arxiv: v2 [math.at] 6 Mar 2019

Transcription

1 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES arxiv: v2 [math.at] 6 Mar 2019 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON Abstract. In this article we compute the cohomology of complex projective spaces associated to finite dimensional representations of Z/2 graded on virtual representations of its fundamental groupoid. This fully graded theory, unlike the classical RO()-graded theory, allows for the definition of push-forward maps between projective spaces, which we also compute. In the computation we use relations generators coming from the fully graded cohomology of the projective space of U, the complete complex Z/2-universe, as carried out by the first author. This work is the first step in a program for developing Z/2-equivariant Schubert calculus. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Background base case 4 3. Additive structure of the cohomology Multiplicative structure of the cohomology Related Results 37 References Introduction In recent years there has been significant progress in equivariant homotopy theory. Both its use in the solution of the Kervaire invariant one conjecture, see [6], its relationship to motivic homotopy theory, see for example [5], have led to a renewed interest in the subject. In relation to our work, the work of Dugger in [4] Hogle [7] on Z/2-equivariant real rassmannians is of particular interest. In [4], Dugger was able to establish an equivariant version of the classical calculation of the cohomology of infinite rassmannians. He provided a Borel style presentation of the cohomology of r k (U ), where U is a complete Z/2 universe. His methods were computational involve investigating the cellular spectral sequence. In particular, they are specific to the infinite case they do not have a geometric interpretation. The work of Hogle extends these computations to include finite rassmannians. Hogle has been able to compute the equivariant cohomology of r k (R n Λ), r 2 (R n Λ 2 ), where R denotes the trivial representation Λ denotes the sign representation, as well as their analogs over C. It is worth noting that all of the computations of Dugger Hogle are with coefficients in the constant Mackey functor taking value F 2. 1

2 2 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON Other classical RO()-graded computations were done by Lewis. He computed the equivariant cohomology of complex projective spaces associated to complex representations of Z/p in [9]. His computations don t provide a simple description of the product structure for all representations. Our present computation remedies this for Z/2 by using an extension of the classical equivariant theory, one which is the natural home for Euler classes. Theorem A. Let 0 p < 0 q < with p + q > 0. As an algebra over (S 0 ), H RO(ΠB) (P(C p M q ) + ) is generated by the elements c ω, c, c, H RO() c, with c p ω infinitely divisible by c c q infinitely divisible by c. The generators satisfy the following relations: c p ωc q = 0 c c (1 κ)c c ω = e 2 c c = ξ. Here, C denotes the trivial complex Z/2-representation while M denotes C with the sign action. The Z/2-space B is P(C M ). We denote by ω the canonical line bundle over P(C p M q ) denotes ω M. The classes c ω c denote the Euler classes of these bundles while c c denote associated classes. More details are given in Section 2.1. We are able to give such a description as we are using RO(ΠB)-graded equivariant cohomology, as developed by the first author Waner in [3]. This theory mixes both equivariant parametrized homotopy theory. It has been used previously by the first author to compute the cohomology of complex projective spaces of complete universes for groups of prime order, see [2] for p = 2 [1] for odd primes. Unlike in the classical situation, we utilize the infinite case in order to obtain information about the finite case. Specifically, the generators as well as the last two relations come from the infinite case via restriction. In future work, we would like to compute the fully graded cohomology of other finite rassmannians, that is H RO(ΠX) (X; A) where X is a finite rassmannian Motivation for extended grading. In classical Schubert calculus, the pushforward map in the Chow ring plays a fundamental role. Thus, in order to begin work on equivariant Schubert calculus we must have such constructions at h. In order to have push-forward maps we will use RO(ΠB)-graded cohomology theories. The following example will demonstrate that ordinary RO()-graded equivariant cohomology does not possess sufficiently nice push-forward maps. Suppose that we do have functorial push-forwards (meaning that g! f! = (g f)! ) that satisfy the projection formula we recover classical push-forward maps when we apply the fixed point functors. We will see that the existence of such maps leads to a contradiction. We write H p+qλ (X) for cohomology in grading R p Λ q. We use RZ to denote the constant Mackey functor taking value Z, as in [2] [1]. We have two natural transformations from equivariant to ordinary cohomology. The first maps to the nonequivariant cohomology of the underlying space while the second maps to the nonequivariant cohomology of the fixed points. We now consider the the following equivariant complex projective spaces P(C M) f P(C 2 M) g P(C 2 M 2 ).

3 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 3 The RO()-graded cohomology of these spaces with coefficients in RZ can be computed by use of the cellular spectral sequence, as detailed in Kronholm [8] (note that Kronholm uses a different grading convention). All differentials must vanish for degree reasons the spectral sequence collapses. The cohomology of the relevant projective spaces are H RO() (P(C M)) = H RO() H RO() (P(C 2 M)) = H RO() H RO() (S 0 ){1, a} (S 0 ){1, a, b} (P(C 2 M 2 )) = H RO() (S 0 ){1, a, b, c} where a = 2Λ, b = 2 + 2Λ, c = 2 + 4Λ. It is a consequence of the projection formula the fact that both f g are surjective in cohomology that the push-forward maps f!, g!, (g f)! change cohomology by a fixed element of RO(). This is because the projection formula implies that these push-forward maps are completely determined by the image of 1. We compute this element of RO() by considering the associated push-forward maps f! e, ge!, f Z/2!, g Z/2!. Here, the superscript e denotes forgetting the action the superscript Z/2 denotes taking the fixed points of the action. Upon taking underlying spaces we get CP 1 f CP 2 g CP 3 this in turn induces H (CP 1 ) f e! H +2 (CP 2 ) ge! H +4 (CP 3 ) which is classical. This uses the natural transformation H p+qλ (X; RZ) H p+q (X e ; Z). We see that the push-forward map f! must increase p + q by 2 g! must increase p + q by 2. Taking Z/2 fixed points produces this in turn induces CP 0 CP 0 f Z/2 CP 1 CP 0 gz/2 CP 1 CP 1 H (CP 0 CP 0 ) f Z/2! H +? (CP 1 CP 0 ) gz/2! H +?? (CP 1 CP 1 ) This uses the natural transformation H p+qλ (X; RZ) H p (X Z/2 ; Z). Focusing on the first path component we see that? = 2?? = 2. This implies that f! changes the grading by +2 that g! changes the grading by +2Λ. However, if we instead focused on the second component we would arrive at the opposite conclusion. Thus there is no coherent choice we can make with respect to this grading. The problem stems from the fixed points being disconnected. Extending the grading fixes this issue, it can be thought of as a way of building local coefficients into different gradings. The foundations of this extended theory were worked out by the first author Waner in [3]. This cohomology theory is graded on real representations of the equivariant fundamental groupoid, denoted RO(ΠB). rading on RO(ΠB) will allow us to deal with disconnected fixed point sets. This is precisely the source of the ambiguity in the above example. As RO(ΠB) contains RO() as the constant

