Let $M$ be a compact manifold, de Rham theorem asserts that this is an isomorphism between de Rham cohomology and singular cohomology. Suppose that $M$ admits a smooth group $G$, where $G$ is a compcat Lie group. We can define the complex of $G$-invaraint forms with differential whose cohomology is denoted by $H^{*,G}_{dR}(M)$; and complex of $G$-invariant cochain with real coefficient, whose cohomology is denoted by $H^{*,G}(M)$.

I guess that $H^{*,G}_{dR}(M)\cong H^{*,G}(M)$.

Q 1. Did someone already show this(any reference), or its proof is exactly the same as the de Rham Theorem? (I can not image any obstruction)


  1. It is wrong, with a counter-example?
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The complex of invariant $H^{*,G}_{dR}(M)$ is isomorphic to $H^*_{dR}(M)$, at least if $G$ is compact: You prove this by averaging a form over the group action. $\endgroup$ – Thomas Rot Dec 18 '19 at 14:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If $G$ is not compact, clearly the result is not true, as we can see from the real number line. $\endgroup$ – Ben McKay Dec 18 '19 at 15:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Thomas Rot for this you need the group to be compact and path connected. The action of a finite group on itself is a counter example otherwise. $\endgroup$ – S. carmeli Dec 18 '19 at 20:37
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Ben McKay and S. Carmeli. $\endgroup$ – Thomas Rot Dec 18 '19 at 21:19
  • $\begingroup$ @ThomasRot So, do you think it is true/ trivial? $\endgroup$ – DLIN Dec 19 '19 at 3:05

A reference for the proof (from the n-lab entry): Eckhard Meinrenken, Equivariant cohomology and the Cartan model, in: Encyclopedia of Mathematical Physics, Pages 242-250 Academic Press 2006 (pdf, doi:10.1016/B0-12-512666-2/00344-8) http://www.math.toronto.edu/mein/research/enc.pdf

The proof is as indicated by Thomas Rot, and requires the group to be compact and connected.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ I’m not sure this has the (dR-side) result and proof alluded to by @ThomasRot. On the other hand, I think Chevalley-Eilenberg (1948) have it as Theorem 2.3, attributing the method to, as you said, Cartan (1930). $\endgroup$ – Francois Ziegler Dec 19 '19 at 20:02

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.