Does the existence of a string structure depend on a spin structure ? (and a generalization)

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "<!-- COMMENT: To achieve a unified layout, along with using the template below, please OBSERVE the following: besides, $...$ and $$...$$, you should use two environments: - Fo...")
Line 51: Line 51:
In general, we are given two maps $f,g:X\to BO\langle n \rangle$ (i.e. two stable vector bundles over $X$ with $BO\langle n \rangle$-structure)
In general, we are given two maps $f,g:X\to BO\langle n \rangle$ (i.e. two stable vector bundles over $X$ with $BO\langle n \rangle$-structure)
for which we assume that the compositions with $BO\langle n \rangle \to BO\langle m \rangle$ are homotopic
for which we assume that the compositions with $BO\langle n \rangle \to BO\langle m \rangle$ are homotopic
(i.e. the bundles are isomorphic as bundles with $BO\langle n-1 \rangle$-structure).
+
(i.e. the bundles are isomorphic as bundles with $BO\langle m \rangle$-structure).
We have to investigate whether it is possible that $f^*k\ne g^*k=0$.
We have to investigate whether it is possible that $f^*k\ne g^*k=0$.
Here let us assume that $BO\langle n\rangle$ and $BO\langle m\rangle$ are consecutive connective covers in the sense that
Here let us assume that $BO\langle n\rangle$ and $BO\langle m\rangle$ are consecutive connective covers in the sense that

Revision as of 18:49, 20 January 2011

Contents

1 Question

Let E\to X be a (stable) vector bundle. This has a classifying map X\to BO.

A BO\langle n\rangle-structure on E is (the vertical homotopy class of) a lift of the classifying map to a map X\to BO\langle n \rangle. (For n=2,4,8 this is an orientation, a spin structure, a string structure respectively.)

Since for n>m,the map BO\langle n \rangle \to BO factors through BO\langle m \rangle \to BO, a BO\langle n\rangle-structure induces a BO\langle m\rangle-structure, or, vice versa, this specific BO\langle m\rangle-structure can be lifted to a BO\langle n\rangle-structure.

Question 1.1. Given a vector bundle X\to BO and two BO\langle n\rangle-structures on it, is it possible that one of the BO\langle n\rangle-structures can be lifted to a BO\langle n+1\rangle-structure and the other can't?

2 Answers

This is not possible for n=2 and n=4, i.e. the question whether an oriented vector bundle admits a spin structure does not depend on the orientation, and the question whether a spin vector bundle admits a string structure does not depend on the spin structure.

The answer is however yes for larger n. For example the existence of a BO\langle 9\rangle-structure on a string vector bundle can depend on the string structure.



3 Further discussion

The map BO\langle n+1 \rangle \to BO\langle n \rangle has homotopy fiber K(\pi_{n}BO,n-1) and is the pullback of the path-loop fibration

\displaystyle \Omega K(\pi_{n}BO,n) \to PK(\pi_{n}BO,n) \to K(\pi_{n}BO,n)
via a map BO\langle n\rangle \to  K(\pi_{n}BO,n), corresponding to a class k\in H^{n}(BO\langle n\rangle;\pi_{n}BO). Note that this is the generator of H^{n}(BO\langle n\rangle;\pi_{n}BO)\cong Hom(\pi_{n}BO;\pi_{n}BO).

By obstruction theory, it follows that a map f:X\to BO\langle n \rangle lifts to BO\langle n+1\rangle if and only if the "characteristic" class

\displaystyle f^*k\in  H^{n}(X;\pi_{n}BO)
vanishes.

This is for n=1,2 the first and second Stiefel-Whitney class of the corresponding vector bundle over X. In particular, since the Stiefel-Whitney classes of a vector bundle are independent of an orientation, this answers the question for n=2.

In general, we are given two maps f,g:X\to BO\langle n \rangle (i.e. two stable vector bundles over X with BO\langle n \rangle-structure) for which we assume that the compositions with BO\langle n \rangle \to BO\langle m \rangle are homotopic (i.e. the bundles are isomorphic as bundles with BO\langle m \rangle-structure). We have to investigate whether it is possible that f^*k\ne g^*k=0. Here let us assume that BO\langle n\rangle and BO\langle m\rangle are consecutive connective covers in the sense that

\displaystyle BO\langle n\rangle = BO\langle n-1\rangle = \dots = BO\langle m+1\rangle \ne BO\langle m\rangle.

Since the compositions of f and g with BO\langle n \rangle \to BO\langle m \rangle are homotopic, it follows that f and g differ by a map from X to the homotopy fiber K(\pi_{m}BO,m-1) of BO\langle n \rangle \to BO\langle m \rangle. More precisely, the map BO\langle n \rangle \to BO\langle m \rangle is a map of H-spaces, and given f,g as above, there exists a map h:X\to K(\pi_{m}BO,m-1) such that f is homotopic to the composition

\displaystyle  X \stackrel{g,h}{\longrightarrow} BO\langle n  \rangle\times K(\pi_{m}BO,m-1) \stackrel{id\times i}\longrightarrow BO\langle n  \rangle\times BO\langle n  \rangle\to BO\langle n \rangle

where the last map is the H-space multiplication.

Under the H-space multiplication k pulls back to

\displaystyle k\otimes 1 + 1\otimes k \in H^*(BO\langle n\rangle)\otimes H^*(BO\langle n\rangle)\subseteq H^*(BO\langle n\rangle \times BO\langle n\rangle).

Now it follows that f^*k=(g,ih)^*(k\otimes 1 + 1\otimes k)=g^*k+h^*i^*k.

Now we choose X=K(\pi_{m}BO,m-1) and h=id as the "universal" example; thus we have to know whether i^*(k)=0.

For n=4,m=2 we need to know the pullback of k=\frac{p_1}{2} under i: K(\Zz_2,1)\to BSpin. This is zero.

For n=8,m=4 we need to know the pullback of k=\frac{p_2}{6} under i: K(\Zz,3)\to BString. This is a non-zero class: it suffices to show that its reduction modulo 3 is nontrivial. This follows from [Giambalvo1969, Theorem 1'].

4 References

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox