Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory

Benjamin Böhme

doi:10.1112/blms.12362

Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory

Böhme, Benjamin 2018-08-29 00:00:00 IDEMPOTENT CHARACTERS AND EQUIVARIANTLY MULTIPLICATIVE SPLITTINGS OF K-THEORY BENJAMIN BÖHME Abstract. We classify the primitive idempotents of the p-local complex representation ring of a ﬁnite group G in terms of the cyclic subgroups of order prime to p and show that they all come from idempotents of the Burnside ring. Our results hold without adjoining roots of unity or inverting the order of G, thus extending classical structure theorems. We then derive explicit group-theoretic obstructions for tensor induction to be compatible with the resulting idempotent splitting of the representation ring Mackey functor. Our main motivation is an application in homotopy theory: we conclude that the idem- potent summands of G-equivariant topological K-theory and the corresponding sum- mands of the G-equivariant sphere spectrum admit exactly the same ﬂavors of equi- variant commutative ring structures, made precise in terms of Hill-Hopkins-Ravenel norm maps. 1. Introduction The purpose of this paper is twofold: We ﬁrst classify the primitive idempotents in the real and complex representation rings RO(G) and RU(G) of a ﬁnite group G and their local variants, as summarized in §1.1, extending various classical results. We then study the compatibility of tensor induction with the splittings of RO(G) and RU(G) into idempotent summands, and as a consequence obtain an explicit descrip- tion of the G-equivariant commutative ring spectrum structures occuring as idempo- tent summands of real and complex G-equivariant topological K-theory. See §1.2 for a summary of these results. We begin with some motivation. Multiplicative induction is a familiar tool in repre- sentation theory and group cohomology. In the wake of Hill, Hopkins and Ravenel’s ground-breaking solution to the Kervaire invariant one problem [HHR16], it has also received much interest in equivariant homotopy theory. Starting from the observa- tion that localization can destroy some of the structure of an equivariant commutative 2000 Mathematics Subject Classiﬁcation. 19L47; 19A22, 20C15, 55P43, 55P60, 55P91, 55S91. Key words and phrases. Equivariant stable homotopy theory, Hill-Hopkins-Ravenel norm, equivariant com- mutative ring spectrum, topological K-theory, representation ring, idempotent, multiplicative induction, Tambara functor. arXiv:1808.09832v3 [math.AT] 16 Apr 2020 2 Benjamin Böhme ring spectrum, Hill and Hopkins [HH14] gave a necessary and sufﬁcient criterion (cf. Proposition 4.4) for the localization x x x −1 −V −(V⊕V) R[x ] := hocolim R −→ S ∧ R −→ S ∧ R −→ . . . of a G-E ring spectrum R at an element x ∈ π (R) to admit a G-E ring structure. ∞ ∞ −1 The critical part is that R[x ] might not admit Hill-Hopkins-Ravenel norm maps H G N : G ∧ Res (R) → R + H K K H/K for all nested subgroups K ≤ H ≤ G. Subsequently, more general notions of equivari- ant commutative ring spectra equipped with incomplete collections of norm maps, called N ring spectra, were studied by Blumberg and Hill in [BH15], [BH18] and [BH20]. Interesting examples of equivariant localizations arise from primitive idempotent el- ements e ∈ π (R). These induce a decomposition of the homotopy Mackey functor π (R) into indecomposable summands (also called blocks) of the form −1 e · π (R) = π (R)[e ] ∗ ∗ −1 and hence yield a block decomposition of R as a wedge of G-spectra R[e ]. One can now ask about the possible N ring structures on these blocks. Hill and Hopkins’ aforementioned criterion involves checking relations involving multiplicative induc- tion in π (R), which in general are hard to access. Problem 1.1. Determine the nested subgroups K ≤ H ≤ G such that H 2 (1) the norm map N for R descends to a well-deﬁned norm map H G −1 −1 N : G ∧ Res (R[e ]) → R[e ] + H K K H/K on the block of R deﬁned by the primitive idempotent e ∈ π (R) H K H (2) the induced norm operation on homotopy groups N : π (R) → π (R) descends K 0 0 to a well-deﬁned norm operation H K −1 H −1 N : π (R[e ]) → π (R[e ]). K 0 0 In the prequel [Böh19], the author gave an explicit group-theoretical answer in the fundamental example of the G-equivariant sphere spectrum S. It built on an analysis of An idempotent is primitive if it cannot be written as a sum of non-zero idempotents. Throughout the paper, we write N for the norms of a localization to distinguish them from the norms of the original object. Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 3 G ∼ multiplicative induction in the Burnside ring A(G) and Segal’s identiﬁcation π (S) = A(G) [Seg71]. In the present paper, we present a complete solution to Problem 1.1 for G-equivariant complex topological K-theory KU and its real analogue KO . The homotopy groups G G G G ∼ ∼ π (KU ) = RU(G), π (KO ) = RO(G) G G 0 0 identify with the complex and real representation ring RU(G) and RO(G), respectively, see e.g. [Seg68, §2]. 1.1. Primitive idempotents in representation rings. Dress’ classiﬁcation of primitive idempotents in the Burnside ring and its local variants [Dre69] was the starting point for the investigation of the idempotent splittings of A(G) and S in [Böh19]. Given a collection P of prime numbers, write A(G) := A(G) ⊗ Z for the P-local Burnside (P) (P) −1 ring, where Z := Z p | p ∈ / P . Dress showed that the primitive idempotent (P) elements e ∈ A(G) are in canonical bijection with the conjugacy classes of P-perfect L (P) subgroups L ≤ G. See § 2.1 for further details. It is known that the complex representation ring RU(G) has no idempotents other than zero or one, see [Ser77, §11.4, Corollary]. We extend this result to a classiﬁcation of the primitive idempotents in the P-local representation ring RU(G) := RU(G) ⊗ Z (P) (P) as follows. Consider the “linearization” map lin : A(G) → RU(G) (P) (P) given by sending a ﬁnite G-set to its associated permutation representation. Theorem 1.2. The assignment C 7→ lin(e ) deﬁnes a bijection between the conjugacy classes of cyclic subgroups C ≤ G of order not divisible by any prime in P and the primitive idempotent elements of the ring RU(G) . Here, e ∈ A(G) denotes Dress’ idempotent associated to (P) C (P) C, see Theorem 2.5. Theorem 1.2 is an instance of the phenomenon that one passes from the Burnside ring to the representation ring by restricting attention to cyclic subgroups. The proof is given in §2. Remark 1.3. Theorem 1.2 extends classical work in the following way: Building on work by Solomon [Sol67], Gluck [Glu81a] studies the idempotents lin(e ) and their character values in the rational and the p-local case for a single prime p, but does not show that they are primitive. He also observes that Dress’ idempotent e ∈ A(G) (P) is in the kernel of the linearization map if L is not a cyclic group; we prove this in the general P-local case in Corollary 2.7. 4 Benjamin Böhme We record an immediate consequence of Theorem 1.2. Write RO(G) for the P-local (P) real representation ring and RQ(G) ⊗ Z for the ring of Z -linear combinations of (P) (P) G-representations over the rational numbers. It is well-known that these embed into RU(G) as subrings. (P) Corollary 1.4. The primitive idempotents of RU(G) all lie in the subrings RO(G) and (P) (P) RQ(G) ⊗ Z . Hence, they are precisely the primitive idempotents of these subrings. (P) In the special case of RQ(G) ⊗ Q, this result appeared as [Sol67, Thm. 3]. 1.2. Multiplicativity of idempotent summands. We now turn to the multiplicative properties of the idempotent splittings of the complex and real representation rings −1 and equivariant K-theory spectra. Since the block RU(G) [lin(e ) ] agrees with the (P) A(G) -module localization (P) −1 −1 RU(G) [e ] = RU(G) ⊗ A(G) [e ], (P) (P) A(G) (P) C C (P) we obtain an identiﬁcation −1 −1 (KU ) [lin(e ) ] ≃ (KU ) ∧ S [e ] G C G (P) (P) (P) of the blocks of P-local G-equivariant K-theory with an e -localization in genuine G- spectra. By Corollary 1.4, the same is true for RO(G) and (KO ) . This enables us (P) (P) to reduce the solution to Problem 1.1 for equivariant K-theory to the one for the sphere given in the prequel [Böh19]. The resulting classiﬁcation of the maximal N ring structures of the idempotent summands of (KU ) can be summarized as follows: (P) Theorem 1.5. Let C ≤ G be a cyclic group of order not divisible by any prime in P and let e be the corresponding primitive idempotent in A(G) . Let K ≤ H ≤ G be nested subgroups. (P) Then the following are equivalent: −1 H H (a) The G-spectrum S [e ] inherits a norm map N from the norm map N of S . (P) K K (P) −1 (b) The G-spectrum (KU ) [e ] inherits a norm map N from that of (KU ) . G (P) G (P) C K −1 (c) The Mackey functor A(−) [e ] inherits a norm map N from that of A(−) . (P) (P) C K −1 H (d) The Mackey functor RU(−) [e ] inherits a norm map N from that of RU(−) . (P) (P) C K (e) Any subgroup C ≤ H conjugate in G to C lies in K. All of the above holds with (KU ) and RU(−) replaced by their real variants (KO ) G (P) (P) G (P) and RO(−) . (P) The equivalence of (a), (c) and (e) was already proven in [Böh19]. Theorem 1.5 is made more precise in Theorem 3.4, Theorem 3.8 and Corollary 4.3 in terms of Blumberg and Hill’s framework of incomplete Tambara functors and N operads. ∞ Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 5 Remark 1.6. If H does not contain a group conjugate in G to C, then the norms N exist for trivial reasons: It can be seen from Theorem 2.5 that the restriction of e to H −1 −1 vanishes, and so A(H) [e ] and RU(H) [e ] must be zero. In other cases, these (P) (P) C C groups are always non-zero. An immediate consequence of Theorem 1.5 is the following: −1 Corollary 1.7. The summand (KU ) [e ] is a G-E ring spectrum if and only if C ≤ G G ∞ (p) is the trivial group. The same is true for real K-theory. 1.3. Organization. In §2, we recall Dress’ work on idempotents in the Burnside ring and give a proof of Theorem 1.2. The algebraic and homotopical parts of Theorem 1.5 are discussed in §3 and §4, respectively. 1.4. Acknowledgements. The present work was part of the author’s PhD project at the University of Copenhagen; a previous version of the article was included in his PhD thesis [Böh18]. The author would like to thank his PhD advisor Jesper Grodal, his PhD committee consisting of Andrew Blumberg, John Greenlees and Lars Hessel- holt, as well as Markus Hausmann, Joshua Hunt, Malte Leip, Riccardo Pengo, David Sprehn and an anonymous referee for many helpful discussions and suggestions. This research was supported by the Danish National Research Foundation through the Centre for Symmetry and Deformation (DNRF92). 2. Idempotent elements in representation rings The goal of this section is to prove Theorem 1.2. In §2.1, we show how some parts of the theorem follow easily from the classiﬁcation of idempotents in the Burnside ring. The difﬁcult part is to prove that the images of the Burnside ring idempotents are indeed primitive. We recall Atiyah’s description [Ati61] of the prime ideal spectrum Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) in §2.2, where O is obtained from Z by adjoining sufﬁciently F F (P) many roots of unity, classify the idempotents of RU(G) ⊗ O in §2.3, and deduce (P) the primitivity part of Theorem 1.2 in §2.4. In the rational and in the p-local case, it is possible to prove the primitivity in an easier way, as we explain in §2.5. 2.1. Idempotents in the Burnside ring. We recall Dress’ classiﬁcation of idempotents of A(G) [Dre69] and prove parts of Theorem 1.2. (P) Notation 2.1. Recall that by the Chinese remainder theorem applied to hgi, each g ∈ G can be written uniquely as a product g · g ⊥ of powers of g, where g is of order P P divisible only by primes in P, and g is of order prime to P. The elements g and g ⊥ ⊥ P P are called the P-part and P-prime part of g, respectively. 6 Benjamin Böhme Deﬁnition 2.2. The P-residual subgroup of a group H is the unique minimal normal subgroup O (H) such that the quotient is a solvable P-group, i.e. a solvable group of order only divisible by primes in P. H is called P-perfect if O (H) = H. Lemma 2.3. For cyclic groups, we have O (g) = hg i. In particular, a cyclic group is P-perfect if and only if its order is not divisible by any element of P. Deﬁnition 2.4. For a subgroup H ≤ G, the mark homomorphism φ : A(G) → Z is (P) (P) extended additively from the assignment X 7→ |X | for ﬁnite G-sets X. Theorem 2.5 ([Dre69], Prop. 2). There is a canonical bijection between the conjugacy classes of P-perfect subgroups L ≤ G and the set of primitive idempotent elements of A(G) . It (P) sends L to the element e ∈ A(G) whose marks φ (e ) at a subgroup H ≤ G are one if L (P) L O (H) and L are conjugate in G, and zero otherwise. Write χ(V)(g) for the value of the character of V ∈ RU(G) at the element g ∈ G. (P) The linearization map lin: A(G) → RU(G) satisﬁes the following simple identity: (P) (P) hgi Lemma 2.6. For X ∈ A(G) , we have χ(lin(X))(g) = φ (X) ∈ Z. (P) Corollary 2.7. Let L ≤ G be a P-perfect subgroup. Then the virtual representation lin(e ) has character values 1 if hg i ∼ L hgi χ(lin(e ))(g) = φ (e ) = L L 0 otherwise. In particular, lin(e ) is zero if L is not cyclic. The elements lin(e ) are mutually orthogonal L C idempotents summing to one, where C ranges over a set of representatives for the conjugacy classes of cyclic P-perfect subgroups. Proof. The statement follows from Theorem 2.5, Lemma 2.6, and Lemma 2.3. This proves all the statements of Theorem 1.2 except for the primitivity of the idempo- tents lin(e ). Note that the rational case (P = ∅) of Corollary 2.7 is stated in [Glu81a, Theorem] and goes back to a similar result by Solomon [Sol67, Thm. 3]. The following observation is not part of the proof of Theorem 1.2, but we record it for later reference. Lemma 2.8. The P-local Burnside ring splits as A(G) = e · A(G) × e · A(G) cyc (P) (P) ker (P) where e (respectively e ) is deﬁned to be the sum of all primitive idempotents e with L cyc ker L cyclic (respectively non-cyclic). Moreover, the summand e · A(G) is precisely the kernel ker (P) of the linearization map lin: A(G) → R(G) . (P) (P) Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 7 Proof. The ﬁrst part follows from Theorem 2.5 by writing 1 = e + e . Lemma 2.6 cyc ker implies that the kernel of lin consists of those virtual G-sets whose marks vanish at all cyclic subgroups. By Corollary 2.7, these are precisely the elements of the ideal e · A(G) . ker (P) 2.2. Prime ideals in the splitting ﬁeld case. Let exp(G) be the exponent of G and write F for the exp(G)-th cyclotomic extension of Q with ring of integers O and Galois group Γ := Gal(F : Q). All characters of G-representations over the complex numbers take values in O , and therefore can be viewed as class functions G/∼ → O , F F where G/∼ is the set of conjugacy classes of G. When working P-locally, the elements of RU(G) are Z -linear combinations of irreducible representations of G over the (P) (P) complex numbers, hence their characters take values in O := O ⊗ Z . F,(P) (P) Notation 2.9. Any element V ∈ RU(G) ⊗ O can be written as an O -linear (P) F F,(P) combination V = λ · V of irreducible G-representations V . We write i i i i χˆ(V)(g) := λ · χ(V )(g) ∑ i i for the value of the O -linear character of V at g ∈ G. F,(P) Characters are multiplicative in tensor products of representations, hence χ(−)(g) deﬁnes a ring homomorphism RU(G) ⊗ O → O . Atiyah [Ati61] described the (P) F,(P) structure of the prime ideal spectrum Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) in terms of these maps. His proof applies without changes to the open subscheme Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) cut out (P) by P-localization. Proposition 2.10 (Cf. [Ati61], Prop. 6.4). The topological space Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) can (P) be described as follows: (1) Every prime ideal of RU(G) ⊗ O is of the form (P) F −1 Q(p, g) := (χˆ(−)(g)) (p) = {V ∈ RU(G) ⊗ O | χˆ(V)(g) ∈ p} (P) for some element g ∈ G and some prime ideal p E O . F,(P) (2) Let p, q E O be prime ideals such that Z ∩ q = qZ for a prime q ∈ Z. There is an F,(P) inclusion Q(p, g) ⊆ Q(q, h) if and only if p is contained in q and g is conjugate in G to h ⊥. (3) The prime ideals Q(p, g) with p = (0) are minimal and the ones with p 6= (0) are maximal. In particular, the Krull dimension of RU(G) ⊗ O is one. (P) The exponent of a ﬁnite group is the least common multiple of the orders of all group elements. 