·

Note on perfectoid spaces

发布时间:2024-04-26 21:18:04阅读量:698
学术文章
·
笔记
转载请注明来源

In this section, we focus on Section 2 in [Sch], following [Hu], [Hu1], and [Hu2]. Moreover, we need to compare Huber's adic spaces with Berkovich's analytic spaces and Tate's rigid analytic spaces. Hence, we will briefly introduce the notion of Berkovich's analytic spaces in §1.3 and the notion of rigid analytic varieties in §1.4.

§1. Adic Spaces

Definition 1.1.  A morphism $f:X\rightarrow Y$ of adic spaces is adic if, for every $x\in X$, there exist open affinoid subspaces $U,V$ of $X,Y$ with $x\in U$ and $f(U)\subset V$ such that the ring homomorphism $\mathscr{O}_{Y}(V)\rightarrow\mathscr{O}_{X}(U)$ of $f$-adic rings is adic.

§1.1. Morphisms of finite type.

The material can be seen in [SP] and [Hu1].

First, we review the definition of morphisms of schemes of finite type/presentation (see [SP], Definition 29.15.1, Lemma 29.15.2, and Definition 29.21.1, and Lemma 29.21.2).

Definition 1.2. Let $f:X\rightarrow Y$ be a morphism of schemes.

  1. We say that $f$ is locally of finite type if, for all affine opens $U,V$ of $X,Y$ with $f(U)\subset V$, the ring map $\mathscr{O}_{Y}(V)\rightarrow\mathscr{O}_{X}(U)$ is of finite type.
  2. We say that $f$ is of finite type if it is quasi-compact and locally of finite type.
  3. We say that $f$ is locally of finite presentation if, for all affine opens $U,V$ of $X,Y$ with $f(U)\subset V$, the ring map $\mathscr{O}_{Y}(V)\rightarrow\mathscr{O}_{X}(U)$ is of finite presentation.
  4. We say that $f$ is of finite presentation if it is quasi-compact, quasi-separated, and locally of finite presentation.

Compared with the above definition, we reach to the case of adic spaces.

Definition 1.3 ([Hu1, Definition 1.2.1]). Let $f:X\rightarrow Y$ be a morphism of adic spaces.

  1. We say that $f$ is locally of finite type if, for every $x\in X$, there exists open affinoid subspaces $U,V$ of $X,Y$ with $x\in U$ and $f(U)\subset V$ such that the ring homomorphism $(\mathscr{O}_{Y}(V),\mathscr{O}^{+}_{Y}(V))\rightarrow(\mathscr{O}_{X}(U),\mathscr{O}^{+}_{X}(U))$ of affinoid rings is topologically of finite type.
  2. We say that $f$ is of finite type if it is quasi-compact and locally of finite type.
  3. We say that $f$ is locally of finite presentation if, for every $x\in X$, there exists open affinoid subspaces $U,V$ of $X,Y$ with $x\in U$ and $f(U)\subset V$ such that the ring homomorphism $(\mathscr{O}_{Y}(V),\mathscr{O}^{+}_{Y}(V))\rightarrow(\mathscr{O}_{X}(U),\mathscr{O}^{+}_{X}(U))$ of affinoid rings is topologically of finite type and, if the topology of $\mathscr{O}_{Y}(V)$ is discrete, the ring map $\mathscr{O}_{Y}(V)\rightarrow\mathscr{O}_{X}(U)$ is of finite presentation.

Then $\{\textrm{morphisms locally of finite presentation}\}\subset\{\textrm{morphisms locally of finite type}\}\subset\{\textrm{adic}\newline\textrm{morphisms}\}$.

§1.2. Unramified, smooth, and étale morphisms.

For definitions of morphisms of finite type and finite presentation, see §1.1.

First, we review the notions of unramified, smooth, and étale ring maps (see [SP], 10.138, 10.148, and 10.150, and 10.151).

Definition 1.4. Let $R\rightarrow S$ be a ring map. We say $R\rightarrow S$ is formally smooth/formally unramified/formally étale or $S$ is formally smooth/formally unramified/formally étale over $R$ if for every solid commutative diagram

where $I\subset A$ is a square zero ideal, there exists at least one/at most one/a unique dotted map $S\rightarrow A$ making the diagram commute.

