DOCSLIB.ORG

Homotopical Algebra

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Homotopical Algebra Yuri Berest, Sasha Patotski Fall 2015 These are lecture notes of a graduate course MATH 7400 currently taught by Yuri Berest at Cornell University. The notes are taken by Sasha Patotski; the updates will appear every week. If you are reading the notes, please send us corrections; your questions and comments are also very much welcome. Emails: [email protected] and [email protected]. ii Contents 1 Homotopy theory of categories 1 1 Basics of simplicial sets . .1 1.1 Definitions . .1 1.2 Motivation . .3 1.3 Examples of (co-)simplicial sets . .5 1.4 Remarks on basepoints and reduced simplicial sets . .7 1.5 The nerve of a category . .8 1.6 Examples of nerves . .9 1.7 One example: the nerve of a groupoid . 11 2 Geometric realization . 12 2.1 General remarks on spaces . 12 2.2 Definition of geometric realization . 14 2.3 Two generalizations of geometric realization . 16 2.4 Kan extensions . 17 2.5 Comma categories . 20 2.6 Kan extensions using comma categories . 22 3 Homotopy theory of categories . 24 3.1 The classifying space of a small category . 24 3.2 Homotopy-theoretic properties of the classifying spaces . 26 3.3 Connected components . 28 3.4 Coverings of categories . 28 3.5 Explicit presentations of fundamental groups of categories . 30 3.6 Homology of small categories . 31 3.7 Quillen's Theorem A . 34 3.8 Fibred and cofibred functors . 37 3.9 Quillen's Theorem B . 39 2 Algebraic K-theory 41 1 Introduction and overview . 41 2 Classical K-theory . 42 2.1 The group K0(A)............................. 42 2.2 The group K1(A)............................. 42 iii 2.3 The group K2(A)............................. 43 2.4 Universal central extensions . 44 3 Higher K-theory via \plus"-construction . 46 3.1 Acyclic spaces and maps . 46 3.2 Plus construction . 50 3.3 Higher K-groups via plus construction . 50 3.4 Milnor K-theory of fields . 54 3.5 Loday product . 56 3.6 Bloch groups . 57 3.7 Homology of Lie groups \made discrete" . 58 3.8 Relation to polylogarithms, and some conjectures . 62 4 Higher K-theory via Q-construction . 63 4.1 Exact categories . 63 4.2 K-group of an exact category . 64 4.3 Q-construction . 66 4.4 Some remarks on the Q-construction . 66 4.5 The K0-group via Q-construction . 67 4.6 Higher K-theory . 69 4.7 Elementary properties . 70 4.8 Quillen{Gersten Theorem . 71 5 The \plus = Q" Theorem . 72 5.1 The category S−1S ............................ 73 5.2 K-groups of a symmetric monoidal groupoid . 74 5.3 Some facts about H-spaces . 75 5.4 Actions on categories . 77 5.5 Application to \plus"-construction . 80 5.6 Proving the \plus=Q" theorem . 83 6 Algebraic K-theory of finite fields . 89 6.1 Basics of topological K-theory . 90 6.2 λ-structures and Adams operations . 91 6.3 Witt vectors and special λ-rings . 93 6.4 Adams operations . 95 6.5 Higher topological K-theory and Bott periodicity . 96 6.6 Quillen Theorem for Finite fields . 97 6.7 λ-operations in Higher K-theory . 98 7 Final remarks on Algebraic K-theory . 104 7.1 Historic remarks on algebraic and topological K-theory . 104 7.2 Remarks on delooping . 106 iv 3 Introduction to model categories 109 1 Model categories . 109 1.1 Axioms . 109 1.2 Examples of model categories . 111 1.3 Natural constructions . 112 2 Formal consequences of axioms . 114 2.1 Lifting properties . 114 2.2 Homotopy equivalence relations . 116 2.3 Whitehead Theorem . 121 3 Homotopy category . 122 3.1 Definition of a homotopy category . 123 3.2 Homotopy category as a localization . 124 3.3 Derived functors . 126 3.4 Quillen's Adjunction Theorem . 127 3.5 Quillen's Equivalence Theorem . 129 3.6 About proofs of of Quillen's Adjunction and Equivalence Theorems . 130 3.7 Example: representation functor . 132 A Topological and geometric background 135 1 Connections on principal bundles . 135 2 Coverings of spaces . 137 3 Homotopy fibration sequences and homotopy fibers . 140 v vi Chapter 1 Homotopy theory of categories 1 Basics of simplicial sets 1.1 Definitions Definition 1.1.1. The simplicial category ∆ is a category having the finite totally ordered sets [n] := f0; 1; : : : ; ng, n 2 N, as objects, and order-preserving functions as morphisms (i.e. the functions f :[n] ! [m] such that i 6 j ) f(i) 6 f(j)). Definition 1.1.2. A simplicial set is a contravariant functor from ∆ to the category of sets Sets. Morphism of simplicial sets is just a natural transformation of functors. Notation 1.1.3. We denote the category Fun(∆op; Sets) of simplicial sets by sSets. Definition 1.1.4. Dually, we define cosimplicial sets as covariant functors ∆ ! Sets. We denote the category of cosimplicial sets by cSets. There are two distinguished classes of morphisms in ∆: i d :[n − 1] ,! [n](n > 1; 0 6 i 6 n) j s :[n + 1] [n](n > 0; 0 6 j 6 n) called the face maps and degeneracy maps respectively. Informally, di skips the value i in its image and sj doubles the value j. More precisely, they are defined by ( ( k if k < i k if k j di(k) = sj(k) = 6 k + 1 if k > i k − 1 if k > j Theorem 1.1.5. Every morphism f 2 Hom∆ ([n]; [m]) can be decomposed in a unique way as f = di1 di2 ··· dir sj1 ··· sjs where m = n − s + r and i1 < ··· < ir and j1 < ··· < js. 1 The proof of this theorem is a little technical, but a few examples make it clear what is going on. For the proof, see for example Lemma 2.2 in [GZ67]. Example 1.1.6. Let f : [3] ! [1] be f0; 1 7! 0; 2; 3 7! 1g. One can easily check that f = s0 ◦ s2. Corollary 1.1.7. For any f 2 Hom∆([n]; [m]), there is a unique factorization s d f :[n] / / [k] / [m] where s is surjective and d injective. Corollary 1.1.8. The category ∆ can be presented by fdig and fsjg as generators with the following relations: djdi = didj−1 i < j j i i j+1 s s = s s i 6 j (1.1) 8 disj−1 if i < j <> sjdi = id if i = j or i = j + 1 :>di−1sj if i > j + 1 Corollary 1.1.9. Giving a simplicial set X∗ = fXngn>0 is equivalent to giving a family of sets fXng equipped with morphisms di : Xn ! Xn−1 and si : Xn ! Xn+1 satisfying didj = dj−1di i < j sisj = sj+1si i 6 j (1.2) 8 s d if i < j <> j−1 i disj = id if i = j or i = j + 1 > :sjdi−1 if i > j + 1 i i The relation between (1.1) and (1.2) is given by di = X(d ) and si = X(s ). Remark 1.1.10. It is convenient (at least morally) to think of simplicial sets as a graded right \module" over the category ∆, and of cosimplicial set as a graded left \module". A standard way to write X 2 Ob(sSets) is o o / X0 / X1 o X2 ::: o o / with solid arrows denoting the maps di and dashed arrows denoting the maps sj. Definition 1.1.11. For a simplicial set X∗ the elements of Xn := X[n] 2 Sets are called n-simplices. 2 Definition 1.1.12. For a simplicial set X∗, an n-simplex x 2 Xn is called degenerate if x 2 Im(sj : Xn−1 ! Xn) for some j. The set of degenerate n-simplices is given by n−1 [ fdegenerate n-simplicesg = sj(Xn−1) ⊆ Xn (1.3) j=0 An alternative way to describe degenerate simplices is provided by the following Lemma 1.1.13. The set of degenerate n-simplices in X∗ is given by [ X(f)(Xk) = colim X(f)(Xk): (1.4) f :[n][k] f :[n][k] f6=id Proof. Exercise. Remark 1.1.14. Although formula (1.3) looks simpler, formula (1.4) has advantage over (1.3) as it can be used to define degeneracies in simplicial objects of an arbitrary category C (at least, when the latter has small colimits). Definition 1.1.15. If X = fXng is a simplicial set, and Yn ⊆ Xn is a family of subsets, 8n > 0, then we call Y = fYng a simplicial subset of X if • Y forms a simplicial set, • the inclusion Y,! X is a morphism of simplicial sets. The definition of simplicial (and cosimplicial) sets can be easily generalized to simplicial and cosimplicial objects in any category. Definition 1.1.16. For any category C we define a simplicial object in C as a functor ∆op ! C. The simplicial objects in any category C form a category, which we will denote by sC. Definition 1.1.17. Dually, we define a cosimplicial object in C as a (covariant) functor ∆ ! C. The category Fun(∆; C) of cosimplicial objects in C will be denoted by cC. 1.2 Motivation In this section we provide some motivation for the definition of simplicial sets, which might seem rather counter-intuitive. We will discuss various examples later in section 1.3 which will hopefully help to develop some intuition. Definition 1.2.1. The n-dimensional geometric simplex is the topological space ( n ) n n+1 X ∆ = (x0; : : : ; xn) 2 R : xi = 1; xi > 0 i=0 3 Thus ∆0 is a point, ∆1 is an interval, ∆2 is an equilateral triangle, ∆3 is a filled n n tetrahedron, etc.
Recommended publications
  • The (∞,1) ( ∞ , 1 ) -Topos of Derived Stacks

