21
$\begingroup$

Let $X$ be a $G$-space. There are a number of places in the literature where one can find the claim that under certain conditions rationalization and taking homotopy fixed points with respect to a finite group action commute, that is, the map $X^{hG} \to (X_{\mathbb{Q}})^{hG}$ is a rationalization or equivalently $(X^{hG})_{\mathbb{Q}} \to (X_{\mathbb{Q}})^{hG}$ is a weak equivalence.

I know how to prove a number of special cases of this (e.g. when $X$ is based with $G$-fixed base point and nilpotent with finitely many non-zero homotopy groups), but a quite general result is claimed in the 1989 thesis of Goyo (he uses $(-)^{(G)}$ as notation for homotopy fixed points):

enter image description here

However, I don't understand his proof (it seems to use the claim that an infinite limit of rationalizations is a rationalization, which is not true). So I am looking for a reference which gives an answer to the following question:

When exactly does rationalization commute with homotopy fixed points?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ What's $X$ here? A space, a spectrum, a complex... $\endgroup$ – Denis Nardin Jun 13 at 7:59
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @DenisNardin I think X is a space, since proposition 5.13 is about G-spaces. $\endgroup$ – cellular Jun 13 at 9:29
  • $\begingroup$ There is a spectral sequence $E^{p,q}_{2}=H^{-p}(G,\pi_{q}(X))$ converging to $\pi_{p+q}(X^{hG})$. I think that $E^{p,q}_{2}=H^{-p}(G,\pi_{q}(X)\otimes \mathbb{Q} )$ converges to $\pi_{p+q}(X^{hG})\otimes \mathbb{Q}$. Which should imply that $X_{\mathbb{Q}}^{hG}\simeq (X^{hG})_{\mathbb{Q}}$ under simply connected hypothesis. $\endgroup$ – cellular Jun 13 at 13:58
18
$\begingroup$

The statement appears to me to be false. The difficulty, from some point of view, is that in the spectral sequence going from $H^{-i}(G;\pi_j(M))$ to $\pi_{i+j}(M^{hG})$ an infinite number of torsion groups can conspire to make something rationally non-trivial.

As I understand it, the statement you are asking about says that if a finite group $G$ acts on a space $M$, and if both $M$ and the homotopy fixed point space $M^{hG}$ are simply connected, and if $M\to M_{\mathbb Q}$ is a rationalization of $M$ that is also a $G$-map for some action of $G$ on $M_{\mathbb Q}$, then the induced map $M^{hG}\to (M_{\mathbb Q})^{hG}$ is also a rationalization.

Let's make a counterexample in which $G$ acts trivially on $M$ (and on $M_{\mathbb Q}$). In this case $M^{hG}$ is the function space $Map(BG,M)$. I claim that it is enough if we can find a simply connected space $M$ and a finite group $G$ such that the based function space $Map_\ast(BG,M)$ is simply connected but not rationally trivial. If so, then the fibration sequence $$ Map_\ast(BG,M)\to Map(BG,M)\to M $$ shows that $Map(BG,M)$ is simply connected, and also in the fibration sequence $$ Map_\ast(BG,M)_{\mathbb Q}\to Map(BG,M)_{\mathbb Q}\to M_{\mathbb Q} $$ the right hand map is not a weak equivalence. On the other hand, in the fibration sequence $$ Map_\ast(BG,M_{\mathbb Q})\to Map(BG,M_{\mathbb Q})\to M_{\mathbb Q} $$ the right hand map is a weak equivalence because $H^j(BG;V)=0$ for $j>0$ and $V$ a rational vector space. It follows that $$ Map(BG,M)_{\mathbb Q}\to Map(BG,M_{\mathbb Q}) $$ is not a weak equivalence.

To come up with such an $M$ and $G$ we can use the Atiyah-Segal completion theorem. The basic idea is to take $M$ to be $BU$, but I have to modify this a little to make $Map_\ast (BG,M)$ simply connected.

Start with $BU$, whose homotopy groups are $\pi_{2k}\cong \mathbb Z$ with complex conjugation acting by $+1$ when $k$ is even and by $-1$ when $k$ is odd. Localize it by inverting $2$, and split the result as a product of two factors according to that conjugation action. $M$ will be the factor corresponding to $-1$, so its homotopy groups are $\pi_j\cong \mathbb Z[1/2]$ if $j$ congruent to $2$ mod $4$.

Let $G$ be the dihedral group of order $6$. Then $H^i(BG;\mathbb Z[1/2])$ is trivial when $i$ is not a multiple of $4$ and is of order $3$ if $i>0$ is a multiple of $4$. It follows that $Map_\ast(BG,M)$ is simply connected and that $\pi_2Map_\ast(BG,M)$ is the inverse limit of larger and larger finite $3$-groups. By Atiyah-Segal (which describes the homotopy groups of the related space $Map_\ast(BG,BU)$) there is actually a copy of the $3$-adic integers here, so the group is rationally nontrivial.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I expected it to be false, and this is a great counterexample. I will wait to see whether someone can find a simpler one (e.g. M a finite CW complex), but otherwise I will expect it. $\endgroup$ – skupers Jun 13 at 20:11
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ If M is finite then the Sullivan conjecture suggests that the statement should be true -- certainly for trivial action. $\endgroup$ – Tom Goodwillie Jun 13 at 20:45
  • $\begingroup$ I wonder if Goyo's statement had an implicit finiteness assumption. I have not looked at the supposed proof. $\endgroup$ – Tom Goodwillie Jun 14 at 12:01
  • $\begingroup$ @skupers here an article (just after theorem 2) using the same result "Rational homotopy of the (homotopy) fixed point sets of circle actions" Urtzi Buijs , Yves Félix , Aniceto Murillo It seems that the condition is that the $G$-action extends to $X_{\mathbb{Q}}$ whtever it means... $\endgroup$ – cellular Jun 14 at 15:08

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.