Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Dec 2 at 8:49 vote accept Chris
S Dec 2 at 8:35 history edited Achim Krause CC BY-SA 4.0
added 1030 characters in body
Dec 2 at 8:19 comment added Chris Can you edit your answer to explicitly spell this out? If so I will gladly accept you answer. My apologies, I am just trying to fully wrap my head around this because it all feels mildly sketchy.
Dec 2 at 8:17 comment added Achim Krause Ah. Then he probably deduces the unstable statement from the stable one? Once you know that $H^*(MO)$ is free (which you can prove less explicitly using the Milnor-Moore theorem), the unstable statement follows simply because the cohomology of $MO(r)$ and $MO$ agree in the necessary range of degrees.
Dec 2 at 8:06 comment added Chris I am more so asking why the statement "The free module structure follows from the stability $\widetilde{H}^{r+i}(MO(r))\cong \widetilde{H}^{r+i+1}(MO(r+1))$ for $i\leq r$." implies that $H^*(MO(r))$ looks like a free module in degrees $\leq 2r$.
Dec 2 at 8:03 comment added Achim Krause Writing down such a homomorphism just corresponds to choosing a family of elements of degree $n_i$ in the target. Checking that it is an isomorphism in degrees $\leq 2r$ amounts to checking that certain terms are linearly independent and generate. This of course involves serious computations, the details should be explained by Stong.
Dec 2 at 7:39 comment added Chris Could you potentially elaborate a bit more on how we justify this isomorphism? For example, Stong seems to presuppose that we can get maps like this and uses it to get a homotopy equivalence to Eilenberg McLane spaces, so I am not sure how to justify that such an isomorphism exists.
Dec 2 at 7:37 review Suggested edits
S Dec 2 at 8:35
Dec 2 at 7:31 history answered Achim Krause CC BY-SA 4.0