text:
# Floating bundles and their applications

## 1 The homotopic functor, connected with floating algebra bundles

The aim of this section is to define the homotopic functor to category of Abelian groups, connected with the special classes of bundles with fiber matrix algebra or projective space. The results, which will be represented (without proofs111see some proofs in the articles (in Russian)  Ershov A. V. O gomotopicheskikh svoistvakh rassloenii so strukturnoi gruppoi avtomorfizmov matrichnikh algebr // Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta, ser. Matematika. Mekhanika. 6, 1999, s. 56-58,  Ershov A. V. O $`K`$-teorii rassloenii na matrichnie algebri // UMN, T. 55, Vip. 2, 2000, c. 137-138.) below, were obtained in the author’s dissertation.

Let $`X`$ be a finite $`CW`$-complex, $`\stackrel{~}{M}_n:=X\times M_n()`$ be the product bundle over $`X`$ with fiber $`M_n()`$ (where $`M_n()`$ is the algebra of all $`n\times n`$ matrices over $``$).

The next definition is motivated by well-known result that every vector bundle over compact base is the subbundle in a product bundle.

###### Definition 1.

Let $`A_k`$ be a locally trivial bundle over $`X`$ with fiber $`M_k()`$. Assume that there exists a bundle map

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{}\end{array}$$

such that for any point $`xX`$ the fiber $`(A_k)_xM_k()`$ is embedded (by the restriction $`\mu _x`$ of $`\mu `$) into the fiber $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})_xM_{kl}()`$ as a central simple subalgebra. Then the triple $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ is called the algebra bundle (AB) over $`X`$. Moreover if $`k`$ and $`l`$ are relatively prime (i. e. if their greatest common divisor $`(k,l)=1`$), then the triple $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ is called the floating algebra bundle (FAB).

There exists the similar class of bundles with fiber projective space.

###### Definition 2.

Let $`X`$ be a finite $`CW`$-complex; $`P^{k1}`$ and $`Q^{l1}`$ be two locally trivial bundles (over $`X`$) with fibers $`P^{k1}`$ and $`P^{l1}`$ respectively. By $`\stackrel{~}{P}^{kl1}`$ denote the product bundle over $`X`$ with fiber $`P^{kl1}.`$ Assume that there exists a bundle map

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{}\end{array}$$

(where $`P^{k1}\underset{X}{\times }Q^{l1}`$ is the product of the bundles over $`X`$) such that for any point $`xX`$ the fiber $`(P^{k1}\underset{X}{\times }Q^{l1})_xP^{k1}\times P^{l1}`$ is embedded into the fiber $`(\stackrel{~}{P}^{kl1})_xP^{kl1}`$ by the map of Segre. Then the bundle $`P^{k1}\underset{X}{\times }Q^{l1}`$ is called the bundle of Segre’s product (BSP), and under the condition $`(k,l)=1`$ the floating bundle of Segre’s product (FBSP).

Note that the projective space $`P^{n1}`$ and the matrix algebra $`M_n()`$ have the same group of automorphisms $`PGL(n).`$ There exists the special class of principal bundles such that any bundle satisfies the conditions of Definition 1 or 2 is associated with a bundle from this class. Therefore we get one-to-one correspondence between AB and BSP (respectively FAB and FBSP) over $`X`$.

A morphism from AB $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ to AB $`(B_m,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{mn})`$ (over $`X`$) is a pair $`(f,g),`$ where $`f:A_kB_m`$ and $`g:\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}\stackrel{~}{M}_{mn}`$ are bundle maps such that their restricts to any fiber are monomorphisms of central simple algebras and the corresponding quadratic diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}& \stackrel{g}{}& \stackrel{~}{M}_{mn}\\ \mu & & \nu \\ A_k& \stackrel{f}{}& B_m\end{array}$$
(1)
is commutative. Note that the morphism $`(f,g)`$ exists only if $`km,ln.`$

Morphisms of BSP may be defined analogously.

