author | Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net> |
Mon, 31 May 2010 08:59:18 -0700 | |
changeset 309 | 386d2d12f95b |
parent 306 | 06f06de6f133 |
child 312 | 5bb1cbe49c40 |
permissions | -rw-r--r-- |
113 | 1 |
%!TEX root = ../blob1.tex |
2 |
||
3 |
\section{The blob complex for $A_\infty$ $n$-categories} |
|
4 |
\label{sec:ainfblob} |
|
5 |
||
6 |
Given an $A_\infty$ $n$-category $\cC$ and an $n$-manifold $M$, we define the blob |
|
146 | 7 |
complex $\bc_*(M)$ to the be the homotopy colimit $\cC(M)$ of Section \ref{sec:ncats}. |
113 | 8 |
\nn{say something about this being anticlimatically tautological?} |
9 |
We will show below |
|
225
32a76e8886d1
minor tweaks on small blobs
scott@6e1638ff-ae45-0410-89bd-df963105f760
parents:
222
diff
changeset
|
10 |
in Corollary \ref{cor:new-old} |
113 | 11 |
that this agrees (up to homotopy) with our original definition of the blob complex |
12 |
in the case of plain $n$-categories. |
|
13 |
When we need to distinguish between the new and old definitions, we will refer to the |
|
14 |
new-fangled and old-fashioned blob complex. |
|
15 |
||
16 |
\medskip |
|
17 |
||
286
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
18 |
\subsection{The small blob complex} |
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
19 |
|
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
20 |
\input{text/smallblobs} |
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
21 |
|
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
22 |
\subsection{A product formula} |
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
23 |
|
123 | 24 |
\begin{thm} \label{product_thm} |
306
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
25 |
Given a topological $n$-category $C$ and a $n{-}k$-manifold $F$, recall from Example \ref{ex:blob-complexes-of-balls} that there is an $A_\infty$ $k$-category $C^{\times F}$ defined by |
291 | 26 |
\begin{equation*} |
27 |
C^{\times F}(B) = \cB_*(B \times F, C). |
|
28 |
\end{equation*} |
|
29 |
Now, given a $k$-manifold $Y$, there is a homotopy equivalence between the `old-fashioned' blob complex for $Y \times F$ with coefficients in $C$ and the `new-fangled' (i.e. homotopy colimit) blob complex for $Y$ with coefficients in $C^{\times F}$: |
|
30 |
\begin{align*} |
|
31 |
\cB_*(Y \times F, C) & \htpy \cB_*(Y, C^{\times F}) |
|
32 |
\end{align*} |
|
113 | 33 |
\end{thm} |
34 |
||
306
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
35 |
\nn{To do: remark on the case of a nontrivial fiber bundle. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
36 |
I can think of two approaches. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
37 |
In the first (slick but maybe a little too tautological), we generalize the |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
38 |
notion of an $n$-category to an $n$-category {\it over a space $B$}. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
39 |
(Should be able to find precedent for this in a paper of PT. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
40 |
This idea came up in a conversation with him, so maybe should site him.) |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
41 |
In this generalization, we replace the categories of balls with the categories |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
42 |
of balls equipped with maps to $B$. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
43 |
A fiber bundle $F\to E\to B$ gives an example of such an $n$-category: |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
44 |