8 Benjamin Böhme 2.3. Idempotents in the splitting ﬁeld case. We can deduce a classiﬁcation of the idempotent elements of RU(G) ⊗ O from Proposition 2.10. Our proof is inspired (P) by Dress’ approach [Dre69, Prop. 2] to the idempotents in the Burnside ring. Theorem 2.11. The map G → π (Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O )) 0 (P) F that sends x ∈ G to the connected component of Q(0, x) induces a bijection between the set of conjugacy classes of P-prime elements of G and the set of connected components of Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ). In particular, the prime ideal spectrum of RU(G) ⊗ O is connected. F F (P) This follows directly from: Proposition 2.12. For any (not necessarily P-prime) elements x, y ∈ G, the prime ideals Q(p, x) and Q(q, y) lie in the same connected component of Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) if and only if x ⊥ and y ⊥ are conjugate in G. P P Proof. First observe that for p 6= (0), the height one ideal Q(p, x) lies in the closure of the height zero ideal Q((0), x), so without loss of generality we may assume that p = q = (0). Since RU(G) ⊗ O has Krull dimension one, two points Q((0), x) and (P) F Q((0), y) lie in the same component if and only if there is a zig-zag of inclusions of prime ideals Q(p , x ) = Q(p , x ) . . . 0 0 0 1 88 ff▼ q ▼ 44 jj❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ ❥ ❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ ❥ ❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ ❥ ❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ ❥ ❚ Q((0), x ) Q((0), x ) Q((0), x ) 0 1 r for some elements x = x , x , . . . , x = y ∈ G and some prime ideals p E O . By 0 1 r i F,(P) part (2) of Theorem 2.10, we have an equality Q(p , x ) = Q(p , x ) if and only (x ) ⊥ i i i i+1 i is conjugate in G to (x ) , where p is given by Z ∩ p = p Z. i+1 i i i For the “only if” part of the proposition, given a zig-zag as above, it follows that x ⊥ = ((x ) ⊥) ⊥ ∼ ((x ) ⊥) ⊥ = ((x ) ⊥) ⊥ ∼ . . . ∼ ((x ) ⊥ ) ⊥ = y ⊥ 0 G 1 1 G G r P P P P P P p p p p 0 0 1 r−1 where ∼ indicates being conjugate in G. For the “if” part, assume that x ⊥ ∼ y ⊥. Since the prime ideals Q((0), g) only de- P G P pend on the conjucagy class of g, it follows that Q((0), x ) and Q((0), y ) agree. ⊥ ⊥ P P Thus, it sufﬁces to show that for any g ∈ G, the prime ideals Q((0), g) and Q((0), g ) lie in the same component. We will construct an explicit zig-zag as above. Let A P-prime element is an element x such that x ⊥ = x. P Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 9 p , p , . . . , p be all primes in P that divide the order of G. By the going-up theo- 0 1 r rem, we can ﬁnd prime ideals p E O such that p ∩ Z = p Z. Then g may be i i i F,(P) P computed as g ⊥ = (· · · (g ⊥) ⊥ · · · ) ⊥. P p p p 0 1 Inductively, deﬁne g := g and g := (g ) ⊥ so that we have (g ) ⊥ = (g ) ⊥. Then i i−1 i i+1 p p p i−1 i i these choices of elements g and prime ideals p give rise to a zig-zag between Q((0), g) i i and Q((0), g ⊥), which completes the proof. Corollary 2.13. The conjugacy classes of P-prime elements (x) of G are in canonical bijection with the primitive idempotents e of RU(G) ⊗ O . The character of the element e is given x (P) F x as follows: 1 if g ⊥ ∼ x χˆ(e )(g) = 0 otherwise Proof. It is a standard fact of algebraic geometry that for any commutative ring R, the subsets V ⊆ Spec(R) that are both open and closed are in canonical bijection with the idempotent elements of R, by assigning to V the global section which is constant one on V and constant zero on the complement of V. Under this identiﬁcation, the primitive idempotents correspond to the minimal non-empty open and closed subsets. The latter agree with the connected components of Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) since there (P) are only ﬁnitely many of them. The ﬁrst claim now follows from Theorem 2.11. For the description of characters, note that χˆ(e )(g) = 1 if and only if the corresponding global section e evaluates to one at the point Q((0), g) if and only if Q((0), x) and Q((0), g) are in the same connected component. Remark 2.14. Roquette [Roq52] shows that the classiﬁcation given in Corollary 2.13 also holds for the primitive idempotents in the p-adic representation ring after adjoin- ing all e-th roots of unity. Remark 2.15. Using Schur’s orthogonality relations, it follows from Corollary 2.13 that e is given explicitly as −1 e = χ(V)(x ) · V |C (x)| where V runs over a system of representatives of the irreducible representations of G and C (x) denotes the centralizer of x in G. This observation goes back at least to Brauer [Bra47, (7)]. The coefﬁcients can also be expressed in terms of Möbius functions, see [Sol67, Thm. 4], [Glu81b, Prop.] and [Yos83, §3]. Here we use that by deﬁnition, the global sections of Spec(R) agree with the ring R. 10 Benjamin Böhme ∼ × 2.4. Idempotents of RU(G) . Recall that Γ = (Z/ exp(G)) denotes the Galois (P) group of the cyclotomic extension F/Q. The left Γ-action on F restricts to an ac- tion on O . Let Γ act on RU(G) ⊗ O via its action on the right factor. Then F (P) F clearly RU(G) = (RU(G) ⊗ O ) . The group Γ then acts from the right on (P) (P) F Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) and we have Spec(RU(G) ) (Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ))/Γ, F F (P) (P) (P) cf. [Ser77, §11.4, Exerc. 11.4]. We will now describe these Γ-orbits in terms of the prime ideals Q(p, x). First recall that the left Γ-action on O induces a right Γ-action on Spec(O ) that is F F −1 given by p.γ = γ (p). Deﬁnition 2.16 ([Ser77], §12.4). Deﬁne a right Γ-action on the underlying set of G as −1 × m follows: If γ ∈ Γ corresponds to the unit m ∈ (Z/ exp(G)) , let g.γ := g , where −1 m is (any integer representing) the inverse of m in the group Γ. This action is well-deﬁned since the order of g ∈ G divides exp(G). Moreover, it is compatible with conjugation in G. We can describe the Γ-orbits in G easily: Lemma 2.17 ([Ser77], §13.1, Cor.). Two elements x, y ∈ G lie in the same Γ-orbit if and only if they generate the same cyclic subgroup of G. Proof. Let n divide exp(G). Then Γ = (Z/ exp(G)) permutes the generators of Z/ exp(G) transitively, and the same is true for the generators of the cyclic group Z/n, viewed as a subgroup of Z/ exp(G). Proposition 2.18. The left Γ-action on RU(G) ⊗ O induces a right Γ-action on the space (P) F Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) which coincides with the action deﬁned by Q(p, x).γ = Q(p.γ, x.γ). (P) Proof. As in Notation 2.9, write λ · V for a generic element of RU(G) ⊗ O . Then i i (P) F −1 Q(p, x).γ = γ (Q(p, g)) = { λ · V | γ(λ ) · χ(V )(g) ∈ p} i i i i ∑ ∑ i i −1 = { λ · V | λ · γ (χ(V )(g)) ∈ p.γ} ∑ i i ∑ i i i i = { λ · V | λ · χ(V )(g.γ) ∈ p.γ} i i i i ∑ ∑ i i = Q(p.γ, g.γ) Corollary 2.19. The map G → π (Spec(RU(G) )) 0 (P) that sends an element x to the component of the orbit Q((0), x).Γ induces a bijection between the Γ-orbits of conjugacy classes of P-prime elements x ∈ G and the set of components of the topological space Spec(RU(G) ). In particular, the spectrum of RU(G) is connected. (P) Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 11 Corollary 2.20. There is a canonical bijection between the Γ-orbits of conjugacy classes of P-prime elements x ∈ G and the primitive idempotents in RU(G) . The idempotent e x.Γ (P) associated to the orbit of (x) has character given by 1 if g ⊥ ∼ x.γ for some γ ∈ Γ χ(e )(g) = x.Γ 0 otherwise Proof. This follows from Corollary 2.19 in the same way that Corollary 2.13 follows from Theorem 2.11, see the proof of Corollary 2.13. Remark 2.21. In particular, we have e = e in RU(G) . A simple calculation x.Γ x.γ γ∈Γ (P) −1 shows that e = γ (e ) in RU(G) ⊗ O . Therefore e = tr (e ) is the ﬁeld x.γ x x (P) F x.Γ F/Q trace of e . We will not use this fact. By Lemma 2.17, we can write e := e and rephrase Corollary 2.20 in terms of cyclic x.Γ hxi subgroups. At this point, there is no dependence on the ﬁeld extension F/Q anymore. Corollary 2.22. There is a canonical bijection between the conjugacy classes of cyclic P-perfect subgroups C ∈ G and the primitive idempotents in RU(G) . The primitive idempotent e (P) C has character given by 1 if hg ⊥i ∼ C χ(e )(g) = 0 otherwise. In particular, the character of e agrees with that of lin(e ) given in Corollary 2.7 and hence we have e = lin(e ). Theorem 1.2 follows. Remark 2.23. It is clear from Corollary 2.22 that the primitive idempotents of RU(G) (P) only depend on those primes p ∈ P that divide the order of G. 2.5. Quick proofs of special cases. In the rational and p-local case, we can give short ad-hoc proofs of the primitivity of the elements lin(e ) stated as part of Theorem 1.2. Lemma 2.24. Let x, y ∈ G generate the same subgroup. If all character values of the virtual representation V ∈ RU(G) lie in Z , then χ(V)(x) = χ(V)(y). (P) (P) Proof. By Lemma 2.17, we can ﬁnd γ ∈ Γ such that y = x.γ. Then −1 χ(V)(y) = χ(V)(x.γ) = γ (χ(V)(x)) = χ(V)(x) because χ(V)(x) ∈ Z = (O ) . (P) F,(P) Corollary 2.25. For any cyclic C ≤ G, the idempotent lin(e ) ∈ RU(G) ⊗ Q is primitive. C 12 Benjamin Böhme Proof. Recall that the character of lin(e ) is one on elements that generate subgroups conjugate to C and zero otherwise. But Lemma 2.24 shows that any integer-valued character must be constant on the set where lin(e ) is one, hence lin(e ) cannot de- C C compose as a sum of idempotents. For the p-local case, we need another lemma. It was used in Atiyah’s proof of Theo- rem 2.10. Lemma 2.26 ([Ati61], proof of Lemma 6.3). Let V ∈ RU(G) and let p be a prime of (p) O = O ⊗ Z . Then χ(V)(g) ≡ χ(V)(g ⊥) mod p. F,(p) (p) p Proof. Without loss of generality, we may assume that G is cyclic and V one-dimensional, hence its character is multiplicative. Write g = g ⊥ · h where the order of h is p , then (χ(V)(h)) = 1. But O /p is a ﬁnite ﬁeld of characteristic p, so F,(P) χ(V)(h) ≡ 1 mod p, and consequently χ(V)(g) ≡ χ(V)(g ⊥) · χ(V)(h) ≡ χ(V)(g ⊥) mod p. p p Deﬁnition 2.27. For C ≤ G cyclic of order prime to p, let S := {g ∈ G | hg i ∼ C}. C G Combining Lemma 2.24 and Lemma 2.26 gives: Corollary 2.28. Let p be any prime ideal in O . If all character values of V ∈ RU(G) F,(p) (p) lie in Z , then the character of V is constant modulo p on the set S . (p) C Finally, a proof similar to that of Corollary 2.25 shows: Corollary 2.29. For any cyclic p-perfect C ≤ G, the idempotent lin(e ) ∈ RU(G) is C (p) primitive. Lemma 2.26 does not hold in the general P-local case, as the next example shows. However, it follows from Theorem 1.2 that the statement becomes true under the ad- ditional assumption that the character of V be zero outside of S . We do not know how to use this assumption to give a quick proof of the primitivity of the elements lin(e ) that applies to all choices of P. Example 2.30. Let G = C × C be the cyclic group of order 6 and P = {2, 3}. Write 2 3 1 for the trivial representation and let V ∈ RU(G) be given as the tensor product (P) Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 13 of the sign representation of C with the sum of the two non-trivial irreducible C - 2 3 representations. Let g ∈ G be a generator and observe that g = 1. However, χ(V − 1)(g) = 0 6≡ 1 = χ(V − 1)(1) mod p for any prime ideal p of O . F,(P) 3. Idempotent splittings of representation rings As before, let P be a ﬁxed collection of prime numbers, and let R(G) denote one of (P) the rings RO(G) or RU(G) . The goal of this section is to describe the multiplica- (P) (P) tivity of the idempotent splitting −1 R(−) = R(−) [e ]. (P) ∏ (P) (C) We start by brieﬂy recalling the notion of an (incomplete) Tambara functor in §3.1. In §3.2, we study the multiplicativity of the idempotent splitting of R(−) : we char- (P) acterize the norms which are compatible with e -localization in Theorem 3.4 and describe the incomplete Tambara functor structure of each idempotent summand in Theorem 3.8. It is then easy to read off the structure that is preserved by the entire splitting, as we explain in §3.3. 3.1. Incomplete Tambara functors. Recall that many naturally arising Mackey func- tors have additional multiplicative structure. Deﬁnition 3.1. A Green functor is a Mackey functor R equipped with commutative ring structures on the values R(H) for all H ≤ G such that all restrictions maps H H R : R(H) → R(K) become ring homomorphisms and all transfer maps T : R(K) → K K R(H) are morphisms of R(H)-modules. Often, Green functors come equipped with additional multiplicative transfer maps or norms N : R(K) → R(H) for all subgroup inclusions K ≤ H ≤ G, satisfying a number of compatibility relations for norms, additive transfers and restrictions. Tam- bara [Tam93] axiomatized the structure of these objects and called them TNR-functors; nowadays they are referred to as Tambara functors. Blumberg and Hill [BH18] introduced the more general notion of an (incomplete) I- Tambara functor that only admits a partial collection of norms for certain subgroup inclusions K ≤ H ≤ G, parametrized by well-behaved collections I of admissible H-sets H/K. These indexing systems form a poset under inclusion. Thus, I-Tambara functors for varying I interpolate between the notion of a Green functor (which doesn’t nec- essarily admit any norms) and that of a Tambara functor (which admits all possible norms). We refer to the above sources for precise deﬁnitions and further details. 