The set of all subalgebras in $`M_{kl}()`$, that are isomorphic to $`M_k(),`$ is parametrized by the homogeneous manifold $`Gr_{k,kl}^{}.`$ This manifold may be considered as an analog of Grassmannian manifold. Moreover, the set of Segre’s maps $`P^{k1}\times P^{l1}P^{kl1}`$ (where $`P^{kl1}`$ is fixed) is parametrized by the same manifold $`Gr_{k,kl}^{}.`$

Note that the stable (i. e. $`\pi _r(Gr_{k,kl}^{})`$ under the condition $`r<2\mathrm{min}\{k,l\}`$) homotopic groups of $`Gr_{k,kl}^{}`$ are the same as for $`BSU.`$

Let us consider the canonical AB $`(𝒜_k^{},\mu ^{},\stackrel{~}{}_{kl}^{})`$ over $`Gr_{k,kl}^{},`$ defined in the following way. The fiber of the bundle $`𝒜_k^{}`$ over a point $`xGr_{k,kl}^{}`$ is the subalgebra in $`M_{kl}(),`$ which corresponds to $`x`$. Thus the bundle $`𝒜_k^{}`$ and its embedding into the product bundle $`\stackrel{~}{}_{kl}^{}`$ are uniquely defined. If $`(k,l)=1`$, then $`(𝒜_k^{},\mu ^{},\stackrel{~}{}_{kl}^{})`$ is FAB.

The canonical BSP (if $`(k,l)=1`$, then FBSP) $`𝒫^{{}_{}{}^{}k1}\underset{Gr_{k,kl}^{}}{\times }𝒬^{{}_{}{}^{}l1}`$ over $`Gr_{k,kl}^{}`$ is defined in a similar way.

By the standard method of reduction of a structural group we can replace the noncompact manifold $`Gr_{k,kl}^{}`$ by the homotopy-equivalent compact manifold $`Gr_{k,kl}.`$ Fibers of the canonical AB $`(𝒜_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{}_{kl})`$ (respectively canonical BSP $`𝒫^{k1}\underset{Gr_{k,kl}}{\times }𝒬^{l1}`$ ) over $`Gr_{k,kl}`$ have a concordant Hermitian (respectively Kählerian) structure.

Since the categories of AB and BSP (respectively FAB and FBSP) are equivalent, we shall formulate the next results only in terms of AB and FAB.

The following Proposition shows that if $`(k,l)=1,`$ then $`Gr_{k,kl}`$ and the canonical FAB $`(𝒜_k,\mu ,_{kl})`$ are the classifying space and the universal FAB (for FAB of the form $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ over a finite $`CW`$-complexes) respectively.

###### Proposition 3.

Let $`X`$ be a finite $`CW`$-complex, $`dimX<2\mathrm{min}\{k,l\}`$, $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ be a FAB over $`X`$, i. e. $`(k,l)=1`$. Then there exists a map (unique up to homotopy) $`\phi :XGr_{k,kl}`$ such that $`\phi ^{}(𝒜_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{}_{kl})(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ (i. e. $`\phi `$ is a classifying map for $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$).

Now let us consider an embedding $`i_{kl,mn}:Gr_{k,kl}Gr_{m,mn}`$ induced by an embedding of algebras $`M_{kl}()M_{mn}()(k|m,l|n).`$ Let the map $`i_{kl,mn}:\pi _r(Gr_{k,kl})\pi _r(Gr_{m,mn})`$ be the homomorphism induced by $`i_{kl,mn}.`$ Let $`\gamma _{k,l}`$ be the generator of $`\pi _{2s}(Gr_{k,kl}),`$ then $`i_{kl,mn}(\gamma _{k,l})=\frac{(m,n)}{(k,l)}\gamma _{m,n}`$ (here we assume that $`s<\mathrm{min}\{k,l\}`$; recall that in this case $`\pi _2(Gr_{k,kl})=0,`$ $`\pi _{2s}(Gr_{k,kl})=\pi _{2s}(BSU)=,s>1,`$ $`\pi _{2s+1}(Gr_{k,kl})=\pi _{2s+1}(BSU)=0`$).

It follows from the last result that if $`(m,n)=1((k,l)=1)`$ then the map $`i_{kl,mn}:Gr_{k,kl}Gr_{m,mn}`$ induces an isomorphism of the stable homotopic groups. Therefore the homotopic groups are stabilized under the passage to the direct limit $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}Gr_{k,kl}.`$ This explains the reason of separate study of FAB. In general case the localization of the homotopic groups occurs. Note that the theory of FAB (which will be stated below) cannot be reduced to the theory of usual principal bundles: embedding $`\mu `$ plays an important role. Moreover a bundle $`A_k,`$ which forms a FAB $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}),`$ has a special form.