assign to $p:D\to B$ the blob complex $\bc_*(p^*(E))$. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
45 |
We can do the colimit thing over $B$ with coefficients in a n-cat-over-B. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
46 |
The proof below works essentially unchanged in this case to show that the colimit is the blob complex of the total space $E$. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
47 |
} |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
48 |
|
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
49 |
\nn{The second approach: Choose a decomposition $B = \cup X_i$ |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
50 |
such that the restriction of $E$ to $X_i$ is a product $F\times X_i$. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
51 |
Choose the product structure as well. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
52 |
To each codim-1 face $D_i\cap D_j$ we have a bimodule ($S^0$-module). |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
53 |
And more generally to each codim-$j$ face we have an $S^{j-1}$-module. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
54 |
Decorate the decomposition with these modules and do the colimit. |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
55 |
} |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
56 |
|
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
57 |
\nn{There is a version of this last construction for arbitrary maps $E \to B$ |
06f06de6f133
outline two approaches for non-trivial bundles
Kevin Walker <kevin@canyon23.net>
parents:
303
diff
changeset
|
58 |
(not necessarily a fibration).} |
286
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
59 |
|
134 | 60 |
|
61 |
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{product_thm}] |
|
113 | 62 |
We will use the concrete description of the colimit from Subsection \ref{ss:ncat_fields}. |
63 |
||
123 | 64 |
First we define a map |
65 |
\[ |
|
66 |
\psi: \bc_*^\cF(Y) \to \bc_*^C(Y\times F) . |
|
67 |
\] |
|
113 | 68 |
In filtration degree 0 we just glue together the various blob diagrams on $X\times F$ |
69 |
(where $X$ is a component of a permissible decomposition of $Y$) to get a blob diagram on |
|
70 |
$Y\times F$. |
|
71 |
In filtration degrees 1 and higher we define the map to be zero. |
|
72 |
It is easy to check that this is a chain map. |
|
73 |
||
123 | 74 |
Next we define a map |
75 |
\[ |
|
76 |
\phi: \bc_*^C(Y\times F) \to \bc_*^\cF(Y) . |
|
77 |
\] |
|
113 | 78 |
Actually, we will define it on the homotopy equivalent subcomplex |
115 | 79 |
$\cS_* \sub \bc_*^C(Y\times F)$ generated by blob diagrams which are small with |
80 |
respect to some open cover |
|
113 | 81 |
of $Y\times F$. |
82 |
\nn{need reference to small blob lemma} |
|
83 |
We will have to show eventually that this is independent (up to homotopy) of the choice of cover. |
|
84 |
Also, for a fixed choice of cover we will only be able to define the map for blob degree less than |
|
85 |
some bound, but this bound goes to infinity as the cover become finer. |
|
86 |
||
115 | 87 |
Given a decomposition $K$ of $Y$ into $k$-balls $X_i$, let $K\times F$ denote the corresponding |
88 |
decomposition of $Y\times F$ into the pieces $X_i\times F$. |
|
89 |
||
90 |
%We will define $\phi$ inductively, starting at blob degree 0. |
|
91 |
%Given a 0-blob diagram $x$ on $Y\times F$, we can choose a decomposition $K$ of $Y$ |
|
92 |
%such that $x$ is splittable with respect to $K\times F$. |
|
93 |
%This defines a filtration degree 0 element of $\bc_*^\cF(Y)$ |
|
94 |
||
95 |