14 Benjamin Böhme Example 3.2. The Mackey functors deﬁned by the Burnside ring A(−) and the rep- resentation rings R(−) are examples of Tambara functors. The multiplicative norms N in the Burnside ring are induced by the co-induction functor map (H, −) from ﬁnite K-sets to ﬁnite H-sets. Those of the representation ring are induced by tensor induction of representations. The linearization maps lin : A(−) → R(−) are maps of Tambara functors. More generally, Brun [Bru07] showed that the zeroth equivariant homotopy groups of a G-E ring spectrum naturally form a Tambara functor. Remark 3.3. Note that the RO(G)-graded homotopy groups of a G-E ring spectrum form a graded Tambara functor in the sense of Angeltveit-Bohmann [AB18]. 3.2. Multiplicativity of the idempotent summands. Observe that the canonical lo- −1 calization maps R(−) → R(−) [e ] are levelwise ring homomorphisms that (P) (P) are compatible with the Mackey functor structure, hence the idempotent splitting of R(G) induces a splitting of the underlying Green functor of R(−) . Our next goal (P) (P) −1 is to describe the idempotent summands R(−) [e ] by proving the equivalence of (P) the statements (c), (d) and (e) of Theorem 1.5. For convenience of the reader, we record this in the following theorem. Theorem 3.4. Let C ≤ G be a cyclic P-perfect subgroup and let e ∈ A(G) be the corre- (P) sponding primitive idempotent element. Fix subgroups K ≤ H ≤ G. Then the following are equivalent: (c) The norm map N : A(K) → A(H) descends to a well-deﬁned map of multi- (P) (P) plicative monoids H −1 −1 N : A(K) [e ] → A(H) [e ]. (P) (P) K C C (d) The norm map N : R(K) → R(H) descends to a well-deﬁned map of multi- K (P) (P) plicative monoids H −1 −1 N : R(K) [e ] → R(H) [e ]. K (P) (P) C C (e) Any subgroup C ≤ H conjugate in G to C lies in K. It was proven in [Böh19, Thm. 4.1] that the statements (c) and (e) are equivalent, so Theorem 3.4 reduces to showing that (c) and (d) are equivalent. We recall the following fact due to Blumberg and Hill (see [Böh19, Thm. 2.33] for an elementary proof): Theorem 3.5 ([BH18], Thm. 5.25). Let R be an I-Tambara functor structured by an indexing −1 system I. Let x ∈ R(G). Then the orbit-wise localization R[x ] is a localization in the Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 15 category of I-Tambara functors if and only if for all admissible sets H/K of I, the element H G G N R (x) divides a power of R (x). K K H If the element x is idempotent, then checking the above division relation amounts to checking an equation: ′ ′ Lemma 3.6. Let e, e ∈ R be idempotents in a commutative ring. Then e divides e if and only ′ ′ if e · e = e . ′ ′ ′ ′ Proof. Assume that e divides e . Then e ∈ eR, hence e · e = e , since multiplication by e is projection onto the idempotent summand eR of R. The other direction is obvious. Proof of Theorem 3.4. We only need to show the equivalence (c) ⇔ (d). By Theorem 3.5 and Lemma 3.6, the statement (c) (respectively (d)) holds if and only if the equation H G G G N R (x) · R (x) = R (x) K K H H holds in A(H) for x = e (respectively in R(H) for x = lin(e )). The linearization (P) C (P) C map lin : A(−) → R(−) is a map of Tambara functors, hence preserves norms, (P) (P) restrictions and multiplication. By Lemma 2.8, lin is injective on the ideal summand e · A(G) and that summand contains the element e . It follows that the above cyc (P) C equation holds for x = e if and only if it holds for x = lin(e ). C C We can use the language of incomplete Tambara functors [BH18] to describe the alge- −1 braic structure of R(G) [e ] in terms of certain indexing systems. (P) Proposition 3.7 ([Böh19], Prop. 4.16). Let L ≤ G be P-perfect. There is an indexing system I given as follows: for all H ≤ G, I (H) is the full subcategory of ﬁnite H-sets spanned L L by all coproducts of the orbits H/K such that the groups K ≤ H ≤ G satisfy the following condition: Any subgroup L ≤ H conjugate in G to L lies in K. Note that this condition on H/K is a generalized version of condition (e) of Theo- ′ ′ rem 1.5 with C and C replaced by P-perfect subgroups L and L that are not necessar- ily cyclic. Theorem 3.8. Let C ≤ G be a cyclic P-perfect subgroup, and denote by R(−) one of the (P) Tambara functors RU(−) or RO(−) . Then the following hold: (P) (P) −1 i) The Green functor R(−) [e ] admits the structure of an I -Tambara functor under (P) R(−) . (P) ii) The indexing system I is maximal among the indexing systems that satisfy i). C 16 Benjamin Böhme −1 iii) The canonical map R(−) → R(−) [e ] is an e -localization in the category of (P) (P) C I -Tambara functors. We record two easy consequences of our characterization of norm maps in the idem- potent summands. −1 Corollary 3.9. The summand R(−) [e ] is a Tambara functor (i.e., has a complete set of (P) norms) if and only if C is the trivial group. −1 Corollary 3.10. The subgroup C is normal in G if and only if the summand R(−) [e ] (P) admits all norms of the form N such that K contains a subgroup conjugate in G to C. 3.3. Multiplicativity of the idempotent splittings. We can now describe the multi- plicativity of the idempotent splitting of R(−) in terms of the indexing system (P) I := I cyc C (C) arising as the intersection of the indexing systems I deﬁned in Prop. 3.7. −1 Proposition 3.11. The localization maps R(−) → R(−) [e ] assemble into an isomor- (P) (P) phism of I -Tambara functors cyc −1 R(−) → R(−) [e ] (P) ∏ (P) (C)≤G where the product is taken over conjugacy classes of cyclic P-perfect subgroups. Moreover, I cyc is maximal among all indexing sets with this property. −1 Proof. Each of the canonical maps R(−) → R(−) [e ] is a map of I -Tambara (P) (P) functors by 3.8, hence their product is a map of I -Tambara functors. It is a level- cyc wise isomorphism by construction. The maximality also follows from Theorem 3.8: it implies that I is maximal among the indexing systems J such that each summand cyc −1 R(−) [e ] is a J -Tambara functor. (P) The admissible sets of I can be characterized as follows. cyc Lemma 3.12 ([Böh19], Lemma 4.23). Let K ≤ H ≤ G, then H/K is an admissible set for I if and only if for all cyclic P-perfect C ≤ H, C is contained in K. cyc 4. Idempotent splittings of equivariant K-theory Let K denote one of the genuine G-spectra KU or KO , i.e., either complex or real G G G equivariant K-theory. We will determine the multiplicativity of the P-local idempotent splitting −1 (K ) ≃ (K ) [e ], G G (P) ∏ (P) (C) Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 17 i.e., we will explicitly describe the maximal N algebra structure on each of the factors, as well as the maximal N algebra structure preserved by the splitting. Recall that as a consequence of Theorem 1.2, the blocks of (K ) are given as the e -localizations G (P) C −1 (K ) ∧ S [e ] (P) (P) of (K ) in the category of G-spectra. G (P) 4.1. Preliminaries. The N operads of [BH15] structure G-equivariant ring spectra with incomplete sets of norm maps parametrized by their associated indexing systems. According to [GW18, Thm. 4.7, Prop. 4.10], any given indexing system can be realized as the indexing system of a Σ-coﬁbrant N operad. Similar existence results were given in [Rub17, Thm. 2.16] and [BP17, Cor. IV]. Notation 4.1. For each conjugacy class of cyclic P-perfect subgroups C ≤ G, let O be a Σ-coﬁbrant N operad whose associated indexing system is I . Let O be a ∞ C cyc Σ-coﬁbrant N operad whose associated indexing system is I . ∞ cyc Note that by deﬁnition, an N operad P is a certain operad in the category of unbased G-spaces. By the usual abuse of notation, we refer to an algebra over the operad Σ P in G-spectra as a P-algebra. Remark 4.2. For any choice of the operad O , both S and K are naturally algebras C G over O : both spectra can be modelled as strictly commutative monoids in orthogonal G-spectra, and hence admit an action by O that factors through the action of the commutative operad. 4.2. Multiplicativity of the idempotent summands. We are now ready to state our main homotopical result. Theorem 4.3. Let C ≤ G be a cyclic P-perfect subgroup. Then: −1 i) The G-spectrum (K ) [e ] is an O -algebra under (K ) . G C G (P) (P) ii) The operad O is maximal among the N -operads that satisfy i). C ∞ −1 iii) The canonical map (K ) → (K ) [e ] is an e -localization in the category of O - G (P) G (P) C C algebras in G-spectra. The key to the proof is the following preservation result for N algebras given in [Böh19]. It extends previous work of Hill and Hopkins [HH14] and uses a result of Gutiérrez and White [GW18, Cor. 7.10]. An operad O in G-spaces is Σ-coﬁbrant if each space O(n) is of the homotopy type of a (G × Σ )-CW complex. 18 Benjamin Böhme Proposition 4.4 ([Böh19], Prop. 2.32). Let P be a Σ-coﬁbrant N operad. Fix x ∈ π (S ). (P) Then the Bousﬁeld localization L given by smashing with x x −1 S [x ] = hocolim S −→ S −→ . . . (P) (P) (P) preserves P-algebras in P-local G-spectra if and only if for all H ≤ G and all transitive H G G H admissible H-sets H/K, the element N R (x) divides a power of R (x) in the ring π (S ). (P) K K H 0 Proof of Theorem 4.3. Ad i): We know from Theorems 3.5 and 3.4 that for each of the ad- −1 missible sets of I , hence of O , the division relation of Prop. 4.4 holds, so (K ) [e ] C C G (P) is an O -algebra under (K ) . C G (P) Ad ii): Assume that P is an element strictly greater than O in the poset of (homotopy types of) N operads. Then any norm that comes from P but not from O induces a ∞ C corresponding norm on homotopy groups that does not correspond to an admissible set of I , thus contradicting the maximality statement included in Theorem 3.8. Ad iii): It is an e -localization in G-spectra and a map of O -algebras. C C We obtain the homotopical analogue of Corollary 3.9, stated as Corollary 1.7 in the introduction. There is also a homotopical version of Corollary 3.10: −1 Corollary 4.5. The group C is normal in G if and only if (K ) [e ] admits all norm maps G (P) of the form N such that K and H both contain a subgroup conjugate in G to C. 4.3. Multiplicativity of the idempotent splitting. We can also describe the multiplica- tivity of the entire idempotent splitting: Corollary 4.6. Let O be a Σ-coﬁbrant N operad realizing the indexing system I = cyc ∞ cyc I . Then the idempotent splitting (C) −1 (K ) ≃ (K ) [e ] G G (P) ∏ (P) (C) is an equivalence of O -algebras. Here, the product is taken over all conjugacy classes of cyc cyclic P-perfect subgroups of G. References [AB18] V. Angeltveit and A. M. Bohmann. Graded Tambara functors. J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 222(12):4126–4150, 2018. [Ati61] M. F. Atiyah. Characters and cohomology of ﬁnite groups. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., 9:23–64, 1961. [BH15] A. J. Blumberg and M. A. Hill. Operadic multiplications in equivariant spectra, norms, and transfers. Adv. Math., 285:658–708, 2015. in the sense of [GW18, Def. 7.3] Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 19 [BH18] A. J. Blumberg and M. A. Hill. Incomplete Tambara functors. Algebr. Geom. Topol., 18(2):723–766, [BH20] A. J. Blumberg and M. A. Hill. G-symmetric monoidal categories of modules over equivariant commutative ring spectra. Tunis. J. Math., 2(2):237–286, 2020. [Böh18] B. Böhme. Equivariant multiplications and idempotent splittings of G-spectra. PhD thesis, University of Copenhagen, 2018. [Böh19] B. Böhme. Multiplicativity of the idempotent splittings of the Burnside ring and the G-sphere spectrum. Adv. Math., 347:904–939, 2019. [BP17] P. Bonventre and L. A. Pereira. Genuine equivariant operads. arXiv:1707.02226v1, 2017. [Bra47] R. Brauer. On Artin’s L-series with generalized group characters. Ann. of Math. (2), 48:502–514, [Bru07] M. Brun. Witt vectors and equivariant ring spectra applied to cobordism. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3), 94:351–385, 2007. [Dre69] A. Dress. A characterisation of solvable groups. Math. Z., 110:213–217, 1969. [Glu81a] D. Gluck. A character table bound for the Schur index. Illinois J. Math., 25(4):649–653, 1981. [Glu81b] D. Gluck. Idempotent formula for the Burnside ring algebra with applications to the p- subgroup simplicial complex. Illinois J. Math., 25(1):63–67, 1981. [GW18] J. J. Gutiérrez and D. White. Encoding equivariant commutativity via operads. Algebr. Geom. Topol., 18(5):2919–2962, 2018. [HH14] M. A. Hill and M. J. Hopkins. Equivariant multiplicative closure. Algebraic topology: applications and new directions, Contemp. Math., 620, 2014. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI. [HHR16] M. A. Hill, M. J. Hopkins, and D. C. Ravenel. On the nonexistence of elements of Kervaire invariant one. Ann. of Math. (2), 184(1):1–262, 2016. [Roq52] P. Roquette. Arithmetische Untersuchung des Charakterringes einer endlichen Gruppe. Mit Anwendungen auf die Bestimmung des minimalen Darstellungskörpers einer endlichen Gruppe und in der Theorie der Artinschen L-Funktionen. J. Reine Angew. Math., 190, 1952. [Rub17] J. Rubin. Combinatorial N operads. arXiv:1705.03585v2, 2017. [Seg68] G. Segal. Equivariant K-theory. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., 34:129–151, 1968. [Seg71] G. Segal. Equivariant stable homotopy theory. Actes, Congrés Intern. Math., Tome 2 (1970), pages 59–63, Paris, 1971. [Ser77] J.-P. Serre. Linear representations of ﬁnite groups. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 42. Springer- Verlag, New York-Heidelberg, 1977. Translated from the second French edition by Leonard L. Scott. [Sol67] L. Solomon. The Burnside algebra of a ﬁnite group. J. Combinatorial Theory, 2:603–615, 1967. [Tam93] D. Tambara. On multiplicative transfer. Comm. Algebra, 21(4):1393–1420, 1993. [Yos83] T. Yoshida. Idempotents of Burnside Rings and Dress Induction Theorem. J. Algebra, 80:90–105, Max Planck Institute for Mathematics, Vivatsgasse 7, 53111 Bonn, Germany E-mail address: boehme@mpim-bonn.mpg.de http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Mathematics arXiv (Cornell University) http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/arxiv-cornell-university/idempotent-characters-and-equivariantly-multiplicative-splittings-of-k-RNN5NXba0G