We shall study only FAB below.

It may be proved that for any sequence $`\{k_j,l_j\}_j`$ of pairs, satisfies the following conditions

$$(\mathrm{i})k_j,l_j\mathrm{};(\mathrm{ii})k_j|k_{j+1},l_j|l_{j+1};(\mathrm{iii})(k_j,l_j)=1,$$

the spaces $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{j}}{lim}Gr_{k_j,k_jl_j}`$ are homotopy-equivalent. By $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}Gr_{k,kl}`$ or $`Gr`$ denote this unique homotopic type.

Let us consider a FAB of the form $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_k,\tau ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}).`$ Let $`\tau `$ be the map $`\tau :X\times M_k()X\times M_{kl}()`$ such that $`\tau (x,T)=(x,TE_l)`$ (where $`xX`$, $`TM_k(),`$ $`E_l`$ is the matrix unit of order $`l\times l`$, and $`TE_l`$ denotes the Kronecker product of matrix). Then the FAB $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_k,\tau ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ is called trivial.

###### Definition 4.

Isomorphism from FAB $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ to FAB $`(C_k,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ over $`X`$ is a pair of bundle maps $`f:A_kC_k`$, $`g:\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}`$ such that the following conditions hold:

* for any point $`xX`$ the fiber $`(A_k)_x`$ (respectively the fiber $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})_x`$) is embeded into the fiber $`(C_k)_x`$ (respectively into the fiber $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})_x`$) by the restriction of $`f`$ (respectively of $`g`$) as a central simple subalgebra (in particular $`f_x,`$ $`g_x`$ are homomorphisms),
* the following diagram

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{}\end{array}$$

is commutative.

###### Definition 5.

FAB $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ and $`(B_m,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{mn})`$ are called stable equivalent if there exist a sequence of pairs of natural numbers $`\{t_i,u_i\}`$, $`1is`$ and a corresponding sequence of FAB $`(A_{t_i},\mu _i,\stackrel{~}{M}_{t_iu_i})`$ such that the following conditions hold:

* $`\{t_1,u_1\}=\{k,l\},\{t_s,u_s\}=\{m,n\};`$
* $`(t_it_{i+1},u_iu_{i+1})=1`$ for $`s>1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}is1;`$
* $`(A_{t_1},\mu _1,\stackrel{~}{M}_{t_1u_1})=(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}),`$ $`(A_{t_s},\mu _s,\stackrel{~}{M}_{t_su_s})=(B_m,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{mn});`$
* $`(A_{t_i},\mu _i,\stackrel{~}{M}_{t_iu_i})(\stackrel{~}{M}_{t_{i+1}},\tau ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{t_{i+1}u_{i+1}})(A_{t_{i+1}},\mu _{i+1},\stackrel{~}{M}_{t_{i+1}u_{i+1}})(\stackrel{~}{M}_{t_i},\tau ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{t_iu_i})`$

for $`s>1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}is1,`$ where $`(\stackrel{~}{M}_{t_i},\tau ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{t_iu_i})`$ is the trivial FAB.

The space $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}Gr_{k,kl}`$ is the classifying space for FAB with the just defined relation of the stable equivalence. This motivates Definition 5.

By $`[(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})]`$ denote the stable equivalence class of the FAB $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}).`$

Now let us show that the set of all stable equivalence classes of FAB over $`X`$ is an Abelian group with respect to the operation, induced by the tensor product of FAB. For this we need the following Proposition.

###### Proposition 6.

For any pair $`\{k,l\}`$ such that $`(\mathrm{i})`$ $`(k,l)=1,`$ $`(\mathrm{ii})`$ $`2\mathrm{min}\{k,l\}>dimX`$ every equivalence class of FAB over $`X`$ has a representative of the form $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$.

