How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Two graded rings with the same Proj
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice). Let be a field and let be graded by total degree, so , with second Veronese regrading (graded so that sits in degree ; Nonnegatively graded rings and modules, homogeneous elements, and twists, Proj is invariant under Veronese regrading). Then:
- canonically, and under this isomorphism the twist corresponds to , not to ;
- nevertheless and are not isomorphic as graded -algebras: while .
So does not determine the graded ring up to graded isomorphism, and the twist data must be carried separately .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Choice, A field , the graded polynomial ring with , its second Veronese regrading , and the scheme .
For every commutative nonnegatively graded ring and every there is a canonical isomorphism of schemes mapping the chart , for homogeneous of positive degree, to with the same coordinate ring, and under it the twist corresponds to . (Proj is invariant under Veronese regrading)
A nonnegatively graded ring is a commutative ring with ; a homomorphism of graded rings is a ring homomorphism carrying into for every , so an isomorphism of graded -algebras restricts to a -linear isomorphism of degree-one parts. (Nonnegatively graded rings and modules, homogeneous elements, and twists)
with the standard charts , so the two constructions of the counterexample take place on the same scheme. (Projective space is Proj of a polynomial ring)
On the twist has frames on and on , related by on the overlap, where ; the chart rings are , and respectively. (Twist transitions on the projective line)
The Axiom of Choice is the choice-function principle (The Axiom of Choice). It licenses the AC-qualified supplier used at step 2.1.
Verification
The rings and their degree-one parts. By [F2] the ring with is nonnegatively graded with , of dimension , and the Veronese is the graded -subalgebra generated by the three degree-two monomials: every is spanned by the monomials with and . Hence , of dimension , so and .
The twists are different. By [F4], a global section of for or is a pair on and on , where , , and the overlap condition is . This holds exactly when has degree at most , with . Hence and . An isomorphism of these sheaves would give an isomorphism of their global-section -vector spaces, which is impossible. Thus the two twists are not isomorphic.
Same Proj. Under the AC premise [F5], since , [F1] with and gives a canonical isomorphism which maps the chart of to the chart of , and under which corresponds to ; by [F3] the scheme is the projective line .
No graded isomorphism. Suppose is an isomorphism of graded -algebras, that is, a -algebra isomorphism with for all ; by [F2] it restricts to a -linear isomorphism , so . By step 1.1 this would require , which is impossible; hence and are not isomorphic as graded -algebras.
Conclusion. Steps 2.1 and 2.2 exhibit the two graded -algebras and with canonically isomorphic Proj but no graded isomorphism between them; steps 2.1 and 1.2 show that the isomorphism matches with and not with , so not even the degree-one twists correspond. Since and its Veronese are nonnegatively graded with nonzero degree-one parts, neither Proj is empty and the invariant is defined; the case of [F1] is excluded here because the two rings are then equal, while is the smallest regrading for which in this example. No choice principle is used beyond the inherited Proj construction.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
16 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- The Stacks Project, Constructions of Schemes, Sections 27.8-27.21 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Ravi Vakil, The Rising Sea, 29 August 2022, Sections 4.5, 7.4, 9.3, 10.6, 17.4, 17.6, 18.2 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Gao-Zhang, Lectures on Algebraic Geometry, Chapter 5 (standard reference, not scraped)