Loading next page...

References (29)

Javier Guti'errez, David White (2017)
Encoding equivariant commutativity via operads
Algebraic & Geometric Topology
A. Blumberg, M. Hill (2016)
Incomplete Tambara functors
arXiv: Algebraic Topology
A. Blumberg, M. Hill (2013)
Operadic multiplications in equivariant spectra, norms, and transfers
arXiv: Algebraic Topology
A. Dress (1969)
A characterisation of solvable groups
Mathematische Zeitschrift, 110
M. Atiyah (1961)
Characters and cohomology of finite groups
Publications Mathématiques de l'Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, 9
A. J. Blumberg, M. A. Hill (2020)
G‐symmetric monoidal categories of modules over equivariant commutative ring spectra
, 2
D. Tambara (1993)
On multiplicative transfer
Communications in Algebra, 21
B. Böhme (2019)
Multiplicativity of the idempotent splittings of the Burnside ring and the G-sphere spectrum
Advances in Mathematics, 347
P. Bonventre, L. Pereira (2017)
Genuine equivariant operads
Advances in Mathematics
Tomoyuki Yoshida (1983)
Idempotents of Burnside rings and dress induction theorem
Journal of Algebra, 80
Morten Brun (2007)
Witt vectors and equivariant ring spectra applied to cobordism
Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 94
(2018)
Equivariant multiplications and idempotent splittings of G-spectra
D. Gluck (1981)
Idempotent formula for the Burnside algebra with applications to the $p$-subgroup simplicial complex
Illinois Journal of Mathematics, 25
M. Hopkins (1968)
Equivariant K-theory
R. Brauer (1947)
On Artin's L-Series with General Group Characters
Annals of Mathematics, 48
Louis Solomon (1967)
The Burnside algebra of a finite group
Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 2
(2017)
operads’, Preprint, 2017, arXiv:1705.03585v2
Lars Hesselholt (2013)
Algebraic Topology: Applications and New Directions
, 620
D. Gluck (1981)
A character table bound for the schur index
Illinois Journal of Mathematics, 25
G. Segal (1968)
Equivariant K-theory
Publications mathématiques de l'IHÉS, 34
V. Angeltveit, A. Bohmann (2015)
Graded Tambara functors
Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra
Jonathan Rubin (2017)
Combinatorial N∞ operads
Algebraic & Geometric Topology
S. Schwede (2018)
Equivariant stable homotopy theory
P. Roquette (1952)
Arithmetische Untersuchung des Charakterringes einer endlichen Gruppen. Mit Anwendungen auf die Bestimmung des minimalen Darstellungskörpers einer endlichen Gruppe und in der Theorie der Artinschen L-Funktionen.
Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal), 1952
A. Blumberg, M. Hill (2015)
G-symmetric monoidal categories of modules over equivariant commutative ring spectra
Tunisian Journal of Mathematics
Jean-Pierre Serre (1977)
Linear representations of finite groups
, 42
M. Hill, M. Hopkins, D. Ravenel (2009)
On the nonexistence of elements of Kervaire invariant one
Annals of Mathematics, 184
(2017)
and L
M. Hopkins, M. Hill (2013)
Equivariant Multiplicative Closure
arXiv: Algebraic Topology