The definitions of smooth and étale ring maps make use of the naive cotangent complex, but we will simplify this.

Definition 1.5. Let $R\rightarrow S$ be a ring map.

  1. We say $R\rightarrow S$ is smooth/étale or $S$ is smooth/étale over $R$ if $R\rightarrow S$ is of finite presentation and formally smooth/formally étale.
  2. We say $R\rightarrow S$ is unramified or $S$ is unramified over $R$ if $R\rightarrow S$ is of finite type and formally unramified.

Compared with the definitions above, we reach to the case of adic spaces via changing some arrows.

Definition 1.6 ([Hu1, Definition 1.6.5]).

  1. A morphism $f:X\rightarrow Y$ of adic spaces is unramified/smooth/étale if $f$ is locally of finite type/locally of finite presentation/locally of finite presentation and if, for any affinoid ring $A$, any ideal $I\subset A^{\vartriangleright}$ with $I^{2}=0$, and any morphism ${\rm{Spa}}(A)\rightarrow Y$, the map ${\rm{Hom}}_{Y}({\rm{Spa}}(A),X)\rightarrow{\rm{Hom}}_{Y}({\rm{Spa}}(A/I),X)$ is injective/surjective/bijective.
  2. A morphism $f:X\rightarrow Y$ of adic spaces is unramified/smooth/étale at a point $x\in X$ if there exist open affinoid subspaces $U,V$ of $X,Y$ with $x\in U$ and $f(U)\subset V$ such that $f|_{U}:U\rightarrow V$ is unramified/smooth/étale.

Note that the second statement of (i) above can be described as follows. For every solid commutative diagram in the following, there exist at most one/at least one/a unique one dotted map making the diagram commute.

§1.3. Berkovich’s analytic spaces.

We will introduce the notion of Berkovich's analytic spaces following [Ber] and [Ber1]. Berkovich's analytic spaces is one of the non-archimedean analogues of complex analytic spaces. The definition of analytic spaces in [Ber1] is more general than the definition in [Ber] (the analytic spaces in [Ber] corresponds to the good analytic spaces in [Ber1]). So we will make use of the definition in [Ber1].

§1.3.1 Underlying topological spaces.

First, we introduce some structures on topological spaces for further use (see [Ber1, §1, 1.1]). All compact, locally compact, and paracompact spaces are assumed to be Hausdorff.

Definition 1.7.

  1. A topological space is paracompact if it is Hausdorff and every open cover of it admits a locally finite refinement.
  2. A topological space $X$ is locally Hausdorff if every point $x\in X$ admits an open Hausdorff neighborhood.

Remark 1.8. Note that in [Tam], a paracompact space also requires that the locally finite refinement in (i) above is an open cover.

Let $X$ be a topological space and let $\tau$ be a collection of subsets of $X$ provided with the induced topology. We put $\tau|_{Y}:=\{V\in\tau;V\subset Y\}$ for any subset $Y\subset X$.

Definition 1.9. We say that the collection $\tau$ above is a quasi-net on $X$ if, for every point $x\in X$, there exist $V_{1},...,V_{n}\in\tau$ such that $x\in V_{1}\cap\cdot\cdot\cdot\cap V_{n}$ and the set $V_{1}\cup\cdot\cdot\cdot\cup V_{n}$ is a neighborhood of $x$, i.e. $V_{1}\cup\cdot\cdot\cdot\cup V_{n}$ contains an open set $U\subset X$ with $x\in U$. Furthermore, $\tau$ is said to be a {\rm{net on $X$}} if it is a quasi-net and, for any $U,V\in\tau$, $\tau|_{U\cap V}$ is a quasi-net on $U\cap V$.

Definition 1.10 ([Dug, p255]). Let $X$ be a topological space and $S\subset X$ be a subset. $S$ is said to be locally closed if every point $s\in S$ has a neighborhood $U$ such that $S\cap U$ is closed in $U$.

§1.3.2 The category of analytic spaces.

Throughout, we fix a nonarchimedean field $k$ whose valuation can be trivial. The category of $k$-affinoid spaces is dual to the category of $k$-affinoid algebras (see [Ber, §2.1]). The $k$-affinoid spaces associated with a $k$-affinoid algebra $\mathscr{A}$ is denoted by $X:=\mathscr{M}(\mathscr{A})$.

