Hi everybody,


I have a lack of references concerning projective limits and injective limits. Up to my faults in Bourbaki there are only proj and inj limits indexed by a partially ordered set (not a category), and this set is almost systematically directed (i.e. for all $i,j$ there exists $k$ such that $k\geq i$, and $k\geq j$). The problem of combining projective limits with inductive limits is not treated at all as far as I can see. 


I need a reference for this. Can someone help me ? Thank you !


My specific problem is the following: Assume given a system of modules $(M\_{i,j})\_{i,j}$ and arrows among them, over the same ring $A$.


We consider both


1) the projective limit with respect to the index $j$ of the injective limits with respect to the indexes $i$. Call it 


$\projlim\_j \;\;(\injlim\_i \;\; (M\_{i,j}))$


2) the injective limit with respect to the index $i$ of the projective limits with respect to the indexes $j$. Call it 


$\injlim\_i \;\;(\projlim\_j\;\; (M\_{i,j}))$


-- (Up to errors) There exists a canonical map 


$\displaystyle CAN : \injlim\_i \;\;(\projlim\_j\;\; (M\_{i,j})) \;\to\; \projlim\_j\;\; (\injlim\_i\;\; (M\_{i,j})) $


Under which assumptions this map is INJECTIVE ?


As an example if there is no arrows at all between the $M\_{i,j}$, then one has a direct sum instead of the injective limit, and a product instead of a projective limit. The arrow CAN becomes


$\displaystyle CAN : \oplus\_i \;\;\prod\_j \;M\_{i,j} \;\to\; \prod\_j \;\;\oplus\_i \;M\_{i,j}$


where 


$((a\_{i,j})\_i)\_j \mapsto ((a\_{i,j})\_j)\_i$


In this case the arrow CAN is always injective independently on the nature of the $M\_{i,j}$ (and up to errors it is an isomorphism if and only if one of the sets of index "$i$" or "$j$" is finite). I suspect that in the general case the injectivity only depends on the nature of the arrows, but not of the nature of the objects. Does anyone have a useful comment or a reference? 


Many thanks !



permutation of projective limits with inductive limits
The canonical morphism $\alpha : \mathrm{colim}\_{i \in I} ~ \mathrm{lim}\_{j \in J} M\_{ij} \to \mathrm{lim}\_{j \in J} ~ \mathrm{colim}\_{i \in I} M\_{i,j}$ is injective in the following situation:


1) $I$ is a directed set.


2) For every $j \in J$ and every $i \to i'$ in $I$ the morphism $M\_{i,j} \to M\_{i',j}$ is injective.


More detailed: Let us still assume 1) and let $x \in \mathrm{ker}(\alpha)$. Choose $i$ such that $x$ comes from an element in $\lim\_j M\_{i,j}$, say $x = (x\_{ij})\_j$. Now $\alpha(x)=0$ says that for all $j$ there is some $i(j) \geq i$ such that the image of $x\_{ij}$ in $M\_{i(j),j}$ vanishes. If we have 2), this already gives us $x\_{ij}=0$ for all $j$, thus $x=0$.


More generally, if $j \mapsto i(j)$ is a *bounded* function, say by $i\_{\infty}$, we see that the image of $x$ in $\lim\_j M\_{i\_{\infty},j}$ vanishes, which implies $x=0$ in the colim-lim. Now it's easy to find an example where this function is not bounded and, in fact, $\alpha$ is not injective:


Let's take $I=\mathbb{N}$ as a partial order and $J = \mathbb{N}$ as a discrete category, so that we consider the canonical map $\mathrm{colim}\_n \prod\_m M\_{nm} \to \prod\_m \mathrm{colim}\_n M\_{n,m}$. For all $n,m$ let $M\_{n,m} = A[X]$ and let $M\_{n,m} \to M\_{n+1,m}$ be the formal derivative of polynomials. Then $(1,X,X^2,X^3,\dotsc)$ represents a nontrivial element in the kernel of $\alpha$, since every $X^m$ satisfies $\partial^{m+1} X^m = 0$, but there is no $n$ with $\partial^{n} X^m = 0$ for all $m$.


