On ${\rm mod}~p$ $A_p$-spaces
Ruizhi Huang, Jie Wu

TL;DR
This paper establishes a necessary condition for mod p A_p-structures on spaces, proves finiteness of such spaces of given rank, and classifies rank 3 mod 3 homotopy associative H-spaces.
Contribution
It introduces a new necessary condition for the existence of mod p A_p-structures and provides a classification of rank 3 mod 3 homotopy associative H-spaces.
Findings
Necessary condition for mod p A_p-structures
Finiteness of mod p A_p-spaces of fixed rank
Classification of rank 3 mod 3 homotopy associative H-spaces
Abstract
We prove a necessary condition for the existence of the -structure on spaces, and also derive a simple proof for the finiteness of the number of -spaces of given rank. As a direct application, we compute a list of possible types of rank homotopy associative -spaces.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology · Algebraic structures and combinatorial models · Advanced Topics in Algebra
\agtart\givenname
Ruizhi \surnameHuang
\urladdrhttps://sites.google.com/site/hrzsea/
\givennameJie \surnameWu
\urladdrhttp://www.math.nus.edu.sg/ matwujie
\subjectprimarymsc201055P45, 55S25 \subjectsecondarymsc201055P15, 55S05, 55N15 \arxivreference \arxivpassword \volumenumber \issuenumber \publicationyear \papernumber \startpage \endpage
\MR \Zbl
\published \publishedonline \proposed \seconded \corresponding \editor \version
On -spaces
Ruizhi Huang
Department of Mathematics
National University of Singapore
10 Lower Kent Ridge Road
Singapore 119076
Jie Wu
Department of Mathematics
National University of Singapore
10 Lower Kent Ridge Road
Singapore 119076
Abstract
We prove a necessary condition for the existence of the -structure on spaces, and also derive a simple proof for the finiteness of the number of -spaces of given rank. As a direct application, we compute a list of possible types of rank homotopy associative -spaces.
keywords:
-space, -operation, homotopy associative -space, Steenrod powers, Adem relations
1 Introduction
A longstanding problem in algebraic topology is to classify finite -spaces. However, this problem is rather complicated, and only been solved in few cases. There is Zabrodsky’s localization and mixing theorem [26] yielding that a simply connected finite complex is an -space if and only if each of its -localizations is an -space. One would also like to know for which primes the localization at fails to be an -space, so it is natural to consider the -local version of -spaces.
Let be a -complex with cohomology being an exterior algebra generated by elements of odd dimension, we call the rank of . For , J. F. Adams has determined that , , are the only -spaces localized at by solving the famous Hopf invariant one problem [1], and all odd spheres are -spaces localized at any odd prime [2]. For , the case (then the integral case) has been solved by a series of papers [3], [15], [27], [7], [19], as well as the case by N. Hagelgans [9]. The remaining case is challengeable and an open question for decades, while a recent progress on this problem can be found in [8].
The phenomenon that the -structures are largely controlled by the prime behaves similarly when we consider higher homotopy associative structures. Namely, if we consider spaces in the sense of J. Stasheff [21], the -structures are controlled by that of localization at , where a connected -space is just an -space. In general, For any -space , Stasheff suggests an -projective space over , denoted by which is the analogy to Milnor’s classifying space for topological group (See Def. 3.5 and paragraph before that for the explicit definition of -spaces and related comments).
Let , then it is well-known that there exists some non-trivial -th power in the cohomology of -stage projective space which exactly catches the -structure. Furthermore, Hemmi [12] has defined a modified projective space for a special family of -spaces which is our main concern in this paper. Based on these ideas and constructions, we prove the following theorem which generalizes the result of [23] for local spheres:
Theorem 1.1**.**
Fix an odd prime and let be a connected -local -space with cohomology ring , and , . Define
[TABLE]
then .
For the reverse of the theorem, we recall that in [22] Stasheff has constructed realization for polynomial algebras with using a theorem of Quillen. Here, our proof of this theorem is based on a generalization of a method of Adams and Atiyah (see [4] and section ), using which we also derive a simple proof of a finiteness theorem of Hubbuck and Mimura ([16], also see Theorem 3.7) which claims that there are only finitely many possible homotopy types of spaces with fixed rank which are -spaces.
