most recent 30 from mathoverflow.net 2026-05-01T11:37:35Z https://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/510804 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/rdf https://mathoverflow.net/q/510804 6 Mikkel https://mathoverflow.net/users/586240 2026-04-29T19:04:17Z 2026-04-30T08:34:14Z <p>In Kedlayas lecture notes on prismatic cohomology it is an exercise (2.5.9) to prove that the category of rings equipped with a Frobenius lift (denotet <span class="math-container">$\mathbf{Ring}_\phi$</span>, the morphisms are ringhoms compatible with the corresp. Frob. lift) admits equalizers. However in a lecture of James Borger on <span class="math-container">$\delta$</span>-rings he claims that <span class="math-container">$\mathbf{Ring}_\phi$</span> doesn't have equalizers. Does someone know what is true and how to prove it or what would be a counterexample.<br /> Link to Kedlayas work: <a href="https://kskedlaya.org/prismatic/sec_overview.html" rel="noreferrer">https://kskedlaya.org/prismatic/sec_overview.html</a> <br /> Link to Borgers lecture: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y2Tcu-iJV4&amp;t=10s" rel="noreferrer">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y2Tcu-iJV4&amp;t=10s</a> <br /> Any help or advice would be great.</p> https://mathoverflow.net/questions/510804/-/510805#510805 11 Thorgott https://mathoverflow.net/users/517429 2026-04-29T20:21:13Z 2026-04-30T08:34:14Z <p>While it is true that Borger writes that the category does not have equalizers, what he actually <em>explains</em> is that the equalizer as computed in the category of rings equipped with an endomorphism (which, underlying, is the equalizer of rings) is not necessarily a Frobenius lift anymore, which is the same caveat as in Kedlaya's Execise 2.5.9(b).</p> <p>It is indeed true that the category of rings equipped with a Frobenius lift admits equalizers. In fact, it is presentable: it sits in a pullback square <span class="math-container">$$ \require{AMScd} \begin{CD} \mathrm{Ring}_{\phi} @&gt;&gt;&gt; \mathrm{Fun}(B\mathbb{N},\mathrm{Ring})\\ @VVV @VVV\\ \mathrm{Ring}^{\mathrm{char}=p} @&gt;&gt;&gt; \mathrm{Fun}(B\mathbb{N},\mathrm{Ring}^{\mathrm{char}=p}). \end{CD} $$</span> The right vertical arrow takes a ring equipped with an endomorphism and mods out <span class="math-container">$p$</span>. It is left adjoint to the obvious inclusion. The bottom horizontal arrow takes a characteristic <span class="math-container">$p$</span> ring and equips it with the Frobenius. It is an isofibration and left adjoint to the functor that takes a pair <span class="math-container">$(B,\varphi)$</span> consisting of a characteristic <span class="math-container">$p$</span> ring <span class="math-container">$B$</span> and a ring endomorphism <span class="math-container">$\varphi$</span> to the equalizer of <span class="math-container">$\varphi$</span> and the Frobenius. The categories in the cospan are all presentable, so the claim follows since <span class="math-container">$\mathrm{Pr}^L$</span> is closed under pseudo-limits in <span class="math-container">$\widehat{\mathrm{Cat}}$</span>.</p> https://mathoverflow.net/questions/510804/-/510806#510806 10 Will Sawin https://mathoverflow.net/users/18060 2026-04-29T20:21:42Z 2026-04-29T20:21:42Z <p>The equalizers do exist.</p> <p>You can take the equalizer in the category of rings with a homomorphism to themselves and then transfinitely iterate the operation of taking the subring of elements <span class="math-container">$x$</span> such that <span class="math-container">$x^p\equiv \phi(x)$</span> mod <span class="math-container">$p$</span>.</p> https://mathoverflow.net/questions/510804/-/510821#510821 4 Simd https://mathoverflow.net/users/45564 2026-04-30T06:18:16Z 2026-04-30T06:18:16Z <p>Here is an example where the equalizer in rings with endomorphism is not an object of the category in question.</p> <p>Let <span class="math-container">$p$</span> be a prime, and put <span class="math-container">$$ A=\mathbb Z[x,y],\qquad \phi(x)=x^p+py,\quad \phi(y)=y^p. $$</span> Let <span class="math-container">$$ B=A/(py), $$</span> with the induced endomorphism; this is possible since <span class="math-container">$$ \phi(py)=p y^p\in (py). $$</span> Let <span class="math-container">$$ q,r:A\rightrightarrows B $$</span> be given by taking <span class="math-container">$q$</span> to be the quotient map and <span class="math-container">$$ r(x)=x,\qquad r(y)=0. $$</span> These are maps preserving the Frobenius lifts.</p> <p>Their equalizer in rings is <span class="math-container">$$ R=\{F\in\mathbb Z[x,y]:F(x,y)-F(x,0)\in (py)\} =\mathbb Z[x]+py\,\mathbb Z[x,y]. $$</span> This is stable under <span class="math-container">$\phi$</span>. But the induced endomorphism of <span class="math-container">$R$</span> is not a Frobenius lift: <span class="math-container">$x\in R$</span>, while <span class="math-container">$$ \phi(x)-x^p=py. $$</span> On the other hand <span class="math-container">$$ pR=p\mathbb Z[x]+p^2y\,\mathbb Z[x,y], $$</span> so <span class="math-container">$py\notin pR$</span>.</p> <p>Thus the forgetful functor to rings, or to rings with endomorphism, does not preserve this equalizer.</p>