4 4 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON representations of ΠB, the RO()-graded cohomology is contained in the RO(ΠB)- graded cohomology. The naturally occurring push-forward maps do not preserve the RO()-graded cohomology inside the RO(ΠB)-graded cohomology. One way to see this is that the normal bundle to the embeddings g f do not give representations of ΠB that are constant. Further, we will see that the generators of the cohomology of P(C p M q ) lie outside the RO()-graded part. This explains why the multiplicative structure appears so complicated if we only consider RO()-graded cohomology Outline. The general argument is a proof by induction. In Section 2, we give the full structure of the cohomology of P(C p M q ) after recalling the cohomology of P(C p ), P(M q ) P(C M ). We then show that the statement of the theorem is satisfied for both P(C p ) P(M q ). This forms the base case of our induction argument. We will first establish the additive structure in Section 3. This is done by looking at long exact sequences which are induced by particular families of cell attachments. We do this in Section 3.2 after developing some necessary tools in Section 3.1. We then show by induction that the induced long exact sequences degenerate into short exact sequences in Lemma These short exact sequences split as all of the H RO() (S 0 )-modules in sight are in fact free. Each of these families of short exact sequences will give us half of the cohomology of P(C p M q ). We then turn to computing the product structure. This is also done by induction uses push-forward maps crucially. After recalling the relevant facts about push-forward maps in Section 4.1, we compute the full multiplicative structure in Section 4.2. As we already have the additive structure in h this amounts to naming the generators. Lastly, we address the cohomology of P(C p M ), P(C M q ), the RO()-graded subring, other coefficient systems in Section Background base case 2.1. Earlier work our main result. Throughout, will denote the group Z/2, B will denote P(C M ), the space of complex lines in C M. Recall that C is the trivial complex -representation that M is C with the sign action. We consider ex--spaces over B grade all homology cohomology on RO(ΠB), the equivariant fundamental groupoid of B. Details on ΠB as well as RO(ΠB) can be found in both [3] [2]. Coefficients will be assumed to be the Burnside Mackey functor A, until Section 5.3. We use these overlines to denote that an object is being viewed as a Mackey functor. We will compute the cohomology, as a Mackey functor, of X p,q = P(C p M q ), with 0 p, q. Thus, X, = B each X p,q can be thought of as a space over B. For each p p q q, there are canonical inclusions X p,q X p,q. The push-forward with respect to these maps will be used to compute the multiplicative structure of the cohomology. Further, these maps induce canonical isomorphisms of equivariant fundamental groupoids when p 1 q 1. Thus grading the cohomology of X p,q on RO(ΠB) is canonically equivalent to grading the cohomology on RO(ΠX p,q ). We let ω denote the canonical complex line bundle over B as well as its restrictions to each X p,q. Every equivariant bundle over B gives an associated representation of ΠB. Thus, we also write ω for the associated element of RO(ΠB).

5 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 5 There is a -involution χ: B B such that, if f : X B classifies a bundle η, then χf classifies η M, which we also call χη. We write c ω = e(ω) H ω (B +) for the Euler class of ω c = e() H (B +) for the Euler class of. We write ω = Hom(ω, C) for the dual bundle, note that () = χ(ω ) = Hom(ω, M), so we write simply. The representation ring RO(ΠB) is isomorphic to Z 3. The isomorphism is given by sending R a Λ b ω c to the triple (a, b, c). This result can be found in [2]. We assume the following computation of the cohomology of B, also from [2]. Theorem 2.1. H RO(ΠB) (B + ) is an algebra over H RO() (S 0 ) generated by the Euler classes c ω c together with classes c c. These elements live in gradings c ω = ω c = = ω M c = ω 2 c = 2 = ω + M. They satisfy the following relations: Writing c c (1 κ)c c ω = e 2 c c = ξ ɛ = e 2 κc c ω H 0 (B + ), the units in H 0 (B +), which all square to 1, are ±1, ±(1 κ), ±(1 ɛ), ± (1 κ)(1 ɛ) = ±(1 κ + ɛ). The Euler classes of dual bundles are given by e(ω ) = (1 ɛ)c ω e( ) = (1 κ)(1 ɛ)c. Here, κ, e ξ are elements of H RO() (S 0 ). The classes c c can be constructed as Euler classes, see Section 3.12 of [3], or they can be realized as restrictions of classes in the cohomology of ΠB. Upon forgetting the equivariant structure they become invertible. The following is our main theorem. We use the same names for the restrictions of ω their Euler classes to each X p,q. Theorem A. Let 0 p < 0 q < with p + q > 0. As an algebra over (S 0 ), H RO(ΠB) (P(C p M q ) + ) is generated by the elements c ω, c, c, H RO() c, together with the following elements: c p ω is infinitely divisible by c, meaning that, for k 1, there are unique elements c k cp ω such that c k c k cp ω = c p ω. Similarly, c q is infinitely divisible by c, meaning that, for k 1, there are unique elements c k cq such that c k c k cq = c q. The generators satisfy the following relations: (2.2) c p ωc q = 0

6 6 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON (2.3) (2.4) c c (1 κ)c c ω = e 2 c c = ξ The elements c c have the following cancellation properties. For an element x H nω+α ((X p,q ) + ) with n Z α RO(), we have c x = 0 = x = 0 if n p, α 2(p n), α 2(p n) c x = 0 = x = 0 We write or if p q n p, α 4(p n), α 2(p n); if n q, α 2(q n), α 2q or if q n p q, α 4q, α 2q. c k cm ω c n = (c k cp ω)c m p ω c n m p k 1 c k cm ω c n = (c k cq )c m ω c n q n q k 1. Additively, one can check that H RO(ΠB) ((X p,q ) + ) is a free H RO() (S 0 )-module on the following basis: {c k c m ω k > 0, 0 m < p} {c k c n k > 0, 0 n < q, k + n > 0} {c m ω c n 0 m p, 0 n q, m + n < p + q} {c c m ω c n 1 m p, 0 n < q, m n + 1} {c c m ω c n 0 m < p, 2 n q, n > m + 1} {c k cp ωc n k 1, 0 n < q} {c k cm ω c q k 1, 0 m < p}. Moreover, the homology H RO(ΠB) ((X p,q) + ) is also a free module over H RO() (S 0 ), on basis elements in the same gradings as for cohomology. This should remind the reader of the classical computation of the cohomology of CP p+q 1. Both c ω c are sent to c 1 H 2 (CP p+q 1 ; Z) under the forgetful functor. Similarly, both c c are sent to a unit in H 0 (CP p+q 1 ; Z). Thus the relation c p ωc q = 0 is the appropriate analog of c n+1 1 = 0 in the cohomology of CP n. Next, we list some additional relations in the cohomology of X p,q. Proposition 2.5. Assuming that Theorem A is true for a particular p q, the following relations must also hold in H RO(ΠB) ((X p,q ) + ), for all k: c k cp+1 ω c k cq+1 c k cm ω c n = 0 c k cm ω c n = 0 = e 2 c (k+1) = e 2 c (k+1) cp ω + ξc (k+2) cp ωc c q + ξc (k+2) c ω c q c c k cm ω c n = c (k 1) cm ω c n m p c c k cm ω c n = ξc (k+1) cm ω c n m p m p n q m p n q

7 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 7 c k cm ω c n c l cs ωc t = c k l cm+s ω c n+t m, s p c c k cm ω c n = ξc (k+1) c m ω c n n q c c k cm ω c n = c (k 1) c m ω c n n q c k cm ω c n c l cs ωc t = c k l c k cm ω c n c l cs ωc t = 0 cm+s ω c n+t n, t q m p t q Before we move on to the proof let us mention some consequences of the above proposition. The relations listed above determine the complete multiplicative structure of H RO(ΠB) ((X p,q ) + ). They can be used to construct an algorithm for writing any monomial in the generators in terms of the basis described in Theorem A. For example, the relation c k cp+1 ω = e 2 c (k+1) cp ω + ξc (k+2) cp ωc gives us the relation c k cp+1 ω c n = e 2 c (k+1) cp ωc n + ξc (k+2) cp ωc n+1. By induction, we can then show that m ( ) m (2.6) c k cp+m ω c n = e 2(m l) ξ l c (k+m+l) c p l ωc n+l, l=0 a linear combination of basis elements, with the understing that any terms with n + l q vanish. Proof of Proposition 2.5. Start with the claim that c c k cm ω c n = c (k 1) for m p. Consider the special case c c k cp ω = c (k 1) cp ω first. We have c k 1 (c c k cp ω) = c k c k cp ω = c p ω by definition, so we must have c c k cp ω = c (k 1) cp ω as claimed, by the uniqueness of c (k 1) cp ω. The general case follows: If m p, then c c k cm ω c n = (c c k = (c (k 1) cp ω)c m p ω c n cp ω)c m p ω c n = c (k 1) cm ω c n. The calculation of c c k cm ω c n is the same. This gives us the easy calculation c c k cm ω c n = c c c (k+1) cm ω c m = ξc (k+1) similarly for c c k For the calculation of c k c k cp+1 ω cm ω c n. cp+1 ω, we have = (c c ω )c (k+1) cp ω = (e 2 + (1 κ)c c )c (k+1) cp ω = e 2 c (k+1) cp ω + (1 κ)ξc (k+2) = e 2 c (k+1) cp ω + ξc (k+2) cp ωc. The calculation of c k cq+1 is the same, mutatis mutis. cp ωc cm ω c m cm ω c n

8 8 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON Now consider the claim that c k cm ω c n = 0 for m p n q. It follows easily if k 0, so the interesting case is k > 0. Consider first c k cp ωc q proceed by induction on k, the case k = 0 being already known. Inductively, we have that c c k cp ωc q = c (k 1) cp ωc q = 0, so we need to check if we are in a grading where we can cancel c conclude that c k cp ωc q = 0. This element lives in grading (p q + k)ω + 2q + (q k)m. With n = p q + k α = 2q + (q k)m, we see that α = 4q 2k = 4(p n) + 2k α = 2q = 2(p n) + 2k. If 0 < k q, so that p q < n p, we have α > 4(p n) α > 2(p n). If k > q, then n > p we have α = 4(p n) + 2k = 2(p n) + 2(p n + k) = 2(p n) + 2q > 2(p n) again α = 2(p n) + 2k > 2(p n). Thus, for any k > 0, we are in a grading where c can be canceled we conclude that c k cp ωc q = 0. The general statement then follows for m p n q: c k cm ω c n = (c k cp ωc q )c m p ω c n q = 0. The proof that c k cm ω c n = 0 for m p n q is similar. To calculate c k cm ω c n c l cs ωc t, m p s p, it suffices to consider the special case c k cp ω c l cp ω. For this we proceed by induction on k, the case of k = 0 being known by definition. We have c (c k cp ω c l cp ω) = c (k 1) cp ω c l = c (k+l 1) c 2p ω cp ω = c c (k+l) c2p ω by induction, so we need to check that we are in a grading where we can cancel c. The grading is (2p + k + l)ω (k + l)m. With n = 2p + k + l α = (k + l)m, we have n > p, α = 2(k + l) = 2(2p n) 2(p n), α = 0 > 2(p n). Thus we are in a grading where we can cancel c, so we conclude that c k cp ω c l cp ω = c (k+l) c2p ω, the general case follows. The calculation of c k cm ω c n c l cs ωc t for n q t q is similar. Finally, consider c k cm ω c n c l cs ωc t for m p t q, for which it suffices to consider the case c k cp ω c l cq with k 0 l 0. We proceed by induction on k + l, the base case k + l = 0 being known. We want to take advantage of either c (c k cp ω c l cq ) = c (k 1) cp ω c l cq = 0

9 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 9 or c (c k cp ω c l cq ) = c k cp ω c (l 1) c q = 0 to conclude that c k cp ω c l cq = 0. We first note that c k cp ω c l cq lives in grading (p q + k l)ω + 2(q + l) + (q k)m, so let n = p q + k l α = 2(q + l) + (q k)m. There are several cases to consider. First, suppose that k l q so that n p. We have α = 2(2q k + l) = 2(p n + q) 2(p n) α = 2(q + l) = 2(p n + k) 2(p n), so we are in a grading where c (c k cp ω c l cq ) = 0 implies that c k cp ω c l cq = 0. If 0 k l q, so p q n p q p n, then α = 2(p n + q) 4(p n) α = 2(q + l) = 2(p n + k) 2(p n), so we can again conclude that c k cp ω c l cq = 0. If p k l 0, so q n p q p n q, then α = 2(p n + q) 4q α = 2(q + l) 2q, so we can conclude from c (c k cp ω c l cq ) = 0 that c k cp ω c l cq = 0. If k l p, so n q, then α = 2(p n + q) 2(q n) α = 2(q + l) 2q, so we can again conclude that c k cp ω c l cq = 0. We also have the following description of each H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) which will be useful in the inductive step of the proof of Theorem A. Proposition 2.7. Assuming that Theorem A is true for a particular p q with p q, we have the following bases for the restriction of the grading to cosets of RO(), each basis having exactly p + q elements. (Note that, in corner cases, some of the series of elements listed may be empty.) If n p, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c ω,..., c n p+1 c p 1 ω, c (n p) cp ω, c (n p+1) c p ωc,..., c (n p+q 1) c p ωc q 1 }

10 10 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON If p q < n < p, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c ω,..., c n ω, c c n+1 ω, c n+1 ω c, c c n+2 ω c, c n+2 ω c 2,..., c c p ωc p n 1, c p ωc p n c 1 cp ωc p n+1, c 2 cp ωc p n+2,,..., c (n p+q 1) c p ωc q 1 If n = p q, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c ω,..., c n ω, } c c n+1 ω, c n+1 ω c, c c n+2 ω c, c n+2 ω c 2,..., cω p 1 c q 1, c c p ωc q 1 If 0 n < p q, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c ω,..., c n ω, c c n+1 ω, c n+1 ω c, c c n+2 ω c, c n+2 ω c 2,..., c c n+q ω c q 1, c n+q ω c 1 cn+q+1 ω c q, c 2 cn+q+2 ω c q,..., c (p q n 1) If q < n < 0, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c,..., c n, c c n +1, c ω c n +1, c c ω c n +2, c 2 ωc n +2,..., c q n c 1 cq n +1 ω c q, c 2 cq n +2 ω ω c q, c q,..., c ( n q+p 1) If n q, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c,..., c n q+1 c ( n q) c q 1, c q, c ( n q+1) c ω c q,..., c ( n q+p 1) c q, } cω p 1 c q } cω p 1 c q } cω p 1 c q } In each case, the grading of each basis element is either 2 or M larger than the preceding element, in the order listed. For p < q, we have the following bases: If n p, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c ω,..., c n p+1 c p 1 ω, c (n p) cp ω, c (n p+1) c p ωc,..., c (n p+q 1) c p ωc q 1 If 0 n < p, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c ω,..., c n ω, c c n+1 ω, c n+1 ω c, c c n+2 ω c, c n+2 ω c 2,..., c c p ωc p n 1, c p ωc p n c 1 cp ωc p n+1, c 2 cp ωc p n+2, },..., c (n p+q 1) c p ωc q 1 If p q < n < 0, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c,..., c n, c c n +1, c ω c n +1, c c ω c n +2, c 2 ωc n +2,..., c c p 1 c 1 cp ωc n +p+1, c 2 cp ωc n +p+2 ω c n +p, c p ωc n +p, },..., c (q p n 1) c p ωc q 1 }

11 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 11 If n = p q, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c,..., c n, c c n +1, c ω c n +1, c c ω c n +2, c 2 ωc n +2,..., cω p 1 c q 1, c cω p 1 If q < n < p q, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c,..., c n, c c n +1, c ω c n +1, c c ω c n +2, c 2 ωc n +2,..., c q n c 1 cq n +1 ω c q, c 2 cq n +2 ω ω c q, c q,..., c ( n +p q 1) If n q, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) has as a basis the set {c n, c n 1 c,..., c n q+1 c ( n q) c q 1, c q, c ( n q+1) c ω c q,..., c ( n +p q 1) c q } cω p 1 c q } cω p 1 c q } Proof. The proof just requires one to compute the gradings of the basis elements given in Theorem A arrange them in the appropriate ranges. It is given in the body of the proof of Theorem A The cohomology of P(C p ) P(M q ). We look at two special cases of the general calculation. X p,0 X 0,q are both copies of complex projective spaces with trivial -action. However, they do differ as -spaces over B. As they are fixed by, they must map to fixed points of B. B Z/2 is just B 0 B1, where each is a copy of CP. X p,0 maps to the component B 0 of B while X 0,q maps to the component B 1. Parts (2) (4) of the following theorem appear in [2] as part of the calculation of the cohomology of B. Theorem 2.8. (1) If 0 < p <, then H RO(ΠB) Additively, H RO(ΠB) ((X p,0 ) + ) = H RO() (S 0 )[c ω, c, c 1 ]/ cp ω. basis for the submodule H nω+ro() (2) If p =, then H RO(ΠB) Additively, H RO(ΠB) ((X p,0 ) + ) is a free module over H RO() (S 0 ) with a ((X p,0 ) + ), n Z, given by the set {c n, c n 1 c ω,..., c n p+1 cω p 1 }. ((X,0 ) + ) = H RO() (S 0 )[c ω, c, c 1 ]. basis for the submodule H nω+ro() (3) If 0 < q <, then H RO(ΠB) ((X,0 ) + ) is a free module over H RO() (S 0 ) with a ((X,0 ) + ) given by the set {c n, c n 1 c ω, c n 2 c2 ω,...}. ((X 0,q ) + ) = H RO() (S 0 )[c, c, c 1 ]/ cq.

12 12 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON Additively, H RO(ΠB) basis for the submodule H nω+ro() (4) If q =, then H RO(ΠB) Additively, H RO(ΠB) ((X 0,q ) + ) is a free module over H RO() (S 0 ) with a ((X 0,q ) + ) given by the set {c n, c n 1 c,..., c n q+1 c q 1 }. ((X 0, ) + ) = H RO() (S 0 )[c, c, c 1 ]. basis for the submodule H nω+ro() ((X 0, ) + ) is a free module over H RO() (S 0 ) with a ((X 0, ) + ) given by the set {c n, c n 1 c, c n 2 c2,...}. In all cases, the homology groups H RO(ΠB) ((X p,0) + ) or H RO(ΠB) ((X 0,q) + ) will also be a free module over H RO() (S 0 ), on basis elements in the same gradings as for cohomology. Proof. We prove (1). Recall that the nonequivariant cohomology of X p,0 with Z coefficients is H Z ((X p,0 ) + ) = Z[c]/ c p, where c is the (nonequivariant) Euler class of ω, so c = 2. Because the nonequivariant cohomology is free over Z, [2, 6.2] implies that H RO() ((X p,0 ) + ) = H Z ((X p,0 ) + ) H RO() (S 0 ) = H RO() (S 0 )[c]/ c p. Because RO(ΠX p,0 ) = RO(), this extends to RO(ΠB)-grading by the adjunction of an invertible element in grading = ( 2, 0, 1), which generates the kernel of the map RO(ΠB) RO(ΠX p,0 ). The element c is such an element (as shown in [2]), so we get H RO(ΠB) ((X p,0 ) + ) = H RO() (S 0 )[c, c, c 1 ]/ cp. From [2] we also know that c ω = c c, so we may replace c with c ω as a polynomial generator, with c p ω = 0 still. The statement about the basis in gradings nω+ro() follows easily. The other three parts of the theorem are proved similarly. The statement about homology is proved in the same way, starting from the nonequivariant calculation. The cohomology of X p,0 also contains the elements c c, while the cohomology of X 0,q contains c ω c. We identify these elements in the following result. Proposition 2.9. In H RO(ΠB) ((X p,0 ) + ), we have In H RO(ΠB) ((X 0,q ) + ), we have c = e 2 c 1 + ξc 2 c ω c = ξc 1. c ω = e 2 c 1 + ξc 2 c c = ξc 1.

