Is there something well-known about which ring can be a cohomology ring of a manifold? More concretely, I would be interested in the following question: does there exists an $m$, s.t. for each $r,s\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\beta_{i,j}^k\in\mathbb{Z}$, there exists a connected compact $m$-manifold $M$ s.t. $H^2(M)\simeq \mathbb{Z}^r$, $H^4(M)\simeq \mathbb{Z}^{s}$ and $x_i\smile x_j=\sum \beta_{i,j}^k y_k$ for the cohomology generators? I would be grateful for some reference..

  • $\begingroup$ It seems to me that your structure constants must satisfy associativity (at least), and that you should impose more conditions upon them such as the existence of a unit. Perhaps you can assume that the cohomology ring has the structure of a Frobenius algebra. I am leaving this in comments because I am not sure. But if this is so, then you should be able to construct such a manifold using handles. $\endgroup$ Aug 12, 2012 at 16:20
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @Scott: my interpretation of the question is that the $x_i$ are in $H^2$ while the $y_k$ are in $H^4$, so associativity is not necessary (for example $H^6$ might vanish). $\endgroup$ Aug 12, 2012 at 16:58
  • $\begingroup$ are you requiring the manifold to be closed? $\endgroup$ Aug 12, 2012 at 19:44

1 Answer 1


You probably meant $\beta_{ij}^k=\beta_{ji}^k$ (the cup-product is commutative). With that condition, there is always a simply-connected compact $7$-manifold $M$ whose only non-trivial cohomology groups are $H^0(M)\cong\mathbb{Z}$, $H^2(M)\cong\mathbb{Z}^r$, and $H^4(M)\cong\mathbb{Z}^s$, and such that the cup-product is as you indicate.

The manifold $M$ can be constructed from a CW-complex $X$ defined as the mapping cone of a certain map $\varphi\colon\vee_s S^3\rightarrow\vee_rS^2$. There is a subpolyhedron $K\subset\mathbb{R}^7$ of the same (even simple) homotopy type of $X$, see http://math.berkeley.edu/~stall/embkloz.pdf. Take $M$ to be the closure of a nice regular neighbourhood of $K\subset\mathbb{R}^7$. This $M$ is a compact simply-connected $7$-manifold (with boundary). The manifold $M$ is (simply) homotopy equivalent to $X$.

Let me now indicate how to define $\varphi$ to get the desired cohomology ring, see Baues' book on 4-dimensional complexes.

Recall that $\pi_3(\vee_rS^2)\cong\Gamma(\mathbb{Z}^r)$. Here $\Gamma$ is Whitehead's functor, defined for any abelian group $A$ by the existence of a universal quadratic map $\gamma\colon A\rightarrow\Gamma(A)$ (not a homomorphism), i.e. a map such that $\gamma(a)=\gamma(-a)$ and the cross effect map $A\times A\rightarrow \Gamma(A)\colon (a,b)\mapsto (a|b)=\gamma(a+b)-\gamma(a)-\gamma(b)$ is bilinear. The isomorphism $\pi_3(\vee_rS^2)\cong\Gamma(\mathbb{Z}^r)$ is defined by the map $\mathbb{Z}^r\cong \pi_2(\vee_rS^2)\rightarrow \pi_3(\vee_rS^2)\colon f\mapsto f\eta$ given by pre-composition with the Hopf map $\eta\colon S^3\rightarrow S^2$, which is universal with those properties. The group $\Gamma(\mathbb{Z}^r)$ is free abelian of rank $\binom{r+1}{2}$. If $\{e_1,\dots,e_r\}\subset \mathbb{Z}^r$ is a basis, then $\{\gamma(e_1),\dots,\gamma(e_r)\}\cup\{(e_i|e_j) \,;\, 1\leq i < j \leq r\}\subset \Gamma(\mathbb{Z}^r)$ is a basis.

There is a natural homomorphism $\tau\colon \Gamma(A)\rightarrow A\otimes A$ defined by the quadratic map $A\rightarrow A\otimes A\colon a\mapsto a\otimes a$. If $A=\mathbb{Z}^r$ then $\tau(\gamma(e_i))=e_i\otimes e_i$ and $\tau(e_i|e_j)=e_i\otimes e_j+e_j\otimes e_i$.

A homotopy class $\varphi\colon\vee_s S^3\rightarrow\vee_rS^2$ is essentially the same as a homomorphism $f=\pi_3(\varphi)\colon \mathbb{Z}^s\rightarrow \Gamma(\mathbb{Z}^r)$. The cohomology of the mapping cone $X$ is obviously $H^0(X)\cong\mathbb{Z}$, $H^2(X)\cong\mathbb{Z}^r$, $H^4(X)\cong\mathbb{Z}^s$, and zero otherwise. The cup-product $H^2(X)\otimes H^2(X)\rightarrow H^4(X)$ turns out to be the $\mathbb{Z}$-linear dual of $\tau f\colon \mathbb{Z}^s\rightarrow \Gamma(\mathbb{Z}^r)\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^r\otimes \mathbb{Z}^r$. Hence, if $\{e_1,\dots,e_r\}\subset \mathbb{Z}^r$ and $\{\bar e_1,\dots, \bar e_s\}\subset\mathbb{Z}^s$ are the canonical bases, given by the inclusions of the factors of the wedges, it is enough to define $f$, and hence $\varphi$, as $f(\bar e_k)=\sum_{i=1}^r \beta_{ii}^k\gamma(e_i)+\sum_{1\leq i<k \leq r}\beta_{ij}^k(e_i|e_j)$.


Your Answer

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

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