We will define $\phi$ using a variant of the method of acyclic models. |
|
122 | 96 |
Let $a\in \cS_m$ be a blob diagram on $Y\times F$. |
97 |
For $m$ sufficiently small there exists a decomposition $K$ of $Y$ into $k$-balls such that the |
|
123 | 98 |
codimension 1 cells of $K\times F$ miss the blobs of $a$, and more generally such that $a$ is splittable along (the codimension-1 part of) $K\times F$. |
115 | 99 |
Let $D(a)$ denote the subcomplex of $\bc_*^\cF(Y)$ generated by all $(a, \bar{K})$ |
100 |
such that each $K_i$ has the aforementioned splittable property |
|
101 |
(see Subsection \ref{ss:ncat_fields}). |
|
116 | 102 |
\nn{need to define $D(a)$ more clearly; also includes $(b_j, \bar{K})$ where |
103 |
$\bd(a) = \sum b_j$.} |
|
104 |
(By $(a, \bar{K})$ we really mean $(a^\sharp, \bar{K})$, where $a^\sharp$ is |
|
115 | 105 |
$a$ split according to $K_0\times F$. |
106 |
To simplify notation we will just write plain $a$ instead of $a^\sharp$.) |
|
107 |
Roughly speaking, $D(a)$ consists of filtration degree 0 stuff which glues up to give |
|
108 |
$a$, filtration degree 1 stuff which makes all of the filtration degree 0 stuff homologous, |
|
109 |
filtration degree 2 stuff which kills the homology created by the |
|
110 |
filtration degree 1 stuff, and so on. |
|
111 |
More formally, |
|
112 |
||
113 |
\begin{lemma} |
|
114 |
$D(a)$ is acyclic. |
|
115 |
\end{lemma} |
|
116 |
||
117 |
\begin{proof} |
|
118 |
We will prove acyclicity in the first couple of degrees, and \nn{in this draft, at least} |
|
119 |
leave the general case to the reader. |
|
116 | 120 |
|
115 | 121 |
Let $K$ and $K'$ be two decompositions of $Y$ compatible with $a$. |
116 | 122 |
We want to show that $(a, K)$ and $(a, K')$ are homologous via filtration degree 1 stuff. |
123 |
\nn{need to say this better; these two chains don't have the same boundary.} |
|
124 |
We might hope that $K$ and $K'$ have a common refinement, but this is not necessarily |
|
125 |
the case. |
|
126 |
(Consider the $x$-axis and the graph of $y = x^2\sin(1/x)$ in $\r^2$.) |
|
127 |
However, we {\it can} find another decomposition $L$ such that $L$ shares common |
|
128 |
refinements with both $K$ and $K'$. |
|
129 |
Let $KL$ and $K'L$ denote these two refinements. |
|
130 |
Then filtration degree 1 chains associated to the four anti-refinemnts |
|
131 |
$KL\to K$, $KL\to L$, $K'L\to L$ and $K'L\to K'$ |
|
132 |
give the desired chain connecting $(a, K)$ and $(a, K')$ |
|
119 | 133 |
(see Figure \ref{zzz4}). |
134 |
||
135 |
\begin{figure}[!ht] |
|
136 |
\begin{equation*} |
|
188 | 137 |
\begin{tikzpicture} |
138 |
\foreach \x/\label in {-3/K, 0/L, 3/K'} { |
|
139 |
\node(\label) at (\x,0) {$\label$}; |
|
140 |
} |
|
141 |
\foreach \x/\la/\lb in {-1.5/K/L, 1.5/K'/L} { |
|
142 |
\node(\la \lb) at (\x,-1.5) {$\la \lb$}; |
|
143 |
\draw[->] (\la \lb) -- (\la); |
|
144 |
\draw[->] (\la \lb) -- (\lb); |
|
145 |
} |
|
146 |
\end{tikzpicture} |
|
119 | 147 |
\end{equation*} |
148 |
\caption{Connecting $K$ and $K'$ via $L$} |
|
149 |
\label{zzz4} |
|
150 |
\end{figure} |
|
116 | 151 |
|
152 |
Consider a different choice of decomposition $L'$ in place of $L$ above. |
|
153 |
This leads to a cycle consisting of filtration degree 1 stuff. |
|
154 |
We want to show that this cycle bounds a chain of filtration degree 2 stuff. |
|
155 |
Choose a decomposition $M$ which has common refinements with each of |
|
156 |
$K$, $KL$, $L$, $K'L$, $K'$, $K'L'$, $L'$ and $KL'$. |
|
117
b62214646c4f
preparing for semi-public version soon
kevin@6e1638ff-ae45-0410-89bd-df963105f760
parents:
116