Suppose $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ and $`(B_m,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{mn})`$ are FAB over $`X`$. If $`(km,ln)=1`$, then it is clear that $`(A_kB_m,\mu \nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{klmn})`$ is the FAB. Then by definition, put $`[(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})][(B_m,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{mn})]=[(A_kB_m,\mu \nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{klmn})].`$ Otherwise, applying the previous Proposition, we can replace $`(B_m,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{mn})`$ by an another representative $`(B_m^{},\nu ^{},\stackrel{~}{M}_{m^{}n^{}})`$ of the same equivalence class such that $`(km^{},ln^{})=1`$.

It is clear that the product of stable equivalence classes is well defined. The unit of this operation is the class of trivial FAB $`[(\stackrel{~}{M}_k,\tau ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})]`$. For given FAB $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ consider the subbundle $`B_l`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}`$ such that $`(B_l)_x=Z_{(\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})_x}((A_k)_x)`$ (where $`Z_B(A)`$ is the centralizer of a subalgebra $`A`$ in an algebra B) for any point $`xX`$. This also defines the embedding $`\nu :B_l\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}.`$ Thus the FAB $`(B_l,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ is defined. The inverse element for $`[(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})]`$ is the class of FAB $`(B_l,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}).`$

The next theorem sums the basic results obtained up to now.

###### Theorem 7.

The set of all stable equivalence classes of FAB with respect to the operation, induced by the tensor product of FAB, defines the contravariant homotopic functor to the category of Abelian groups. This functor is denoted by $`\stackrel{~}{AB}^1`$. Its represented space is the space $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}Gr_{k,kl}`$ with the structure of $`H`$-group, defined by the maps $`Gr_{k,kl}\times Gr_{m,mn}Gr_{km,kmln}`$ for $`(km,ln)=1`$ (the last maps are induced by the tensor product of algebras).

###### Definition 8.

Let $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ be an AB. The bundle $`A_k`$ (that is considered as a locally trivial bundle with the structural group $`AutM_k()PGL(k)`$) is called the base of the AB $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl}).`$

In the next Lemma the important property of bundles (with fiber matrix algebra), which are bases of FAB, is established.

###### Lemma 9.

Let $`X`$ be a finite $`CW`$-complex, $`dimX<2\mathrm{min}\{k,m\}`$. Then the following conditions are equivalent:

* $`A_k`$ is a base of a FAB over $`X`$;
* for any $`m,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}m>dimX,`$ there exists a bundle $`B_m`$ with fiber $`M_m()`$ such that $`A_k\stackrel{~}{M}_mB_m\stackrel{~}{M}_k`$;
* for some $`m,`$ $`(k,m)=1,`$ an isomorphism $`A_k\stackrel{~}{M}_mB_m\stackrel{~}{M}_k`$ holds.

Moreover for any pair of bundles $`(A_k,B_m)`$ over $`X`$ such that $`(k,m)=1`$ and $`A_k\stackrel{~}{M}_mB_m\stackrel{~}{M}_k,`$ there exists a unique stable equivalence class of FAB over $`X`$ which has representatives of forms $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kn})`$ and $`(B_m,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{mn})`$ (for any sufficiently large $`n`$ such that $`(km,n)=1`$). This class is denoted by $`[(A_k,B_m)].`$

The most interesting implication in this Lemma is $`(\mathrm{iii})(\mathrm{i}).`$ In its proof, which is based on the obstruction theory, the relatively primality of $`k`$ and $`m`$ plays the fundamental role.

Further in this section we describe a connection between the functor $`\stackrel{~}{AB}^1`$ and the reduced $`K`$-functor $`\stackrel{~}{KSU}.`$

Let $`X`$ be a finite $`CW`$-complex, $`\xi _k`$ be a complex vector $`SU(k)`$-bundle over $`X`$ of a rank $`k,`$ $`2k>dimX.`$ By $`[n]`$ denote the trivial bundle of rank $`n`$ over $`X.`$ Take a positive integer m such that $`(k,m)=1`$ and $`m>k.`$ Let us consider the pair

$$\xi _k[k][k(k1)],(\xi _k[mk])[m][m(m1)]$$

of virtual bundles of virtual dimensions $`k`$ and $`m`$ respectively. The condition $`dimX<2k`$ implies that there exists a unique (up to isomorphism) $`k`$-dimensional geometric representative of the stable equivalence class of $`\xi _k[k][k(k1)].`$ By $`\xi _k^{}`$ denote this geometric representative. Let $`(\xi _k[mk])^{}`$ be the analogous $`m`$-dimensional representative of the class of $`(\xi _k[mk])[m][m(m1)].`$

The next proposition is almost obviously.

