0
$\begingroup$

$\DeclareMathOperator\Hom{Hom}$I am reading Introduction to affine group schemes by Waterhouse. In the second chapter he defines a closed embedding in the following way. Let $G = \Hom_k(A,-)$ and $H'= \Hom_k(B',-)$ be affine group schemes and $\Psi : H' \to G $ be a homomorphism. $\Psi$ is called a closed embedding if the corresponding algebra map $\phi :A \to B'$ is surjective.

It is easy to see that when $\phi$ is surjective then for any $k$-algebra $R$ the homomorphism $\Psi_R : H'(R) \to G(R)$ is injective. But I am not sure about the converse.

A natural definition of "embedding" could have been the homomorphism $\Psi_R : H'(R) \to G(R)$ is injective for all $k$-algebras $R$ but the author has defined otherwise. Is there any example where each $\Psi_R$ is injective but the corresponding map $A \to B'$ is not surjective? May be this is the reason for the definition given in Waterhouse?

Note: Waterhouse does not consider $A$, $B'$ to be finitely generated $k$-algebras.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I think your algebra map is the wrong way around: a map of schemes from $H'$ to $G$ should be a map of algebras from $A$ to $B'$, not $B'$ to $A$. \\ I don't know an example off the top of my head, but note that a closed embedding is not just an injection on the functorial level, but an isomorphism of $H'$ with a closed subgroup of $G$. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2024 at 12:03
  • $\begingroup$ Yes yes, I messed up while writing. Edited now $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 17, 2024 at 12:44
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Perhaps if $B' = S^{-1}A$ is a localization of $A$, then the canonical map $\phi: A \to B'$ is an epimorphism of commutative rings (but not a surjective ring homomorphism), and then the corresponding map of affine schemes is a monomorphism? At any rate, this question could be relevant: What do epimorphisms of (commutative) rings look like? $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 18, 2024 at 2:07
  • $\begingroup$ The main reason for the terminology is that this is the definition for affine schemes. One would not want a different meaning for affine group schemes. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 18, 2024 at 7:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Melon_Musk Just delete 'group' and replace 'homomorphism' with 'morphism'. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 19, 2024 at 6:40

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.