lecture 3
From Scholarpedia
| This article has not been published yet; It may be unfinished, contain inaccuracies or unapproved changes. | |||||||||||||||||||||
Author: Dr. Jan A. Sanders, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Contents |
abstract
In this lecture we define the cohomology modules
Lifting the representation to the forms
definition
is called a (two-sided) ideal in the 
if
.
example
Let
. Then for
and
one has
It follows that
is a two-sided ideal in
.
Observe that this proof does not hold in the case of
.
definition
Let
be a
and
a (two-sided) ideal.
Then
is a Leibniz algebra with the bracket
where
denotes the equivalence class of
.
This is well defined, since varying
and
with elements in
does not change the answer:
terminology
When
is a module and a representation space of
,
one says that
is a
-module. If the representation is zero,
is a trivial
-module.
definition
Let
be an
-module.
In order to give a general definition of a coboundary operator
, one defines first an induced left representation on
as follows.
Let, for
,
This is indeed a representation. Let
. Then
It follows that
or,
.
remark
Remark that
is invariant under
for all
.
Definition of the coboundary operator.
We now reformulate the definition of
using the
. First we introduce the contraction operator
by
.
Recall the following definitions of the coboundary operators.
.
definition
This strongly suggests the following recursive definition:
lemma
Let
and
. Then
proof
Consider
.
lemma
Let
. Then
.
proof
For
one has
.
For
one has, with
and
, that
.
This implies the statement of the lemma
by induction.
The final check is
Again, since
, it follows by induction that
This shows that
is a coboundary operator.
proposition
Cohomology
Define
, the space of cocycles, and
, the space of coboundaries.
Since
, one can define
,
the
-cohomology module of
with values in
.
If
, the equivalence class in
is denoted by
. Elements in the zero equivalence class, the image of
, are called trivial.
remark
For
,
, that is,
is consists of all elements in
which are
-invariant.
This indicates that computing the cohomology can be a formidable problem, since it contains for instance classical invariant theory. Cohomology theory itself does not provide the answers, it just asks the right questions and removes the trivial answers.
theorem
is invariant under the action (by
) of
.
So one could say that
is a trivial
-module and an
-module.
proof
Indeed, since
,
scaling lemma
Suppose there exists an element
such that
,
with
and
the ring of the module
.
Then for
one has
,
that is, if
is invertible, then
.
In practice, this is very useful in computing cohomology, since it allows one to restrict the attention to those
which have a noninvertible
.
Notice that the argument does not work for
.
the homotopy formula
If
equals
or
there is an explicit formula,
the homotopy formula, to compute the preimage, at least on the span of the eigenforms.
Let
and let
be the span
of all such
with
. Then if
,
one defines
.
This defines
by linearity. Let
.
Then for
one has
.
Here the meaning of the integral is
and with
,
proof
Let
.
Then
| Invited by: | Dr. Eugene M. Izhikevich, Editor-in-Chief of Scholarpedia, the peer-reviewed open-access encyclopedia |
.
.