For the special case when , a -space is the usual -local homotopy associative -space. The only simply connected homotopy associative -space at of rank is . If we define the sequence of the increasing numbers to be the type of in Theorem 1.1, then the complete list of types for rank -local simply connected homotopy associative -spaces are , , and (see Theorem in [24]). It is clear that provides example for , for and for . In [10], Harper gives a decomposition where is the bundle over classified by , and further in [28], Zarbrodsky shows that is a loop space which provides example for . In this paper, we consider the case of rank . With the help of the method of Adams and Atiyah, and some results of Wilkerson ([24] or Theorem 4.2), we prove the following theorem by careful analysis of the effect of both Steenrod operations and Adams’ -operations.
Theorem 1.2**.**
Let be an indecomposable -local homotopy associative -space with cohomology ring where and , then the type of can only be one of the following:
[TABLE]
For the above list, the only known example is which is of type . Here are a few things we know about potential examples of rank -local -spaces of the remaining five types. For , we can form a space as the total space of a -principal fibration over which is classified by the generator of . Then the classifying map factors as and we get where is the total space of the fibration classified by and also an -space by Theorem of [8]. However, we still do not known whether is an -space or not. For the case , we have Nishida’s which is a -component of (see [20]). Still, we do not know whether is homotopy associative. If is of type , then has a generating complex of the form by the knowledge of the homotopy groups of sphere, where is of type . For , Harper and Zabrodsky have proved in [11] that if the exterior algebra of rank generated by can be realized by an -space, then , and the inverse question is still open for . For the last possible case of type , we have and .
The article is organized as follows. In section , we will introduce a refined version of Adams and Atiyah’s method in [4]. In section , we use number theory to prove Theorem 1.1 and the finiteness theorem of Hubbuck and Mimura. The last section is devoted to prove Theorem 1.2.
2 A method of Adams and Atiyah
In [4], Adams and Atiyah develop a method to detect the -th power of cohomology elements using Adams’s -operations. For our purpose, we need to modify it slightly.
Given a connected CW-complex with no -torsion in , suppose there exists a subalgebra of such that
[TABLE]
as rings, is an ideal and also and are closed under the action of the Steenrod algebra . Then by Atiyah-Hirzebruch-Whitehead spectral sequence and Theorem in [5], we have the corresponding filtered subalgebra of such that
[TABLE]
as filtered rings, and also and are closed under -action. Write the Chern character of an element as
[TABLE]
with , and (the subscripts refer to the degree), then we have
[TABLE]
Hence is indeed a semisimple linear transformation if we use Chern character to identify with , and the eigenspace decomposition of is independent of the choice of . In particular, and are invariant under for any as they are invariant under , and then and are also invariant under each . Then the same as in [4], we get (partial) eigenspace decomposition
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where , (which means the degree of its elements) and is allowed to be [math] vector space. For each , is the eigenspace corresponding to the eigenvalue . We also notice that but only as vector spaces. Now define a linear transformation on by
[TABLE]
and a number
[TABLE]
Notice that induces a linear transformation on which is the natural projection onto the -th component . For any , we have
[TABLE]
Accordingly,
[TABLE]
If we write for some , then we also have
[TABLE]
Now we make a crucial assumption that for each
[TABLE]
Since is a -module, we have
[TABLE]
i.e., . Still the same as in [4], on the cohomology level where denotes the corresponding element of in .
Remark 2.1*.*
Notice that when and , the above result is exactly the Corollary in [4].
3 Proof of Theorem 1.1 and the finiteness theorem
3.1 Proof of Theorem 1.1
We prove the theorem by contradiction, while the main task is to prove the condition (2.1) holds. So we have to do some work in number theory first.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let be a positive integer, define
1) ,
- .
.
Suppose is a primitive root modulo , then is also a primitive root modulo for all . Then for any positive integer , we have
[TABLE]
So is the exact exponent of in the prime factorization of if .
The following lemma is well known and basic in number theory:
Lemma 3.2** (Legendre, ).**
[TABLE]
where is the sum of all the digits in the expansion of in the base .
From above, we easily get:
Corollary 3.3**.**
1) ;
2) , if .
Now we are ready to prove our main lemma which is a generalization of Lemma in [4]:
Lemma 3.4**.**
Let be an odd prime, be a primitive root modulo , , such that and
[TABLE]
then we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
We set , , and , then since . Then we have
[TABLE]
By (3.1), we only need to consider ’s satisfying , i.e., , then we have
[TABLE]
Now if , then
[TABLE]
If , then
[TABLE]
On the other hand, we have always holds, for otherwise, implies (we use here). Now combining all above, it is easy to see in both cases. ∎
Now we are going to prove Theorem 1.1. First we recall some background on -spaces for which Stasheff’s original papers [21] are the standard reference. Stasheff’s -spaces can be defined inductively with the help of Stasheff polytopes which are also called associahedrons. Explicitly, an associahedron is an -dimensional convex polytope whose vertices are in one to one correspondence with the parenthesizings of the word , and whose edges correspond to single application of the associativity rule. In particular, is a point, is a interval and is the convex hull of a pentagon. There are canonical maps among ’s. Indeed, the family can be endowed with an operadic structure such that any -space is the so-called -space ( is called -opeard). Then an -space is just an space with the action of only up to the -stage (the corresponding opeard is called -operad). Stasheff also gave another equivalence description of -spaces which he used as definition.