13 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 13 Proof. These follow on restricting the relations that hold in H RO(ΠB) (B + ). The identifications of c c are straightforward. For the identification of c in the cohomology of X p,0, we start with From this we get c c = e 2 + (1 κ)c c ω. c = e 2 c 1 + c 1 (1 κ)ξc 1 c ω = e 2 c 1 + ξc 2 c ω, where we use that κξ = 0, so (1 κ)ξ = ξ. The identification of c ω in the cohomology of X 0,q is similar. As mentioned, the proof of Theorem A will be by induction, on p + q. The base cases are those in which either p = 0 or q = 0, which have essentially been taken care of above in Theorem 2.8. Lemma Theorem A is true if p = 0 or q = 0. Proof. We discuss the case q = 0, the case p = 0 being similar. Theorem 2.8 showed that H RO(ΠB) ((X p,0 ) + ) = H RO() (S 0 )[c ω, c, c 1 ]/ cp ω, Proposition 2.9 showed that c = e 2 c 1 + ξc 2 c ω c = ξc 1. The relations basis listed in Theorem A can now be verified. The cancellation property of c is clear, because it is invertible. For the cancellation property of c, we note that the only case to consider is n p. The generators in gradings nω + RO() are with gradings {c n, c n 1 c ω, c n 2 c2 ω,..., c n p+1 c p 1 ω }, nω 2n, nω 2(n 1),..., nω 2(n p + 1) = nω + 2(p n 1). So, in fact, if x H nω+α ((X p,0 ) + ) with n p, α 2(p n), α 2(p n), then x = 0 the cancellation property of c is trivially true. 3. Additive structure of the cohomology In this section we compute the additive structure of the cohomology. Let us fix a p q assume by induction that we have already computed the RO(ΠB)- graded cohomology of X p,q for p p q < q, or p < p q q. We will show that the cohomology of X p,q is determined by a set called D p,q, in the sense that H RO(ΠB) (X) = Σ α H RO() (S 0 ). α D p,q Specifically, D p,q Z 3 is the set of gradings that generators of the cohomology of X p,q occur in. Each generator is determined uniquely by the grading it occurs in, which will be a consequence of our proof. The definition of D p,q is inductive. We work out explicitly D 1,2 in Example 3.9.

14 14 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON We will only establish the additive structure of the cohomology of X p,q in this section. We will show that the sets D p,q can be constructed as a union of p + q lines, denoted L [p,q] i. Each L [p,q] i are sent to c i 1 H 2i (CP p+q 1 ; Z). specifies generators of H RO(ΠB) ((X p,q ) + ) which 3.1. Definitions initial observations. We begin by defining the following elementary sets. They will describe gradings that families of generators occur in. The sets E i F j will form the base cases of our induction while the p,q will end up being the contribution of the top cell of X p,q. Definition 3.1. For i, j N we define {( ) } E i := 2(n i), 0, n n Z F j := {( ) } 2j, 2n, n n Z. For (i, j) N 2 \ {(0, 0)} define i,0 := E i 1, 0,j := F j 1 {( ) } {( ) i,j = 2(i n 1), 2j, n n i j 2(j 1), 2(i n), n for the cases in which both indices are strictly positive. } n i j Remark 3.2. We will now give a visualization of the above sets. E i is a line pointing in direction (2, 0, 1) = (ω 2) which passes through the point (0, 0, i) = ω i. F j is a line passing through the point (2j, 2j, j) = j pointing in direction (0, 2, 1) = ( 2). The axes in our diagrams correspond to the different generators R, Λ, ω of RO(ΠB). We also give the coordinates of the labeled points in Figure 1 Figure 2. The axes are in terms of the generators R, Λ, ω of RO(ΠB). Λ Λ E i a a 1 0 ω R ω F j b 0 b 1 R Figure 1: a 0 = (0, 0, i 1), a 1 = (2, 0, i 2), b 0 = (2j 2, 2, 1), b 1 = (2j 2, 0, 0). After the multiplicative structure is established, E i will give the gradings of elements of the form c n c i ω for n Z. Similarly, F j will give the gradings of elements of the form c n c j for n Z. Finally, i,j is the union of two half lines starting at ( 2+2j, 2j, i j) pointing in directions (2, 0, 1) (0, 2, 1), which correspond to c 1 Note that ω i j 1 ω i 1 j both belong to i,j. c 1 respectively.

15 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 15 Λ i,j b c ω a R Figure 2: a = ( 2 + 2j, 2j 2, i j + 1), b = ( 2 + 2j, 2j, i j), c = ( 2 + 2j, 2j, i j 1). In Figure 2, b corresponds to the elements c c i ωc j 1 c c i 1 ω c j. Using Relation (4.5), these two elements are dependent over the coefficients H RO() (S 0 ) so they each generate the same summ. One half of i,j is comprised of elements of the form c n ci 1 ω c j while the other is comprised of elements of the form c n ci ωc j 1 where n N. This, of course, requires the multiplicative structure. We are now ready to inductively define the sets D p,q. For n Z, we will denote by H + n = {(a, b, c) Z 3 c n} H n = {(a, b, c) Z 3 c n}, the two half spaces delimited by the plane P n = {(,, n)}. Definition 3.3. For p, q N \ {0} set p 1 q 1 D p,0 := E i D 0,q := F i. i=0 For (p, q) ( N \ {0} ) 2 we set ( ) ( ) D p,q := D p,q 1 H p q + D p 1,q Hp q p,q. Recall that H + p q, H p q, P p q are defined in Definition 3.1. The definition of D p,q mimics the way in which we will inductively compute the cohomology of X p,q. This will be done by using two different cofiber sequences coming from different cell attachments. Each will compute the cohomology of X p,q in a range bounded by the plane P p q. The p,q will come from the cohomology of the two different cells we attach, half coming from each different cell attachment. Remark 3.4. Note that Theorem 2.8 says that the sets D p,0 D 0,q give the gradings of the generators of the cohomology of X p,0 X 0,q respectively. This is recalled in Lemma There is in fact overlap between D p,q 1 D p 1,q in the plane P p q. In fact, we have that D p,q 1 P p q = D p 1,q P p q. Thus we could similarly write ( ) ( ) D p,q := D p,q 1 H p q + D p 1,q Hp q 1 p,q. i=0

