ScalingStacks

8 Model near a singular point [03W2]

Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.

Complete original source context Β· Original author HTML

8 Model near a singular point

Here we will construct an analytic torus fibration corresponding to standard singularity (see Sections 3.2.4 and 6.4).

Let XβŠ‚π€3X\subset{\bf A}^{3} be the algebraic surface given by equation (Ξ±β€‹Ξ²βˆ’1)​γ=1(\alpha\beta-1)\gamma=1 in coordinates (Ξ±,Ξ²,Ξ³)(\alpha,\beta,\gamma), and Xa​nX^{an} be the corresponding analytic space. We define a continuous map f:Xa​n→𝐑3f:X^{an}\to{{\bf R}}^{3} by the formula f⁑(Ξ±,Ξ²,Ξ³)=(a,b,c)f(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)=(a,b,c) where a=max⁑(0,log⁑|Ξ±|p),b=max⁑(0,log⁑|Ξ²|p),c=log⁑|Ξ³|p=βˆ’log⁑|Ξ±β€‹Ξ²βˆ’1|pa=\max(0,\log|\alpha|_{p}),b=\max(0,\log|\beta|_{p}),c=\log|\gamma|_{p}=-\log|\alpha\beta-1|_{p}. Here |β‹…|p=exp(βˆ’valp(β‹…))|\cdot|_{p}=\exp(-val_{p}(\cdot)) denotes the multiplicative seminorm corresponding to the point p∈Xa​np\in X^{an} (see Appendix A).

Proposition 4

The map ff is proper. Moreover

a) Image of ff is homeomorphic to 𝐑2{\bf R}^{2}.

b) All points of the image except of (0,0,0)(0,0,0) are ff-smooth.

Proof. Here is the plan of the proof.

  1. 1.

    We define three open domains Ti,i=1,2,3T_{i},\,\,i=1,2,3 in three copies of the standard two-dimensional analytic torus (𝐆ma​n)2({\bf G}_{m}^{an})^{2}, and continuous maps Ο€i:Ti→𝐑2\pi_{i}:T_{i}\to{{\bf R}}^{2} such that all points of the image Ui=Ο€i​(Ti)U_{i}=\pi_{i}(T_{i}) are Ο€i\pi_{i}-smooth (i.e. each Ο€i\pi_{i} is an analytic torus fibration). Domains UiU_{i} cover 𝐑2βˆ–{(0,0)}{\bf R}^{2}\setminus\{(0,0)\}.

  2. 2.

    For each i,1≀i≀3i,1\leq i\leq 3 we construct an open embedding gi:Tiβ†ͺXa​ng_{i}:T_{i}\hookrightarrow X^{an}.

  3. 3.

    We construct an embedding j:𝐑2β†ͺ𝐑3j:{{\bf R}}^{2}\hookrightarrow{{\bf R}}^{3} such that each open set UiU_{i} is homeomorphically identified with f​(gi​(Ti))f(g_{i}(T_{i})) and j⁑((,,,))=(0,0,0)j((0,0))=(0,0,0). Moreover, Ο€i\pi_{i}-smooth points are mapped into ff-smooth points.

The Proposition will follow from 1)-3).

Let us describe the constructions and formulas. We start with open sets Ui,1≀i≀3U_{i},1\leq i\leq 3. Let us fix a number 0<Ξ΅<10<\varepsilon<1 and define

U1={(x,y)βˆˆπ‘2|x<Ρ​|y|}U2={(x,y)βˆˆπ‘2|x>0,y<Ξ΅x}U3={(x,y)βˆˆπ‘2|x>0,y>0}\begin{array}[]{lll}U_{1}&=&\{(x,y)\in{{\bf R}}^{2}|x<\varepsilon|y|\,\}\\ U_{2}&=&\{(x,y)\in{{\bf R}}^{2}|x>0,y<\varepsilon x\,\}\\ U_{3}&=&\{(x,y)\in{{\bf R}}^{2}|x>0,y>0\}\end{array}

Clearly 𝐑2βˆ–{(0,0)}=U1βˆͺU2βˆͺU3{{\bf R}}^{2}\setminus\{(0,0)\}=U_{1}\cup U_{2}\cup U_{3}. We define also a slightly modified domain U2β€²U_{2}^{\prime} as {(x,y)βˆˆπ‘2|x>0,y<Ξ΅1+Ξ΅x}\{(x,y)\in{{\bf R}}^{2}|x>0,y<\frac{\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}x\,\}.