If for each nonarchimedean field $K$ over $k$, we are given a class $\Phi_{K}$ of $K$-affinoid spaces, the system $\Phi=\{\Phi_{K}\}$ is assumed to satisfy the following conditions:

(i) $\mathscr{M}(K)\in\Phi_{K}$.

(ii) $\Phi_{K}$ is stable under isomorphisms and direct products. In other words, for $X\in\Phi_{K}$, if $X'$ is a $K$-affinoid space with $X\cong X'$, then we have $X'\in\Phi_{K}$, and for $X,Y\in\Phi_{K}$, we have $X\times Y\in\Phi_{K}$.

(iii) If $\varphi:Y\rightarrow X$ is a finite morphism of $K$-affinoid spaces with $X\in\Phi_{K}$, then $Y\in\Phi_{K}$.

(iv) If $(V_{i})_{i\in I}$ is a finite affinoid covering of a $K$-affinoid space $X$ with $V_{i}\in\Phi_{K}$, then $X\in\Phi_{K}$.

(v) If $K\hookrightarrow L$ is an isometric embedding of nonarchimedean fields over $k$, then for any $X\in\Phi_{K}$, one has $X{\widehat{\otimes}_{K}L}\in\Phi_{L}$.

Definition 1.11. The class $\Phi_{K}$ is said to be dense if each point of each $X\in\Phi_{K}$ admits a fundamental system of affinoid neighborhoods $V\in\Phi_{K}$. The system $\Phi$ is said to be dense if all $\Phi_{K}$ are dense.

The affinoid spaces from $\Phi_{K}$ (resp. $\Phi$) and their affinoid algebras will be called $\Phi_{K}$-affinoid (resp. $\Phi$-affinoid).

From (ii) and (iii) above, we deduce that $\Phi_{K}$ is stable under fiber products. In other words, for $X,Y,Z\in\Phi_{K}$ with morphisms $X\rightarrow Z$ and $Y\rightarrow Z$, we have $X\times_{Z}Y\in\Phi_{K}$.

Let $X$ be a locally Hausdorff space and let $\tau$ be a net of compact subsets on $X$.

Definition 1.12. A $\Phi_{K}$-atlas $\mathscr{A}$ on $X$ with the net $\tau$ is a map that assigns, to each $U\in\tau$, a $\Phi_{K}$-affinoid algebra $\mathscr{A}_{U}$ together with a homeomorphism $U\xrightarrow{\sim}\mathscr{M}(\mathscr{A}_{U})$ and, to each pair $U,V\in\tau$ with $U\subset V$, a bounded homomorphism $\mathscr{A}_{V}\rightarrow\mathscr{A}_{U}$ of $\Phi_{K}$-affinoid algebras that identifies $(U,\mathscr{A}_{U})$ with an affinoid domain in $(V,\mathscr{A}_{V})$.

Definition 1.13. A triple $(X,\mathscr{A},\tau)$ of the above form is said to be a $\Phi_{K}$-analytic space.

§1.4. Rigid analytic varieties.

The notion of rigid analytic variety is also one of the nonarchimedean analogues of complex analytic space. It originated in John Tate's thesis, [Tat]. In this subsection, we briefly introduce it following [BGR] and [BS].

§1.4.1 $G$-topological spaces.

As a technical trick, we generalize the usual topology to the so-called Grothendieck topology, [SGA4]. Roughly speaking, a $G$-topological space is a set that admits a Grothendieck topology. We will first introduce Grothendieck topology following the definition in [BS], where the "Grothendieck topology" means the "Grothendieck pretopology" in [SGA4].

Definition 1.14. Let $\mathscr{C}$ be a (small) category. A Grothendieck topology $T$ consists of the category ${\rm{Cat}}(T)=\mathscr{C}$ and a set ${\rm{Cov}}(T)$ of families $(U_{i}\rightarrow U)_{i\in I}$ of morphisms in $\mathscr{C}$, called open coverings, such that the following axioms are satisfied:

  1. If $U'\rightarrow U$ is an isomorphism in $\mathscr{C}$, then the one-element family $(U'\rightarrow U)\in{\rm{Cov}}(T)$.
  2. If $(U_{i}\rightarrow U)_{i\in I}$ and $(V_{ij}\rightarrow U_{i})_{j\in I}$ are open coverings, then $(V_{ij}\rightarrow U)_{i,j\in I}\in{\rm{Cov}}(T)$.
  3. If $(U_{i}\rightarrow U)_{i\in I}$ is an open covering and $V\rightarrow U$ is a morphism in $\mathscr{C}$, then the fiber products $V\times_{U}U_{i}$ exist in $\mathscr{C}$ and $(V\times_{U}U_{i}\rightarrow V)_{i\in I}\in{\rm{Cov}}(T)$.

