closed immersion then   is said to be a sub-torsor of  . We can also say, inheriting the language from topology, that   admits a reduction of structure group scheme from   to  .

Structure reduction theorem edit

An important result by Vladimir Drinfeld and Carlos Simpson goes as follows: let   be a smooth projective curve over an algebraically closed field  ,   a semisimple, split and simply connected algebraic group (then a group scheme) and   a  -torsor on  ,   being a finitely generated  -algebra. Then there is an étale morphism   such that   admits a reduction of structure group scheme to a Borel subgroup-scheme of  .[9][10]

Further remarks edit

  • It is common to consider a torsor for not just a group scheme but more generally for a group sheaf (e.g., fppf group sheaf).
  • The category of torsors over a fixed base forms a stack. Conversely, a prestack can be stackified by taking the category of torsors (over the prestack).
  • If   is a connected algebraic group over a finite field  , then any  -torsor over   is trivial. (Lang's theorem.)

Invariants edit

If P is a parabolic subgroup of a smooth affine group scheme G with connected fibers, then its degree of instability, denoted by  , is the degree of its Lie algebra   as a vector bundle on X. The degree of instability of G is then  . If G is an algebraic group and E is a G-torsor, then the degree of instability of E is the degree of the inner form   of G induced by E (which is a group scheme over X); i.e.,  . E is said to be semi-stable if   and is stable if  .

Examples of torsors in applied mathematics edit

According to John Baez, energy, voltage, position and the phase of a quantum-mechanical wavefunction are all examples of torsors in everyday physics; in each case, only relative comparisons can be measured, but a reference point must be chosen arbitrarily to make absolute values meaningful. However, the comparative values of relative energy, voltage difference, displacements and phase differences are not torsors, but can be represented by simpler structures such as real numbers, vectors or angles.[11]

In basic calculus, he cites indefinite integrals as being examples of torsors.[11]

See also edit

Notes edit

  1. ^ Demazure, Michel; Gabriel, Pierre (2005). Groupes algébriques, tome I. North Holland. ISBN 9780720420340.
  2. ^ Vistoli, Angelo (2005). Grothendieck Topologies, in "Fundamental Algebraic Geometry". AMS. ISBN 978-0821842454.
  3. ^ Milne 1980, The discussion preceding Proposition 4.6.
  4. ^ Nori, Madhav V. (1976). "On the Representations of the Fundamental Group" (PDF). Compositio Mathematica. 33 (1): 29–42. MR 0417179. Zbl 0337.14016.
  5. ^ Nori, Madhav V. (1982). "The fundamental group-scheme". Proceedings Mathematical Sciences. 91 (2): 73–122. doi:10.1007/BF02967978. S2CID 121156750.
  6. ^ Szamuely, Tamás (2009). Galois Groups and Fundamental Groups. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511627064. ISBN 9780521888509.
  7. ^ Antei, Marco; Emsalem, Michel; Gasbarri, Carlo (2020). "Sur l'existence du schéma en groupes fondamental". Épijournal de Géométrie Algébrique. arXiv:1504.05082. doi:10.46298/epiga.2020.volume4.5436. S2CID 227029191.
  8. ^ Antei, Marco; Emsalem, Michel; Gasbarri, Carlo (2020). "Erratum for "Heights of vector bundles and the fundamental group scheme of a curve"". Duke Mathematical Journal. 169 (16). doi:10.1215/00127094-2020-0065. S2CID 225148904.
  9. ^ Gaitsgory, Dennis (October 27, 2009). "Seminar notes: Higgs bundles, Kostant section, and local triviality of G-bundles" (PDF). Harvard University. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2022-06-30.
  10. ^ Lurie, Jacob (March 5, 2014). "Existence of Borel Reductions I (Lecture 14)" (PDF). Harvard University.
  11. ^ a b Baez, John (December 27, 2009). "Torsors Made Easy". math.ucr.edu. Retrieved 2022-11-22.

References edit

Further reading edit