ISSN: 0024-6093
eISSN: ARCH-3343
DOI: 10.1112/blms.12362
Publisher site: See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

IDEMPOTENT CHARACTERS AND EQUIVARIANTLY MULTIPLICATIVE SPLITTINGS OF K-THEORY BENJAMIN BÖHME Abstract. We classify the primitive idempotents of the p-local complex representation ring of a ﬁnite group G in terms of the cyclic subgroups of order prime to p and show that they all come from idempotents of the Burnside ring. Our results hold without adjoining roots of unity or inverting the order of G, thus extending classical structure theorems. We then derive explicit group-theoretic obstructions for tensor induction to be compatible with the resulting idempotent splitting of the representation ring Mackey functor. Our main motivation is an application in homotopy theory: we conclude that the idem- potent summands of G-equivariant topological K-theory and the corresponding sum- mands of the G-equivariant sphere spectrum admit exactly the same ﬂavors of equi- variant commutative ring structures, made precise in terms of Hill-Hopkins-Ravenel norm maps. 1. Introduction The purpose of this paper is twofold: We ﬁrst classify the primitive idempotents in the real and complex representation rings RO(G) and RU(G) of a ﬁnite group G and their local variants, as summarized in §1.1, extending various classical results. We then study the compatibility of tensor induction with the splittings of RO(G) and RU(G) into idempotent summands, and as a consequence obtain an explicit descrip- tion of the G-equivariant commutative ring spectrum structures occuring as idempo- tent summands of real and complex G-equivariant topological K-theory. See §1.2 for a summary of these results. We begin with some motivation. Multiplicative induction is a familiar tool in repre- sentation theory and group cohomology. In the wake of Hill, Hopkins and Ravenel’s ground-breaking solution to the Kervaire invariant one problem [HHR16], it has also received much interest in equivariant homotopy theory. Starting from the observa- tion that localization can destroy some of the structure of an equivariant commutative 2000 Mathematics Subject Classiﬁcation. 19L47; 19A22, 20C15, 55P43, 55P60, 55P91, 55S91. Key words and phrases. Equivariant stable homotopy theory, Hill-Hopkins-Ravenel norm, equivariant com- mutative ring spectrum, topological K-theory, representation ring, idempotent, multiplicative induction, Tambara functor. arXiv:1808.09832v3 [math.AT] 16 Apr 2020 2 Benjamin Böhme ring spectrum, Hill and Hopkins [HH14] gave a necessary and sufﬁcient criterion (cf. Proposition 4.4) for the localization x x x −1 −V −(V⊕V) R[x ] := hocolim R −→ S ∧ R −→ S ∧ R −→ . . . of a G-E ring spectrum R at an element x ∈ π (R) to admit a G-E ring structure. ∞ ∞ −1 The critical part is that R[x ] might not admit Hill-Hopkins-Ravenel norm maps H G N : G ∧ Res (R) → R + H K K H/K for all nested subgroups K ≤ H ≤ G. Subsequently, more general notions of equivari- ant commutative ring spectra equipped with incomplete collections of norm maps, called N ring spectra, were studied by Blumberg and Hill in [BH15], [BH18] and [BH20]. Interesting examples of equivariant localizations arise from primitive idempotent el- ements e ∈ π (R). These induce a decomposition of the homotopy Mackey functor π (R) into indecomposable summands (also called blocks) of the form −1 e · π (R) = π (R)[e ] ∗ ∗ −1 and hence yield a block decomposition of R as a wedge of G-spectra R[e ]. One can now ask about the possible N ring structures on these blocks. Hill and Hopkins’ aforementioned criterion involves checking relations involving multiplicative induc- tion in π (R), which in general are hard to access. Problem 1.1. Determine the nested subgroups K ≤ H ≤ G such that H 2 (1) the norm map N for R descends to a well-deﬁned norm map H G −1 −1 N : G ∧ Res (R[e ]) → R[e ] + H K K H/K on the block of R deﬁned by the primitive idempotent e ∈ π (R) H K H (2) the induced norm operation on homotopy groups N : π (R) → π (R) descends K 0 0 to a well-deﬁned norm operation H K −1 H −1 N : π (R[e ]) → π (R[e ]). K 0 0 In the prequel [Böh19], the author gave an explicit group-theoretical answer in the fundamental example of the G-equivariant sphere spectrum S. It built on an analysis of An idempotent is primitive if it cannot be written as a sum of non-zero idempotents. Throughout the paper, we write N for the norms of a localization to distinguish them from the norms of the original object. Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 3 G ∼ multiplicative induction in the Burnside ring A(G) and Segal’s identiﬁcation π (S) = A(G) [Seg71]. In the present paper, we present a complete solution to Problem 1.1 for G-equivariant complex topological K-theory KU and its real analogue KO . The homotopy groups G G G G ∼ ∼ π (KU ) = RU(G), π (KO ) = RO(G) G G 0 0 identify with the complex and real representation ring RU(G) and RO(G), respectively, see e.g. [Seg68, §2]. 1.1. Primitive idempotents in representation rings. Dress’ classiﬁcation of primitive idempotents in the Burnside ring and its local variants [Dre69] was the starting point for the investigation of the idempotent splittings of A(G) and S in [Böh19]. Given a collection P of prime numbers, write A(G) := A(G) ⊗ Z for the P-local Burnside (P) (P) −1 ring, where Z := Z p | p ∈ / P . Dress showed that the primitive idempotent (P) elements e ∈ A(G) are in canonical bijection with the conjugacy classes of P-perfect L (P) subgroups L ≤ G. See § 2.1 for further details. It is known that the complex representation ring RU(G) has no idempotents other than zero or one, see [Ser77, §11.4, Corollary]. We extend this result to a classiﬁcation of the primitive idempotents in the P-local representation ring RU(G) := RU(G) ⊗ Z (P) (P) as follows. Consider the “linearization” map lin : A(G) → RU(G) (P) (P) given by sending a ﬁnite G-set to its associated permutation representation. Theorem 1.2. The assignment C 7→ lin(e ) deﬁnes a bijection between the conjugacy classes of cyclic subgroups C ≤ G of order not divisible by any prime in P and the primitive idempotent elements of the ring RU(G) . Here, e ∈ A(G) denotes Dress’ idempotent associated to (P) C (P) C, see Theorem 2.5. Theorem 1.2 is an instance of the phenomenon that one passes from the Burnside ring to the representation ring by restricting attention to cyclic subgroups. The proof is given in §2. Remark 1.3. Theorem 1.2 extends classical work in the following way: Building on work by Solomon [Sol67], Gluck [Glu81a] studies the idempotents lin(e ) and their character values in the rational and the p-local case for a single prime p, but does not show that they are primitive. He also observes that Dress’ idempotent e ∈ A(G) (P) is in the kernel of the linearization map if L is not a cyclic group; we prove this in the general P-local case in Corollary 2.7. 4 Benjamin Böhme We record an immediate consequence of Theorem 1.2. Write RO(G) for the P-local (P) real representation ring and RQ(G) ⊗ Z for the ring of Z -linear combinations of (P) (P) G-representations over the rational numbers. It is well-known that these embed into RU(G) as subrings. (P) Corollary 1.4. The primitive idempotents of RU(G) all lie in the subrings RO(G) and (P) (P) RQ(G) ⊗ Z . Hence, they are precisely the primitive idempotents of these subrings. (P) In the special case of RQ(G) ⊗ Q, this result appeared as [Sol67, Thm. 3]. 1.2. Multiplicativity of idempotent summands. We now turn to the multiplicative properties of the idempotent splittings of the complex and real representation rings −1 and equivariant K-theory spectra. Since the block RU(G) [lin(e ) ] agrees with the (P) A(G) -module localization (P) −1 −1 RU(G) [e ] = RU(G) ⊗ A(G) [e ], (P) (P) A(G) (P) C C (P) we obtain an identiﬁcation −1 −1 (KU ) [lin(e ) ] ≃ (KU ) ∧ S [e ] G C G (P) (P) (P) of the blocks of P-local G-equivariant K-theory with an e -localization in genuine G- spectra. By Corollary 1.4, the same is true for RO(G) and (KO ) . This enables us (P) (P) to reduce the solution to Problem 1.1 for equivariant K-theory to the one for the sphere given in the prequel [Böh19]. The resulting classiﬁcation of the maximal N ring structures of the idempotent summands of (KU ) can be summarized as follows: (P) Theorem 1.5. Let C ≤ G be a cyclic group of order not divisible by any prime in P and let e be the corresponding primitive idempotent in A(G) . Let K ≤ H ≤ G be nested subgroups. (P) Then the following are equivalent: −1 H H (a) The G-spectrum S [e ] inherits a norm map N from the norm map N of S . (P) K K (P) −1 (b) The G-spectrum (KU ) [e ] inherits a norm map N from that of (KU ) . G (P) G (P) C K −1 (c) The Mackey functor A(−) [e ] inherits a norm map N from that of A(−) . (P) (P) C K −1 H (d) The Mackey functor RU(−) [e ] inherits a norm map N from that of RU(−) . (P) (P) C K (e) Any subgroup C ≤ H conjugate in G to C lies in K. All of the above holds with (KU ) and RU(−) replaced by their real variants (KO ) G (P) (P) G (P) and RO(−) . (P) The equivalence of (a), (c) and (e) was already proven in [Böh19]. Theorem 1.5 is made more precise in Theorem 3.4, Theorem 3.8 and Corollary 4.3 in terms of Blumberg and Hill’s framework of incomplete Tambara functors and N operads. ∞ Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 5 Remark 1.6. If H does not contain a group conjugate in G to C, then the norms N exist for trivial reasons: It can be seen from Theorem 2.5 that the restriction of e to H −1 −1 vanishes, and so A(H) [e ] and RU(H) [e ] must be zero. In other cases, these (P) (P) C C groups are always non-zero. An immediate consequence of Theorem 1.5 is the following: −1 Corollary 1.7. The summand (KU ) [e ] is a G-E ring spectrum if and only if C ≤ G G ∞ (p) is the trivial group. The same is true for real K-theory. 1.3. Organization. In §2, we recall Dress’ work on idempotents in the Burnside ring and give a proof of Theorem 1.2. The algebraic and homotopical parts of Theorem 1.5 are discussed in §3 and §4, respectively. 1.4. Acknowledgements. The present work was part of the author’s PhD project at the University of Copenhagen; a previous version of the article was included in his PhD thesis [Böh18]. The author would like to thank his PhD advisor Jesper Grodal, his PhD committee consisting of Andrew Blumberg, John Greenlees and Lars Hessel- holt, as well as Markus Hausmann, Joshua Hunt, Malte Leip, Riccardo Pengo, David Sprehn and an anonymous referee for many helpful discussions and suggestions. This research was supported by the Danish National Research Foundation through the Centre for Symmetry and Deformation (DNRF92). 2. Idempotent elements in representation rings The goal of this section is to prove Theorem 1.2. In §2.1, we show how some parts of the theorem follow easily from the classiﬁcation of idempotents in the Burnside ring. The difﬁcult part is to prove that the images of the Burnside ring idempotents are indeed primitive. We recall Atiyah’s description [Ati61] of the prime ideal spectrum Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) in §2.2, where O is obtained from Z by adjoining sufﬁciently F F (P) many roots of unity, classify the idempotents of RU(G) ⊗ O in §2.3, and deduce (P) the primitivity part of Theorem 1.2 in §2.4. In the rational and in the p-local case, it is possible to prove the primitivity in an easier way, as we explain in §2.5. 