Remark 1.15. Note that this is slightly different to the definition in [Poon], which requires that a Grothendieck topology consists of the set ${\rm{Cov}}(T)$ only. Moreover, the pair $(\mathscr{C},T)$ is usually called a site. However, to suite our needs in rigid geometry, we stick with the terminology in [BS].

We specialize the definition above to the case that is more suited to our needs. And from now on, we will exclusively consider the Grothendieck topology of such a special type, unless explicitly stated otherwise.

Definition 1.16. Let $X$ be a set. A Grothendieck topology (also called $G$-topology) $\mathfrak{T}$ on $X$ consists of

  1. a category of subsets of $X$, called admissible open subsets or $\mathfrak{T}$-open subsets of $X$, with inclusions as morphisms, and
  2. a set ${\rm{Cov}}(\mathfrak{T})$ of families $(U_{i}\rightarrow U)_{i\in I}$ of inclusions with $\bigcup_{i\in I}U_{i}=U$, called admissible coverings or $\mathfrak{T}$-coverings.

Remark 1.17. Note that in this case, the fiber products will come as intersections of sets.

We call $X$ a $G$-topological space and write more explicitly as $X_{\mathfrak{T}}$ when $\mathfrak{T}$ is needed to be specified.

§1.4.2 Presheaves and sheaves on $G$-topological spaces.

The notion of Grothendieck topology defined in § 1.4.1 enables us to adapt presheaf or sheaf to such a general situation.

Definition 1.18 ([BS, 5.1, Definition 2]). Let $\mathfrak{C}$ be a category and let $\mathfrak{T}$ be a Grothendieck topology in the sense of Definition 1.14. A presheaf $\mathscr{F}$ on $\mathfrak{T}$ with values in $\mathscr{C}$ is a functor $$\mathscr{F}:{\rm{Cat}}(\mathfrak{T})^{opp}\longrightarrow\mathfrak{C}.$$

If $\mathfrak{C}$ is a category admitting products, then the presheaf $\mathscr{F}$ is said to be a sheaf if the sequence $$\mathscr{F}(U)\rightarrow\prod_{i\in I}\mathscr{F}(U_{i})\mathrel{\mathop{\rightrightarrows}} \prod_{i,j\in I}\mathscr{F}(U_{i}\times_{U}U_{j})$$ is exact for any open covering $(U_{i}\rightarrow U)_{i\in I}$ in ${\rm{Cov}}(\mathfrak{T})$.

Remark 1.19. Note that the definition of Grothendieck topology assures the existence of the fiber products $U_{i}\times_{U}U_{j}$ in $\textrm{Cat}(\mathfrak{T})$.

Morphisms of presheaves or sheaves are just natural transformations of functors.

Definition 1.20. A morphism of presheaves $f:\mathscr{F}\rightarrow\mathscr{G}$ is a morphism of functors from $\mathscr{F}$ to $\mathscr{G}$. A morphism of sheaves $f:\mathscr{F}\rightarrow\mathscr{G}$ is a morphism of presheaves $f:\mathscr{F}\rightarrow\mathscr{G}$.

Hence, we can define presheaves and sheaves on a $G$-topological space.

Definition 1.21 ([BGR, 9.2.1, Definition 1]). A presheaf $\mathscr{F}$ with values in a category $\mathscr{C}$ on a $G$-topological space $X$ is a contravariant functor $$\mathscr{F}:{\rm{Cat}}(\mathfrak{T})\longrightarrow\mathscr{C},$$ where $\mathfrak{T}$ is a Grothendieck topology on $X$. If $\mathscr{C}$ is a category admitting products, then $\mathscr{F}$ is a sheaf on the $G$-topological space $X$ if it is a sheaf in the sense of Definition 1.18.