16 16 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON The Line decomposition. The set D p,q decompose as a union of disjoint lines L [p,q] i. These lines are described by functions l [p,q] i. The main use of these is to establish Proposition 3.12, which is necessary for proving the splitting result, Lemma 3.18, in the following section. We will later see, after establishing the multiplicative structure of the cohomology, that these lines are in fact quite natural. For example, the classes in H RO(ΠB) ((X p,q ) + ) in gradings given by L [p,q] k all realize to c k H 2k (CP p+q 1 ). Definition 3.5. Fix a pair (p, q) N \ {(0, 0)} set m := min{p, q} M := max{p, q}. For every i N such that 0 i p + q 1, we define the set L [p,q] i as follows. If 0 i m 1, then we set i+1,0 on H + L [p,q] i i := i+1 j,j on H + i 2j H i 2j+2 for 0 < j < i + 1 0,i+1 on H i. If m i < M 1, then set µ := min{p, i + 1} µ,i+1 µ on H + L [p,q] 2µ i 2 i := µ j,i+1 µ+j on H + 2µ i 2j 2 H 2µ i 2j for 0 < j < m µ m,i+1 µ+m on H 2µ i 2m. If M 1 i p + q 1, then set ν := p + q i p,q ν on H = L [p,q] p q+ν 1 + p+q ν := p j,q ν+j on H + p q+ν 2j 1 H p q+ν 2j+1 p ν,q on Hp q ν+1. L [p,q] i for 0 < j < ν Remark 3.6. For every pair (p, q) ( N \ {0} ) 2 every choice of strictly positive i < p + q, we have ( ) ( ) L [p,q] i = L [p,q 1] i H p q + L [p 1,q] i Hp q. This follows directly from the above defintion. These lines also give the following decomposition of the sets D p,q. Proposition 3.7. For every (p, q) N 2 \ {(0, 0)} we have D p,q = p+q 1 i=0 L [p,q] i. Proof. The proof is by induction, with all the pairs of the form (p, 0) (0, q) (for which the statement is trivial) as the base case of the induction. In view of the inductive hypothesis we have (3.8) D p,q 1 = p+q 2 i=0 p+q 2 L [p,q 1] i D p 1,q = i=0 L [p 1,q] i

17 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 17 from which it follows that ( ) ( ) D p,q 1 H p q + D p 1,q Hp q p+q 2 i=0 ( L [p,q 1] i ) L [p 1,q] i Now we observe that p,q = L [p+q] p+q 1, which is disjoint from the other two components which constitute D p,q. We are left to show that ( ) ( ) p+q 2 D p,q 1 H p q + D p 1,q Hp q = L [p,q] i. Each L [p,q] i is disjoint from L [p,q ] i whenever i i. This follows from the definitions of the L i s comparable property of the i,j. Now, by using (3.8), Remark 3.6, that the L [p,q] i s are disjoint, we can rewrite the right h side as follows ( p+q 2 ) ( i=0 L [p,q 1] i H p q + p+q 2 ) i=0 L [p 1,q] i Hp q = p+q 2 i=0 L [p,q] i. i=0 We now give the example of D 1,2 to aid with the understing of these definitions. Example 3.9. Consider D 1,2. By definition we have that D 1,2 = ( ) ( ) D 1,1 H 1 + D 0,2 H 2 1,2. We will write D 1,1 + for D 1,1 H 1 + D 0,2 for D 0,2 H 2. We have used,, in order to distinguish the different lines L [1,2] 0, L [1,2] 1, L 2 [1, 2], respectively. Λ Λ D + 1,1 D 0,2 ω R ω R

18 18 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON D + 1,1 D 0,2 Λ 1,2 Λ ω R ω R Taking the union of these gives us D 1,2 which looks as follows. D 1,2 Λ ω R The basis elements that are determined by L [1,2] 1 are, in order, {..., c ω c 3, c ωc 2, c ωc 1, c ω, c ω c, c, c c, c c 2,...} where both c ω c ω c are s on the coordinate axes. Note here that we make explicit use of Relation (4.5) to relate the classes c ω c c c. For comparison with the work of Lewis in [9], the following are diagrams of the nω + RO()-page of the H RO(ΠB) ((X 1,2 ) + ) for n between 2 3. We have used the grading convention of Lewis so that the axes are in terms of the virtual dimension, denoted α, of the representation the virtual dimension of the fixed

19 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 19 points, denoted α, for α RO(). α α c 2 c ωc c 1 c ω α c c ω c 1 c ωc α c 2 H 2ω+RO() (P(C 1 M 2 ) + ) α H ω+ro() (P(C 1 M 2 ) + ) α c c ω c c ω c c c ω c c 1 α α α H RO() (P(C 1 M 2 ) + ) c 2 c c H ω+ro() (P(C 1 M 2 ) + ) α c 3 1 c c2 c 2 c c 2 α α H 2ω+RO() (P(C 1 M 2 ) + ) H 3ω+RO() (P(C 1 M 2 ) + ) Remark It is worth pointing out that for i < min{p, q}, the set L [p,q] i is actually independent of the choice of p q. In other words, we have that L [p+1,q] i = L [p,q] i = L [p,q+1] i. We will now consider functions l [p,q] i : Z Z 3 where l [p,q] i (n) is the point of intersection of L [p,q] i with P n. These are well defined as each intersection has a single element. These functions will be useful for our proof of Lemma 3.18.

20 20 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON Definition The definition of i,j gives the following description of the function g i,j : Z Z 3 which associates to each n Z the coordinates of i,j P n. Thus we have that ( ) 2(i n 1), 2j, n for n i j g i,j (n) = ( ) 2(j 1), 2(i n), n for i j n. We also have the functions associated to the E i the F j. They take the form {( ) } {( ) } e i (n) := 2(n i), 0, n n Z f j (n) := 2j, 2n, n n Z. This next proposition will allow us to prove our theorem in the next section. In essence, it gives a sort of boundedness on H RO(ΠB) ((X p,q ) + ), that in H RO(ΠB) ((X p,q ) + ) P n the contribution of L [p,q] p+q 1 is above to the right of the contribution of all the other L [p,q] i s. This will imply that certain boundary maps in a long exact sequence are necessarily zero. This is the heart of the proof of Lemma 3.18 as well as the main reason for introducing all of these structures. Proposition Let (p, q) N 2 \{(0, 0)} let k N be such that k p+q 1. For j {1, 2} set λ j := π j l [p,q] p+q 1 λ j := π j l [p,q] k, where π j : Z 3 Z is the projection on the j-th component. Then, for every n Z, we have i) λ 1(n) = λ 1 (n) or λ 1(n) λ 1 (n) 2 ii) (λ 1 + λ 2)(n) (λ 1 + λ 2 )(n) 2. iven two functions α β, we will write that α β if the conclusion of the above proposition is satisfied. The relation is both reflexive transitive. We will rely on the fact that the lines are built from the i,j s where the statement is also true easier to establish. Lemma Let (i, j ), (i, j) N 2 \ {(0, 0)} such that i i j j. Set σ k (n) := π k g i,j, σ k(n) := π k g i,j for k {1, 2}. Then, for every n Z, we have i) σ 1(n) = σ 1 (n) or σ 1(n) σ 1 (n) 2 ii) (σ 1 + σ 2)(n) (σ 1 + σ 2 )(n) 2. Proof. We will prove this by induction on the pair (i, j) since the condition is transitive. We will consider the following 2 cases: Case A: g i,j g i+1,j, Case B: g i,j g i,j+1. We will give the proof of case A only as that of B is similar. A) When j = 0 this simplifies to checking that g i,0 = e i+1 e i+2 = g i+1,0., which is obvious from the formulas. When i = 0 we must show that f j 1 g 1,j, which is also straightforward. This leaves us with the case when both i j are nonzero. Showing that g i,j g i+1,j involves examining three cases: n i j, n = i+1 j, n i + 2 j. For n i j we have that g i,j (n) = ( 2(i n 1), 2j, n ) while g i+1,j (n) = ( ) 2(i n), 2j, n.

