6
$\begingroup$

On the nlab page for Chevalley–Eilenberg algebras, it defines $\operatorname{CE}(\mathfrak g)$ for $\mathfrak g$ finite dimensional, and then says "This has a more or less evident generalization to infinite-dimensional Lie algebras", and provides no more details.

Please could someone outline this generalisation, and if the theory follows through (e.g. is there still a contravariant equivalence of categories?).

$\endgroup$
1
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I think the definition of the algebra itself literally goes through unchanged, and all that is different is that one usually does not speak of structure constants in the infinite-dimensional case. But I have no idea how the rest of the theory goes. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Aug 18, 2021 at 0:52

1 Answer 1

6
$\begingroup$

A definition that always works and does agree with that one in the finite-dimensional case is the following: put $$ C^k(\mathfrak{g})=({\Lambda}^k\mathfrak{g})^*=\operatorname{Hom}({\Lambda}^k\mathfrak{g}, \mathbb{F}). $$ (Here $\mathbb{F}$ is the ground field, of course.) The differential is given by the formula $$ (d\phi)(g_1\wedge\dotsb\wedge g_{k+1})=\sum_{1\le i<j\le k+1}(-1)^{i+j-1}\phi([g_i,g_j]\wedge g_1\wedge\dotsb \wedge\widehat{g_i}\wedge\dotsb\wedge \widehat{g_j}\dotsb\wedge g_{k+1}), $$ where the hat means missing the corresponding factor. If you define the product of cochains by the usual shuffle product formula, you will see that the differential is a derivation, and so all nice properties still hold. The main thing that breaks is precisely the identification $({\Lambda}^k\mathfrak{g})^*\cong {\Lambda}^k(\mathfrak{g}^*)$ used in the nlab page.

(See, for example, the classical reference Cohomology of Infinite-Dimensional Lie Algebras by D.B. Fuks.)

The statement about equivalence of categories does not extend, however, precisely because the cochain algebra is not generated by degree one elements. There are many different situations where things can be patched: many infinite-dimensional algebras have additional gradings with finite-dimensional components (and you can work in the corresponding monoidal category), sometimes all you need is continuous cochains on algebras that have some topology etc. Again, the book of Fuks details many of those situations.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I presume it can also be "fixed" by considering topological tensor (exterior in this case) products? g has canon structure of ind-finite vec space whence dual has canon structure of pro-finite one and one has notion of tensor product of these. Presumably algebra is generated topologically in degree 1. Perhaps problem is that g is not ind limit of finite lie alg, just of vector spaces $\endgroup$
    – user108998
    Commented Aug 18, 2021 at 9:50
  • $\begingroup$ @EBz what do you mean by a canonical structure of ind-finite vector space? Canonical in in what sense? Also, it is important to remember that you consider the exterior algebra of the dual as a dg algebra, and I am not sure how the differential agrees with the ind/pro structures you have in mind... $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 18, 2021 at 22:08
  • $\begingroup$ @LSpice thank you for fixing the typo in the previous version. I however find the replacement of $\Lambda$ by $\bigwedge$ completely uncalled for - the symbol $\bigwedge$ looks really horrible especially with the exponent $k$ attached to it, and my use of $\Lambda$ was very intentional. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 18, 2021 at 22:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LSpice Aesthetics wins over semantics in my view of typography :-) Also, I enjoy $\lambda$-rings, and I find great deal of satisfaction in the fact that "$\Lambda$ categorifies $\lambda$". $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 18, 2021 at 23:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Vladimir Dotsenko - canonical as it is the limit of its finite dimensional sub spaces, thus its dual space is canon topologized. (Nb this is why when one considers an infinite dim vector space as alg geom object typically one considers it as ind-scheme so that functions on it are topological algebra). Ur point about differentials is probably the main problem, as I mentioned it would not be a problem if the Lie algebra was a limit of its finite dim sub lie algebras $\endgroup$
    – user108998
    Commented Aug 19, 2021 at 12:40

You must log in to answer this question.

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