diff
changeset
|
157 |
\nn{need to also require that $KLM$ antirefines to $KM$, etc.} |
119 | 158 |
Then we have a filtration degree 2 chain, as shown in Figure \ref{zzz5}, which does the trick. |
159 |
(Each small triangle in Figure \ref{zzz5} can be filled with a filtration degree 2 chain.) |
|
116 | 160 |
|
119 | 161 |
\begin{figure}[!ht] |
186 | 162 |
%\begin{equation*} |
163 |
%\mathfig{1.0}{tempkw/zz5} |
|
164 |
%\end{equation*} |
|
119 | 165 |
\begin{equation*} |
186 | 166 |
\begin{tikzpicture} |
167 |
\node(M) at (0,0) {$M$}; |
|
168 |
\foreach \angle/\label in {0/K', 45/K'L, 90/L, 135/KL, 180/K, 225/KL', 270/L', 315/K'L'} { |
|
169 |
\node(\label) at (\angle:4) {$\label$}; |
|
170 |
} |
|
171 |
\foreach \label in {K', L, K, L'} { |
|
172 |
\node(\label M) at ($(M)!0.6!(\label)$) {$\label M$}; |
|
173 |
\draw[->] (\label M)--(M); |
|
174 |
\draw[->] (\label M)--(\label); |
|
175 |
} |
|
176 |
\foreach \k in {K, K'} { |
|
177 |
\foreach \l in {L, L'} { |
|
178 |
\node(\k \l M) at (intersection cs: first line={(\k M)--(\l)}, second line={(\l M)--(\k)}) {$\k \l M$}; |
|
179 |
\draw[->] (\k \l M)--(M); |
|
180 |
\draw[->] (\k \l M)--(\k \l ); |
|
181 |
\draw[->] (\k \l M)--(\k M); |
|
182 |
\draw[->] (\k \l M)--(\l); |
|
183 |
\draw[->] (\k \l M)--(\l M); |
|
184 |
\draw[->] (\k \l M)--(\k); |
|
185 |
} |
|
186 |
} |
|
187 |
\draw[->] (K'L') to[bend right=10] (K'); |
|
188 |
\draw[->] (K'L') to[bend left=10] (L'); |
|
189 |
\draw[->] (KL') to[bend left=10] (K); |
|
190 |
\draw[->] (KL') to[bend right=10] (L'); |
|
191 |
\draw[->] (K'L) to[bend left=10] (K'); |
|
192 |
\draw[->] (K'L) to[bend right=10] (L); |
|
193 |
\draw[->] (KL) to[bend right=10] (K); |
|
194 |
\draw[->] (KL) to[bend left=10] (L); |
|
195 |
\end{tikzpicture} |
|
119 | 196 |
\end{equation*} |
197 |
\caption{Filling in $K$-$KL$-$L$-$K'L$-$K'$-$K'L'$-$L'$-$KL'$-$K$} |
|
198 |
\label{zzz5} |
|
199 |
\end{figure} |
|
116 | 200 |
|
123 | 201 |
Continuing in this way we see that $D(a)$ is acyclic. |
115 | 202 |
\end{proof} |
203 |
||
123 | 204 |
We are now in a position to apply the method of acyclic models to get a map |
205 |
$\phi:\cS_* \to \bc_*^\cF(Y)$. |
|
206 |
This map is defined in sufficiently low degrees, sends a blob diagram $a$ to $D(a)$, |
|
207 |
and is well-defined up to (iterated) homotopy. |
|
115 | 208 |
|
123 | 209 |
The subcomplex $\cS_* \subset \bc_*^C(Y\times F)$ depends on choice of cover of $Y\times F$. |
210 |
If we refine that cover, we get a complex $\cS'_* \subset \cS_*$ |
|
211 |
and a map $\phi':\cS'_* \to \bc_*^\cF(Y)$. |
|
212 |
$\phi'$ is defined only on homological degrees below some bound, but this bound is higher than |
|
213 |
the corresponding bound for $\phi$. |
|
214 |
We must show that $\phi$ and $\phi'$ agree, up to homotopy, |
|
215 |
on the intersection of the subcomplexes on which they are defined. |
|
216 |
This is clear, since the acyclic subcomplexes $D(a)$ above used in the definition of |
|
217 |
$\phi$ and $\phi'$ do not depend on the choice of cover. |
|
218 |
||
219 |
\nn{need to say (and justify) that we now have a map $\phi$ indep of choice of cover} |
|
220 |
||
221 |
We now show that $\phi\circ\psi$ and $\psi\circ\phi$ are homotopic to the identity. |
|
222 |
||
223 |
$\psi\circ\phi$ is the identity. $\phi$ takes a blob diagram $a$ and chops it into pieces |
|
224 |
according to some decomposition $K$ of $Y$. |
|
225 |
$\psi$ glues those pieces back together, yielding the same $a$ we started with. |
|
226 |
||
227 |
$\phi\circ\psi$ is the identity up to homotopy by another MoAM argument... |
