0
$\begingroup$

Lemma: Given a short exact sequence of cochain complexes in an abelian category $\mathcal{C}$ with enough injectives, $$0 \to P^\bullet \xrightarrow{f} Q^\bullet \xrightarrow{g} R^\bullet \to 0,$$ There exist complexes $I^\bullet, J^\bullet, K^\bullet$ of injective objects, and a diagram commmutative up to homotopy $$ \begin{array}{} 0 & \rightarrow & P^\bullet & \overset{f}{\rightarrow} & Q^\bullet & \overset{g}{\rightarrow} & R^\bullet & \rightarrow & 0 \\ && \!\!\!\! \sim \downarrow a&& \!\!\!\!\sim \downarrow b && \!\!\!\!\sim \downarrow c \\ 0 & \rightarrow & I^\bullet & \overset{u}{\rightarrow} & J^\bullet & \overset{v}{\rightarrow} & K^\bullet & \rightarrow & 0 \end{array} $$ where the rows are exact, and the vertical arrows are homotopy equivalences.

In the proof of this theorem in Iversen's book, he begins by choosing an injective resolution of $Q^\bullet$ and $R^\bullet$, and a map $v$ (unique up to homotopy) between them: $$ \begin{array}{} 0 & \rightarrow & P^\bullet & \overset{f}{\rightarrow} & Q^\bullet & \overset{g}{\rightarrow} & R^\bullet & \rightarrow & 0 \\ &&&& \!\!\!\!\sim \downarrow b && \!\!\!\!\sim \downarrow c \\ & & & & J^\bullet & \overset{v}{\rightarrow} & K^\bullet & \rightarrow & 0 \end{array} $$ Since the diagram is homotopy commutative, he selects a homotopy $Q^\bullet \xrightarrow{s} K^\bullet[-1]$ between $c \circ g \Rightarrow v \circ b$.

So far, so good. Then he says

Choose a map $t:Q^\bullet \xrightarrow{} J^\bullet[-1]$ such that $s=v \circ t$.

This is where I fall off. Why does $s$ necessarily factor through $v[-1]$?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Do you know the proof of the dual statement? $\endgroup$ – Pedro Tamaroff Jun 25 '16 at 23:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Note you are changing the names of your objects and arrows. $\endgroup$ – Pedro Tamaroff Jun 25 '16 at 23:38
  • $\begingroup$ @PedroTamaroff Whoops, just fixed it. No, I don't know the proof of the dual. Only for a projective resolution of a short exact sequence of objects (via the "horseshoe lemma"). Not for complexes. $\endgroup$ – Eric Auld Jun 25 '16 at 23:42
0
$\begingroup$

He means choose a map of graded modules, not a chain map. This is possible because $v$ admits a section as a map of graded modules (not as chain complexes).

$\endgroup$

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.