Complex Oriented Cohomology Theories and the Language of Stacks
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
COMPLEX ORIENTED COHOMOLOGY THEORIES AND THE LANGUAGE OF STACKS COURSE NOTES FOR 18.917, TAUGHT BY MIKE HOPKINS Contents Introduction 1 1. Complex Oriented Cohomology Theories 2 2. Formal Group Laws 4 3. Proof of the Symmetric Cocycle Lemma 7 4. Complex Cobordism and MU 11 5. The Adams spectral sequence 14 6. The Hopf Algebroid (MU∗; MU∗MU) and formal groups 18 7. More on isomorphisms, strict isomorphisms, and π∗E ^ E: 22 8. STACKS 25 9. Stacks and Associated Stacks 29 10. More on Stacks and associated stacks 32 11. Sheaves on stacks 36 12. A calculation and the link to topology 37 13. Formal groups in prime characteristic 40 14. The automorphism group of the Lubin-Tate formal group laws 46 15. Formal Groups 48 16. Witt Vectors 50 17. Classifying Lifts | The Lubin-Tate Space 53 18. Cohomology of stacks, with applications 59 19. p-typical Formal Group Laws. 63 20. Stacks: what's up with that? 67 21. The Landweber exact functor theorem 71 References 74 Introduction This text contains the notes from a course taught at MIT in the spring of 1999, whose topics revolved around the use of stacks in studying complex oriented cohomology theories. The notes were compiled by the graduate students attending the class, and it should perhaps be acknowledged (with regret) that we recorded only the mathematics and not the frequent jokes and amusing sideshows which accompanied it. Please be wary of the fact that what you have in your hands is the `alpha- version' of the text, which is only slightly more than our direct transcription of the stream-of- consciousness lectures. Much of what is here is somewhat incoherent, and some of it is actually wrong. A `beta-version' may perhaps appear sometime in the future, but until then the notes should probably only be circulated via the topology underground. Date: August 13, 1999. 1 2 COURSE NOTES FOR 18.917, TAUGHT BY MIKE HOPKINS In brief, the main physical goal of the course was to present proofs of the Landweber Exact Functor Theorem and the Morava/Miller-Ravenel Change-of-Rings Theorem using the language of stacks. The lecturer often prophesized that in this context those theorems would seem `almost obvious'| the reader can decide for himself whether he ultimately buys this. There was a secondary goal of the course, however, and that was to introduce students to the general yoga of complex oriented cohomology theories. There are many lectures devoted to this background machinery, much of which appears as an aside to the main discussion. The organization is at the moment somewhat convoluted, but there also several nice vignettes to be found here. Good luck... 1. Complex Oriented Cohomology Theories A complex oriented cohomology theory is a generalized cohomology theory E which is multiplica- tive and has a choice of Thom class for every complex vector bundle. The latter statement means 2n ξ that if ξ ! X is a complex vector bundle of dimension n then we are given a class U = Uξ 2 E~ (X ) with the following properties: (a) For each x 2 X, the image of Uξ under the composition ∼ E~2n(Xξ) ! E~2n(∗ξ) ! E~2n(S2n) −=! E0(∗) is the canonical element 1. ∗ (b) The classes Uξ should be natural under pullbacks: if f : Y ! X then Uf ∗ξ = f (Uξ). (c) Multiplicativity: Uξ⊕η = Uξ · Uη. Remark 1.1. It may appear that we had to make some choices in writing down the maps appearing in part (a)|for instance, we had to choose an identification of S2n with ∗ξ. But the fact that ξ is a complex vector bundle gives a preferred orientation of ∗ξ, and the induced map on cohomology E~2n(∗ξ) ! E~2n(∗) only depends on the way the orientations match up. Example 1.2. (a) Both singular cohomology H ∗(−; Z) and complex K-theory K∗ are complex orientable. (b) Real K-theory KO∗ is not complex orientable. For example, if ξ is the canonical line bundle over CP 1 then one can show that the map 2 2 Z =∼ KO (Xξ) ! KO (S2) =∼ Z coincides with multiplication by 2. So 1 is not in the image. g g If ξ is the tautological line bundle over CP 1 then the zero section CP 1 ! (CP 1)ξ turns out 2 1 