4
$\begingroup$

$U(1)$ seems to lead a dual life. On one hand it is the group we know and love, and on the other, it is the classifying space of the integers. Thinking about $n$-groups says that we should also think about this delooping $B\mathbb{Z}$ as the 2-group presented by the crossed module $\mathbb{Z} \to 1$. What is the relationship between this and $U(1)$ as a group?

In particular, let me ask what this relationship says about projective representations of a group. That is, if we have a projective representation of a group $G$, we get a cocycle in $H^2(G,U(1))$. This defines a central extension

$1 \to U(1) \to \hat G \to G \to 1$,

to which our representation lifts to an ordinary representation. We can also think about this cocycle as living in $H^3(G,\mathbb{Z})$, which then defines a central extension of 2-groups

$1 \to B\mathbb{Z} \to \tilde G \to G \to 1$,

or equivalently a 4-term exact sequence with $\mathbb{Z}$ on the left. Can I see the projective representation in terms of $\tilde G$ or this 4-term exact sequence?

Thanks.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Is "Dold-Kan correspondence" a reasonable answer to your first question? A complex with an abelian group $A$ in degree $n$ and zero elsewhere corresponds to an Eilenberg-MacLane simplicial group $K(A,n)$. $\endgroup$
    – S. Carnahan
    Commented Aug 7, 2013 at 6:57
  • $\begingroup$ That seems to me just to explain why I called $B\mathbb{Z}$ the same thing as $\mathbb{Z} \to 1$. In this special case, there is the strangeness that $B\mathbb{Z}$ is naturally a group as well as a 2-group. I want to know the relationship between these structures. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 7, 2013 at 7:11

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

This is about the difference between and relation of "bare" groups and groupoids and higher groupoids (bare = no extra geometry) and smooth groups and groupoids and higher groupoids.

The main fact is that there is an $\infty$-functor

$$ \Pi : Smooth \infty Grpd \to \infty Grpd $$

which is $\infty$-left adjoint to the one that equips $\infty$-groupoids with their discrete smooth structure, and this is geometric realization of smooth infinity-groupoids .

This functor is a reflection: it sends discretely smooth $\infty$-groupoids such as $\mathbf{B}^n \mathbb{Z}$ to themselves, with the geometry forgotten. But otherwise it is far from being injective.

We can say that for $A \in \infty Grpd$ any bary $\infty$-groupoid, that a lift through $\Pi$, hence a smooth infinity-groupoid $\mathbf{A}$ with $\Pi(\mathbf{A}) \simeq A$, is a smooth refinement of $A$.

For example $\mathbf{B}^n U(1)$ is naturally a smooth $\infty$-groupoid for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and one finds that

$$ \Pi(\mathbf{B}^n U(1)) \simeq B^{n+1} \mathbb{Z} \simeq K(\mathbb{Z}, n+1) \,. $$

Here on the left the "$\mathbf{B}$" is in boldface just to amplify that this is the deloopoing in smooth $\infty$-groupoids, whereas the "$B$" on the right is the traditional delooping in bare homotopy types.

Also $\mathbf{B}^{n+1}\mathbb{Z}$ exists as a (discretely) smooth $\infty$-groupoid, but is as such not equivalent to $\mathbf{B}^n U(1)$. Nevertheless, both are smooth refinements of $B^{n+1} \mathbb{Z}$.

Another thing relevant to your question is the following: for nice enough smooth $\infty$-groups $G$ it happens that while $\mathbf{B}G$ is very different from $B G := \Pi(\mathbf{B}G)$, both classify $G$-principal $\infty$-bundles on equivalence classes . But the smooth version only sees also the right homotopy type of smooth gauge transformations of these.

This follows from the fact that for nice enough $G$ homotopy pullbacks over $\mathbf{B}G$ are preserved by $\Pi$. This also implies that in these cases $\Pi$ preserves the $\infty$-group structure.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, Urs. Let me see if I understand you. $BA$ is typically a group up to homotopy, and for Lie groups, every element is homotopic to the identity. However, choosing such a homotopy for every element is going to introduce some strange relations. For example, if elements $a$ of $U(1)$ are cancelled out using the homotopy $h_a$ that just rotates clockwise without any extra winding, then $h_a h_b$ differs from $h_{ab}$ by some element in $\pi_1(U(1)) = \mathbb{Z}$, and this is the relationship between $\pi_1$ and the H-space structure. These homotopies are the cohesion $\Pi$ cares about. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 7, 2013 at 8:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Okay, so what you have in mind now seems to be the presentation of the group $U(1)$ as equivalently the 2-group that comes from the crossed module $[\mathbb{Z} \hookrightarrow \mathbb{R}]$. A cocycle in this latter 2-group is given by elements in $\mathbb{R}$ that on triple intersections differ by an element in $\mathbb{Z}$. This equivalent 2-group is also one way to see that the geometric realization of $U(1)$ is $B \mathbb{Z} = [\mathbb{Z} \to 1]$, because $\mathbb{R}$ is topologically contractible. Morever, all this remains true under arbitrary further delooping. So for instance... $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 7, 2013 at 10:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ...for instance the smooth 2-group $\mathbf{B}U(1)$ is equivalent to that given by the crossed module $\mathbf{B}[\mathbb{Z} \to \mathbb{R}] = [\mathbb{Z} \to \mathbb{R} \to 1]$ (all under Dold-Kan). $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 7, 2013 at 10:38
  • $\begingroup$ Hi Urs. Is it true that the ordinary loopspace $\Omega \mathbf{B}^{d+1} U(1) = \mathbf{B}^d U(1)$, or in general does one need to use a smooth homotopy pullback? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 24, 2013 at 4:38
  • $\begingroup$ You need to do the homotopy pullback in higher stacks. (This is what the boldface of the "B" is meant to remind us of.) Of course the statement does remain true under geometric realization as a statement about homotopy pullbacks in homotopy types of topological spaces, too. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 24, 2013 at 15:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .