Definition
A group scheme is a group object in a category of schemes that has fiber products and some final object S. That is, it is an S-scheme G equipped with one of the equivalent sets of data
- a triple of morphisms μ: G ×S G → G, e: S → G, and ι: G → G, satisfying the usual compatibilities of groups (namely associativity of μ, identity, and inverse axioms)
- a functor from schemes over S to the category of groups, such that composition with the forgetful functor to sets is equivalent to the presheaf corresponding to G under the Yoneda embedding.
A homomorphism of group schemes is a map of schemes that respects multiplication. This can be precisely phrased either by saying that a map f satisfies the equation fμ = μ(f × f), or by saying that f is a natural transformation of functors from schemes to groups (rather than just sets).
A left action of a group scheme G on a scheme X is a morphism G ×S X→ X that induces a left action of the group G(T) on the set X(T) for any S-scheme T. Right actions are defined similarly. Any group scheme admits natural left and right actions on its underlying scheme by multiplication and conjugation. Conjugation is an action by automorphisms, i.e., it commutes with the group structure, and this induces linear actions on naturally derived objects, such as its Lie algebra, and the algebra of left-invariant differential operators.
An S-group scheme G is commutative if the group G(T) is an abelian group for all S-schemes T. There are several other equivalent conditions, such as conjugation inducing a trivial action, or inversion map ι being a group scheme automorphism.
Read more about this topic: Group Scheme
Famous quotes containing the word definition:
“Perhaps the best definition of progress would be the continuing efforts of men and women to narrow the gap between the convenience of the powers that be and the unwritten charter.”
—Nadine Gordimer (b. 1923)
“Beauty, like all other qualities presented to human experience, is relative; and the definition of it becomes unmeaning and useless in proportion to its abstractness. To define beauty not in the most abstract, but in the most concrete terms possible, not to find a universal formula for it, but the formula which expresses most adequately this or that special manifestation of it, is the aim of the true student of aesthetics.”
—Walter Pater (1839–1894)
“The physicians say, they are not materialists; but they are:MSpirit is matter reduced to an extreme thinness: O so thin!—But the definition of spiritual should be, that which is its own evidence. What notions do they attach to love! what to religion! One would not willingly pronounce these words in their hearing, and give them the occasion to profane them.”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)