21 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 21 For n = i + 1 j the usual expressions are equivalent to g i,j (n) = ( ) 2(j 1), 2(j 1), n g i+1,j (n) = ( ) 2(j 1), 2j, n. For i + 2 j n we then have g i,j (n) = ( ) 2(j 1), 2(i n), n while g i+1,j (n) = ( ) 2(j 1), 2(i + 1 n), n. In each of these regions we see that g i,j g i+1,j by inspection. We now turn to the proof of Proposition Proof. For each k, p, q we have that L [p,q] k i p,j q i+j=k 1 i,j as sets. This follows from Definition 3.5, the definition of L [p,q] k. It also implies that if there is a function α such that g i,j α for each pair (i, j) appearing above, then l [p,q] k α. We want to show that l [p.q] k l [p,q] p+q 1 for each k p + q 1. We have that l [p,q] p+q 1 = g p,q since L [p,q] p+q 1 = p,q. The previous lemma establishes that g i,j g p,q for each pair (i, j) with i p j q. Therefore l [p.q] k g p,q = l [p,q] p+q 1 as desired. Remark We let α denote the generator on the nω + RO()-page of the cohomology of X p,q coming from the line L [p,q] p+q 1. The function λ gives the grading of the generator α, which is λ 1 (n) λ 2(n)M + nω (note that λ 2 (n) is always even). The lemma then implies the following picture of the nω + RO()-page of the cohomology of X p,q. As RO() is generated by R Λ, R is the horizontal axis Λ is the vertical axis. We will use this convention throughout. enerators coming from a line L [p,q] p +q, where p q satisfy the hypothesis of the lemma, can occur in the shaded region containing λ (n) or in the places denoted by, which lie in the H RO() (S 0 )-submodule generated by α. This picture is the whole point of Proposition 3.12.

22 22 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON λ (n) α 3.2. Proof of the additive structure. We are now in a position to provide a proof of the additive structure of the cohomology of X p,q. Theorem The cohomology of X p,q as a H RO() (S 0 )-module is given by H RO(ΠB) ((X p,q ) + ) = Σ α H RO() (S 0 ) α D p,q is thus a free H RO() (S 0 )-module. We will prove this by an inductive argument. The base case is given by the following lemma while the induction step is proved using Lemma Lemma The statement holds when either p or q is 0. This follows trivially as in these cases D p,q is simply several E i s or F i s as is mentioned in Remark 3.4. We have the computations of H RO(ΠB) ((X p,0 ) + ) H RO(ΠB) ((X 0,q ) + ), given in Section 2.2, which show that the cohomology is of this form. Our sting assumption for the remainder of this section is that p 1, q 1, Theorem 3.15 is true for X p,q 1 X p 1,q. For the inductive step, we examine the two inclusions i: X p,q 1 X p,q j : X p 1,q X p,q. Taking the cofibers over B, we have X p,q / B X p 1,q S 2(p 1)+qM 0 X p,q / B X p,q 1 S 2(q 1)+pM 1. Here, S 2(p 1)+qM 0 indicates a sphere sitting over the fixed-point component B 0 of B while S 2(q 1)+pM 1 sits over B 1. Remark Note that H RO(ΠB) (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ) = H RO() (S 0 ){u}[c, c 1 ]

23 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 23 where u = 2(p 1) + qm c = ω 2. Thus, in gradings nω + RO(), H nω+ro() (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ) is a free H RO() (S 0 )-module on the single generator c n u, which lies in grading c n u = n(ω 2) + 2(p 1) + qm = nω + 2(p n 1) + qm. The generators of H nω+ro() (S2(p 1)+qM 0 ) occur in the same gradings. Similarly, we have that H RO(ΠB) (S 2(q 1)+pM 1 ) = H RO() (S 0 ){u}[c, c 1 ] where u = 2(q 1) + pm c = 2. Thus, in gradings nω + RO(), H nω+ro() (S 2(q 1)+pM 1 ) is a free H RO() (S 0 )-module on the single generator c n u since nω + RO() = n + RO(). This class lies in grading c n u = n( 2) + 2(q 1) + pm = nω + 2(q 1) + (p n)m. The generators of H nω+ro() (S2(q 1)+pM 1 ) occur in the same gradings. Also recall that H RO() (S 0 ) is nonzero when α = α 1 + α 2 Λ RO() α 2 α α 2 0 α 1 α 2 α 2 0 Thus we have that H nω+ro() (S 2(q 1)+pM 1 ) looks as follows. Here, x is used to denote the generator c n u. Λ x R Each bullet denotes a nonzero Mackey functor each edge denotes a nontrivial action of the classes e or ι in H RO() (S 0 ). Thus as modules over H RO() (S 0 ), the cohomology of these spheres is in gradings from p,q. See [2, Section 1.4] for more details. Lemma 3.18.

24 24 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON (1) If n p q, then we have split short exact sequences 0 H nω+ro() (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ) Moreover, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) j H nω+ro() ((X p 1,q ) + ) 0. j : H nω+α ((X p,q ) + ) = H nω+α ((X p 1,q ) + ) for α RO() with α < 2(p + q n 1) α < 2(p n 1). (2) If n p q, then we have split short exact sequences 0 H nω+ro() (S 2(q 1)+pM 1 ) Moreover, H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) i H nω+ro() ((X p,q 1 ) + ) 0. i : H nω+α ((X p,q ) + ) = H nω+α ((X p,q 1 ) + ) for α RO() with α < 2(p + q n 1) α < 2(q 1). Proof. The cofiber sequences X p 1,q X p,q S 2(p 1)+qM 0 X p,q 1 X p,q S 2(q 1)+pM 1 each induce a long exact sequence in RO(ΠB)-graded cohomology. We know that H nω+α (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ) = 0 whenever n p q, α RO() with α < 2(p+q n 1), α < 2(p n 1) by the description of the cohomology of a point given in Remark Similarly, we know that for n p q, α RO() with α < 2(p+q n 1), α < 2(q 1) that H nω+α (S 2(q 1)+pM 1 ) = 0. These each imply the stated isomorphisms. We want to show that the long exact sequences of RO()-graded Mackey functors H nω+ro() (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ) H nω+ro() (S 2(q 1)+pM 1 ) H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) j H nω+ro() ((X p 1,q ) + ). H nω+ro() ((X p,q ) + ) i H nω+ro() ((X p,q 1 ) + ). degenerate into short exact sequences. To see this we examine the boundary maps for α RO(). H nω+α (X p 1,q ) δ0 H nω+α+1 H nω+α (X p,q 1 ) δ1 H nω+α+1 (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ) (S 2(q 1)+pM 1 )