    The (∞,1) ( ∞ , 1 ) -Topos of Derived Stacks

    The (¥, 1)-topos of derived stacks Pieter Belmans 20 November 2013 Description These are the notes for my talk at the Winter school on Derived alge- braic geometry (see http://www.math.ethz.ch/u/calaqued/DAG-school). Below the official abstract is given, more information on the contents of my talk can be found in the introduction on page2. Abstract The étale (¥, 1)-site of derived affine schemes, derived stacks, truncations and relations with underived stacks. Basic examples: 1. classifying stacks, 2. derived fibered products, 3. derived mapping stacks References: [HAG-II, §2.2.1, 2.2.2 & 2.2.4]. Contents Introduction2 1 Preliminaries on homotopical algebraic geometry3 1.1 Homotopical algebra contexts....................3 1.2 Homotopical algebraic geometry contexts.............4 1.3 Stacks..................................6 2 The topos of derived stacks7 2.1 Reminder on sites...........................7 2.2 The étale site of (derived) affine schemes..............7 2.3 The topos of derived stacks.....................9 2.4 Geometric stacks........................... 10 2.5 What about other topologies?..................... 11 3 Truncation and extension 12 3.1 Definition............................... 12 3.2 Properties............................... 13 1 4 Basic examples 16 4.1 Classifying stacks........................... 16 4.2 Derived fibered products....................... 17 4.3 Derived mapping stacks....................... 19 Bibliography 21 Introduction The goal of this talk (and these notes) is to tie together the homotopy theory of commutative dg algebras (cdga’s from now on, always concentrated in non- positive cohomological degree) and the abstract notion of a model topos (or (¥, 1)-topos in Lurie’s sense) to obtain a good definition of “derived algebraic geometry” (and show how we can obtain the usual algebraic geometry too).
  • Chhomotopical.Pdf