|
228 |
||
229 |
This concludes the proof of Theorem \ref{product_thm}. |
|
230 |
\nn{at least I think it does; it's pretty rough at this point.} |
|
113 | 231 |
\end{proof} |
232 |
||
233 |
\nn{need to say something about dim $< n$ above} |
|
234 |
||
123 | 235 |
\medskip |
113 | 236 |
|
123 | 237 |
\begin{cor} |
225
32a76e8886d1
minor tweaks on small blobs
scott@6e1638ff-ae45-0410-89bd-df963105f760
parents:
222
diff
changeset
|
238 |
\label{cor:new-old} |
123 | 239 |
The new-fangled and old-fashioned blob complexes are homotopic. |
240 |
\end{cor} |
|
241 |
\begin{proof} |
|
242 |
Apply Theorem \ref{product_thm} with the fiber $F$ equal to a point. |
|
243 |
\end{proof} |
|
113 | 244 |
|
245 |
\medskip |
|
133 | 246 |
|
286
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
247 |
\subsection{A gluing theorem} |
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
248 |
\label{sec:gluing} |
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
249 |
|
133 | 250 |
Next we prove a gluing theorem. |
251 |
Let $X$ be a closed $k$-manifold with a splitting $X = X'_1\cup_Y X'_2$. |
|
252 |
We will need an explicit collar on $Y$, so rewrite this as |
|
253 |
$X = X_1\cup (Y\times J) \cup X_2$. |
|
254 |
\nn{need figure} |
|
255 |
Given this data we have: \nn{need refs to above for these} |
|
256 |
\begin{itemize} |
|
257 |
\item An $A_\infty$ $n{-}k$-category $\bc(X)$, which assigns to an $m$-ball |
|
258 |
$D$ fields on $D\times X$ (for $m+k < n$) or the blob complex $\bc_*(D\times X; c)$ |
|
259 |
(for $m+k = n$). \nn{need to explain $c$}. |
|
260 |
\item An $A_\infty$ $n{-}k{+}1$-category $\bc(Y)$, defined similarly. |
|
261 |
\item Two $\bc(Y)$ modules $\bc(X_1)$ and $\bc(X_2)$, which assign to a marked |
|
262 |
$m$-ball $(D, H)$ either fields on $(D\times Y) \cup (H\times X_i)$ (if $m+k < n$) |
|
263 |
or the blob complex $\bc_*((D\times Y) \cup (H\times X_i))$ (if $m+k = n$). |
|
264 |
\end{itemize} |
|
265 |
||
266 |
\begin{thm} |
|
286
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
267 |
\label{thm:gluing} |
133 | 268 |
$\bc(X) \cong \bc(X_1) \otimes_{\bc(Y), J} \bc(X_2)$. |
269 |
\end{thm} |
|
270 |
||
271 |
\begin{proof} |
|
272 |
The proof is similar to that of Theorem \ref{product_thm}. |
|
273 |
\nn{need to say something about dimensions less than $n$, |
|
274 |
but for now concentrate on top dimension.} |
|
275 |
||
276 |
Let $\cT$ denote the $n{-}k$-category $\bc(X_1) \otimes_{\bc(Y), J} \bc(X_2)$. |
|
277 |
Let $D$ be an $n{-}k$-ball. |
|
278 |
There is an obvious map from $\cT(D)$ to $\bc_*(D\times X)$. |
|
279 |
To get a map in the other direction, we replace $\bc_*(D\times X)$ with a subcomplex |
|
280 |
$\cS_*$ which is adapted to a fine open cover of $D\times X$. |
|
281 |
For sufficiently small $j$ (depending on the cover), we can find, for each $j$-blob diagram $b$ |
|
282 |
on $D\times X$, a decomposition of $J$ such that $b$ splits on the corresponding |
|
283 |
decomposition of $D\times X$. |
|
284 |
The proof that these two maps are inverse to each other is the same as in |
|
285 |
Theorem \ref{product_thm}. |
|
286 |
\end{proof} |
|
287 |
||
222
217b6a870532
committing changes from loon lake - mostly small blobs
scott@6e1638ff-ae45-0410-89bd-df963105f760
parents:
214
diff
changeset
|
288 |
This establishes Property \ref{property:gluing}. |
133 | 289 |
|
290 |
\medskip |
|
211 | 291 |
|
286
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
292 |
\subsection{Reconstructing mapping spaces} |
ff867bfc8e9c
mostly minor changes, reading modules section, stopping for dinner\!