We define Ti:=Ο€c​a​nβˆ’1(Ui)βŠ‚(𝐆ma​n)2,i=1,3T_{i}:=\pi_{can}^{-1}(U_{i})\subset({\bf G}_{m}^{an})^{2},i=1,3 and T2:=Ο€c​a​nβˆ’1​(U2β€²)βŠ‚(𝐆ma​n)2T_{2}:=\pi_{can}^{-1}(U_{2}^{\prime})\subset({\bf G}_{m}^{an})^{2}. Then the projections Ο€i:Tlβ†’Ul\pi_{i}:T_{l}\to U_{l} are given by the formulas

Ο€i(ΞΎi,Ξ·i)=Ο€c​a​n(ΞΎi,Ξ·i)=(log|ΞΎi|,log|Ξ·i|),i=1,3,\pi_{i}(\xi_{i},\eta_{i})=\pi_{can}(\xi_{i},\eta_{i})=(\log|\xi_{i}|,\log|\eta_{i}|),\,\,\,i=1,3\,\,,
Ο€2​(ΞΎ2,Ξ·2)={(log⁑|ΞΎ2|,log⁑|Ξ·2|)Β if ​|Ξ·2|<1(log⁑|ΞΎ2|βˆ’log⁑|Ξ·2|,log⁑|Ξ·2|)Β if ​|Ξ·2|β‰₯1.\pi_{2}(\xi_{2},\eta_{2})=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}(\log|\xi_{2}|,\log|\eta_{2}|)&\mbox{ if }|\eta_{2}|<1\\ (\log|\xi_{2}|-\log|\eta_{2}|,\log|\eta_{2}|)&\mbox{ if }|\eta_{2}|\geq 1\end{array}\right.\,\,.

In these formulas (ΞΎi,Ξ·i)(\xi_{i},\eta_{i}) are coordinates on Ti,1≀i≀3T_{i},1\leq i\leq 3.

We define inclusion gi:Tiβ†ͺX,1≀i≀3g_{i}:T_{i}\hookrightarrow X,1\leq i\leq 3 by the following formulas:

g1​(ΞΎ1,Ξ·1)=(1ΞΎ1,ΞΎ1​(1+Ξ·1),1Ξ·1)g2​(ΞΎ2,Ξ·2)=(1+Ξ·2ΞΎ2,ΞΎ2,1Ξ·2)g3​(ΞΎ3,Ξ·3)=(1+Ξ·3ΞΎ3​η3,ΞΎ3​η3,1Ξ·3)\begin{array}[]{lll}g_{1}(\xi_{1},\eta_{1})&=&({1\over{\xi_{1}}},\xi_{1}(1+\eta_{1}),{1\over{\eta_{1}}})\\ g_{2}(\xi_{2},\eta_{2})&=&({1+\eta_{2}\over{\xi_{2}}},\xi_{2},{1\over{\eta_{2}}})\\ g_{3}(\xi_{3},\eta_{3})&=&({1+\eta_{3}\over{\xi_{3}\eta_{3}}},\xi_{3}\eta_{3},{1\over{\eta_{3}}})\end{array}

Let us decompose Xa​n=Xβˆ’βˆͺX0βˆͺX+X^{an}=X_{-}\cup X_{0}\cup X_{+} according to the sign of log⁑|Ξ³|p\log|\gamma|_{p} where p∈Xa​np\in X^{an} is a point. It is easy to see that

f⁑(Xβˆ’)={(a,b,c)βˆˆπ‘3|c<0,aβ‰₯0,bβ‰₯0,ab(a+b+c)=0}f⁑(X0)={(a,b,c)βˆˆπ‘3|c=0,aβ‰₯0,bβ‰₯0,ab=0}f⁑(X+)={(a,b,c)βˆˆπ‘3|c>0,aβ‰₯0,bβ‰₯0,ab=0}\begin{array}[]{lll}f(X_{-})&=&\{\,(a,b,c)\in{{\bf R}}^{3}\,|\,c<0,a\geq 0,b\geq 0,\,ab(a+b+c)=0\,\}\\ f(X_{0})&=&\{\,(a,b,c)\in{{\bf R}}^{3}\,|\,c=0,a\geq 0,b\geq 0,\,ab=0\,\}\\ f(X_{+})&=&\{\,(a,b,c)\in{{\bf R}}^{3}\,|\,c>0,a\geq 0,b\geq 0,\,ab=0\,\}\end{array}