    Chhomotopical.Pdf

    Contents 19 Homotopical algebra 3 1 Model categories . 3 1.1 Definition . 3 1.2 The retract argument . 5 Copyright 2011 the CRing Project. This file is part of the CRing Project, which is released under the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2. 1 CRing Project, Chapter 19 2 Chapter 19 Homotopical algebra In this chapter, we shall introduce the formalism of model categories. Model categories provide an abstract setting for homotopy theory: in particular, we shall see that topological spaces form a model category. In a model category, it is possible to talk about notions such as \homotopy," and thus to pass to the homotopy category. But many algebraic categories form model categories as well. The category of chain complexes over a ring forms one. It turns out that this observation essentially encodes classical homological algebra. We shall see, in particular, how the notion of derived functor can be interpreted in a model category, via this model structure on chain complexes. Our ultimate goal in developing this theory, however, is to study the non-abelian case. We are interested in developing the theory of the cotangent complex, which is loosely speaking the derived functor of the K¨ahlerdifferentials ΩS=R on the category of R-algebras. This is not a functor on an additive category; however, we shall see that the non-abelian version of derived functors (in the category of simplicial R-algebras) allows one to construct the cotangent complex in an elegant way. x1 Model categories 1.1 Definition We need to begin with the notion of a retract of a map.
  • On the Friedlander-Milnor Conjecture for Groups of Small Rank

    On the Friedlander-Milnor Conjecture for Groups of Small Rank

    On the Friedlander-Milnor conjecture for groups of small rank Fabien Morel Contents 0 Introduction 2 1 1 A 1 The A -local space BSing• (G) 14 1.1 The Suslin-Voevodsky construction . 14 1 1 A 1.2 The A -local space Sing• (G) and its classifying space . 15 2 The Friedlander conjecture and the rigidity property 16 2.1 The rigidity properties at ` .................... 16 2.2 Reformulation of the rigidity property in term of simplicial chain complex . 20 3 The rigidity property and the A1-chain complex 25 3.1 A1-chain complexes and the A1-lower central series . 25 3.2 A1-homological characterization of the rigidity property . 31 1 A ^n 4 Reduction to the rigidity property for the C∗ ((Gm) )'s 35 4.1 A1-chain complex of mixed Tate type . 35 4.2 Bruhat decomposition and A1-chain complex of G . 37 1 A ^n 5 The rigidity property for the C∗ ((Gm) )'s 40 1 ^n 5.1 The Transfers morphisms on the A -localization of the Z(Gm )'s 41 1 A n 5.2 Transfers structures on the H∗ ((Gm) )'s and rigidity . 48 A A1-coverings and Friedlander conjecture in degree 2 54 A.1 A1-coverings and central extensions of algebraic groups . 54 A.2 Proof of the Friedlander conjecture in degree 2 . 58 1 0 Introduction The title refers to the following conjecture of E. Friedlander [12]: Conjecture 1 For any algebraically closed field F , any reductive algebraic F -group G and any prime ` different from char(F ) the natural ring homo- morphism ∗ ∗ Het(BG; Z=`) ! H (BG(F ); Z=`) from the Z=`-´etalecohomology of the simplicial classifying space of G to the cohomology with Z=`-coefficients of the discrete group G(F ) is an isomor- phism.
  • Homotopy of Operads and Grothendieck– Teichmüller Groups Part 1: the Algebraic Theory and Its Topological Background

    Homotopy of Operads and Grothendieck– Teichmüller Groups Part 1: the Algebraic Theory and Its Topological Background

    Mathematical Surveys and Monographs Volume 217 Homotopy of Operads and Grothendieck– Teichmüller Groups Part 1: The Algebraic Theory and its Topological Background Benoit Fresse American Mathematical Society 10.1090/surv/217.1 Homotopy of Operads and Grothendieck– Teichmüller Groups Part 1: The Algebraic Theory and its Topological Background Mathematical Surveys and Monographs Volume 217 Homotopy of Operads and Grothendieck– Teichmüller Groups Part 1: The Algebraic Theory and its Topological Background Benoit Fresse American Mathematical Society Providence, Rhode Island EDITORIAL COMMITTEE Robert Guralnick Benjamin Sudakov Michael A. Singer, Chair Constantin Teleman MichaelI.Weinstein 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 55P48; Secondary 18G55, 55P10, 55P62, 57T05, 20B27, 20F36. For additional information and updates on this book, visit www.ams.org/bookpages/surv-217 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Fresse, Benoit. Title: Homotopy of operads and Grothendieck-Teichm¨uller groups / Benoit Fresse. Description: Providence, Rhode Island : American Mathematical Society, [2017]- | Series: Mathe- matical surveys and monographs ; volume 217 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Contents: The algebraic theory and its topological background – The applications of (rational) homotopy theory methods Identifiers: LCCN 2016032055| ISBN 9781470434816 (alk. paper) | ISBN 9781470434823 (alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Homotopy theory. | Operads. | Grothendieck groups. | Teichm¨uller spaces. | AMS: Algebraic topology
  • Quillen Model Categories

