Quotient by an equivalence relation

In mathematics, given a category C, a quotient of an object X by an equivalence relation is a coequalizer for the pair of maps

where R is an object in C and "f is an equivalence relation" means that, for any object T in C, the image (which is a set) of is an equivalence relation; that is, a reflexive, symmetric and transitive relation.

The basic case in practice is when C is the category of all schemes over some scheme S. But the notion is flexible and one can also take C to be the category of sheaves.

Examples

  • Let X be a set and consider some equivalence relation on it. Let Q be the set of all equivalence classes in X. Then the map that sends an element x to the equivalence class to which x belongs is a quotient.
  • In the above example, Q is a subset of the power set H of X. In algebraic geometry, one might replace H by a Hilbert scheme or disjoint union of Hilbert schemes. In fact, Grothendieck constructed a relative Picard scheme of a flat projective scheme X[1] as a quotient Q (of the scheme Z parametrizing relative effective divisors on X) that is a closed scheme of a Hilbert scheme H. The quotient map can then be thought of as a relative version of the Abel map.
gollark: I think what would also be neat is a central price comparison/stock tracking system.
gollark: Higher work → mining produces blocks faster for same amount of H/sLower work → the opposite, slower blocks for same H/sThe server automatically tries to balance it so you get 1 block a minute.
gollark: Basically, when you do things for a company or person or whatever, they pay you for it, and you can then use that money to purchase goods and services.
gollark: It's documented on the arch wiki, you *have* to announce it.
gollark: It is, yes.

See also

Notes

  1. One also needs to assume the geometric fibers are integral schemes; Mumford's example shows the "integral" cannot be omitted.

References

  • Nitsure, N. Construction of Hilbert and Quot schemes. Fundamental algebraic geometry: Grothendieck’s FGA explained, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs 123, American Mathematical Society 2005, 105–137.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.