Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
added this statement:
Let
Ffib⟶A↓pBbe a Serre fibration of connected topological spaces, with fiber F (over any base point) also connected.
If in addition
π1(B) acts nilpotently on H•(F,k)
(e.g. if B is simply connected);
at least one of A, F have rational finite type
then the cofiber of any relative Sullivan model for p is a Sullivan model for F.
Did you mean π1(Y) acts nilpotently?
Yes, I had fixed it in the entry, didn’t fix it here.
added the addendum:
Moreover, if CE(𝔩B) is a minimal Sullivan model for B, then the cofiber of the corresponding minimal relative Sullivan model for p is the minimal Sullivan model CE(𝔩F) for F:
CE(𝔩F)cofib(CE(𝔩p))⟵CE(𝔩BA)↓CE(𝔩p)CE(𝔩B)added pointer to:
added the following further addendum to the proposition:
But this cofiber, being the cofiber of a relative Sullivan model and hence of a cofibration in the projective model structure on dgc-algebras, is in fact the homotopy cofiber, and hence is a model for the homotopy fiber of the rationalized fibration.
Therefore (eq:SullivanModelForFiber) implies that on fibrations of connected finite-type spaces where π1 of the base acts nilpotently on the homology of the fiber, rationalization preserves homotopy fibers.
(This was originally proven in Bousfield-Kan 72, Chapter II.)
added pointer also to the followup book
where the above statement appears as Theorem 5.1
1 to 8 of 8