From this explicit description we see that ff is proper and the image of ff is homeomorphic to 𝐑2{{\bf R}}^{2}.

Let us consider the embedding j:𝐑2→𝐑3j:{{\bf R}}^{2}\to{{\bf R}}^{3} given by formula

j⁑(x,y)={(βˆ’x,max⁑(x+y,0),βˆ’y)Β ifΒ x≀0( 0,x+max⁑(y,0),βˆ’y)Β ifΒ xβ‰₯0j(x,y)=\left\{\begin{array}[]{lll}(-x\,,\,\max(x+y,0)\,,\,-y\,)&\mbox{ if }&x\leq 0\\ (\,0\,,\,x+\max(y,0)\,,\,-y\,)&\mbox{ if }&x\geq 0\end{array}\right.

One can easily check that the image of jj coincides with the image of ff, jβˆ˜Ο€i=f∘gij\circ\pi_{i}=f\circ g_{i} and fβˆ’1​(j⁑(Ui))=gi​(Ti)f^{-1}(j(U_{i}))=g_{i}(T_{i}) for all 1≀i≀31\leq i\leq 3. This concludes the proof of Proposition. β– \blacksquare

We can derive more from explicit formulas given in the proof.

Let us denote by Ο€:Xa​n→𝐑2\pi:X^{an}\to{{\bf R}}^{2} the map j(βˆ’1)∘fj^{(-1)}\circ f. It is an analytic torus fibration outside of point (0,0)(0,0). The induced 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on 𝐑2βˆ–{(0,0)}{{\bf R}}^{2}\setminus\{(0,0)\} is in fact the standard singular 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure described in Sections 3.2.4 and 6.4, as follows immediately from formulas for projections Ο€i,i=1,2,3\pi_{i},\,i=1,2,3.

Let us introduce another sheaf π’ͺc​a​n{\cal O}^{can} on 𝐑2βˆ–{(0,0)}{{\bf R}}^{2}\setminus\{(0,0)\}. It is defined as (Ο€i)βˆ—β€‹(π’ͺTi)(\pi_{i})_{*}\left({\cal O}_{T_{i}}\right) in each domain UiU_{i}, with identifications

(ΞΎ1,Ξ·1)=(ΞΎ2,Ξ·2)Β on ​U1∩U2(ΞΎ1,Ξ·1)=(ΞΎ3,Ξ·3)Β on ​U1∩U3(ΞΎ2,Ξ·2)=(ΞΎ3​η3,Ξ·3)Β on ​U2∩U3\begin{array}[]{llcl}(\xi_{1},\eta_{1})&=&(\xi_{2},\eta_{2})&\mbox{ on }U_{1}\cap U_{2}\\ (\xi_{1},\eta_{1})&=&(\xi_{3},\eta_{3})&\mbox{ on }U_{1}\cap U_{3}\\ (\xi_{2},\eta_{2})&=&(\xi_{3}\eta_{3},\eta_{3})&\mbox{ on }U_{2}\cap U_{3}\end{array}

Let us consider the direct image sheaf Ο€βˆ—β€‹(π’ͺXa​n)\pi_{\ast}({\cal O}_{X^{an}}). It is easy to see that on the sets U1U_{1} and U2βˆͺU3U_{2}\cup U_{3} this sheaf is canonically isomorphic to π’ͺc​a​n{\cal O}^{can}. The isomorphism is given by the identification of coordinates (ΞΎ1,Ξ·1)(\xi_{1},\eta_{1}) on U1U_{1}, and of coordinates (ΞΎ2,Ξ·2)(\xi_{2},\eta_{2}) and (ΞΎ3,Ξ·3)(\xi_{3},\eta_{3}) on U2βˆͺU3U_{2}\cup U_{3}. Therefore on the intersection U1∩(U2βˆͺU3)U_{1}\cap(U_{2}\cup U_{3}) we identify two copies of the canonical sheaf by certain automorphism Ο†\varphi of π’ͺc​a​n{\cal O}^{can} which preserves one coordinate (namely, the coordinate Ξ·\eta). We will develop the theory of such transformations and their analytic continuations in Section 11. The explicit formulas for Ο†\varphi is