The following kind of Grothendieck topology is of special interest to us.

Definition/Proposition 1.22 ([BGR, §5.1, Proposition 5]). Let $K$ be a field and let $X$ be an affinoid $K$-space. Then the strong Grothendieck topology on $X$ is a Grothendieck topology on $X$ that satisfies the following conditions:

$(G_{0})$ $\varnothing$ and $X$ are admissible open subsets of $X$.

$(G_{1})$ Let $U\subset X$ be an admissible open subset with an admissible covering $(U_{i})_{i\in I}$ and let $V\subset U$ a subset. If $U_{i}\cap V$ is admissible open in $X$ for each $i\in I$, then $V$ is admissible open in $X$.

$(G_{2})$ If $\mathfrak{U}=(U_{i})_{i\in I}$ is a covering of an admissible open $U\subset X$ with an admissible refinement such that each $U_{i}$ is admissible open in $X$, then $\mathfrak{U}$ is an admissible covering of $U$.

§1.4.3 Locally $G$-ringed spaces and analytic varieties.

The definition of rigid analytic varieties makes use of the notion of locally $G$-ringed spaces. The so-called $G$-ringed spaces are analogous to our familiar ringed spaces.

Definition 1.23 ([BGR, §9.1.1]). A $G$-ringed space is a pair $(X,\mathscr{O}_{X})$ consisting of a $G$-topological space $X$ and a sheaf $\mathscr{O}_{X}$ of rings on $X$, called the structure sheaf of $X$. A locally $G$-ringed space is a $G$-ringed space $(X,\mathscr{O}_{X})$ such that all stalks $\mathscr{O}_{X,x},x\in X$, are local rings. If the structure sheaf $\mathscr{O}_{X}$ is a sheaf of algebras over a fixed ring $R$, then such a $G$-ringed space $(X,\mathscr{O}_{X})$ is said to be over $R$.

Definition 1.24 ([BGR, §9.1.1]). A map $f:X\rightarrow Y$ between $G$-topological spaces is said to be continuous if the following conditions are satisfied:

(i) If $V\subset Y$ is an admissible subsets, then $f^{-1}(V)$ is an admissible subsets of $X$.

(ii) If $(V_{i})_{i\in I}$ is an admissible covering of an admissible subset $V\subset Y$, then $(f^{-1}(V_{i}))_{i\in I}$ is an admissible covering of the admissible subset $f^{-1}(V)$.

We need appropriate morphisms for $G$-ringed spaces. In fact, we have the following definitions analogous to that of morphisms of ringed spaces and locally ringed spaces.

Definition 1.25 ([BGR, 9.3.1]). A morphism of $G$-ringed spaces $f:(X,\mathscr{O}_{X})\rightarrow(Y,\mathscr{O}_{Y})$ is a pair $(f,f^{*})$ where $f:X\rightarrow Y$ is a continuous map of $G$-topological spaces and $f^{*}$ is a collection $\mathscr{O}_{Y}(V)\rightarrow\mathscr{O}_{X}(f^{-1}(V))$ of ring maps for any admissible open subset $V\subset Y$ that are compatible with restriction maps.

A morphism of locally $G$-ringed spaces $f:(X,\mathscr{O}_{X})\rightarrow(Y,\mathscr{O}_{Y})$ is a morphism of $G$-ringed space $f:(X,\mathscr{O}_{X})\rightarrow(Y,\mathscr{O}_{Y})$ such that all induced ring maps $f^{*}_{x}:\mathscr{O}_{Y,f(x)}\rightarrow\mathscr{O}_{X,x}$ for $x\in X$ are local.

Let $R$ be a fixed ring. An $R$-morphism $f:(X,\mathscr{O}_{X})\rightarrow(Y,\mathscr{O}_{Y})$ of $G$-ringed spaces over $R$ is a morphism of $G$-ringed spaces $f:(X,\mathscr{O}_{X})\rightarrow(Y,\mathscr{O}_{Y})$ such that, in addition, $f^{*}$ is a collection $\mathscr{O}_{Y}(V)\rightarrow\mathscr{O}_{X}(f^{-1}(V))$ of $R$-algebra homomorphisms for all admissible open subsets $V\subset Y$.

