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. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 5, 2015 at 4:16

You must log in to answer this question.

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