φ⁑(ΞΎ,Ξ·)={(ξ⁑(1+Ξ·),Ξ·)Β onΒ U1∩U2(ξ⁑(1+1/Ξ·),Ξ·)Β onΒ U1∩U3\varphi(\xi,\eta)=\left\{\begin{array}[]{cll}(\xi(1+\eta),\eta)&\mbox{ on }&U_{1}\cap U_{2}\\ (\xi(1+1/\eta),\eta)&\mbox{ on }&U_{1}\cap U_{3}\end{array}\right.

We would like to say now few words about analytic volume forms. Notice that each TiβŠ‚(𝐆ma​n)2T_{i}\subset({\bf G}_{m}^{an})^{2} carries a nowhere vanishing top degree analytic form given by the formula Ξ©i=d​ξi∧d​ηiΞΎi​ηi\Omega_{i}={d\xi_{i}\wedge d\eta_{i}\over{\xi_{i}\eta_{i}}}. Then a straightforward calculation shows that Ξ©Ti\Omega^{T_{i}} is the pullback under gig_{i} of nowhere vanishing on Xa​nX^{an} analytic top degree form

Ξ©=βˆ’Ξ³β€‹dβ€‹Ξ±βˆ§d​β.\Omega=-\gamma\,d\alpha\wedge d\beta\,\,.

Form Ξ©\Omega satisfies Constant Norm Assumption, hence it gives a KK-affine structure on 𝐑2βˆ–{(0,0)}{\bf R}^{2}\setminus\{(0,0)\}. On the other hand, the sheaf π’ͺc​a​n{\cal O}^{can} of algebras is also endowed with top-degree form Ξ©c​a​n\Omega^{can}, equal to d​ξi∧d​ηiΞΎi​ηi{d\xi_{i}\wedge d\eta_{i}\over{\xi_{i}\eta_{i}}} in local coordinates.

Lemma 3

The KK-affine structure on 𝐑2βˆ–{(0,0)}{\bf R}^{2}\setminus\{(0,0)\} associated with Ξ©\Omega coincides with the one associated with Ξ©c​a​n\Omega^{can}.

Proof: Using definitions from Section 7.2 one sees immediately that the statement of the Lemma follows from the equality pΞ©c​a​n​(1+Ξ·)=1p_{\Omega^{can}}(1+\eta)=1, which is straightoforward: pΞ©c​a​n​(1+Ξ·)=e​x​p​(R​e​s​(Ξ©c​a​n​log⁑(1+Ξ·)))=1∈π’ͺKΓ—p_{\Omega^{can}}(1+\eta)=exp\left(Res(\Omega^{can}\,\log(1+\eta))\right)=1\in{\cal O}_{K}^{\times}. β– \,\blacksquare

In all the definitions and formulas in this section on can shift domains Ui,,i=1,2,3U_{i},_{,}i=1,2,3 by vector (x0,0)βˆˆπ‘2(x_{0},0)\in{\bf R}^{2} for arbitrary x0βˆˆπ‘x_{0}\in{\bf R}, thus giving a map Xa​n→𝐑2X^{an}\to{\bf R}^{2} with singularity at the point (x0,0)(x_{0},0).

Finally, we denote Ο€βˆ—β€‹(π’ͺXa​n)\pi_{\ast}({\cal O}_{X^{an}}) by π’ͺ𝐑2m​o​d​e​l{\cal O}^{model}_{{\bf R}^{2}}. This will be our model for the sheaf π’ͺB{\cal O}_{B} near each point of the singular set Bs​i​n​gB^{sing}.

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source-backed reader collection; mathematical self-containment is not assessed.