    Quillen Model Categories

    QUILLEN MODEL CATEGORIES MARK HOVEY Abstract. We provide a brief description of the mathematics that led to Daniel Quillen's introduction of model categories, a summary of his seminal work \Homotopical algebra", and a brief description of some of the develop- ments in the field since. Introduction Daniel Quillen's Ph. D. thesis [Qui64], under Raoul Bott at Harvard in 1964, was about partial differential equations. But immediately after that, he moved to MIT and began working on algebraic topology, heavily influenced by Dan Kan. Just three years after his Ph. D., he published a Springer Lecture Notes volume [Qui67] called \Homotopical algebra". This book, in which he introduced model categories, permanently transformed algebraic topology from the study of topological spaces up to homotopy to a general tool useful in many areas of mathematics. Quillen's theory can be applied to almost any situation in which one has a class of maps, called weak equivalences, that one would like to think of as being almost like iso- morphisms. This generality has meant that model categories are more important today than they ever been. Without Quillen's work it would be difficult to imag- ine Voevodsky's Fields Medal winning work on the Milnor conjecture, involving as it does the construction of a convenient stable homotopy category of generalized schemes. The infinity-categories of Joyal, much studied by Lurie and many others, are a direct generalization of model categories. In this paper we describe some of the influences that led to \Homotopical alge- bra", some of the structure of the model categories that Quillen introduced, and some of the modern developments in the subject.
  • Model Categories, 1999 62 Vladimir I

    Model Categories, 1999 62 Vladimir I

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/surv/063 Selected Titles in This Series 63 Mark Hovey, Model categories, 1999 62 Vladimir I. Bogachev, Gaussian measures, 1998 61 W. Norrie Everitt and Lawrence Markus, Boundary value problems and symplectic algebra for ordinary differential and quasi-differential operators, 1999 60 Iain Raeburn and Dana P. Williams, Morita equivalence and continuous-trace C*-algebras, 1998 59 Paul Howard and Jean E. Rubin, Consequences of the axiom of choice, 1998 58 Pavel I. Etingof, Igor B. Frenkel, and Alexander A. Kirillov, Jr., Lectures on representation theory and Knizhnik-Zamolodchikov equations, 1998 57 Marc Levine, Mixed motives, 1998 56 Leonid I. Korogodski and Yan S. Soibelman, Algebras of functions on quantum groups: Part I, 1998 55 J. Scott Carter and Masahico Saito, Knotted surfaces and their diagrams, 1998 54 Casper Goffman, Togo Nishiura, and Daniel Waterman, Homeomorphisms in analysis, 1997 53 Andreas Kriegl and Peter W. Michor, The convenient setting of global analysis, 1997 52 V. A. Kozlov, V. G. Maz'ya? and J. Rossmann, Elliptic boundary value problems in domains with point singularities, 1997 51 Jan Maly and William P. Ziemer, Fine regularity of solutions of elliptic partial differential equations, 1997 50 Jon Aaronson, An introduction to infinite ergodic theory, 1997 49 R. E. Showalter, Monotone operators in Banach space and nonlinear partial differential equations, 1997 48 Paul-Jean Cahen and Jean-Luc Chabert, Integer-valued polynomials, 1997 47 A. D. Elmendorf, I. Kriz, M. A. Mandell, and J. P. May (with an appendix by M. Cole), Rings, modules, and algebras in stable homotopy theory, 1997 46 Stephen Lipscomb, Symmetric inverse semigroups, 1996 45 George M.