Definition 3.5** (Definition in [21]).**
An -structure on a space consists of an -tuple of maps
[TABLE]
such that each is a quasi-fibration, and there is a contracting homotopy such that .
Note that if -structure is given by the operadic action, the above diagram can be constructed such that is the -th ‘projective space’ over (like Milnor’s construction). The reverse process was done by Stasheff. The projective space is crucial for there are non-trivial -th powers in its cohomology ring.
Here, the key construction for our proof of Theorem 1.1 is the so-called modified projective space due to Hemmi [13] which is an analogy of Stasheff’s -projective space [21]. Since we will not use the explicit construction of this concept, we only recall some properties stated in the following lemma.
Lemma 3.6** (part of Theorem in [13]).**
Let and be a finite -space with cohomology ring
[TABLE]
then there exists a modified projective space with a map such that
[TABLE]
as rings for some subalgebra of and , where the idea under quotient in the first factor is generated by monomials of length greater or equal to . Further and are closed under the action of the Steenrod algebra .
Now we are ready to prove Theorem 1.1.
Proof of Theorem 1.1 We prove the theorem by contradiction, and assume . By Lemma 3.6, contains a truncated polynomial algebra
[TABLE]
Let us denote to be the -skeleton of , we then have a ring decomposition where is the canonical inclusion. Then . We then set , and apply Lemma 3.4 for and since by assumption. Then we get , which implies the condition (2.1) holds for since is the lowest degree. Further and are closed under the action of , hence by the argument in Section , for any which contradicts the fact and the proof of Theorem 1.1 is completed.
3.2 The Finiteness Theorem for finite -spaces
As another application, we prove the following theorem of Hubbuck and Mimura:
Theorem 3.7** ([16]).**
Let be a connected finite space of rank . Then there are only finitely many possible homotopy types for the space .
Proof.
Suppose has the type with and form the space which is the -skeleton of with the -skeleton pinched to a point. As in the proof of Theorem 1.1, we can get a ring decomposition using the canonical inclusion and projection, such that and are closed under the action of , and is nontrivial module . We may also fix a number only depending on and such that , and notice that the largest difference of the degrees of any two elements in is bounded by . Suppose the even part of concentrates in dimension , then for sufficient large we have
[TABLE]
for any , i.e., the condition (2.1) holds which contradicts the existence of the nontrivial -th power in . Accordingly the largest dimension of the generators is bounded and there are only finite possible types for . Also by Corollary in [6], there are only finite homotopy types for each certain type. Then in all there are finite homotopy types for fixed rank and the theorem has been proved. ∎
4 rank homotopy associative -spaces
For rank homotopy associative -spaces, we will consider Stasheff’s -projective space instead of Hemmi’s modified projective space used in the proof of Theorem 1.1. The key lemma as an analogy to Lemma 3.6 for projective spaces is the following well-known result.
Lemma 4.1** (e.g. [17]).**
Let and be a finite -space with cohomology ring
[TABLE]
such that each is -primitive, i.e., lies in the image of a series of natural morphisms:
[TABLE]
then we have ring isomorphism
[TABLE]
as -modules and , where .
Notice that the corresponding result in the context of -theory can be easily deduced, and for rank homotopy associative -spaces, the primitive assumption is automatically satisfied. To prove Theorem 1.2, we will also use the following theorem of Wilkerson.
Theorem 4.2** (Theorem and in [24]).**
Let be a finite -space with cohomology ring , such that and , then
(1) there is a with for some .
(2) if for some , there is a such that for some .
Combining Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 4.2, we are left to consider the following cases for the possible types of the -space in Theorem 1.2:
Case , and with ,
Case , and with ,
Case and with ,
Case with , and for any such that .