###### Proposition 10.

$`(End\xi _k^{})\stackrel{~}{M}_m(End(\xi _k[mk])^{})\stackrel{~}{M}_k.`$

Let $`[\xi _k]`$ be the $`\stackrel{~}{KSU}`$-equivalence class of the bundle $`\xi _k.`$

It follows from Lemma 9 that if $`(k,m)=1,`$ then there exists a unique stable equivalence class of FAB over $`X,`$ corresponding to the pair $`\xi _k^{},(\xi _k[mk])^{}.`$ Clearly, that this stable equivalence class of FAB is independent of a choice of representative of the equivalence class $`[\xi _k].`$ Moreover the following Proposition holds.

###### Proposition 11.

Let $`k,m`$ be the positive integers such that $`(k,m)=1,`$ $`2\mathrm{min}\{k,m\}>dimX.`$ Then the map

$$\stackrel{~}{KSU}(X)\stackrel{~}{AB}^1(X),[\xi _k][(A_k,B_m)]$$

(where $`A_k=End\xi _k^{},B_m=End(\xi _k[mk])^{},`$ and $`[(A_k,B_m)]`$ is the stable equivalence class of FAB, corresponding to the pair $`(A_k,B_l)`$ as in Lemma 9) is well defined bijection of the sets.

In particular, any base of FAB has the form $`End\xi _k^{}`$ for some $`SU(k)`$-bundle $`\xi _k.`$

It follows from the previous Proposition that the spaces $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}Gr_{k,kl}`$ and $`BSU`$ are homotopy-equivalent.

Denote by $`BSU_{}`$ the space $`BSU`$ with the structure of $`H`$-group, induced by the tensor product of virtual $`SU`$-bundles of virtual dimension $`1`$.

###### Theorem 12.

The $`H`$-group $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}Gr_{k,kl}`$ with respect to the operation, induced by the tensor product of FAB, is isomorphic to the $`BSU_{}`$ as an $`H`$-group.

Hence the group $`\stackrel{~}{AB}^1(X)`$ is isomorphic to the multiplicative group (in sense of the theory of formal groups) of the ring $`\stackrel{~}{KSU}(X),`$ i. e. to the group (since $`X`$ is the finite $`CW`$-complex) $`\stackrel{~}{KSU}(X)`$ with respect to the operation $`\xi \eta =\xi +\eta +\xi \eta (\xi ,\eta \stackrel{~}{KSU}(X)).`$

By means of FAB, the structure of $`H`$-group on $`BSU_{}`$ may be described in geometric terms. Let us consider, for example, the finding of an inverse element. Recall that for any FAB $`(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ there exists the FAB $`(B_l,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ such that for any point $`xX`$ its base $`B_l`$ has the centralizer $`Z_{(\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})_x}(A_k)_x`$ as the fiber over $`x`$ and $`\nu `$ is the corresponding embedding. The equivalence class of the FAB $`(B_l,\nu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})`$ is the inverse element for the class $`[(A_k,\mu ,\stackrel{~}{M}_{kl})].`$ This shows that the matrix algebra’s structure on fibers of considered bundles plays the same role that a metric in usual theory of vector bundles (recall that in usual theory of vector bundles for finding of a stable inverse class for a given class with a representative $`\xi `$ we must embed the vector bundle $`\xi `$ into a product bundle and take its orthogonal complement there).

Let us consider the bundle space $`𝒫^{k1}\underset{Gr_{k,kl}}{\times }𝒬^{l1},`$ $`(k,l)=1`$ (which was defined on page 2). We also denote this space by $`\stackrel{~}{Gr}_{k,kl}.`$ It follows from Definition 2 that there exists the bundle map (over $`Gr_{k,kl}`$)

$$\lambda _{k,l}:\stackrel{~}{Gr}_{k,kl}Gr_{k,kl}\times P^{kl1}$$

such that its restriction to any fiber (isomorphic to $`P^{k1}\times P^{l1}`$) is the Segre’s map $`P^{k1}\times P^{l1}P^{kl1}.`$ If we take the composition of $`\lambda _{k,l}`$ with the projection onto $`P^{kl1},`$ then we obtain the map

$$\kappa _{k,l}:\stackrel{~}{Gr}_{k,kl}P^{kl1}$$

such that its restriction to any fiber (isomorphic to $`P^{k1}\times P^{l1}`$) is the classifying map for the exterior tensor product of the canonical line bundles over $`P^{k1}`$ and $`P^{l1}.`$