Remark 1.26. We follow the convention of ringed spaces that we denote a $G$-ringed space $(X,\mathscr{O}_{X})$ simply by $X$ and we denote a morphism of $G$-ringed spaces by suppressing the morphism of structure sheaves.

In the following, let $k$ be a fixed complete nonarchimedean field. Next, we are in a position to introduce global analytic varieties.

Definition 1.27 ([BGR, 9.3.1, Definition 4]). A rigid analytic variety over $k$ (also called a $k$-analytic variety) is a locally $G$-ringed space $(X,\mathscr{O}_{X})$ over $k$ such that the following axioms are verified:

(i) The Grothendieck topology of $X$ satisfies properties $G_{0}$, $G_{1}$, and $G_{2}$ described in Proposition 1.22.

(ii) There exists an admissible covering $(X_{i})_{i\in I}$ of $X$ with $(X_{i},\mathscr{O}_{X}|_{X_{i}})$ being a $k$-affinoid variety for each $i\in I$.

§2. Almost mathematics

In this section, we focus on Faltings' almost mathematics which first arose in his paper [Hodg], which is the first of a series works on the subject of $p$-adic Hodge theory, ending with [Falt]. The motivating point of $p$-adic Hodge theory can be traced back to Tate's classical paper [Tat1]. We will use Gabber's book [Gab] as a basic reference. The content will be useful in understanding Section 4 in Scholze's paper [Sch].

References

  1. [BGR] S. Bosch, U. Güntzer, and R. Remmert, Non-Archimedean analysis. A systematic approach to rigid analyticgeometry, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, Bd. 261, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1984.
  2. [BS] Siegfried Bosch, Lectures on Formal and Rigid Geometry, Lect.Notes Mathematics vol. 2105, Springer, Cham, 2014.
  3. [Poon] Bjorn Poonen, Rational Points on Varieties, Graduate Studies in Mathematics Volume: 186, American Mathematical Society, 2017.
  4. [SGA4] M. Artin, A. Grothendieck, and J.-L. Verdier, Théorie des topos et cohomologie étale des schémas, Lecture Notes in Math. 269, 270, 305, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, Springer. 1972-1973.
  5. [Gab] O. Gabber and L. Ramero, Almost ring theory, volume 1800 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003.
  6. [Hodg] G.Faltings, p-adic Hodge theory, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 1 (1988), 255-299.
  7. [Falt] G.Faltings, Almost étale extensions, Astérisque 279 (2002), 185-270.
  8. [Tat] J. Tate, Rigid analytic spaces, Invent. Math. 12 (1971), 257-289.
  9. [Tat1] J. Tate, p-divisible groups, Proc. conf. local fields (1967), 158-183.
  10. [Dug] James Dugundji, Topology, Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 470 Atlantic Avenue, Boston, 1966.
  11. [Tam] Tammo Tom Dieck, Algebraic Topology, European Mathematical Society, 2008.
  12. [Ber] V.G. Berkovich, Spectral Theory and analytic Geometry over NonArchimedean fields, Math. Surv. Monogr. vol. 33, Am. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1990.
  13. [Ber1] V.G. Berkovich, Étale cohomology for non-Archimedean analytic spaces, Publ. Math., Inst. Hautes Etud. Sci. 78 (1993).
  14. [SP] The Stacks Project Authors, Stacks Project. Available at http://math.columbia.edu/algebraic_geometry/stacks-git/.
  15. [Sch] Peter Scholze, Perfectoid Spaces, IHES Publ. math. 116 (2012), 245-313.
  16. [Hu] R. Huber, Continuous valuations, Math. Z. 212 (1993), 455-477.
  17. [Hu1] R. Huber, Étale cohomology of rigid analytic varieties and adic spaces, Aspects of Mathematics, E30., Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn, Braunschweig, Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 1996.
  18. [Hu2] R. Huber, A generalization of formal schemes and rigid analytic varieties, Math. Z. 217 (1994), 513-551.