2.1. Idempotents in the Burnside ring. We recall Dress’ classiﬁcation of idempotents of A(G) [Dre69] and prove parts of Theorem 1.2. (P) Notation 2.1. Recall that by the Chinese remainder theorem applied to hgi, each g ∈ G can be written uniquely as a product g · g ⊥ of powers of g, where g is of order P P divisible only by primes in P, and g is of order prime to P. The elements g and g ⊥ ⊥ P P are called the P-part and P-prime part of g, respectively. 6 Benjamin Böhme Deﬁnition 2.2. The P-residual subgroup of a group H is the unique minimal normal subgroup O (H) such that the quotient is a solvable P-group, i.e. a solvable group of order only divisible by primes in P. H is called P-perfect if O (H) = H. Lemma 2.3. For cyclic groups, we have O (g) = hg i. In particular, a cyclic group is P-perfect if and only if its order is not divisible by any element of P. Deﬁnition 2.4. For a subgroup H ≤ G, the mark homomorphism φ : A(G) → Z is (P) (P) extended additively from the assignment X 7→ |X | for ﬁnite G-sets X. Theorem 2.5 ([Dre69], Prop. 2). There is a canonical bijection between the conjugacy classes of P-perfect subgroups L ≤ G and the set of primitive idempotent elements of A(G) . It (P) sends L to the element e ∈ A(G) whose marks φ (e ) at a subgroup H ≤ G are one if L (P) L O (H) and L are conjugate in G, and zero otherwise. Write χ(V)(g) for the value of the character of V ∈ RU(G) at the element g ∈ G. (P) The linearization map lin: A(G) → RU(G) satisﬁes the following simple identity: (P) (P) hgi Lemma 2.6. For X ∈ A(G) , we have χ(lin(X))(g) = φ (X) ∈ Z. (P) Corollary 2.7. Let L ≤ G be a P-perfect subgroup. Then the virtual representation lin(e ) has character values 1 if hg i ∼ L hgi χ(lin(e ))(g) = φ (e ) = L L 0 otherwise. In particular, lin(e ) is zero if L is not cyclic. The elements lin(e ) are mutually orthogonal L C idempotents summing to one, where C ranges over a set of representatives for the conjugacy classes of cyclic P-perfect subgroups. Proof. The statement follows from Theorem 2.5, Lemma 2.6, and Lemma 2.3. This proves all the statements of Theorem 1.2 except for the primitivity of the idempo- tents lin(e ). Note that the rational case (P = ∅) of Corollary 2.7 is stated in [Glu81a, Theorem] and goes back to a similar result by Solomon [Sol67, Thm. 3]. The following observation is not part of the proof of Theorem 1.2, but we record it for later reference. Lemma 2.8. The P-local Burnside ring splits as A(G) = e · A(G) × e · A(G) cyc (P) (P) ker (P) where e (respectively e ) is deﬁned to be the sum of all primitive idempotents e with L cyc ker L cyclic (respectively non-cyclic). Moreover, the summand e · A(G) is precisely the kernel ker (P) of the linearization map lin: A(G) → R(G) . (P) (P) Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 7 Proof. The ﬁrst part follows from Theorem 2.5 by writing 1 = e + e . Lemma 2.6 cyc ker implies that the kernel of lin consists of those virtual G-sets whose marks vanish at all cyclic subgroups. By Corollary 2.7, these are precisely the elements of the ideal e · A(G) . ker (P) 2.2. Prime ideals in the splitting ﬁeld case. Let exp(G) be the exponent of G and write F for the exp(G)-th cyclotomic extension of Q with ring of integers O and Galois group Γ := Gal(F : Q). All characters of G-representations over the complex numbers take values in O , and therefore can be viewed as class functions G/∼ → O , F F where G/∼ is the set of conjugacy classes of G. When working P-locally, the elements of RU(G) are Z -linear combinations of irreducible representations of G over the (P) (P) complex numbers, hence their characters take values in O := O ⊗ Z . F,(P) (P) Notation 2.9. Any element V ∈ RU(G) ⊗ O can be written as an O -linear (P) F F,(P) combination V = λ · V of irreducible G-representations V . We write i i i i χˆ(V)(g) := λ · χ(V )(g) ∑ i i for the value of the O -linear character of V at g ∈ G. F,(P) Characters are multiplicative in tensor products of representations, hence χ(−)(g) deﬁnes a ring homomorphism RU(G) ⊗ O → O . Atiyah [Ati61] described the (P) F,(P) structure of the prime ideal spectrum Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) in terms of these maps. His proof applies without changes to the open subscheme Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) cut out (P) by P-localization. Proposition 2.10 (Cf. [Ati61], Prop. 6.4). The topological space Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) can (P) be described as follows: (1) Every prime ideal of RU(G) ⊗ O is of the form (P) F −1 Q(p, g) := (χˆ(−)(g)) (p) = {V ∈ RU(G) ⊗ O | χˆ(V)(g) ∈ p} (P) for some element g ∈ G and some prime ideal p E O . F,(P) (2) Let p, q E O be prime ideals such that Z ∩ q = qZ for a prime q ∈ Z. There is an F,(P) inclusion Q(p, g) ⊆ Q(q, h) if and only if p is contained in q and g is conjugate in G to h ⊥. (3) The prime ideals Q(p, g) with p = (0) are minimal and the ones with p 6= (0) are maximal. In particular, the Krull dimension of RU(G) ⊗ O is one. (P) The exponent of a ﬁnite group is the least common multiple of the orders of all group elements. 8 Benjamin Böhme 2.3. Idempotents in the splitting ﬁeld case. We can deduce a classiﬁcation of the idempotent elements of RU(G) ⊗ O from Proposition 2.10. Our proof is inspired (P) by Dress’ approach [Dre69, Prop. 2] to the idempotents in the Burnside ring. Theorem 2.11. The map G → π (Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O )) 0 (P) F that sends x ∈ G to the connected component of Q(0, x) induces a bijection between the set of conjugacy classes of P-prime elements of G and the set of connected components of Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ). In particular, the prime ideal spectrum of RU(G) ⊗ O is connected. F F (P) This follows directly from: Proposition 2.12. For any (not necessarily P-prime) elements x, y ∈ G, the prime ideals Q(p, x) and Q(q, y) lie in the same connected component of Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) if and only if x ⊥ and y ⊥ are conjugate in G. P P Proof. First observe that for p 6= (0), the height one ideal Q(p, x) lies in the closure of the height zero ideal Q((0), x), so without loss of generality we may assume that p = q = (0). Since RU(G) ⊗ O has Krull dimension one, two points Q((0), x) and (P) F Q((0), y) lie in the same component if and only if there is a zig-zag of inclusions of prime ideals Q(p , x ) = Q(p , x ) . . . 0 0 0 1 88 ff▼ q ▼ 44 jj❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ ❥ ❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ ❥ ❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ ❥ ❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ q ▼ ❥ ❚ ❥ ❚ Q((0), x ) Q((0), x ) Q((0), x ) 0 1 r for some elements x = x , x , . . . , x = y ∈ G and some prime ideals p E O . By 0 1 r i F,(P) part (2) of Theorem 2.10, we have an equality Q(p , x ) = Q(p , x ) if and only (x ) ⊥ i i i i+1 i is conjugate in G to (x ) , where p is given by Z ∩ p = p Z. i+1 i i i For the “only if” part of the proposition, given a zig-zag as above, it follows that x ⊥ = ((x ) ⊥) ⊥ ∼ ((x ) ⊥) ⊥ = ((x ) ⊥) ⊥ ∼ . . . ∼ ((x ) ⊥ ) ⊥ = y ⊥ 0 G 1 1 G G r P P P P P P p p p p 0 0 1 r−1 where ∼ indicates being conjugate in G. For the “if” part, assume that x ⊥ ∼ y ⊥. Since the prime ideals Q((0), g) only de- P G P pend on the conjucagy class of g, it follows that Q((0), x ) and Q((0), y ) agree. ⊥ ⊥ P P Thus, it sufﬁces to show that for any g ∈ G, the prime ideals Q((0), g) and Q((0), g ) lie in the same component. We will construct an explicit zig-zag as above. Let A P-prime element is an element x such that x ⊥ = x. P Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 9 p , p , . . . , p be all primes in P that divide the order of G. By the going-up theo- 0 1 r rem, we can ﬁnd prime ideals p E O such that p ∩ Z = p Z. Then g may be i i i F,(P) P computed as g ⊥ = (· · · (g ⊥) ⊥ · · · ) ⊥. P p p p 0 1 Inductively, deﬁne g := g and g := (g ) ⊥ so that we have (g ) ⊥ = (g ) ⊥. Then i i−1 i i+1 p p p i−1 i i these choices of elements g and prime ideals p give rise to a zig-zag between Q((0), g) i i and Q((0), g ⊥), which completes the proof. Corollary 2.13. The conjugacy classes of P-prime elements (x) of G are in canonical bijection with the primitive idempotents e of RU(G) ⊗ O . The character of the element e is given x (P) F x as follows: 1 if g ⊥ ∼ x χˆ(e )(g) = 0 otherwise Proof. It is a standard fact of algebraic geometry that for any commutative ring R, the subsets V ⊆ Spec(R) that are both open and closed are in canonical bijection with the idempotent elements of R, by assigning to V the global section which is constant one on V and constant zero on the complement of V. Under this identiﬁcation, the primitive idempotents correspond to the minimal non-empty open and closed subsets. The latter agree with the connected components of Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) since there (P) are only ﬁnitely many of them. The ﬁrst claim now follows from Theorem 2.11. For the description of characters, note that χˆ(e )(g) = 1 if and only if the corresponding global section e evaluates to one at the point Q((0), g) if and only if Q((0), x) and Q((0), g) are in the same connected component. Remark 2.14. Roquette [Roq52] shows that the classiﬁcation given in Corollary 2.13 also holds for the primitive idempotents in the p-adic representation ring after adjoin- ing all e-th roots of unity. Remark 2.15. Using Schur’s orthogonality relations, it follows from Corollary 2.13 that e is given explicitly as −1 e = χ(V)(x ) · V |C (x)| where V runs over a system of representatives of the irreducible representations of G and C (x) denotes the centralizer of x in G. This observation goes back at least to Brauer [Bra47, (7)]. The coefﬁcients can also be expressed in terms of Möbius functions, see [Sol67, Thm. 4], [Glu81b, Prop.] and [Yos83, §3]. Here we use that by deﬁnition, the global sections of Spec(R) agree with the ring R. 10 Benjamin Böhme ∼ × 2.4. Idempotents of RU(G) . Recall that Γ = (Z/ exp(G)) denotes the Galois (P) group of the cyclotomic extension F/Q. The left Γ-action on F restricts to an ac- tion on O . Let Γ act on RU(G) ⊗ O via its action on the right factor. Then F (P) F clearly RU(G) = (RU(G) ⊗ O ) . The group Γ then acts from the right on (P) (P) F Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) and we have Spec(RU(G) ) (Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ))/Γ, F F (P) (P) (P) cf. [Ser77, §11.4, Exerc. 11.4]. We will now describe these Γ-orbits in terms of the prime ideals Q(p, x). First recall that the left Γ-action on O induces a right Γ-action on Spec(O ) that is F F −1 given by p.