For Case , we need the following lemma:
Lemma 4.3**.**
Under the condition of Theorem 1.2 and Case , we have
(1) If , and , then ;
(2) If , and , then 8{\rm max}\big{(}e(3n-m),e(3n-2m)\big{)}+15\geq n;
(3) If , , then or ;
(4) If , , then 7{\rm max}\big{(}e(3n-m),e(3n-2m)\big{)}+\lfloor{\rm log}_{3}(m-r)\rfloor+17\geq m or .
Proof.
By the condition, we have a -module where the subscripts refer to the filtration degree. For and , , and we only need to consider . We can set
[TABLE]
and define . Now For we have and if , or . And we notice that there are elements of the form , elements of the form and elements of the form in , then
[TABLE]
Similarly, we have e\big{(}\prod_{(\tilde{i},\tilde{j},\tilde{k})\neq(1,j,k)}\big{)}\leq 4e(n)+19 and e\big{(}\prod_{(\tilde{i},\tilde{j},\tilde{k})\neq(2,j,k)}\big{)}\leq e(n)+16. Since condition (2.1) should fail for , we must have .
The remaining three claims can be proved similarly, and notice that for and , we work with if and with if . ∎
Now we are ready to deal with Case :
Proposition 4.4**.**
Under the condition of Theorem 1.2 and Case , the only possible types of are:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Theorem 1.1, we have , then . So by Theorem 4.2, we have with and . Then either or or .
We prove the proposition under condition first:
(1) If , and , by Lemma 4.3, we have . Then
[TABLE]
Since , we have and . Then and is odd. Now it is not hard to check that is the only possible type satisfying all the conditions.
(2) If , and , by Lemma 4.3, 8{\rm max}\big{(}e(3n-m),e(3n-2m)\big{)}+15\geq n. If , then for and . Then it is to show or . In any case, which implies . And then and or . But since , only or is possible for our .
If , then for and . Then we get or . Again since and , we have . Then and or and only and survive.
(3) If , , by Lemma 4.3 we have or . We also notice that which by our early discussion implies or . If the first inequality and hold, then
[TABLE]
which implies . Then implies or for . So and . Since and , we have and . Then we see is impossible for is even, while leads to which contradicts our previous calculation. Similar arguments can be applied to other cases which will show there are no types left.
(4) If , , by Lemma 4.3 and similar calculations as in , we get , , or .
(5) By Theorem 1.1, the only remaining case under condition is but . If , then or which gives . When , we have which is impossible. Further, can not hold by our assumption.
We have proved the proposition when . If , then which implies and . However, since and , this is impossible. ∎
For the remaining cases, we will also use a theorem of Hemmi:
Theorem 4.5** (Theorem in [12], also see Section in [13]).**
Let be a homotopy -space with being finite. Then for any with and , if
[TABLE]
then we have
[TABLE]
is an epimorphism, where and is the submodule consisting of decomposable elements.
Proposition 4.6**.**
Under the condition of Theorem 1.2 and Case , the only possible types of are:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since , by Theorem 4.2, we have with and as before. Then either or .
(1) . If , . So we have which implies . Then contradicts the fact that is even.
If , then which implies or .
If and for some , then in the -module , with by Theorem 4.5. By the Adem relation
[TABLE]
we have which implies has to be the degree of some monomial in . Then by direct computation, we get and which implies . Since , we have or . When , is odd which is impossible. So we have .
If and , then which by Theorem 4.2 implies with and . Then we have or either of which is impossible.
(2) . We have which implies or . ∎
Proposition 4.7**.**
Under the condition of Theorem 1.2 and Case , the only possible types of are:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since , we have . Then by Theorem 4.5, we have .
(1) If , we have which by Theorem 4.2 implies as before. Then either , or or , while the last two cases are easy to be checked and are impossible. For , we apply Theorem 4.5 to get and again by Adem relation (4.3), we get which implies or .
(2) If , again by Adem relation (4.3) we have . By comparing the degree and application of Theorem 4.2, we get a list of possible types: , , , , and also a special type with . For this remaining case, if with , then Theorem 4.5 implies . By the Adem relation
[TABLE]
we have which gives .
For , we argue similarly as in Lemma 4.3 to get a condition . Then the possible types are , and . ∎
Proposition 4.8**.**
Under the condition of Theorem 1.2 and Case , the only possible types of are:
[TABLE]
Proof.
If , then , i.e., . Then we have which is impossible. So we have .
If , then and . Further, if , then which implies as usual. However it is easy to check the later is impossible. Then we get which implies . At this case, the only possible type is .
Now suppose . If , we have , , or by Theorem 4.2. When , we get while is impossible since . When , . Then which implies or . For is even, when which implies . But , so is impossible. If , then we have or either of which is impossible since and . The other two cases can be treated similarly and lead to no possible types.
