4
$\begingroup$

I apologize in advance if this question is inappropriate for this forum.

I am reading Hatcher's book and have the following problem: Let $X$ be a space, $G$ an abelian group and $R$ a ring. In his proof of the universal coefficient theorem in $\S$ 3.1, he considers a natural homomorphism $h\colon H^k(X;G)\to \text{Hom}(H_k(X),G)$. However, when computing cup product structures in $\S$ 3.2, specifically in examples 3.8 and 3.9, he seems to be using a homomorphism $\tilde{h}\colon H^k(X;R)\to \text{Hom}(H_k(X;R),R)$.

I think I can see that such a homomorphism always exists when $R$ is a ring. More precisely, given a cocyle $\phi\colon C_k(X)\to R$, we can define $\tilde{\phi}\colon Z_k(X)\otimes R\to R$ by $\tilde{\phi}(\alpha \otimes r)=\phi(\alpha)r$, and the fact that $\delta\phi=\phi\partial=0$ means that this gives rise to a homomorphism $H_k(X;R)\to R$. In other words, the construction yields a map $\tilde{h}\colon H^k(X;R)\to \text{Hom}(H_k(X;R),R)$.

What I would like to know is:

(a) Is there a way to define something similar to $\tilde{h}$ with $G$ in place of $R$?

(b) Is this map $\tilde{h}$ surjective as $h$ is?

(c) What is its kernel?

Thank you.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ A ring $R$, in Hatcher's context, already has the structure of an abelian group with respect to addition, so everything in 3.1 applies. It is true that a ring has additional structure besides addition --- namely multiplication --- but your questions (a,b,c) are answered by ignoring multiplication. The whole point of cup product is to exploit the additional multiplicative structure on $R$. $\endgroup$
    – Lee Mosher
    Apr 12, 2012 at 16:54
  • $\begingroup$ @Lee: Note that homology on the right hand side of $h$ has coefficients in $\mathbb Z$ while $\tilde{h}$ has coefficients in $R$. Hence it's a bit more subtil than just arguing that a ring is a group with some additional properties. $\endgroup$
    – Ralph
    Apr 12, 2012 at 17:30
  • $\begingroup$ @Ralph: ah, right. Got it. $\endgroup$
    – Lee Mosher
    Apr 12, 2012 at 17:44
  • $\begingroup$ Here's some pure speculation... given $G$ there should always be a group homomorphism from $\mathbb{Z}\rightarrow G$, right? This induces a group homomorphism $Hom(H_k(X),\mathbb{Z})\righarrow Hom(H_k(X),G)$. Maybe this can help you use the $\tilde{h}$ from $R=\mathbb{Z}$ to construct the map you're after. Of course, it can only be a group homomorphism, since $Hom(H_k(X),G)$ is only a group, so there is no guarantee it'll have the nice properties that $\tilde{h}$ has. Now, here's a question: what do you need $\tilde{h}_G$ for? Why isn't $h$ good enough? $\endgroup$ Apr 12, 2012 at 19:16
  • $\begingroup$ It seems to me that you get a homomorphism $H^k(X;A)\to\text{Hom}(H_k(X;B),C)$ when (and probably only when) you have a pairing $A\otimes B\to C$. The $h$ in the question comes from the fact that an abelian group $G$ is a $\mathbb Z$-module, i.e., a pairing $G\otimes\mathbb Z\to G$. The $\tilde h$ comes from the ring multiplication $R\otimes R\to R$. $\endgroup$ Apr 12, 2012 at 21:01

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

Claim 1: If $R$ is a principal ideal domain, then there is a short exact sequence $$0 \to Ext^1_R(H_{n-1}(X;R),R) \to H^n(X;R) \xrightarrow[]{\tilde{h}} Hom_R(H_n(X;R),R) \to 0\hspace{10pt}(\ast)$$

This answers b) and c).

Claim 2: If $R$ or $H_\ast(X)$ is torsion-free, then $\tilde{h} = h$ (for $G=R$).

Proof: Denote the simplicial complex of $X$ by $S(X)$. Then $C := S(X) \otimes_{\mathbb Z} R$ is a complex of free $R$-modules. Hence, by the universal coefficient theorem (cf. Hatcher, after Corollary 3.4) we have the short exact sequence $$0 \to Ext^1_R(H_{n-1}(C),R) \to H^n Hom_R(C,R) \xrightarrow[]{\tilde{h}} Hom_R(H_n(C),R)\to 0.$$ But $Hom_R(C,R) = Hom_R(S(X) \otimes_{\mathbb Z} R,R) \cong Hom(S(X),R)$ (cf. III (3.3) in Brown: Cohomology of Groups) and $H_n(C) = H_n(X;R)$. Hence the short exact sequence above transforms into $(\ast)$.

Moreover, by universal coefficients, $$H_n(X;R) = H_n(X) \otimes_{\mathbb Z}R \oplus Tor_1^{\mathbb Z}(H_{n-1}(X),R) = H_n(X) \otimes_{\mathbb Z}R$$ if $R$ or $H_{n-1}(X)$ is torsion-free. Hence $$Hom_R(H_n(X;R),R) = Hom_R(H_n(X) \otimes_{\mathbb Z} R,R) \cong Hom(H_n(X),R).$$

This shows claim 2.

Remark: a) Example 3.8 from Hatcher uses $R=\mathbb{Z}/2$.

b) Example 3.9 uses $R=\mathbb{Z}/m$. Hence $(\ast)$ doesn't apply (for general $m$). In particular it can't be used to show that $\tilde{h}$ is surjective. This may be the reason for Hatcher's alternative argumentation in this example.


Added: I want to add an application of the short exact sequence $(\ast)$ that is of particular importance: Let $R=k$ be a field. Thus $H_\ast(X;k)$ is a projective $k$-module and hence $Ext_k^1(H_{n-1}(X;k),k)=0$ for all $n$. Now $(\ast)$ yields an isomorphism $$H^n(X;k) \xrightarrow[]{\sim}Hom_k(H_n(X;k),k),$$ i.e. $H^n(X;k)$ is just the dual space of $H_n(X;k)$. This property is frequently used in the literature.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ I thought he wanted to take the construction of $\tilde{h}$, which he understands, and try to make it work to get a map like $h$, i.e. a map $H^k(X;G)\rightarrow Hom(H_k(X),G)$. That's how I read the ``with $G$ in place of $R$'' part of his question. If I'm right, then this answer is probably not what he's looking for, though I still think it's cool. $\endgroup$ Apr 13, 2012 at 0:39
  • $\begingroup$ @David: The OP defines a map $\tilde{h}$ and asks in b), c) about the image and kernel of $\tilde{h}$. And that are the questions I answer. Where's the problem ? $\endgroup$
    – Ralph
    Apr 13, 2012 at 0:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ $\mathbb Z/m$ is hereditary iff $m$ is square free (and then it is semisimple) $\endgroup$ Apr 13, 2012 at 1:05
  • $\begingroup$ @Mariano: You beat me by a few seconds. $\endgroup$
    – Ralph
    Apr 13, 2012 at 1:11
  • $\begingroup$ :) Also, a semi-hereditary ring has $Tor$ dimension at most $1$, but over $\mathbb Z/P^r$ with $r>1$ we have $\mathrm{Tor}_n(\mathbb Z/p,\mathbb Z/p)\neq0$ for all $n$. $\endgroup$ Apr 13, 2012 at 1:22

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.