to be a homotopy equivalence. The Thom class Uξ 2 E~ (CP ) then pulls back to a class usually 2 1 called x (or xE ) in E~ (CP ). Proposition 1.3. Any class x 2 E~2(CP 1) restricting to 1 under the composite E~2(CP 1) ! E~2(CP 1) = E~2(S1) =∼ E0(∗) extends in a unique way to a complex orientation of E. We will return to the proof later. A complex orientation on a cohomology theory E gives rise to a Thom isomorphism ∗ ∼= ∗+2n ξ ·Uξ : E (X) −! E~ (X ): 2i It also gives rise to Chern classes ci(ξ) 2 E~ (X) satisfying (i) Naturality under pullbacks; (ii) cn(ξ ⊕ η) = i+j=n ci(ξ)cj (η); (iii) c (L) = x 2 E~2(CP 1) where L denotes the tautological line bundle over CP 1. 1 P COMPLEX ORIENTED COHOMOLOGY THEORIES AND THE LANGUAGE OF STACKS 3 Question: In singular cohomology one has c1(L1 ⊗ L2) = c1(L1) + c1(L2) for line bundles L1 and L2 over the same base X. What can we say about c1(L1 ⊗ L2) for an arbitrary complex oriented cohomology theory? ∗ Answer: It turns out that c1(L1⊗L2) can be written as F (c1(L1); c1(L2) for some F (x; y) 2 E [[x; y]]. If we write x +F y for F (x; y), then this power series will have the following properties: (i) x +F y = y +F x (because L1 ⊗ L2 =∼ L2 ⊗ L1); (ii) x +F 0 = x = 0 +F x (because L ⊗ 1 =∼ L, where 1 denotes the trivial line bundle); (iii) (x +F y) +F z = x +F (y +F z) (because tensor product of line bundles is associative). Such an F is called a `formal group law' over the ring E∗. As far as is known, any formal group law can occur as the F (x; y) for some complex oriented cohomology theory. One of the main goals of this course will be to frame the conjectural relationships between formal group laws and stable homotopy theory. Some basic computations. Let E be a multiplicative cohomology theory and let x 2 E~2(CP 1) be an element restricting to 1 (as in Proposition 1.3). This gives a map E∗[x] ! E∗(CP n) (for each n). One can see that xn+1 must n map to zero: First note that CP can be covered by n + 1 contractible open sets Ui, and because x is a reduced cohomology class it must restrict to zero on each Ui. As a general rule one knows that ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ n if a 2 E (X; A) and b 2 E (X; B) then ab 2 E (X; A [ B). But we can write x 2 E (CP ; Ui) for n+1 ∗ n ∗ n n each i, and so x lies in E (CP ; U1 [ : : : [ Un+1) = E (CP ; CP ) = 0. We therefore get a map E∗[x]=(xn+1) −! E∗(CP n): Lemma 1.4. The above map is an isomorphism. Proof. Use the Atiyah-Hirzebruch spectral sequence p;q p n q p+q n E2 = H (CP ; E (∗)) ) E (CP ) ∗ n+1 (which is multiplicative). The E2 term is isomorphic to E [x]=(x ), and both x and the elements of E∗ all have to be permanent cycles|so there can be no differentials in the spectral sequence. The rest is left to the reader. We want to next calculate E∗(CP 1), and we can use the Milnor sequence: 0 ! lim1 E∗−1(CP n) ! E∗(CP 1) ! lim E∗(CP n) ! 0: n The right-hand-term is lim E∗[x]=(xn+1) =∼ E∗[[x]], and the left-hand-term is zero because the maps E∗(CP n+1) ! E∗(CP n) are all surjective. This shows that E∗(CP 1) =∼ E∗[[x]]. ∗ 1 1 ∗ The same argument gives that E (CP ×· · ·×CP ) =∼ E [[x1; : : : ; xn]] where xi is the pullback of x along the projection to the ith factor. Chern Classes. A line bundle L ! X is classified by a map f : X ! CP 1 (which is unique up to homotopy). Define ∗ c1(L) = f (x): Let L denote the universal line bundle over CP 1, and consider the map g : CP 1 × CP 1 ! CP 1 which classifies the bundle L ⊗ L. This induces a map on cohomology E∗[[x]] =∼ E∗(CP 1) −! E∗(CP 1 × CP 1) =∼ E∗[[x; y]]; 4 COURSE NOTES FOR 18.917, TAUGHT BY MIKE HOPKINS so the image of x will be some power series F (x; y) 2 E∗[[x; y]]. By considering the universal example above, it is easy to check that if L1 and L2 are two line bundles over a space X then c1(L1 ⊗ L2) = F (c1(L1); c1(L2)): Note that the crucial point in this argument is knowledge of E∗(CP 1). Let ξ ! X be a complex vector bundle of dimension n and let P(ξ) denote the projective bundle of ξ|the fibre bundle over X whose fibre over x is the projective space of ξx. There is a `tautological' 2 line bundle Lξ over P(ξ). Let t 2 E~ (P(ξ)) denote c1(Lξ).