MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

How to calculate the DeRham cohomology of the free loop space $LM= C^\infty(S^1,M)$ as a Frechet manifold?.

Edit: It will be enough for me to know: When $H^1_{DR}(LM)$ is not $\{0\}$.

Bounty is ending within 5 hours.

share|cite|improve this question
This might be of interest… . Once you computed the homology of the based loop space, it is possible via the free loop space fibration $\Omega M\rightarrow \Lambda M\rightarrow M$ to write down spectral sequence which relates the homologies of $M,\Omega M$, and $\Lambda M$. – Thomas Rot Aug 17 '12 at 12:28
I would talk to Andrew Stacey or Patrick Iglesias-Zemmour. – Steven Gubkin Aug 17 '12 at 12:29
Of course the question I linked is asking fof singular homology. I do not know anything about the De-Rham complex on infinite dimensional spaces. – Thomas Rot Aug 17 '12 at 12:50
I would probably start with Chen's papers on iterated integrals, such as – Loop Space Aug 17 '12 at 13:30
What kind of differential forms are you thinking of when you say "de Rham cohomology" in the context Frechet manifold? In case you need this for $LM:=C^0(S^1,M)$ and for singular cohomology then a lot more can be said; the Betti numbers of $LM$ can be computed for a large class of $M$. – Somnath Basu Aug 23 '12 at 20:09
up vote 2 down vote accepted

An equivariant de Rham theory in precisely this setting seems to be developed by Leandre in "Equivariant Cohomology, Fock Space and Loop Groups" (2006). (

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks for the answer.. – Jonujohn Aug 17 '12 at 19:36

Assuming that de Rham cohomology is ordinary cohomology (which shouldn't be too hard by the standard sheaf-theoretic proof?), $H^1 = Hom(\pi_1,\mathbb{R})$. Now the base point fibration gives rise to a short exact sequence $$ 1 \rightarrow \pi_2(M) \rightarrow \pi_1(LM) \rightarrow \pi_1(M) \rightarrow 1 $$ Hence yes, if $H^1(M;\mathbb{R}) \neq 0$, then also $H^1(LM;\mathbb{R}) \neq 0$. Maybe more importantly, in the simply-connected case $H^1(LM) = H^2(M)$, something that one can also see by hand.

share|cite|improve this answer
It's better to say why the base point fibration (you perhaps mean the loop space fibration $\Omega M\to LM\to M$) gives a short exact sequence. In general, you get a long exact sequence; here it splits to short exact sequence as the fibration has a section. Another point to note is that $LM$ is not connected if $M$ has a fundamental group. – Somnath Basu Aug 23 '12 at 21:09
+1 for "see by hand" :) – Mark Grant Aug 23 '12 at 22:38
@eigenbunny: Note: your short exact sequence comes equipped with a section $\pi_1(M) \to \pi_1(LM)$ induced by the inclusion of constant loops. Hence $\pi_1(LM)$ is a semi-direct product of $\pi_1(M)$ by $\pi_2(M)$. – John Klein Aug 26 '12 at 4:03
@John, eigenbunny - If $M$ is not simply connected then $LM$ is not connected; therefore, $\pi_1(LM)$ is meaningless unless you specify which component. The constant section only provides a section for $L_0M \to M$, where $L_0 M$ is the component of constant loops. The components of $LM$ are indexed by the conjugacy classes in $\pi_1(M)$. – Somnath Basu Aug 30 '12 at 3:27

This is comment rather than answer: Please check it, whether it makes sense...

Corollary 2.6 page 11 of Free Loop space and homology by J.L Loday says that For any simply connected space, there is a functorial isomorphism: $$HH_1 (\Omega^1(M)) \cong H^1(LM)$$ And Hochschild-Kostant-Rosenberg theorem says that: For a k-algebra $R$, its module of Kähler differentials coincides with its first Hochschild homology $$\Omega_1(R/k)\cong HH_1(R)$$

Now we have by this MO post, a surjective map $\Omega_1(C^\infty(M))\to \Omega^1(M)$.

So can we say that $H^1(LM)= \Omega_1(C^\infty(M))$ and if $\Omega^1(M)\neq \{0\}$, we have $H^1(LM)\neq \{0\}$ for simply connected finite dimension manifold $M$.

share|cite|improve this answer
this fails to take into account the internal grading or... in what sense is $\Omega^1$ a ring? see eigenbunny for the correct result. – Daniel Pomerleano Aug 24 '12 at 4:07

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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