I am a physicist studying now some supersymmetric sigma models. My question can, however, be reformulated in a purely mathematical language: A twisted de Rham complex involves $d_W = d + dW \wedge $ where $W$ is any even-dimensional form. In all known for me cases the cohomologies of this complex are the same as for the untwisted one. Can one assert that it is always so ? If yes, where is it proven ?
2026-03-27 12:56:06.1774616166
Is a twisted de Rham cohomology always the same as the untwisted one?
1.7k Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in DIFFERENTIAL-GEOMETRY
- Smooth Principal Bundle from continuous transition functions?
- Compute Thom and Euler class
- Holonomy bundle is a covering space
- Alternative definition for characteristic foliation of a surface
- Studying regular space curves when restricted to two differentiable functions
- What kind of curvature does a cylinder have?
- A new type of curvature multivector for surfaces?
- Regular surfaces with boundary and $C^1$ domains
- Show that two isometries induce the same linear mapping
- geodesic of infinite length without self-intersections
Related Questions in PHYSICS
- Why is the derivative of a vector in polar form the cross product?
- What is meant by input and output bases?
- Does Planck length contradict math?
- Computing relative error with ideal gas law.
- Planetary orbits in a $4$-dimensional universe
- Applied Maths: Equations of Motion
- Return probability random walk
- What will be the velocity of a photon ejected from the surface of cesium by a photon with a frequency of 6.12E14 s^-1?
- What mathematical principal allows this rearrangement during simplifying
- Time when velocity of object is zero and position at that point in time
Related Questions in HOMOLOGY-COHOMOLOGY
- Are these cycles boundaries?
- Cohomology groups of a torus minus a finite number of disjoint open disks
- $f$ - odd implies $d(f)$ - odd, question to the proof
- Poincarè duals in complex projective space and homotopy
- understanding proof of excision theorem
- proof of excision theorem: commutativity of a diagram
- exact sequence of reduced homology groups
- Doubts about computation of the homology of $\Bbb RP^2$ in Vick's *Homology Theory*
- the quotien space of $ S^1\times S^1$
- Rational points on conics over fields of dimension 1
Related Questions in DE-RHAM-COHOMOLOGY
- DeRham Cohomology of punctured plane and homotopy.
- Chern-Weil homomorphism and Chern/Pontryagin/Euler class
- Finite dimensionality of the "deRham cohomology" defined using $C^{k,\alpha}$ forms instead of smooth forms.
- Averaging of a differential form.
- De Rham cohomology groups of projective real space
- Homotopy invariance of de Rham cohomology
- The Converse of Poincare Lemma
- How does one introduce characteristic classes
- There is no smooth diffeomorphism $f:\mathbb R^3 \setminus [-\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2}]^3 \to \mathbb R^3$
- Why $H_{dR}^1(M) \simeq \mathbb R^n$ when $H_1(M,\mathbb Z)$ has $n$ generators?
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
I hadn't heard of this definition of twisted deRham cohomology before reading this (I had heard of the one in this question, but they seem to be different) so I don't have full confidence in this. I claim that the answer is "yes" to a question which I hope is equivalent:
Let $X$ be a smooth manifold. The usual definition of $H^i_{DR}(X)$ is "closed $i$-forms modulo exact $i$-forms". In other words, you take those $i$-forms killed by $d$ and quotient by $i$-forms of the form $d \theta$, for $\theta$ an $(i-1)$-form.
Here is the analogous definition in your setting. Let $\Omega^{even}$ and $\Omega^{odd}$ be the spaces of even and odd forms. Let $d_W(\alpha) = d \alpha + (d W) \wedge \alpha$. Define a form to be $d_W$-closed if it is killed by $d_W$, and to be $d_W$-exact if it is of the form $d_W(\theta)$ for some $\theta$. I will show that the space of $d_W$-closed forms, modulo the space of $d_W$-exact forms, has dimension independent of $W$.
Set $$e^W = \sum \frac{W^k}{k!}.$$ If $W$ has no $0$-form component, then this sum only has finitely many terms because high enough powers of $W$ are $0$; if there is a $0$-form in $W$, then the sum above is still convergent.
Observe that $d (e^W) = e^W dW$. This crucially uses that $W$ is even, so $W$ and $dW$ commute. (If $W$ were purely odd, this would also be true, but if $W$ were a mix of even and odd parts, then it needn't be true.)
So $$d \left( e^W \alpha \right) = e^W dW \alpha + e^W d \alpha = e^W d_W \alpha \quad (\ast)$$ using that again that $e^W$ is even.
So $\alpha$ is $d_W$-closed if and only if $e^W \alpha$ is $d$-closed and $\alpha$ is $d_W$-exact if and only if $e^W \alpha$ is exact. So we can identify the space of $d_W$-closed forms modulo the space of $d_W$-exact forms with the space of $d_W$ forms modulo the space of $d_W$ forms by multiplying by $e^W$.
Now, in the ordinary deRham cohomology theory, one shows that the orthogonal complement to the $d$-exact forms is the kernel of $d^{\dagger}$. So, instead of quotienting $\mathrm{Ker}(d)$ by $\mathrm{Image}(d)$, one can instead take the intersection $\mathrm{Ker}(d) \cap \mathrm{Ker}(d^{\dagger})$. Is this also true for $d_W$ and $d_{W}^{\dagger}$ ? In that case, the definition I am working with is the same as yours.