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
225
diff
changeset
|
293 |
|
211 | 294 |
The next theorem shows how to reconstruct a mapping space from local data. |
295 |
Let $T$ be a topological space, let $M$ be an $n$-manifold, |
|
296 |
and recall the $A_\infty$ $n$-category $\pi^\infty_{\leq n}(T)$ |
|
297 |
of Example \ref{ex:chains-of-maps-to-a-space}. |
|
298 |
Think of $\pi^\infty_{\leq n}(T)$ as encoding everything you would ever |
|
299 |
want to know about spaces of maps of $k$-balls into $T$ ($k\le n$). |
|
300 |
To simplify notation, let $\cT = \pi^\infty_{\leq n}(T)$. |
|
301 |
||
302 |
\begin{thm} \label{thm:map-recon} |
|
303
2252c53bd449
minor changes in a few places
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
291
diff
changeset
|
303 |
The blob complex for $M$ with coefficients in the fundamental $A_\infty$ $n$-category for $T$ is quasi-isomorphic to singular chains on maps from $M$ to $T$. |
2252c53bd449
minor changes in a few places
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
291
diff
changeset
|
304 |
$$\cB^\cT(M) \simeq C_*(\Maps(M\to T)).$$ |
211 | 305 |
\end{thm} |
303
2252c53bd449
minor changes in a few places
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
291
diff
changeset
|
306 |
\begin{rem} |
2252c53bd449
minor changes in a few places
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
291
diff
changeset
|
307 |
\nn{This just isn't true, Lurie doesn't do this! I just heard this from Ricardo...} |
2252c53bd449
minor changes in a few places
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
291
diff
changeset
|
308 |
Lurie has shown in \cite{0911.0018} that the topological chiral homology of an $n$-manifold $M$ with coefficients in \nn{a certain $E_n$ algebra constructed from $T$} recovers the same space of singular chains on maps from $M$ to $T$, with the additional hypothesis that $T$ is $n-1$-connected. This extra hypothesis is not surprising, in view of the idea that an $E_n$ algebra is roughly equivalent data as an $A_\infty$ $n$-category which is trivial at all but the topmost level. |
2252c53bd449
minor changes in a few places
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
291
diff
changeset
|
309 |
\end{rem} |
2252c53bd449
minor changes in a few places
Scott Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
parents:
291
diff
changeset
|
310 |
|
211 | 311 |
\begin{proof} |
212 | 312 |
We begin by constructing chain map $g: \cB^\cT(M) \to C_*(\Maps(M\to T))$. |
313 |
We then use \ref{extension_lemma_b} to show that $g$ induces isomorphisms on homology. |
|
314 |
||
315 |
Recall that the homotopy colimit $\cB^\cT(M)$ is constructed out of a series of |
|
316 |
$j$-fold mapping cylinders, $j \ge 0$. |
|
317 |
So, as an abelian group (but not as a chain complex), |
|
318 |
\[ |
|
319 |
\cB^\cT(M) = \bigoplus_{j\ge 0} C^j, |
|
320 |
\] |
|
321 |
where $C^j$ denotes the new chains introduced by the $j$-fold mapping cylinders. |
|
322 |
||
323 |
Recall that $C^0$ is a direct sum of chain complexes with the summands indexed by |
|
324 |
decompositions of $M$ which have their $n{-}1$-skeletons labeled by $n{-}1$-morphisms |
|
325 |
of $\cT$. |
|
326 |
Since $\cT = \pi^\infty_{\leq n}(T)$, this means that the summands are indexed by pairs |
|
327 |
$(K, \vphi)$, where $K$ is a decomposition of $M$ and $\vphi$ is a continuous |
|
328 |
maps from the $n{-}1$-skeleton of $K$ to $T$. |
|
329 |
The summand indexed by $(K, \vphi)$ is |
|
330 |
\[ |
|
331 |
\bigotimes_b D_*(b, \vphi), |
|
332 |
\] |
|
333 |
where $b$ runs through the $n$-cells of $K$ and $D_*(b, \vphi)$ denotes |
|
334 |
chains of maps from $b$ to $T$ compatible with $\vphi$. |
|
335 |
We can take the product of these chains of maps to get a chains of maps from |
|
336 |
