I am trying to understand the definition of (singular) cohomology with compact supports.

My understanding of singular cohomology goes like this. Let $X$ be a topological space. Define the singular chain group $C_n(X)$ to be the free abelian group generated by singular n-simplicies, which are functions $\sigma : \Delta^n \to X.$ The homology of the complex $C_{\bullet}(X)$ is singular homology. If we define $C^n(X):= \operatorname{Hom}(C_n(X), \mathbb{Z})$ to be the dual of the singular cochain group we get singular co-chains. If we now take the cohomology of this new complex, we get singular cohomology.

Now I am trying to understand cohomology with compact supports, which this source begins to define (on page 7 of the pdf) as such:

Given a (singular, simplicial, cellular) cochain complex $C^{\bullet}$ on a space $X$ , consider the subcomplex $C^{\bullet}_c$ of cochains which are compactly supported: each cochain is zero outside some compact subset of $X$ .

What does this last statement mean? Isn't a cochain a map from $C_n(X)$ to $\mathbb{Z}$? How can take have a support inside $X?$ Please help me clear my deep misunderstanding. Thank you.


The idea is that a cochain $\varphi \in C^n(X)$ is compactly supported if there's a $K \subseteq X$ compact subset of $X$ such that $\varphi|_{C_n(X \setminus K)} = 0$.

Edit a little remark: for every $K$ compact subset of $X$ there's an embedding $i \colon X \setminus K \hookrightarrow X$ which give rise to a injective embedding of chain complexes $i_* \colon C_\bullet(X \setminus K) \to C_\bullet (X)$, so we can think of $C_n(X \setminus K)$ as being a submodule of $C_n(X)$ and to be exact what I meant above by $\varphi|_{C_(X \setminus K)}$ should be written more formally as $\varphi|_{i_*(C_n(X \setminus K))}$.

So compactly supported co-chain of $X$ are those co-chains in $C^\bullet(X)$ that vanish on all the simplexes that have image contained in a subspace $X \setminus K$ (for some $K$ compact subset of $X$), i.e. those simplexes $\sigma \colon \Delta^n \to X$ that factors through the inclusion map $i \colon X \setminus K \to X$.

You can find out more about this in Hatcher's book Algebraic Topology.

  • $\begingroup$ Let me see if I understand. $C_n(X)$ is the free abelian group generated by functions $\sigma : \Delta^n \to X.$ If we strict ourselves to only the simplicies that are non-zero inside $X\setminus K$, we can consider them as functions $\sigma:\Delta^n \to X\setminus K.$ The free abelian group generated by only these simplicies is denoted $C_n(X\setminus K).$ A cochain is a map from $C_n(X)$ to $\mathbb{Z}$ and it is compactly supported if its restriction to $C_n(X\setminus K) \subset C_n(X)$ is zero. Is that correct & should the superscript in $C^n(X\setminus K)$ actually be a subscript? $\endgroup$ – Craig Oct 10 '13 at 10:28
  • $\begingroup$ Yes is correct. Just one remark clearly the requirement is that it must be a compact $K$ such that the cochain vanishes outside that compact, and this compact can be different for any compactly supported cochain. $\endgroup$ – Giorgio Mossa Oct 10 '13 at 10:33
  • $\begingroup$ Ahh ok. Thank you very much Giorgio. $\endgroup$ – Craig Oct 10 '13 at 10:37
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I still don't understand. When I said above "If we strict ourselves to only the simplicies that are non-zero inside $X\setminus K$" , that doesn't quite make sense. $X$ is the image, not the domain. If I change that to "only the simplicies whose image is contained inside $X\setminus K$" then is that the correct definition? $\endgroup$ – Craig Oct 10 '13 at 11:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I thought that the compact set $K$ could be different for each simplex? The new definition does not seem to allow that. $\endgroup$ – Craig Oct 10 '13 at 14:59

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.