25 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 25 We will show that δ 0 is necessarily zero for degree reasons. The case of δ 1 is very similar so we omit it. By induction, we have injections L [p 1,q] i H RO(ΠB) ((X p 1,q ) + ) which associate to each element of L [p,q] i the generator in that grading. The restriction of δ 0 to the image of L [p 1,q] p+q 2 = p 1,q in H RO(ΠB) ((X p 1,q ) + ) induces a map p 1,q P n H nω+ro()+1 (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ). Recall from Definition 3.1 that p 1,q = {( ) }} {( ) } 2p 2n 4, 2q, n n p 1 q 2q 2, 2p 2n 2, n n p 1 q when p 1, we will deal with the case when p = 1 later. Thus for n p q we have two cases for p 1,q P n, they correspond to n = p q n < p q respectively. When n = p q the contribution of p 1,q to the nω+ro()-page of H RO(ΠB) ((X p 1,q ) +, H nω+ro() ((X p 1,q ) + ), is a generator in grading 2q 2 + (q 1)M + (p q)ω which gets sent by δ 0 to an element in grading 2q 1 + (q 1)M + (p q)ω of H RO(ΠB) (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ). When n = p q, the nω+ro()-page of H RO(ΠB) is generated, as an H RO() (S 0 )-module, by the class c p q u in grading 2q 2+qM+ (p q)ω. By our knowledge of the H RO() (S 0 )-module structure it is clear that (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ) there is no nontrivial element in grading 2q 1 + (q 1)M + (p q)ω for δ 0 to hit. This would correspond to a nontrivial element of H RO() (S 0 ) in grading 1 M, which doesn t exist. Now we can apply Proposition 3.12 to see that δ 0 vanishes on all other generators of the nω + RO()-page of H RO(ΠB) any other line, say L [p 1,q] k contributed by the line L [p 1,q] p+q qm + (p q)ω of H RO(ΠB) ((X p 1,q ) + ) when n = p q. Let us consider, the associated λ s. We let α denote the generator x denote the generator cp q u in grading 2q (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ).

26 26 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON λ(n) x α By Proposition 3.12, we know that any generator of the nω + RO()-page of H RO(ΠB) ((X p 1,q ) + ) which comes from L [p 1,q] k must lie in the shaded region or in one of the gradings denoted by of the above figure. δ 0 must be trivial on these generators as it changes the grading by +1 in the horizontal direction (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ) is zero in the relevant gradings. Therefore, δ 0 is trivial when H RO(ΠB) restricted to the image of L [p 1,q] k for each k. We next consider the case n < p q. Here we have that the contribution of p 1,q to the nω + RO() page of H RO(ΠB) ((X p 1,q ) + ) is a generator in grading 2(p n 2) + qm + nω which gets sent by δ 0 to an element in grading 2p 2n 3 + qm+nω of H RO(ΠB) (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ). The nω+ro() page of H RO(ΠB) (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ) is generated, as an H RO() (S 0 )-module, by the class c n u in grading 2(p n 1)+ qm + nω. By our knowledge of H RO() (S 0 ) it is clear that there is no nontrivial element in grading 2p 2n 3 + qm + nω for δ 0 to hit. This would correspond to a nontrivial element of H RO() (S 0 ) in grading 1, which, similar to the previous case, doesn t exist. As before, we apply Proposition 3.12 to see that δ 0 vanishes on all other generators of the nω + RO()-page of H RO(ΠB) ((X p 1,q ) + ) when n < p q. Let us consider any other line, say L [p 1,q] k the generator contributed by the line L [p 1,q] grading 2(p n 1) + qm + nω of H RO(ΠB), the associated λ s. We let α denote p+q 2 x denote the generator cn u in (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ).

27 THE Z/2-EQUIVARIANT COHOMOLOY OF COMPLEX PROJECTIVE SPACES 27 λ(n) α x Similarly to the above, δ 0 must be the zero map when restricted to the image of L [p 1,q] k. By Proposition 3.12, we know that any generator of the nω +RO()-page of H RO(ΠB) ((X p 1,q ) + ) which comes from L [p 1,q] k must lie in the shaded region of the above figure or in one of the gradings denoted by of the above figure. Thus δ 0 must be trivial on these generators as it changes the grading by +1 in the horizontal direction the nω +RO()-page of H RO(ΠB) (S 2(p 1)+qM 0 ) is zero in the relevant gradings. Finally, we consider the case when p = 1. In this case we consider 0,q, which is of the form F q 1 = {( ) } 2q 2, 2n, n n Z. As n p q p = 1 we have that n 1 q. The contribution of 0,q to the nω+ro()-page of H RO(ΠB) ((X 0,q ) + ) is a generator in grading 2(q 1) nm+nω of which gets sent by δ 0 to an element in grading 2q 1 nm+nω of H RO(ΠB) (S qm 0 ). The nω + RO()-page of H RO(ΠB) (S qm 0 ) is generated, as an H RO() (S 0 )-module, by the class c n u which lives in grading 2n + qm + nω. By our knowledge of H RO() (S 0 ) it is clear that there is no nontrivial element in grading 2q 1 nm+nω for δ 0 to hit. This would correspond to a nontrivial element of H RO() (S 0 ) in grading 2k 1 km for k = q + n 1, which does not exist. The possible contributions of 0,q as n varies are denoted by in the following diagram. δ 0 must vanish on these classes as there are no nonzero elements one unit to the right of any of these classes. As p = 1, all other lines are also of the form 0,k for k < q so their contributions to the nω + RO()-page of H RO(ΠB) ((X 0,q ) + ) lie in the shaded region.

28 28 STEVEN R. COSTENOBLE, THOMAS HUDSON, AND SEAN TILSON x As we see, the relevant gradings are trivial in H RO() (S 0 ). Note that the grading that contains a a simultaneously is only meant to denote that it contains a contribution from 0,q as well as from the cohomology of S qm 0. Thus we have concluded that δ 0 is trivial when n p q so the long exact sequence in cohomology degenerates into short exact sequences as desired. Showing that δ 1 vanishes is analogous to the above case. We instead use the spheres over B 1, but the arguments are analogous. The lemma above suffices to give us the additive structure of the cohomology of X p,q, in the sense that they are free H RO() (S 0 )-modules with generators in the correct gradings. It is now straightforward to prove Theorem Proof. The proof follows by induction. The base case was already established after the statement of the theorem. The inductive step follows immediately from Lemma We separate it into two cases: n p q n p q 1, following Remark 3.4. Recall that ( ) ( ) D p,q := D p,q 1 H p q + D p 1,q Hp q p,q. We know in the first case that H nω+ro() (X p,q 1 ) = n p q in the second that H nω+ro() (X p 1,q ) = n p q 1 α D p,q 1 H + p q α D p 1,q H p q 1 Σ α H RO() (S 0 ) Σ α H RO() (S 0 ). This follows from the induction hypothesis as restricting n has the effect of intersecting with the appropriate half space. As the cohomology of X p,q 1 X p 1,q are both free, the short exact sequences in the lemma split. Thus each element of