Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Group cohomology is one thing I don't seem to get my head around.

I understand $H^0$ as being the "fixed points" but when it comes to anything higher I have no idea what the notions are meant to be capturing...if anything.

For example I can see that 1-cocycles are homomorphisms with a specific property but that property doesn't seem to mean anything to me...and I think it should!

Is there an intuition or example that explains the meaning or is it just something that "stuck" and seems to work in lots of places?

share|improve this question
1  
You might have a look here –  Georges Elencwajg Mar 8 '12 at 18:31
    
Thanks, I shall take a look at that. –  fretty Mar 8 '12 at 18:36
    
It may be a good idea for Georges to write an answer with that link, and close this question, no? (We cannot close it as a duplicate of a MO queston) –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Mar 8 '12 at 18:43
1  
All right, @Mariano, I have pasted my answer from MO but I suggest you don't close the question, so that users here can also give their answers. I'm sure there are many examples that can help build intuition and I bet you know quite a few ones yourself ! –  Georges Elencwajg Mar 8 '12 at 19:15
    
But it is usually a good idea to keep this things in one place: people can add examples there, too :) I won't close this, though. –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Mar 8 '12 at 19:30
add comment

3 Answers 3

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Group cohomology can be defined very naturally in a purely topological way. The definition of $1$-cocycles is not random, or due to historical accident.

More specifically, given a group, $G$, the Eilenberg-Maclane space $X=K(G,1)$ is defined which has $\pi_1(X)=G$, and $\pi_{\geq 2}(X)=0$. This is well-defined up to homotopy-type if you assume it is a CW-complex. Since the cohomology functor is invariant under homotopy equivalence, the groups $H^i(X)$ are well-defined abelian groups associated with the original group $G$, and this is what we call group cohomology. Now when you take coefficients in a $\mathbb Z[G]$ module $M$, this is actually equivalent to taking cohomology with ``twisted coefficients" of $K(G,1)$.

share|improve this answer
    
Ok, so basically group cohomology is defined to in some sense match up with cohomology of an underlying space? –  fretty Mar 9 '12 at 11:36
    
@fretty: Yes. It is a composition of two functors. One assigns a group its Eilenberg-Maclane space, and the other takes the cohomology of that space. –  Grumpy Parsnip Mar 9 '12 at 11:53
    
ah right, that justifies it enough to me then! Thanks. –  fretty Mar 9 '12 at 12:59
add comment

[At Mariano's suggestion, I'll copy my answer from MathOverflow.]

Here is a completely elementary example which shows that group cohomology is not empty verbiage, but can solve a problem ("parametrization of rational circle") whose statement has nothing to do with cohomology.

Suppose you somehow know that for a finite Galois extension $k\subset K$ with group $G$ the first cohomology group $H^1(G,K^*)$ is zero : this is the homological version of Hilbert's Theorem 90 ( you can look it up in Weibel's book on homological algebra, pages 175-176).

If moreover $G $ is cyclic with generator $s$, this implies that an element of $K$ has norm one if and only if it can be written $\frac{a}{s(a)}$ for some $a\in K$.

Consider now the quadratic extension $k=\mathbb Q \subset K=\mathbb Q(i)$ with generator $s$ of $Gal(\mathbb Q (i)/\mathbb Q)$ the complex conjugation.The statement above says that $x+iy\in \mathbb Q(i)$ satisfies $x^2+y^2=1$ iff $x+iy=\frac{u+iv}{s(u+iv)}=\frac{u+iv}{u-iv}=\frac{u^2-v^2}{u^2+v^2}+i\frac{2uv}{u^2+v^2}$ for some $u+iv\in \mathbb Q (i)$ .

So we have obtained from group cohomology the well-known parametrization for the rational points of the unit circle $x^2+y^2=1$ $$x=\frac{u^2-v^2}{u^2+v^2}, \quad y=\frac{2uv}{u^2+v^2}$$

share|improve this answer
add comment

To add to George's answer above, 1st Galois cohomology group has a natural interpretation as the set of classes of principal homogeneous spaces for a group.

Let $G$ be an algebraic group defined over $k$. Let $K/k$ be a Galois extension. The $K$-points of $G$ form a $\mathrm{Gal}(K/k)$-group (or a $\mathrm{Gal}(K/k)$-module, if $G$ is commutative). A principal homogeneous $K$-space is a $K$-variety $X$ with a free transitive action of $G$. There is a bijective correspondence between $k$-isomorphism classes of principal homogeneous $K$-spaces and cocycles of $H^1(\mathrm{Gal}(K/k), G(K))$.

Let $X$ be a p.h.s. Pick a point $x \in X$ and act on it by $\sigma \in \mathrm{Gal}(K/k)$. Since $G$ acts on $X$ freely and transitively there is a unique $g_\sigma$ such that $g_\sigma \cdot x = \sigma(x)$. One checks that $\sigma \mapsto g_\sigma$ define a 1-cocycle.

Conversely, given a 1-cocyle $\{g_\sigma\}$, consider a disjoint union $\sqcup G \times \{\sigma\}_{\sigma \in \mathrm{Gal}(K/k)}$ and define an action of $\mathrm{Gal}(K/k)$ on it: $\sigma(x,\tau)=(g_\sigma \cdot x, \sigma\tau)$. There is a natural $G$ action on the disjoint union, and the factor by the action $\mathrm{Gal}(K/k)$ inherits the action of $G$ (a highbrow term for what is happening is "Galois descent"), turning it into a p.h.s.

Moreover, if $G$ is commutative, the group law on $H^1(\mathrm{Gal}(K/k), G(K))$ has a natural geometric interpretation in terms of principal homogeneous spaces. This group is also known as Weil-Chatelet group. I recommend the original Weil's article on the subject: A. Weil, "On algebraic groups and homogeneous spaces". Amer. J. Math. , 77 (1955) pp. 493–512

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.