So there's this notion of a group scheme $G$ being 'special' if any principal $G$-bundle over a scheme $X$ (say defined in the etale topology) is also locally trivial in the Zariski topology. I would like to see why $GL_n$ is special in this sense. The few books I've seen mention this refer to other books to as their justification of this fact and the only 'proof' I've seen is in Milne's Etale Cohomology, but it uses many notions which I'm not familiar at all with. I've just started to look at stacks so I was hoping there a more accessible approach to show this?
2026-02-22 23:37:07.1771803427
Showing $GL_n$ is a special algebraic group
424 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in ALGEBRAIC-GEOMETRY
- How to see line bundle on $\mathbb P^1$ intuitively?
- Jacobson radical = nilradical iff every open set of $\text{Spec}A$ contains a closed point.
- Is $ X \to \mathrm{CH}^i (X) $ covariant or contravariant?
- An irreducible $k$-scheme of finite type is "geometrically equidimensional".
- Global section of line bundle of degree 0
- Is there a variant of the implicit function theorem covering a branch of a curve around a singular point?
- Singular points of a curve
- Find Canonical equation of a Hyperbola
- Picard group of a fibration
- Finding a quartic with some prescribed multiplicities
Related Questions in SCHEMES
- Is $ X \to \mathrm{CH}^i (X) $ covariant or contravariant?
- Do torsion-free $\mathcal{O}_X$-modules on curves have dimension one?
- $\mathbb{C}[x,y]$ is the sections of Spec $\mathbb{C}[x,y]$ minus the origin?
- Finitely generated $k-$algebras of regular functions on an algebraic variety
- Is every open affine subscheme of an algebraic $k-$variety an affine $k-$variety?
- Scheme Theoretic Image (Hartshorne Ex.II.3.11.d)
- Is this a closed embedding of schemes?
- Adjunction isomorphism in algebraic geometry
- Closed connected subset of $\mathbb{P}_k^1$
- Why can't closed subschemes be defined in an easier way?
Related Questions in PRINCIPAL-BUNDLES
- Smooth Principal Bundle from continuous transition functions?
- Holonomy bundle is a covering space
- Terminal object for Prin(X,G) (principal $G$-bundles)
- Prove that a "tensor product" principal $G$-bundle coincides with a "pullback" via topos morphism
- Holonomy group and irreducible $\mathrm{SU}(2)$-connections
- Killing field associate to an element in the Lie Algebra
- Different definitions of irreducible $\mathrm{SU}(2)$ connections
- Proving that a form is horizontal in the Chern Weil method proof
- References for endomorphism bundle and adjoint bundle
- References: Equivalence between local systems and vector bundles (with flat connections)
Related Questions in ALGEBRAIC-STACKS
- Pushforward of quasi-coherent sheaves to quotient stack for finite group action?
- Map from schemes to stacks
- Examples of Stacks
- Showing $GL_n$ is a special algebraic group
- Object of a Category $C$ acts as Functor
- Calculating etale cohomology of Picard stack
- Why is this called the cocycle condition?
- Automorphisms and moduli problems
- Making $H^*(\mathbf{P}^\infty)=\lim H^*(\mathbf{P}^n)=k[t]$ precise using stacks
- References for Higgs bundles
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
Let $\pi : P \rightarrow X$ be a $GL(n)-$torsor and is locally trivial in the etale topology. We want to prove that it is locally trivial in the Zariski topology.Hence forth we denote $GL(n)$ by $G$ for convenience.
First let us construct the natural associated vector bundle. We just imitate the classical construction. Let $g \in GL(n)$ act on $P \times \mathbb{A}^n$ by $g.(x,y) = (x.g, g^{-1}.y)$, where $GL(n)$ acts on the right on $P$ and in a natural manner from the left on $\mathbb{A}^n$. Note that this action is free since the action is free on $P$. Let us look at the $GL(n)$ orbit of the action.
Claim : All GL(n) orbit on $P$ is contained in an open affine subset of $P$.
Proof of Claim : We know that for $p \in P$, we have $p.G = \pi^{-1}(\pi(p))$. Also note that $\pi$ is an affine map, since it is affine after etale base change. This is a statement that "affine morphism is local on the target". Now choose an open affine neighbourhood of $\pi(p)$, say $U_{\pi(p)}$ and let $U_p := \pi^{-1}(U_{\pi(p)})$. Since $\pi$ is affine, hence $U_p$ is affine and it clearly contains the orbit. Hence the claim.
Using the claim, we get that orbit of $GL(n)$ on $P \times \mathbb{A}^n$ is contained in an open affine subset since $\mathbb{A}^n$ is affine. Also note that the action is free. This allows us to form a quotient space say $E$ which has an obvious map to $X$ which comes from quotient of the $G-$ equivariant projection map $P \times \mathbb{A}^n \rightarrow P$.
Since $GL(n)$ is a smooth group scheme, $P$ is smooth over $X$. This follows from the following : Let $U \rightarrow X$ be etale cover such that $P \times_X U \rightarrow U$ is locally trivial. Since $GL(n)$ is smooth scheme, hence this is a smooth map. Thus we have the following situation $P \times_X U \rightarrow P$ is a smooth map and $P\times_X U \rightarrow U \rightarrow X$ is a smooth map, hence the map $P \rightarrow X$ is also smooth. This statement is known as "smoothness is etale local on the target"
It can be checked from the construction that $E$ is also etale locally trivial with fibers $\mathbb{A}^n$ and hence $E \rightarrow X$ is smooth affine. Let us assign a name $f : E \rightarrow X$.
Let $U_i \xrightarrow{\phi_i} X$ be etale cover such that for all $i$, we have $E \times_X U_i \rightarrow U_i$ is trivial. Thus we have $\phi^*(f_*\mathcal{O}_E) \cong \mathcal{O}_{U_i}[T_1,\dots T_n]$. Let $F_i = \oplus \mathcal{O}_{U_i}T_i$. Note that since $E$ is locally trivial for etale topology, we automatically have a descent data for $\lbrace F_i, \lbrace{U_i\phi_i} \rbrace \rbrace$(I have supressed the notation for coordinate transformations). Thus we have a zariski locally free sheaf $F$ on $X$, such that $\phi_i^*F \cong F_i$. We have $Spec(Sym(F_i)) \cong E \times_X U_i = \phi_i^*(E) \cong \phi_i^*(f_*\mathcal{O}_E)$. This implies that $Sym(F_i) \cong \phi_i^*(f_*\mathcal{O}_E)$. Thus we have a morphism of (effective)descent data and hence we have a map, infact an isomorphism $E \cong Spec(SymF)$(see 3).
This shows that $E$ is infact locally trivial in the Zariski topology. Now the rest should be clear from the answer here : https://mathoverflow.net/a/168004/58056
I will write it here for completeness. We have $P \cong \underline{Isom}(\mathbb{A}^n_S, E)$. Since $E$ is Zariksi locally trivial, we obtain that $P$ is locally trivial.
Here are some references for the descent arguments.
https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/02L5 a lemma which says that the property of morphism being affine is local on the base for the fppf topology and hence also in the etale topology.
https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/023B is the definition for the definition of descent and morphism of descent data for quasi-coherent sheaves.
https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/023E says that the descent data is always effective and also implies that morphism of descent data gives a unique morphism for the quasi-coherent sheaves.
There might be some gaps in the argument. I do not know of a way to avoid all this terminology except maybe by following the line of argument given in the comment above(http://www-personal.umich.edu/~takumim/takumim_Spr14Thesis.pdf).