all of $M$ to $K$. |
|
337 |
This defines $g$ on $C^0$. |
|
338 |
||
339 |
We define $g(C^j) = 0$ for $j > 0$. |
|
340 |
It is not hard to see that this defines a chain map from |
|
341 |
$\cB^\cT(M)$ to $C_*(\Maps(M\to T))$. |
|
342 |
||
214 | 343 |
|
344 |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
|
345 |
\noop{ |
|
213 | 346 |
Next we show that $g$ induces a surjection on homology. |
347 |
Fix $k > 0$ and choose an open cover $\cU$ of $M$ fine enough so that the union |
|
348 |
of any $k$ open sets of $\cU$ is contained in a disjoint union of balls in $M$. |
|
349 |
\nn{maybe should refer to elsewhere in this paper where we made a very similar argument} |
|
350 |
Let $S_*$ be the subcomplex of $C_*(\Maps(M\to T))$ generated by chains adapted to $\cU$. |
|
351 |
It follows from Lemma \ref{extension_lemma_b} that $C_*(\Maps(M\to T))$ |
|
352 |
retracts onto $S_*$. |
|
353 |
||
354 |
Let $S_{\le k}$ denote the chains of $S_*$ of degree less than or equal to $k$. |
|
355 |
We claim that $S_{\le k}$ lies in the image of $g$. |
|
356 |
Let $c$ be a generator of $S_{\le k}$ --- that is, a $j$-parameter family of maps $M\to T$, |
|
357 |
$j \le k$. |
|
358 |
We chose $\cU$ fine enough so that the support of $c$ is contained in a disjoint union of balls |
|
359 |
in $M$. |
|
360 |
It follow that we can choose a decomposition $K$ of $M$ so that the support of $c$ is |
|
361 |
disjoint from the $n{-}1$-skeleton of $K$. |
|
362 |
It is now easy to see that $c$ is in the image of $g$. |
|
363 |
||
364 |
Next we show that $g$ is injective on homology. |
|
214 | 365 |
} |
213 | 366 |
|
367 |
||
368 |
||
212 | 369 |
\nn{...} |
370 |
||
371 |
||
372 |
||
211 | 373 |
\end{proof} |
374 |
||
212 | 375 |
\nn{maybe should also mention version where we enrich over |
291 | 376 |
spaces rather than chain complexes; should comment on Lurie's \cite{0911.0018} (and others') similar result |
211 | 377 |
for the $E_\infty$ case, and mention that our version does not require |
378 |
any connectivity assumptions} |
|
379 |
||
380 |
\medskip |
|
113 | 381 |
\hrule |
382 |
\medskip |
|
383 |
||
384 |
\nn{to be continued...} |
|
385 |
\medskip |
|
133 | 386 |
\nn{still to do: fiber bundles, general maps} |
113 | 387 |
|
134 | 388 |
\todo{} |
389 |
Various citations we might want to make: |
|
390 |
\begin{itemize} |
|
391 |
\item \cite{MR2061854} McClure and Smith's review article |
|
392 |
\item \cite{MR0420610} May, (inter alia, definition of $E_\infty$ operad) |
|
393 |
\item \cite{MR0236922,MR0420609} Boardman and Vogt |
|
394 |
\item \cite{MR1256989} definition of framed little-discs operad |
|
395 |
\end{itemize} |
|
396 |
||
397 |
We now turn to establishing the gluing formula for blob homology, restated from Property \ref{property:gluing} in the Introduction |
|
398 |
\begin{itemize} |
|
399 |
%\mbox{}% <-- gets the indenting right |
|
400 |
\item For any $(n-1)$-manifold $Y$, the blob homology of $Y \times I$ is |
|
401 |
naturally an $A_\infty$ category. % We'll write $\bc_*(Y)$ for $\bc_*(Y \times I)$ below. |
|
402 |
||
403 |
\item For any $n$-manifold $X$, with $Y$ a codimension $0$-submanifold of its boundary, the blob homology of $X$ is naturally an |
|
404 |
$A_\infty$ module for $\bc_*(Y \times I)$. |
|
405 |
||
406 |
\item For any $n$-manifold $X$, with $Y \cup Y^{\text{op}}$ a codimension |
|
407 |
$0$-submanifold of its boundary, the blob homology of $X'$, obtained from |
|
408 |
$X$ by gluing along $Y$, is the $A_\infty$ self-tensor product of |
|
409 |
$\bc_*(X)$ as an $\bc_*(Y \times I)$-bimodule. |
|
410 |
\begin{equation*} |
|
411 |
\bc_*(X') \iso \bc_*(X) \Tensor^{A_\infty}_{\mathclap{\bc_*(Y \times I)}} \!\!\!\!\!\!\xymatrix{ \ar@(ru,rd)@<-1ex>[]} |
|
412 |
\end{equation*} |
|
413 |
\end{itemize} |
|
414 |