3
$\begingroup$

I am trying to understand group cohomology, and I have a very basic question. So as I understand it, let $\Gamma$ be a group, and $V$ be a $\Gamma$-module (which is essentially another abelian group acted on by $\Gamma$). We shall construct the group cohomology of $\Gamma$ with coefficients in $V$ by constructing a chain complex and taking its homology groups.

1) We could consider the "homogenous" version as follows: let $$C^n(\Gamma,V)=\{f:\Gamma^{n+1} \to V\}$$ with a coboundary operator $$d^n:C^n(\Gamma,V) \to C^{n+1}(\Gamma,V)$$ $$d^nf(g_0,g_1,\dots,g_{n+1})=\sum \limits_{i=0}^{n+1} (-1)^i f(g_0,\dots,\hat{g}_i,\dots,g_{n+1})$$ Now the chain $$0 \to V \to C^1(\Gamma,V) \to C^2(\Gamma,V) \to \dots$$ is exact at every index, but we can consider the subspace of invariants under the action of $\Gamma$ on a function $f \in C^n(\Gamma,V)$ as follows $$g\cdot f (g_0,\dots,g_n)=g\cdot f(g^{-1}g_0,\dots,g^{-1}g_n)$$ to get a complex $$0 \to V^{\Gamma} \to C^1(\Gamma,V)^{\Gamma} \to C^2(\Gamma,V)^{\Gamma} \to \dots$$ and define $H^n(\Gamma,V)$ as the cohomology groups of this complex.

2) We can also define an "inhomogenous" complex to define the cohomology as follows: let $$\tilde{C}^n(\Gamma,V)=\{f:\Gamma^{n} \to V\}$$ with a coboundary operator $$\tilde{d}^n:C^n(\Gamma,V) \to C^{n+1}(\Gamma,V)$$ $$\tilde{d}^n f(g_1,\dots,g_{n+1})=g_1 \cdot f(g_2,\dots,g_{n+1}) + \sum \limits_{i=1}^{n} (-1)^i f(g_1,\dots,g_ig_{i+1},\dots,g_{n+1}) + (-1)^{n+1} f(g_1,\dots,g_n)$$ The complex obtained $$ V \to \tilde{C}^1(\Gamma,V) \to \tilde{C}^2(\Gamma,V) \to \dots$$ can be used directly to define the cohomology groups of $\Gamma$ in $V$ as the cohomology of this complex.

The equivalence of these two constructions can be seen by constructing isomorphisms between $C^n(\Gamma,V)^{\Gamma}$ and $\tilde{C}^{n+1}(\Gamma,V)$.

Note that in the first (homogenous) construction we explicitly specified an action of $\Gamma$ on functions in $f \in C^n(\Gamma,V)$ as follows $$g\cdot f (g_0,\dots,g_n)=f(g^{-1}g_0,\dots,g^{-1}g_n)$$ and used invariants of that action to define the complex and cohomologies. This is in addition to the given action of $\Gamma$ on $V$ which is used to define $V^{\Gamma}$.

On the other hand, in the inhomogenous construction, we do not use any action of $\Gamma$ on functions, but only the given action of $\Gamma$ on $V$, which is just applied pointwise on function values.

So my question is:

What happens if we use a different action of $\Gamma$ on functions in the homogenous construction? Or if we define our own action of $\Gamma$ on functions in the inhomogenous construction (not just using the action on $V$ pointwise)? Will the cohomologies change?

I really don't understand how the action of $\Gamma$ on functions fits together with the given action of $\Gamma$ on functions of $\Gamma^n$ into $V$. Apologies if this is elementary, but I'd be grateful for some explanation.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ There's a variety of cohomology theories that can be defined, but I think the answer you're looking for is that "reasonably similar" constructions should give the same cohomology by abstract nonsense: namely, that a derived functor is independent of the choice of injective resolution (modulo some techincal requirements). $\endgroup$ – anomaly Feb 11 at 19:09
  • $\begingroup$ In the homogeneous cochain, the action of $\Gamma$ is not the one you described. This is rather $(g.f)(x_0,...,x_n)=gf(g^{-1}x_0,...,g^{-1}x_n)$. With this action of $\Gamma$, the group $C^n(\Gamma,V)^\Gamma$ is actually the group of equivariant maps $Hom_{\mathbb{Z}[\Gamma]}(\mathbb{Z}[\Gamma^{n+1}],V)$. So it does use the action of $\Gamma$ on $V$. $\endgroup$ – Roland Feb 11 at 20:12
  • $\begingroup$ @Roland You're right, my mistake. I have corrected it now, thanks for pointing it out. But the broader question still stands. If we use a different action of $\Gamma$ on functions, say a conjugate action, then where would this break down? Is there any reason we define the action in that particular way? $\endgroup$ – BharatRam Feb 11 at 20:17
  • $\begingroup$ Well, if you use a different action, it is a bit as if you changed the action on $V$. Look at the particular degree $n=0$. Then $H^0(\Gamma,V)$ is supposed to be $V^\Gamma$ for the action of $\Gamma$ on $V$. Now with the homogeneous cochain, $H^0(\Gamma,V)$ is the set of maps $\Gamma\to V$ such that $(g.f)=f$ and for all $g,h\in\Gamma, f(g)-f(h)=0$. So $f$ is constant and invariant, thus $H^0(\Gamma,V)=V^\Gamma$. If you use another action, then you won't get the expected result it may look as if you had chosen another action on $V$. $\endgroup$ – Roland Feb 11 at 20:28
  • $\begingroup$ By the way, there is another mistake in the definition with the homogeneous cochain. You have a complex $0\to V\to C^0(\Gamma,V)\to C^1(\Gamma,V)\to...$ (including $n=0$) and you take the cohomology of $0\to C^0(\Gamma,V)^\Gamma\to C^1(\Gamma,V)^\Gamma\to ...$ (starting with $C^0$ and removing the $V^\Gamma$ part). $\endgroup$ – Roland Feb 11 at 20:31

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.