8
$\begingroup$

In Waldhausen's foundational $A(X)$ paper (in Springer LNM 1126) there are some brief remarks on p. 400 about how to define the "linearized" $K$-theory of a space $X$ using abelian group objects in the category of spaces over $X$ rather than abelian group objects in the category of $G$-spaces.

I need to understand these remarks, and would be happy to hear from anybody who already understands them.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

Let me make some guesses, although I worry I'll only say some formal things you already know (or that are wrong).

One description of the Waldhausen K-theory of a pointed connected space $X$ is that it is the algebraic K-theory of the group algebra $\mathbb{S}[\Omega X]$ of its loop space over the sphere spectrum. Module spectra over $\mathbb{S}[\Omega X]$ have the following equivalent descriptions:

  • Representations of $\Omega X$ on spectra.
  • Families of spectra over $X$ (by a kind of Koszul duality).

What Waldhausen seems to mean by "linearization" is passing from the sphere spectrum to $\mathbb{Z}$, by which I mean $\mathbb{Z}$ the Eilenberg-MacLane spectrum. Now we want to look at the algebraic K-theory of the group algebra $\mathbb{Z}[\Omega X]$. A more familiar avatar of this, passing through stable Dold-Kan, is chains $C_{\bullet}(\Omega X)$. Module spectra over this group algebra have the following equivalent descriptions:

  • Representations of $\Omega X$ on $\mathbb{Z}$-module spectra.
  • Representations of $\Omega X$ on chain complexes over $\mathbb{Z}$ (by stable Dold-Kan).
  • Under a connectivity hypothesis, representations of $\Omega X$ on simplicial abelian groups (by ordinary Dold-Kan).
  • Under a connectivity hypothesis, representations of $\Omega X$ on topological abelian groups (by a suitably monoidal version of the equivalence between simplicial sets and topological spaces).
  • Under a connectivity hypothesis, families of topological abelian groups over $X$, or abelian groups in families of spaces over $X$ (by Koszul duality again).
$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ That's the formal picture, but I wanted to understand a certain part of it carefully, and I was hoping to do so by using technical details hinted at in that reference. I think I've sort of got it now. There is a functor that takes an abelian group with $\Omega X$-action and makes a 'family of abelian groups over $X$'. This has a left adjoint which I wish I had a better concrete grasp of. Put appropriate notions of weak equivalence and cell object on these two categories, and then show that the left adjoint induces an equivalence of $K$-theory. $\endgroup$ Feb 5, 2015 at 4:16

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.