γ = γ (p). Deﬁnition 2.16 ([Ser77], §12.4). Deﬁne a right Γ-action on the underlying set of G as −1 × m follows: If γ ∈ Γ corresponds to the unit m ∈ (Z/ exp(G)) , let g.γ := g , where −1 m is (any integer representing) the inverse of m in the group Γ. This action is well-deﬁned since the order of g ∈ G divides exp(G). Moreover, it is compatible with conjugation in G. We can describe the Γ-orbits in G easily: Lemma 2.17 ([Ser77], §13.1, Cor.). Two elements x, y ∈ G lie in the same Γ-orbit if and only if they generate the same cyclic subgroup of G. Proof. Let n divide exp(G). Then Γ = (Z/ exp(G)) permutes the generators of Z/ exp(G) transitively, and the same is true for the generators of the cyclic group Z/n, viewed as a subgroup of Z/ exp(G). Proposition 2.18. The left Γ-action on RU(G) ⊗ O induces a right Γ-action on the space (P) F Spec(RU(G) ⊗ O ) which coincides with the action deﬁned by Q(p, x).γ = Q(p.γ, x.γ). (P) Proof. As in Notation 2.9, write λ · V for a generic element of RU(G) ⊗ O . Then i i (P) F −1 Q(p, x).γ = γ (Q(p, g)) = { λ · V | γ(λ ) · χ(V )(g) ∈ p} i i i i ∑ ∑ i i −1 = { λ · V | λ · γ (χ(V )(g)) ∈ p.γ} ∑ i i ∑ i i i i = { λ · V | λ · χ(V )(g.γ) ∈ p.γ} i i i i ∑ ∑ i i = Q(p.γ, g.γ) Corollary 2.19. The map G → π (Spec(RU(G) )) 0 (P) that sends an element x to the component of the orbit Q((0), x).Γ induces a bijection between the Γ-orbits of conjugacy classes of P-prime elements x ∈ G and the set of components of the topological space Spec(RU(G) ). In particular, the spectrum of RU(G) is connected. (P) Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 11 Corollary 2.20. There is a canonical bijection between the Γ-orbits of conjugacy classes of P-prime elements x ∈ G and the primitive idempotents in RU(G) . The idempotent e x.Γ (P) associated to the orbit of (x) has character given by 1 if g ⊥ ∼ x.γ for some γ ∈ Γ χ(e )(g) = x.Γ 0 otherwise Proof. This follows from Corollary 2.19 in the same way that Corollary 2.13 follows from Theorem 2.11, see the proof of Corollary 2.13. Remark 2.21. In particular, we have e = e in RU(G) . A simple calculation x.Γ x.γ γ∈Γ (P) −1 shows that e = γ (e ) in RU(G) ⊗ O . Therefore e = tr (e ) is the ﬁeld x.γ x x (P) F x.Γ F/Q trace of e . We will not use this fact. By Lemma 2.17, we can write e := e and rephrase Corollary 2.20 in terms of cyclic x.Γ hxi subgroups. At this point, there is no dependence on the ﬁeld extension F/Q anymore. Corollary 2.22. There is a canonical bijection between the conjugacy classes of cyclic P-perfect subgroups C ∈ G and the primitive idempotents in RU(G) . The primitive idempotent e (P) C has character given by 1 if hg ⊥i ∼ C χ(e )(g) = 0 otherwise. In particular, the character of e agrees with that of lin(e ) given in Corollary 2.7 and hence we have e = lin(e ). Theorem 1.2 follows. Remark 2.23. It is clear from Corollary 2.22 that the primitive idempotents of RU(G) (P) only depend on those primes p ∈ P that divide the order of G. 2.5. Quick proofs of special cases. In the rational and p-local case, we can give short ad-hoc proofs of the primitivity of the elements lin(e ) stated as part of Theorem 1.2. Lemma 2.24. Let x, y ∈ G generate the same subgroup. If all character values of the virtual representation V ∈ RU(G) lie in Z , then χ(V)(x) = χ(V)(y). (P) (P) Proof. By Lemma 2.17, we can ﬁnd γ ∈ Γ such that y = x.γ. Then −1 χ(V)(y) = χ(V)(x.γ) = γ (χ(V)(x)) = χ(V)(x) because χ(V)(x) ∈ Z = (O ) . (P) F,(P) Corollary 2.25. For any cyclic C ≤ G, the idempotent lin(e ) ∈ RU(G) ⊗ Q is primitive. C 12 Benjamin Böhme Proof. Recall that the character of lin(e ) is one on elements that generate subgroups conjugate to C and zero otherwise. But Lemma 2.24 shows that any integer-valued character must be constant on the set where lin(e ) is one, hence lin(e ) cannot de- C C compose as a sum of idempotents. For the p-local case, we need another lemma. It was used in Atiyah’s proof of Theo- rem 2.10. Lemma 2.26 ([Ati61], proof of Lemma 6.3). Let V ∈ RU(G) and let p be a prime of (p) O = O ⊗ Z . Then χ(V)(g) ≡ χ(V)(g ⊥) mod p. F,(p) (p) p Proof. Without loss of generality, we may assume that G is cyclic and V one-dimensional, hence its character is multiplicative. Write g = g ⊥ · h where the order of h is p , then (χ(V)(h)) = 1. But O /p is a ﬁnite ﬁeld of characteristic p, so F,(P) χ(V)(h) ≡ 1 mod p, and consequently χ(V)(g) ≡ χ(V)(g ⊥) · χ(V)(h) ≡ χ(V)(g ⊥) mod p. p p Deﬁnition 2.27. For C ≤ G cyclic of order prime to p, let S := {g ∈ G | hg i ∼ C}. C G Combining Lemma 2.24 and Lemma 2.26 gives: Corollary 2.28. Let p be any prime ideal in O . If all character values of V ∈ RU(G) F,(p) (p) lie in Z , then the character of V is constant modulo p on the set S . (p) C Finally, a proof similar to that of Corollary 2.25 shows: Corollary 2.29. For any cyclic p-perfect C ≤ G, the idempotent lin(e ) ∈ RU(G) is C (p) primitive. Lemma 2.26 does not hold in the general P-local case, as the next example shows. However, it follows from Theorem 1.2 that the statement becomes true under the ad- ditional assumption that the character of V be zero outside of S . We do not know how to use this assumption to give a quick proof of the primitivity of the elements lin(e ) that applies to all choices of P. Example 2.30. Let G = C × C be the cyclic group of order 6 and P = {2, 3}. Write 2 3 1 for the trivial representation and let V ∈ RU(G) be given as the tensor product (P) Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 13 of the sign representation of C with the sum of the two non-trivial irreducible C - 2 3 representations. Let g ∈ G be a generator and observe that g = 1. However, χ(V − 1)(g) = 0 6≡ 1 = χ(V − 1)(1) mod p for any prime ideal p of O . F,(P) 3. Idempotent splittings of representation rings As before, let P be a ﬁxed collection of prime numbers, and let R(G) denote one of (P) the rings RO(G) or RU(G) . The goal of this section is to describe the multiplica- (P) (P) tivity of the idempotent splitting −1 R(−) = R(−) [e ]. (P) ∏ (P) (C) We start by brieﬂy recalling the notion of an (incomplete) Tambara functor in §3.1. In §3.2, we study the multiplicativity of the idempotent splitting of R(−) : we char- (P) acterize the norms which are compatible with e -localization in Theorem 3.4 and describe the incomplete Tambara functor structure of each idempotent summand in Theorem 3.8. It is then easy to read off the structure that is preserved by the entire splitting, as we explain in §3.3. 3.1. Incomplete Tambara functors. Recall that many naturally arising Mackey func- tors have additional multiplicative structure. Deﬁnition 3.1. A Green functor is a Mackey functor R equipped with commutative ring structures on the values R(H) for all H ≤ G such that all restrictions maps H H R : R(H) → R(K) become ring homomorphisms and all transfer maps T : R(K) → K K R(H) are morphisms of R(H)-modules. Often, Green functors come equipped with additional multiplicative transfer maps or norms N : R(K) → R(H) for all subgroup inclusions K ≤ H ≤ G, satisfying a number of compatibility relations for norms, additive transfers and restrictions. Tam- bara [Tam93] axiomatized the structure of these objects and called them TNR-functors; nowadays they are referred to as Tambara functors. Blumberg and Hill [BH18] introduced the more general notion of an (incomplete) I- Tambara functor that only admits a partial collection of norms for certain subgroup inclusions K ≤ H ≤ G, parametrized by well-behaved collections I of admissible H-sets H/K. These indexing systems form a poset under inclusion. Thus, I-Tambara functors for varying I interpolate between the notion of a Green functor (which doesn’t nec- essarily admit any norms) and that of a Tambara functor (which admits all possible norms). We refer to the above sources for precise deﬁnitions and further details. 14 Benjamin Böhme Example 3.2. The Mackey functors deﬁned by the Burnside ring A(−) and the rep- resentation rings R(−) are examples of Tambara functors. The multiplicative norms N in the Burnside ring are induced by the co-induction functor map (H, −) from ﬁnite K-sets to ﬁnite H-sets. Those of the representation ring are induced by tensor induction of representations. The linearization maps lin : A(−) → R(−) are maps of Tambara functors. More generally, Brun [Bru07] showed that the zeroth equivariant homotopy groups of a G-E ring spectrum naturally form a Tambara functor. Remark 3.3. Note that the RO(G)-graded homotopy groups of a G-E ring spectrum form a graded Tambara functor in the sense of Angeltveit-Bohmann [AB18]. 3.2. Multiplicativity of the idempotent summands. Observe that the canonical lo- −1 calization maps R(−) → R(−) [e ] are levelwise ring homomorphisms that (P) (P) are compatible with the Mackey functor structure, hence the idempotent splitting of R(G) induces a splitting of the underlying Green functor of R(−) . Our next goal (P) (P) −1 is to describe the idempotent summands R(−) [e ] by proving the equivalence of (P) the statements (c), (d) and (e) of Theorem 1.5. For convenience of the reader, we record this in the following theorem. Theorem 3.4. Let C ≤ G be a cyclic P-perfect subgroup and let e ∈ A(G) be the corre- (P) sponding primitive idempotent element. Fix subgroups K ≤ H ≤ G. Then the following are equivalent: (c) The norm map N : A(K) → A(H) descends to a well-deﬁned map of multi- (P) (P) plicative monoids H −1 −1 N : A(K) [e ] → A(H) [e ]. (P) (P) K C C (d) The norm map N : R(K) → R(H) descends to a well-deﬁned map of multi- K (P) (P) plicative monoids H −1 −1 N : R(K) [e ] → R(H) [e ]. K (P) (P) C C (e) Any subgroup C ≤ H conjugate in G to C lies in K. It was proven in [Böh19, Thm. 4.1] that the statements (c) and (e) are equivalent, so Theorem 3.4 reduces to showing that (c) and (d) are equivalent. We recall the following fact due to Blumberg and Hill (see [Böh19, Thm. 2.33] for an elementary proof): Theorem 3.5 ([BH18], Thm. 5.25). Let R be an I-Tambara functor structured by an indexing −1 system I. Let x ∈ R(G). Then the orbit-wise localization R[x ] is a localization in the Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 15 category of I-Tambara functors if and only if for all admissible sets H/K of I, the element H G G N R (x) divides a power of R (x). K K H If the element x is idempotent, then checking the above division relation amounts to checking an equation: ′ ′ Lemma 3.6. Let e, e ∈ R be idempotents in a commutative ring. Then e divides e if and only ′ ′ if e · e = e . ′ ′ ′ ′ Proof. Assume that e divides e . Then e ∈ eR, hence e · e = e , since multiplication by e is projection onto the idempotent summand eR of R. The other direction is obvious. Proof of Theorem 3.4. We only need to show the equivalence (c) ⇔ (d). By Theorem 3.5 and Lemma 3.6, the statement (c) (respectively (d)) holds if and only if the equation H G G G N R (x) · R (x) = R (x) K K H H holds in A(H) for x = e (respectively in R(H) for x = lin(e )). The linearization (P) C (P) C map lin : A(−) → R(−) is a map of Tambara functors, hence preserves norms, (P) (P) restrictions and multiplication. By Lemma 