8
$\begingroup$

Both $S^3\times \Bbb CP^\infty$ and $\left(S^1\times \Bbb CP^\infty\right)\big/\left(S^1\times \{x_0\}\right)$ have cohomology ring isomorphic to $\Bbb Z[a]\otimes \Lambda[b]$ with $|a|=2$ and $|b|=3$, as can be seen from Künneth and cellular cohomology. Thus, the cohomology ring structure can't distinguish the two spaces.

Hatcher says that the spaces can be distinguished using cohomology operations. I tried arguing somehow from the basic properties of Steenrod operations, but I couldn't figure it out.

I appreciate help.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What about homotopy groups? $\endgroup$ – Pedro Tamaroff May 14 '16 at 17:31
  • $\begingroup$ Sure, @PedroTamaroff, but I would be more interested in seeing a solution using cohomology operations, as I am trying to study those right now. :) $\endgroup$ – iwriteonbananas May 15 '16 at 7:44
  • $\begingroup$ So, did you try computing stuff? $\endgroup$ – Pedro Tamaroff May 15 '16 at 8:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Computing the first few homotopy groups of $S^3\times \Bbb CP^\infty$ isn't so hard. I think that the two spaces have different third homotopy group, but that's more of a guess as I'm not really sure how to compute homotopy groups for that quotient space.I can only show that it is simply connected and that $\Bbb Z$ surjects onto its second homotopy group. $\endgroup$ – iwriteonbananas May 15 '16 at 9:47
7
$\begingroup$

First, consider $Y = \Bbb{CP}^\infty \times S^1$. Its cohomology ring over $\Bbb Z/2 =: \Bbb F$ is $\Bbb F[a] \otimes \Lambda[c]$ where $|a| = 2$ and $|c| = 1$. The Bockstein homomorphism can be seen to be trivial (as you say, cellular cohomology does the trick), and thus so is $\text{Sq}^1$. Now $\text{Sq}^2(ac) = \text{Sq}^2(a)c + \text{Sq}^1(a)\text{Sq}^1(c) + a\text{Sq}^2(c)$; because $|c| = 1$ the last term vanishes, and we have already discussed why the middle term vanishes; because $|a| = 2$, $\text{Sq}^2(a) = a^2$. Hence $\text{Sq}^2(ac) = a^2c$. If $X$ is your second space, the quotient map $p: Y \to X$ induces an injection $H^*(X) \to H^*(Y)$, sending $p^*(a) = a$ and $p^*(b) = ac$. Hence by naturality of Steenrod squares $\text{Sq}^2(b) = ab$.

Now consider $\Bbb{CP}^\infty \times S^3$. We want to calculate $\text{Sq}^2(b)$ here. The inclusion $S^2 \times S^3 \hookrightarrow \Bbb{CP}^\infty \times S^3$ induces an isomorphism on cohomology in degrees $\leq 5$, so by naturality we just need to understand what $\text{Sq}^2(b)$ is in the first space. A product $X \times Y$ of spaces with trivial Steenrod squares has trivial Steenrod squares. First note that because Steenrod squares are additive it suffices to see how the squares behave on elements in $H^i(X) \otimes H^j(Y) \subset H^{i+j}(X \times Y)$; and then by the Cartan formula it suffices inductively to see they vanish on $H^i(X)$ and $H^i(Y) \subset H^i(X \times Y)$. Now invoke the projection maps $\pi: X \times Y \to X$; by the vanishing of the Steenrod squares on $X$ and naturality, they vanish on these primitive classes in $X \times Y$.

Alternatively, we know that the Steenrod square commutes with the suspension isomorphism $H^*(S^2 \times S^3) \to H^{*+1}(\Sigma(S^2 \times S^3))$. As seen here, $\Sigma(X \times Y)$ is homotopy equivalent to $\Sigma X \vee \Sigma Y \vee \Sigma(X \wedge Y)$. In this case, this says that $\Sigma(S^2 \times S^3)$ is homotopy equivalent to $S^3 \vee S^4 \vee S^6$. This space has vanishing Steenrod squares, as does any wedge of spaces with vanishing Steenrod squares. (This is again by naturality, because we have projection maps $X \vee Y \to X$.)

Here's an alternate approach that Hatcher definitely did not intend, invoking characteristic classes of smooth manifolds; you can learn about these in Milnor and Stasheff's book on the subject.

Again we want to calculate $\text{Sq}^2(b)$ on $S^2 \times S^3$. Now, on a closed connected manifold, there are cohomology classes called the Wu classes, such that for $x \in H^{n-k}(M)$, $\text{Sq}^k(x) = x \smile v_k$. They are related to the Stiefel-Whitney classes of the manifold in that $\text{Sq}(v) = w$. Now, $S^2 \times S^3$ is parallelizable, so all of its Stiefel-Whitney classes vanish. This implies that $v=0$, and hence all of the Steenrod squares on this manifold (or any parallelizable manifold) vanish. Whence $\text{Sq}^2(b) = 0$, as desired.

In any case, we have now seen that $\text{Sq}^2(H^3(X)) \neq 0$, but $\text{Sq}^2(H^3(\Bbb{CP}^\infty \times S^3)) = 0$, proving the desired claim.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The point, somehow, is that the Steenrod squares detect that $b \in H^2(X)$ "should split" as a product, even though you've killed the term it splits with, whereas it should be indecomposable in the other space. $\endgroup$ – user98602 May 16 '16 at 8:07
  • $\begingroup$ This is the best answer ever - very instructive. Thank you. $\endgroup$ – iwriteonbananas May 16 '16 at 10:28
  • $\begingroup$ I am always utterly dumbfounded how people are so adept at these kinds of calculations. Sorry for being dense, but how is it obvious that the quotient map $p : Y \to X$ induces in injection on cohomology, and how do I determine it? Also, how do you know the Bockstein homomorphisms are trivial, and what does cellular cohomology have to do with it? $\endgroup$ – user542740 Jun 15 '18 at 15:32
  • $\begingroup$ @Jeroen If I remember right, I spent the better part of a day working this out. It just always looks easier in the end. If you don't mind, give me a day to find some time to answer, and I'll think about your questions. $\endgroup$ – user98602 Jun 15 '18 at 16:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Jeroen So $Y$ is $S^1 \times \Bbb{CP}^\infty$ and $X$ is the space in the title. If one gives $S^1$ and $\Bbb{CP}^\infty$ the standard cell decompositions (whose cellular chain complexes have no differentials), the Kunneth theorem identifies the homology of the product with $H(C_*(S^1) \otimes C_*(\Bbb{CP}^\infty)$, but this tensor-product complex still has identically zero differentials (it's a tensor product of two complexes of such). To obtain the cellular chain complex of $X$, you just kill off a single generator of this chain complex. After dualizing, this surjection $C_* Y \to C_* X$... $\endgroup$ – user98602 Jun 18 '18 at 14:07

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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