4
$\begingroup$

The Eilenberg-MacLane spaces $K(G,q)$ are readily generalized to study cohomology with local coefficients.The generalized Eilenberg-MacLane space $K_{\pi}(G,q)$ are spaces with only two nnvanishing homotopy groups, one of them the fundamental group is $\pi$, the other is $G$ in dimension $q$. And the fundamental group $\pi$ acts on $G$ by representation $\rho:\pi\rightarrow Aut(G)$, where $Aut(G)$ is the group of automorphisms of $G$.

It has been given the construction of Eilenberg-MacLane space K(G,n) in the category of CW complex in All Hathcer's book 'ALGEBRAIC TOPOLOGY'. In Samuel Gitler's article 'Cohomology Operations with Local Coefficients' . The generalized Eilenberg-MacLane space $K_{\pi}(G,q)$ are constructed in the category of Kan Complex, but I have no idea about Kan complex and I have not learned them before. Is it possible to reference me some books or articles which talk about $K_{\pi}(G,q)$ in the category of CW complex?

And I have some idea about construction in the follow. But I am not sure if I am right.

Let $K(\pi,1)$ be the base space and homomorphism $\rho:\pi\rightarrow Aut(G)$ be the representation. The homomorphism $\rho$ can induce representation $\rho_{*}:\pi\rightarrow Homeo(K(G,q);K(G,q))$, where $Homeo(K(G,q);K(G,q))$ is the group of homeomorphisms of $K(G,q)$ itself. Then we can construct a fiber bundle $K(G,q)\rightarrow E\rightarrow K(\pi,1)$ by the representation $\rho_{*}$.

I want know if the total space $E$ is the generalized Eilenberg-MacLane space $K_{\pi}(G,q)$ we need?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You need to be careful when you talk about the group of homeomorphisms from an object to itself which is only well-defined up to (weak) homotopy equivalence; $K(G, q)$ is a (weak) homotopy type, not a space. $\endgroup$ – Qiaochu Yuan Sep 6 '14 at 7:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't think such a space is uniquely characterized by the data you have given. For example, when $q=2$, the failure of strictness on $\rho_\ast$ is known (by a theorem of Sinh) to require a choice of "K-invariant" in $H^3(\pi,G)$ to specify the space $E$ up to homotopy equivalence. $\endgroup$ – S. Carnahan Sep 6 '14 at 10:16
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you very much. Would you please show me the reference of the theorem of Sinh? $\endgroup$ – Xiaoyu Li Sep 6 '14 at 12:17
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I'd recommend Baues' obstruction theory book. $\endgroup$ – Fernando Muro Sep 16 '14 at 14:50
4
$\begingroup$

In some sense, you are right, but as noted in the comments you need to be a bit careful. I am not really sure about references, but I'll reformulate Gitler's construction for you:

Take $G$ a group. The first thing is to take the classifying space $K(G,q)$. This can be done functorially, see this MO-discussion. (Unfortunately, the best way to do this is via realization from simplicial sets - I do not know a nice way which does everything strictly with CW-complexes only.) For $\pi$ acting on $G$, this provides a representation of $\pi$ on $K(G,q)$ (or better, as noted in Qiaochu Yuan's comment - on the model of $K(G,q)$ as realization of some explicitly given simplicial set). The generalized Eilenberg-Mac Lane-space $L_{\pi}(G,q)$ is then defined as the Borel construction $E\pi\stackrel{\pi}{\times}K(G,q)$, where $E\pi$ is now any contractible CW-complex with a free action of $\pi$, and $\stackrel{\pi}{\times}$ means taking the product and dividing out the diagonal $\pi$-action. This is the construction in Gitler's paper.

It is then a general fact in equivariant cohomology, associated fiber bundles etc. that there is a fiber bundle $K(G,q)\to L_{\pi}(G,q)\to K(\pi,1)$ as written in the question.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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