评论区
Ricciflows
Ricciflows

We apologize that this note has ended halfway because the author had quit mathematics😭😭

2024-08-14 13:54:14 回复

弦圈热门内容

注册公司“三细节”

细节一:公户与私户的钱必须分开在公司注册后,一定要将公司的账户和股东的个人账户分开。这样做不仅可以避免公司资金和股东个人资金的混淆还可以确保公司财务的透明度和合法性。细节二:尽可能获取发票在公司的日常运营中,能要发票的情况下,尽量要发票如果没有发票,公司就不能将这笔费用记入公司账户,只能记入股东的个人账户。因此,为了确保公司财务的合法性和准确性,一定要尽量获取发票。细节三:按时报税和年报注册公司后,每个月要按时报一次个人所得税,每个季度报1次增值税和企业所得税。对于一般纳税人,每个月都需要报增值税和企业所得税。此外,每年的上半年需要完成上一年的工商年报,否则公司可能会被列入异常。

$\mathbb{R}$的有限域扩张是$\mathbb{R}$或者同构于$\mathbb{C}$

我们需要证明的命题如下:令$F$为包含$\mathbb{R}$的任意一个域,它满足性质$\dim_{\mathbb R}F < \infty$。然后我们有$F \cong \mathbb R$或者$F \cong \mathbb C$。下面我们给出三个证明,其中第一个证明最为简洁,最后一个最为复杂。证明:由代数闭包的唯一性,我们有嵌入$F \hookrightarrow \mathbb C$,因此我们有$\mathbb R \subset F \subset \mathbb C$。然后命题结论可由$[\mathbb C:\mathbb R]=2$得出,因为这排除了真中间域的存在。证明2:因为$F$在$\mathbb{R}$上是有限维的,它在$\mathbb{R}$上代数。这是关于域扩张的一个基本事实:如果$a\in F$,然后$1,a,a^2,\dots,a^n$在$\mathbb{R}$上线性相关,这里$n=\dim_{\mathbb{R}}F$。所以$F$的每个元素是一个$\mathbb{R}$系数多项式的根。如果$-1$在$F$中不是一个平方,我们可以添加一个平方根$j$( ...

丘成桐:如果我说复几何“无用”,你会不会很失望?

“如果我说复几何暂时还没有跟大数据、人工智能有密切关系,你会不会很失望?”这个是《中国科学报》记者在7月23日举行的复几何与多复变国际会议上,向数学家丘成桐询问类似复几何这这种基础数学研究领域的重要意义时,这位菲尔兹奖得主、美国国家科学院院士、中科院外籍院士、哈佛大学终身教授丘成桐如此直接了当的回答。他说很多领导在听数学家的汇报时,就经常会问这样的问题:“你这个研究有什么实际应用?对发展人工智能等前沿科技有没有好处?”如果科学家的回答是“没有”,领导就会感到很失望,可能就不再支持该项研究了。“应用研究在中国的项目申请上始终占优势,跟这个原因有关。”丘成桐直言。而实际上,这种看似暂时没有什么应用背景的基础学术研究却是非常重要的。其实,基础研究的重要性毋庸讳言,从前不久的“中兴事件”就可见一斑。“中兴事件”涉及的“芯片”问题,表面看是应用的问题,但深层次原因其实是中国在的基础理论的薄弱,也是长期立项重应用轻基础的结果。“没有基础理论的支撑,知其然不知其所以然,只能模仿别人,一个小小的芯片就能‘卡了你的脖子’。”美国加州大学洛杉矶分校终身教授刘克峰坦言,中国过度关注应用,但在基础研究方面却比 ...

愚者趋乐,智者避苦——叔本华的《人生智慧箴言》

叔本华(Arthur Schopenhaue)是19世纪的德国哲学家,他的个人哲学思想融合了东方佛教和欧洲哲学,对后世影响深远。他的哲学主要在《作为意志和表象的世界》一书中表达,这本书于叔本华年轻时出版,但当时的读者反应相当冷淡;直到晚年,叔本华写了《附录与补遗》作为《作为意志和表象的世界》的补充和说明。由于内容更加精简浅近,很快的引起热烈回响,也令他的主要著作《作为意志和表象的世界》重新受到世人重视。叔本华谈论的人生智慧,是探讨如何尽量幸福快乐地生活的一门艺术。虽然在他的主要著作中,他大致认为在我们的世界,人类期望追求稳固持久的快乐,是一种妄想。这是因为人本质上是受意志不断的驱使,而意志始终处于一种欲求不满的状态,所以使得人总是在渴求和无聊之间摆荡,难以得到安宁。人生的幸福有两个敌人,一是痛苦,二是无聊。……我们在何种程度上成功地远离了一个敌人,就在同样程度上接近了另一个,反之亦然。所以,人生其实就是在痛苦与无聊之间像钟摆一样摆动。不过在《人生智慧箴言》里,他还是试图思考:若要尽量幸福快乐生活,该怎么做最靠谱?叔本华的分析,从跟人有关的三个层次开始。人之所是、人之所有、人之形象一个人 ...

企业第四季度要注意什么?

检查发票看看企业的预付账款,有没有企业的钱付出去了,但是发票还没有收回来的情况,要赶紧催收发票;如果年底前拿不到发票的话,企业利润就会虚高,你要交的企业所得税也就会变多。检查利润一定要看一下企业今年的利润,预计是否会超过300万,因为如果超过300万,企业所得税就会从5%升到25%,到那时候企业就非常被动了,因此,最后一个季度,必须对公司的收入、成本费用、利润、资产总额等进行预判。检查招待费包括会务费、培训费、招待费、餐饮费等在内,这类费用如果超过相应比例,明年汇算清缴的时候会被调增,企业有可能会补缴企业所得税,所以,应该在第四季度的时候提前规划和调整好。检查股东借款检查一下今年股东个人有没有向公司借款,股东借款应当在年底前归还给公司,如果没有归还,税务会被认定为股东分红,需要缴纳20%的个人所得税。总的来说,最后一个季度对于整个财务工作来讲,是至关重要的一个时间节点,咱们需要提前做好预判、调整和规划。

约翰·米尔诺:与数学传奇的对话

国际数学家大会(ICM)的亮点之一是有机会见到一位真正的数学传奇。他的名字叫约翰·米尔诺(John Milnor),多年来获得了几项备受瞩目的奖项,包括1962年的菲尔兹奖(Fields Medal)和2011年的阿贝尔奖(Abel Prize)。除了在数学方面的工作,他还以他的写作而闻名,他的写作激励了一代又一代的学生。84岁的米尔诺仍然很健壮。我们参加了米尔诺在大会上给记者们举行的新闻发布会,我们已经为您记录了这些。你可以把它作为播客来听,也可以阅读这段文字记录。第一个问题是……约翰·米尔诺 John Milnor问:你为什么选择做数学?回答:因为对我来说,它比其他科目更容易。你看,我很懒;我做对我来说最容易的事。问:当你证明了你在数学上的第一个有影响力的结果时,你只有19岁,在纽结理论的领域里。你什么时候开始研究复杂数学的?回答:我想我一直喜欢解决具体问题。这是教授在课堂上描述的问题,这是一个非常有趣的问题,所以我开始思考这个问题。我的意思是,那时我已经学了几年数学了,所以我对可能有用的方法有了一些想法,当然,数学中还有很多东西要学。有一本著名的英语书,由刘易斯·卡罗尔写的,关于 ...

广中平祐:我从格罗滕迪克身上认识到了数学家的多样性

格罗滕迪克对数学的执念和热情十分惊人。他的这种执念和热情是从哪里来的呢?带着这样的疑问仔细观察他的学术态度后,我认为这可能来自于他经历过的让人难以想象的逆境。在我看来,世上的所有成功人士,都具备把逆境转化为自己人生宝贵财富的能力。不得不承认,创造也与逆境密不可分。我在巴黎遇到过一位学者,这一点在他的身上体现得淋漓尽致。1958 年,也就是我在哈佛大学留学的第二个年头,学校从法国请了一位数学家过来讲课。这位数学家叫亚历山大·格罗滕迪克(Alexander Grothendieck),在代数几何领域,他是一位赫赫有名的大人物。当时致力于研究代数几何的约翰·泰特(John Tate)教授在哈佛大学任教,在他的建议下,校方决定让格罗滕迪克来美国做为期一年的特聘讲师。格罗滕迪克不是高校的教授,他是法国高等科学研究所(IHES)的研究人员。法国高等科学研究所是一个私立研究所,主要创始人是原巴黎大学的数学教授迪厄多内(Dieudonné)和酷爱数学的实业家莫查纳(Motchane),经费也主要是他们两人从商界筹集来的。当时哈佛大学看中格罗滕迪克的才华,向他抛出橄榄枝。如此能力出众的他为何从来没有在大 ...