If , then which implies or . When , we argue exactly the same as in the proof of the first case in Proposition 4.6 and get none of types is possible in this case. When , we see which implies . Again, no types survive. ∎
We recall the following theorem of Wilkerson and Zabrodsky [25] which is also reproved by McCleary [18], and later strengthened by Hemmi in [14] where the assumption of the primitivity of the generators has been removed:
Theorem 4.9**.**
Let be a simply connected -space with cohomology ring , and . If , then is -quasi-regular, i.e., is -equivalent to a product of odd spheres and ’s, where is the -fibration over characterized by .
Now we are ready to prove Theorem 1.2.
Proof of Theorem 1.2 We collect all the types obtained from Proposition 4.4, 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8, and prove the theorem case by case.
First, we notice that , , and are quasi-regular by Theorem 4.9.
If , we already know in . Then by degree reason
[TABLE]
which contradicts that . So cannot be the type of .
If , we still have by Theorem 4.5. Then by Adem relation 4.3, we have which is impossible since .
If , we know in . Then by degree reason we have
[TABLE]
which implies with . On the other hand, we have from the proof of Proposition 4.7, which implies . But and then is impossible.
If , we have which implies with . Then we have and . Then by Adem relation
[TABLE]
we have with . However, is not equal to , so can not be the type of .
If , we have . Again, by Adem relation 4.3, we have and which implies . However the Adem relation
[TABLE]
implies which contradicts . So is impossible.
For , or , we first prove the following lemma:
Lemma 4.10**.**
Let be a -local -space with cohomology ring , such that each is -primitive, , and . Then there is a such that for some suitable nonzero .
Proof.
This is essentially Lemma in [24], which claims that in the -submodule of , there is a such that with , for in Theorem of [5], Atiyah has shown that if , then holds on the cohomology level. ∎
Now we return to the proof Theorem 1.2. Using above lemma, we see holds in for both mentioned cases. Then we apply Adem relation (4.6) to . Since in both cases , we have . However, , and since is truncated, which is not equal to . Accordingly, either case is impossible to be the type of .
We notice that is impossible directly by the above lemma.
For the remaining cases which do not appear in the final list, we can check whether the condition (2.1) fails or not in an appropriate -module constructed from (with the help of computer), and find that when , , , , , , , or , (2.1) holds which implies can not be -space.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Prof. Stephen D. Theriault and Prof. Mamoru Mimura for helpful discussions and comments, and are also indebted to Prof. John R. Harper for suggesting the reference [12] and valuable knowledge about -space of rank and higher associativity. We wish to thank the referee most warmly for his/her suggestions and comments on using the modified projective space of Hemmi [13] which has essentially improved the article, and also the careful reading of our manuscript. We are also indebted to Prof. Jérôme Scherer and Prof. Fred Cohen for careful reading of the manuscript and many valuable suggestions which have improved the paper.
The authors are partially supported by the Singapore Ministry of Education research grant (AcRF Tier 1 WBS No. R-146-000-222-112). The second author is also supported by a grant (No. 11329101) of NSFC of China.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] J. F. Adams , On the non-existence of elements of Hopf invariant one , Ann. of Math. 72 (1960), 20-104.
- 2[2] J. F. Adams , The spheres, considered as an H 𝐻 H -space mod p 𝑝 p , Quart. J. Math. Oxford ( 2 2 2 ) 12 (1961), 52-60.
- 3[3] J. F. Adams , H 𝐻 H -spaces with few cells , Topology 1 (1962), 62-72.
- 4[4] J. F. Adams, M. F. Atiyah , K 𝐾 K -theory and the Hopf invariant , Quart. J. Math. Oxford ( 2 2 2 ), 17 (1966), 31-38.
- 5[5] M. F. Atiyah , Power operations in K 𝐾 K -theory , Quart. J. Math. Oxford ( 2 2 2 ) 17 (1966), 165-93.
- 6[6] R. A. Body, R. R. Douglas , Homotopy types within a rational homotopy type , Topology, 13 (1974), 209-214.
- 7[7] D. D. Douglas, F. Sigrist , Sphere bundles over spheres and H 𝐻 H -spaces , Topology 8 (1969), 115-118.
- 8[8] J. Grbic, J. Harper, M. Mimura, S. Theriault, J. Wu , Rank p − 1 𝑝 1 p-1 mod- p 𝑝 p H 𝐻 H -spaces , Israel J. Math., 194 (2013), 641-688.