2.8, lin is injective on the ideal summand e · A(G) and that summand contains the element e . It follows that the above cyc (P) C equation holds for x = e if and only if it holds for x = lin(e ). C C We can use the language of incomplete Tambara functors [BH18] to describe the alge- −1 braic structure of R(G) [e ] in terms of certain indexing systems. (P) Proposition 3.7 ([Böh19], Prop. 4.16). Let L ≤ G be P-perfect. There is an indexing system I given as follows: for all H ≤ G, I (H) is the full subcategory of ﬁnite H-sets spanned L L by all coproducts of the orbits H/K such that the groups K ≤ H ≤ G satisfy the following condition: Any subgroup L ≤ H conjugate in G to L lies in K. Note that this condition on H/K is a generalized version of condition (e) of Theo- ′ ′ rem 1.5 with C and C replaced by P-perfect subgroups L and L that are not necessar- ily cyclic. Theorem 3.8. Let C ≤ G be a cyclic P-perfect subgroup, and denote by R(−) one of the (P) Tambara functors RU(−) or RO(−) . Then the following hold: (P) (P) −1 i) The Green functor R(−) [e ] admits the structure of an I -Tambara functor under (P) R(−) . (P) ii) The indexing system I is maximal among the indexing systems that satisfy i). C 16 Benjamin Böhme −1 iii) The canonical map R(−) → R(−) [e ] is an e -localization in the category of (P) (P) C I -Tambara functors. We record two easy consequences of our characterization of norm maps in the idem- potent summands. −1 Corollary 3.9. The summand R(−) [e ] is a Tambara functor (i.e., has a complete set of (P) norms) if and only if C is the trivial group. −1 Corollary 3.10. The subgroup C is normal in G if and only if the summand R(−) [e ] (P) admits all norms of the form N such that K contains a subgroup conjugate in G to C. 3.3. Multiplicativity of the idempotent splittings. We can now describe the multi- plicativity of the idempotent splitting of R(−) in terms of the indexing system (P) I := I cyc C (C) arising as the intersection of the indexing systems I deﬁned in Prop. 3.7. −1 Proposition 3.11. The localization maps R(−) → R(−) [e ] assemble into an isomor- (P) (P) phism of I -Tambara functors cyc −1 R(−) → R(−) [e ] (P) ∏ (P) (C)≤G where the product is taken over conjugacy classes of cyclic P-perfect subgroups. Moreover, I cyc is maximal among all indexing sets with this property. −1 Proof. Each of the canonical maps R(−) → R(−) [e ] is a map of I -Tambara (P) (P) functors by 3.8, hence their product is a map of I -Tambara functors. It is a level- cyc wise isomorphism by construction. The maximality also follows from Theorem 3.8: it implies that I is maximal among the indexing systems J such that each summand cyc −1 R(−) [e ] is a J -Tambara functor. (P) The admissible sets of I can be characterized as follows. cyc Lemma 3.12 ([Böh19], Lemma 4.23). Let K ≤ H ≤ G, then H/K is an admissible set for I if and only if for all cyclic P-perfect C ≤ H, C is contained in K. cyc 4. Idempotent splittings of equivariant K-theory Let K denote one of the genuine G-spectra KU or KO , i.e., either complex or real G G G equivariant K-theory. We will determine the multiplicativity of the P-local idempotent splitting −1 (K ) ≃ (K ) [e ], G G (P) ∏ (P) (C) Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 17 i.e., we will explicitly describe the maximal N algebra structure on each of the factors, as well as the maximal N algebra structure preserved by the splitting. Recall that as a consequence of Theorem 1.2, the blocks of (K ) are given as the e -localizations G (P) C −1 (K ) ∧ S [e ] (P) (P) of (K ) in the category of G-spectra. G (P) 4.1. Preliminaries. The N operads of [BH15] structure G-equivariant ring spectra with incomplete sets of norm maps parametrized by their associated indexing systems. According to [GW18, Thm. 4.7, Prop. 4.10], any given indexing system can be realized as the indexing system of a Σ-coﬁbrant N operad. Similar existence results were given in [Rub17, Thm. 2.16] and [BP17, Cor. IV]. Notation 4.1. For each conjugacy class of cyclic P-perfect subgroups C ≤ G, let O be a Σ-coﬁbrant N operad whose associated indexing system is I . Let O be a ∞ C cyc Σ-coﬁbrant N operad whose associated indexing system is I . ∞ cyc Note that by deﬁnition, an N operad P is a certain operad in the category of unbased G-spaces. By the usual abuse of notation, we refer to an algebra over the operad Σ P in G-spectra as a P-algebra. Remark 4.2. For any choice of the operad O , both S and K are naturally algebras C G over O : both spectra can be modelled as strictly commutative monoids in orthogonal G-spectra, and hence admit an action by O that factors through the action of the commutative operad. 4.2. Multiplicativity of the idempotent summands. We are now ready to state our main homotopical result. Theorem 4.3. Let C ≤ G be a cyclic P-perfect subgroup. Then: −1 i) The G-spectrum (K ) [e ] is an O -algebra under (K ) . G C G (P) (P) ii) The operad O is maximal among the N -operads that satisfy i). C ∞ −1 iii) The canonical map (K ) → (K ) [e ] is an e -localization in the category of O - G (P) G (P) C C algebras in G-spectra. The key to the proof is the following preservation result for N algebras given in [Böh19]. It extends previous work of Hill and Hopkins [HH14] and uses a result of Gutiérrez and White [GW18, Cor. 7.10]. An operad O in G-spaces is Σ-coﬁbrant if each space O(n) is of the homotopy type of a (G × Σ )-CW complex. 18 Benjamin Böhme Proposition 4.4 ([Böh19], Prop. 2.32). Let P be a Σ-coﬁbrant N operad. Fix x ∈ π (S ). (P) Then the Bousﬁeld localization L given by smashing with x x −1 S [x ] = hocolim S −→ S −→ . . . (P) (P) (P) preserves P-algebras in P-local G-spectra if and only if for all H ≤ G and all transitive H G G H admissible H-sets H/K, the element N R (x) divides a power of R (x) in the ring π (S ). (P) K K H 0 Proof of Theorem 4.3. Ad i): We know from Theorems 3.5 and 3.4 that for each of the ad- −1 missible sets of I , hence of O , the division relation of Prop. 4.4 holds, so (K ) [e ] C C G (P) is an O -algebra under (K ) . C G (P) Ad ii): Assume that P is an element strictly greater than O in the poset of (homotopy types of) N operads. Then any norm that comes from P but not from O induces a ∞ C corresponding norm on homotopy groups that does not correspond to an admissible set of I , thus contradicting the maximality statement included in Theorem 3.8. Ad iii): It is an e -localization in G-spectra and a map of O -algebras. C C We obtain the homotopical analogue of Corollary 3.9, stated as Corollary 1.7 in the introduction. There is also a homotopical version of Corollary 3.10: −1 Corollary 4.5. The group C is normal in G if and only if (K ) [e ] admits all norm maps G (P) of the form N such that K and H both contain a subgroup conjugate in G to C. 4.3. Multiplicativity of the idempotent splitting. We can also describe the multiplica- tivity of the entire idempotent splitting: Corollary 4.6. Let O be a Σ-coﬁbrant N operad realizing the indexing system I = cyc ∞ cyc I . Then the idempotent splitting (C) −1 (K ) ≃ (K ) [e ] G G (P) ∏ (P) (C) is an equivalence of O -algebras. Here, the product is taken over all conjugacy classes of cyc cyclic P-perfect subgroups of G. References [AB18] V. Angeltveit and A. M. Bohmann. Graded Tambara functors. J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 222(12):4126–4150, 2018. [Ati61] M. F. Atiyah. Characters and cohomology of ﬁnite groups. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., 9:23–64, 1961. [BH15] A. J. Blumberg and M. A. Hill. Operadic multiplications in equivariant spectra, norms, and transfers. Adv. Math., 285:658–708, 2015. in the sense of [GW18, Def. 7.3] Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory 19 [BH18] A. J. Blumberg and M. A. Hill. Incomplete Tambara functors. Algebr. Geom. Topol., 18(2):723–766, [BH20] A. J. Blumberg and M. A. Hill. G-symmetric monoidal categories of modules over equivariant commutative ring spectra. Tunis. J. Math., 2(2):237–286, 2020. [Böh18] B. Böhme. Equivariant multiplications and idempotent splittings of G-spectra. PhD thesis, University of Copenhagen, 2018. [Böh19] B. Böhme. Multiplicativity of the idempotent splittings of the Burnside ring and the G-sphere spectrum. Adv. Math., 347:904–939, 2019. [BP17] P. Bonventre and L. A. Pereira. Genuine equivariant operads. arXiv:1707.02226v1, 2017. [Bra47] R. Brauer. On Artin’s L-series with generalized group characters. Ann. of Math. (2), 48:502–514, [Bru07] M. Brun. Witt vectors and equivariant ring spectra applied to cobordism. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3), 94:351–385, 2007. [Dre69] A. Dress. A characterisation of solvable groups. Math. Z., 110:213–217, 1969. [Glu81a] D. Gluck. A character table bound for the Schur index. Illinois J. Math., 25(4):649–653, 1981. [Glu81b] D. Gluck. Idempotent formula for the Burnside ring algebra with applications to the p- subgroup simplicial complex. Illinois J. Math., 25(1):63–67, 1981. [GW18] J. J. Gutiérrez and D. White. Encoding equivariant commutativity via operads. Algebr. Geom. Topol., 18(5):2919–2962, 2018. [HH14] M. A. Hill and M. J. Hopkins. Equivariant multiplicative closure. Algebraic topology: applications and new directions, Contemp. Math., 620, 2014. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI. [HHR16] M. A. Hill, M. J. Hopkins, and D. C. Ravenel. On the nonexistence of elements of Kervaire invariant one. Ann. of Math. (2), 184(1):1–262, 2016. [Roq52] P. Roquette. Arithmetische Untersuchung des Charakterringes einer endlichen Gruppe. Mit Anwendungen auf die Bestimmung des minimalen Darstellungskörpers einer endlichen Gruppe und in der Theorie der Artinschen L-Funktionen. J. Reine Angew. Math., 190, 1952. [Rub17] J. Rubin. Combinatorial N operads. arXiv:1705.03585v2, 2017. [Seg68] G. Segal. Equivariant K-theory. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., 34:129–151, 1968. [Seg71] G. Segal. Equivariant stable homotopy theory. Actes, Congrés Intern. Math., Tome 2 (1970), pages 59–63, Paris, 1971. [Ser77] J.-P. Serre. Linear representations of ﬁnite groups. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 42. Springer- Verlag, New York-Heidelberg, 1977. Translated from the second French edition by Leonard L. Scott. [Sol67] L. Solomon. The Burnside algebra of a ﬁnite group. J. Combinatorial Theory, 2:603–615, 1967. [Tam93] D. Tambara. On multiplicative transfer. Comm. Algebra, 21(4):1393–1420, 1993. [Yos83] T. Yoshida. Idempotents of Burnside Rings and Dress Induction Theorem. J. Algebra, 80:90–105, Max Planck Institute for Mathematics, Vivatsgasse 7, 53111 Bonn, Germany E-mail address: boehme@mpim-bonn.mpg.de

Journal

Mathematics – arXiv (Cornell University)

Published: Aug 29, 2018

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory

Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory

Idempotent characters and equivariantly multiplicative splittings of K-theory

References (29)

Abstract

Journal

Recommended Articles

There are no references for this article.

Our policy towards the use of cookies