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.
brief paragraph at Dolbeault cohomology
Recall the philosophy which interprets cohomology as the homset in a (oo,1)-topos. Has such an interpretation been found for Dolbeault cohomology?
Namely, is there an (oo,1)-topos ℰ where the compact Kaehler manifolds form a subcategory, such that, for each p, q, there exists a classifying object Dp,q such that the Dolbeault cohomology H(p,q)(X) is naturally isomorphic to the homset of the mapping space Homℰ(X,Dp,q)?
By the Dolbeault theorem (see there) Dolbeault cohomology is equivalently the abelian sheaf cohomology Hq(X;ΩpX), of the abelian sheaf ΩpX which is the Dolbeault complex of holomorphic p-forms.
And all abelian sheaf cohomology theories are given by hom-spaces in an ∞-topos.
For some discussion along these lines see also page 2 of Differential cohomology is Cohesive homotopy theory (schreiber).
As I understand it, the abelian sheaf cohomology Hq(X;ΩpX) is interpreted as Π0Hom(X,BqΩpX), where the Hom is taken in the oo-topos Sh(∞,1)(X) of simplicial sheaves over X. Thus, as X varies, the oo-topos Sh(∞,1)(X) in consideration also varies.
This unlike ordinary cohomology of topological spaces where there is a single object BqA in a single oo-topos ∞Grpd whereby πoHom(X,BqA)≃Hq(X;A) gives the ordinary cohomology for all topological spaces X.
No, you are to consider the ∞-topos over the site of all complex manifolds, see at complex analytic ∞-groupoid
H≔ℂAnalytic∞Grpd≔Sh∞(CplxMfd).Then given any particular complex manifold X, it represents an object in that ∞-topos, and its Dolbeault cohomology is
ℋp,q(X)≃Hq(X,Ωp)≃π0H(X,BqΩp).Here BqΩp is not a single object in Sh∞(CplxMfd), but really BqΩpX (which depends on X) right?
No, it’s a single object. Ωp∈Sh∞(CpxMfd) is the sheaf on the site of all complex manifolds which assigns to any one its additive group of holomophic p-forms.
The Yoneda lemma says that then
H(X,Ωp)≃ΩpX(X)and the claim about Dolbeault cohomology follows similarly.
1 to 10 of 10