For compact Lie groups, Atiyah and Segal proved a strong relationship between Borel-equivariant K-theory, defined in terms of the K-theory of $X \times_G EG$, and the equivariant K-theory of X defined in terms of equivariant vector bundles. Roughly, for "nice" spaces X the K-theory of $X \times_G EG$ is a completion of the equivariant K-theory of X, and in particular the K-theory of BG is a completion of the complex representation ring of G.

The Segal conjecture is an analogous result proven in subsequent years (by many authors, with Carlsson completing the proof). It's less well-known outside the subject, and obtained by roughly replacing "vector bundles" with "covering spaces" - the original conjecture is that for a finite group $G$, the abelian group of stable classes of maps $\varinjlim[S^n \wedge BG, S^n]$ has as limit to the Burnside ring of finite $G$-sets. There are further statements describing $\varinjlim [S^{n+k} \wedge BG, S^n]$ in terms of a completion of certain equivariant stable homotopy groups. It's notable for the fact that it's not really a computational result - we describe two objects as being isomorphic, without any knowledge of what the resulting groups on either side really are.

There are a number of steps in this proof, and over the years most of them have been recast and reinterpreted in a number of ways. However, the initial steps in the proof are computational. Lin proved this conjecture for the case $G = \mathbb{Z}/2$, and Gunawardena proved it for the case $G = \mathbb{Z}/p$ for odd primes $p$. Lin's original proof involved some very difficult computations in the Lambda algebra and a simplified proof was ultimately written up by Lin-Davis-Mahowald-Adams. It amounts to a computation of certain Ext or Tor groups over the Steenrod algebra - namely, if $H^* \mathbb{RP}^\infty = \mathbb{Z}/2[x]$ has its standard module structure over the Steenrod algebra, then $Ext^{**}(\mathbb{Z}/2[x^{\pm 1}],\mathbb{Z}/2)$ degenerates down to a single nonzero group.

Bordism theory

A lot of the contemporary work in stable homotopy theory uses the relationship between stable homotopy theory and the moduli of formal groups, rather than the Adams-spectral-sequence calculations that are used in the above proofs. The analogous calculation would be the following.

Let L be the Lazard ring carrying the universal formal group law, with 2-series $[2](t)$ whose zeros are the "2-torsion" of the formal group law. Then there is an L-algebra $$ Q = t^{-1} L[[t]]/[2](t) $$ whose functor of points would be described (up to completion issues) as taking a ring R to the set of formal group laws on R equipped with a nowhere-zero 2-torsion point. This comes equipped with natural descent data for change-of-coordinates on the formal group law, and so it describes a sheaf on the moduli stack of formal group laws $\mathcal{M}$.

A student of Doug Ravenel's (Binhua Mao) proved in his thesis that the analogous Ext-computation is valid in the formal-group setting: namely, if one computes the Ext-groups $$Ext_{\mathcal M}(\mathcal{O}, Q \otimes \omega^{\otimes t})$$ where $\omega$ is the sheaf of invariant 1-forms on $\mathcal{M}$, it converges to a completion of $$Ext_{\mathcal M}({\mathcal O}, \omega^{\otimes t}).$$ (The result was stated in different language, and I am still ignoring completion issues.)

However, as I understand the proof (and I don't claim that I really do!) it essentially uses a reduction to the Adams spectral sequence case by using a filtration that reduces to the group scheme of automorphisms of the additive formal group law, and this is very closely connected to the Steenrod algebra. I would regard it as still being computationally focused, and I don't really have a grip on why one might expect it to be true without carrying the motivation from homotopy theory all the way through.

Question (finally)

Is there is a more conceptual interpretation of this computation in terms of the geometry of the moduli of formal groups?

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I think you mean that Lin's theorem says that $Ext(Z/2[x^\pm],Z/2)$ is the same as $Ext(Z/2,Z/2)$ (up to a shift), not that it degenerates to a single non-zero group. $\endgroup$ Apr 9, 2010 at 21:54
  • $\begingroup$ Is there an account of Mao's thesis available anywhere? It doesn't look like it got published. $\endgroup$ Apr 9, 2010 at 22:15
  • $\begingroup$ Ach, you're correct, I was thinking of the Ext-term they calculate in the course of the proof. Mao's thesis I had to request by interlibrary loan - he left mathematics before publishing. $\endgroup$ Apr 10, 2010 at 3:01

1 Answer 1


I can't really answer this. I'll just think out loud for a bit.

Let $R$ be a complete local $\mathbb{F}_p$ algebra. The additive formal group $G$ is a formal scheme $Spf(\mathbb{F}_p[[x]])$. An $R$-point of $G(R)$ is an element of $\mathfrak{m}_R$.

Pick $t\in G(R)=\mathfrak{m}_R$, and consider $f(x)=x(x-t)(x-2t)\cdots (x-(p-1)t)=x^p-tx$. Let $F_t=Spec(R[[x]]/(x^p-tx))=Spec(R[x]/(x^p-tx))$. Then $F_t$ is a finite subgroup scheme of $G$. If we base change $F_t$ to $\tilde{F}_t$ over $R[t^{-1}]$, then $\tilde{F}_t$ becomes an etale group scheme.

The universal example of such an $F_t$ lives over $B=\mathbb{F}_p[[t]]$. The scheme $S$ of automorphisms of $G$ (i.e., the dual Steenrod algebra) acts on $B$, and the action lifts to $B[t^{-1}]=\mathbb{F}_p((t))$. If $\omega$ is the module of invariant differentials on $G$ (isomorphic as a module with $S$-action to $tB/t^2B$, then there's a map $$Res_{t=0}: B[t^{-1}] \otimes_{\mathbb{F}_p} \omega\to \mathbb{F}_p,$$ which is a map of $S$-modules. Lin's theorem asserts that this map induces isomorphisms in $Ext_S^*(\omega^i,{-})$.

So Lin's theorem is something about residues.

You have this residue map is other cases, for instance if we replace $G$ with a Lubin-Tate deformation. Neil Strickland has thought about this: in his Formal Schemes and Formal Groups, he spells out some of the relationship between the residues and the Segal conjecture.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I knew that this map projecting onto degree -1 induced a Tor/Ext isomorphism, but wasn't thinking about it in terms of residues. So somehow if I think of the Ext as governing completion, then this sheaf of nowhere-vanishing torsion points has certain parts of the deformation theory determined by the residue? This is at least somewhere to look. Thanks for aiming me at Strickland's paper, I often need reminding that certain reading should be higher on my priority list. $\endgroup$ Apr 12, 2010 at 4:53

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.