By $`Gr`$ denote the $`H`$-group $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}Gr_{k,kl}`$ (recall that $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}Gr_{k,kl}BSU_{}`$ as $`H`$-groups). By $`\stackrel{~}{Gr}`$ denote the direct limit $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}\stackrel{~}{Gr}_{k,kl}`$ of the FBSP’s bundle spaces over $`Gr_{k,kl}`$ and by $`\kappa `$ denote the direct limit

$$\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}\kappa _{k,l}:\stackrel{~}{Gr}P^{\mathrm{}}$$

of the maps $`\kappa _{k,l},(k,l)=1.`$

It can be proved that the maps

$$\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_{kl,mn}:\stackrel{~}{Gr}_{k,kl}\times \stackrel{~}{Gr}_{m,mn}\stackrel{~}{Gr}_{km,klmn},(km,ln)=1$$

(which correspond to the multiplication of FBSP, consequently their restriction to any pair of fibers is the map

$$(P^{k1}\times P^{l1})\times (P^{m1}\times P^{n1})P^{km1}\times P^{ln1})$$

induce the structure of $`H`$-group on the $`\stackrel{~}{Gr}.`$

Consider the set of pairs $`(\xi _k,\eta _l)`$ of $`k`$ and $`l`$-dimensional ($`(k,l)=1`$) complex vector bundles (not necessarily with the structural group $`SU`$) over a finite $`CW`$-complex such that

$$\xi _k\eta _l\zeta [kl],$$

where $`\zeta `$ is some geometric line bundle. Define on this set the equivalence relation which is analogous to the FAB (or FBSP) stable equivalence relation (see Definition 5). The tensor product of pairs induces the group operation on the set of equivalence classes. It is easy to prove that the $`H`$-group $`\stackrel{~}{Gr}`$ is the represented space for this homotopic functor to category of Abelian groups.

###### Proposition 13.

The map $`\kappa :\stackrel{~}{Gr}P^{\mathrm{}}`$ is the homomorphism of $`H`$-groups. Moreover $`\stackrel{~}{Gr}`$ is isomorphic to $`BSU_{}\times P^{\mathrm{}}\times P^{\mathrm{}}`$ as an $`H`$-group (recall that $`P^{\mathrm{}}`$ is the $`H`$-group with respect to the operation which corresponds to the tensor product of complex line bundles; this $`H`$-structure is induced by the Segre’s maps $`P^{k1}\times P^{l1}P^{kl1}`$).

Consider also the ”one-half” $`𝒫^{k1}`$ of the bundle space of the canonical FBSP $`𝒫^{k1}\underset{Gr_{k,kl}}{\times }𝒬^{l1}`$ over $`Gr_{k,kl}`$ (recall that $`𝒫^{k1}\underset{Gr_{k,kl}}{\times }𝒬^{l1}`$ is the product over $`Gr_{k,kl}`$ of the bundles $`𝒫^{k1}`$ and $`𝒬^{l1}`$ with fibers $`P^{k1}`$ and $`P^{l1}`$ respectively). By $`\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}`$ we denote the bundle space $`𝒫^{k1}`$ over $`Gr_{k,kl}.`$ Let $`\widehat{Gr}`$ be the direct limit $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}.`$ Note that the $`H`$-structure on $`\stackrel{~}{Gr}`$ may be restricted to the subspace $`\widehat{Gr}.`$ It is not hard to prove that the space $`\widehat{Gr}`$ is the $`H`$-group with respect to the induced $`H`$-structure.

###### Proposition 14.

$`H`$-groups $`\widehat{Gr}`$ and $`BU_{}`$ are isomorphic. Moreover they are isomorphic to the direct product $`BSU_{}\times P^{\mathrm{}}.`$

## 2 Formal groups over Hopf algebras

The aim of this section is to define some generalization of the notion of formal group. More precisely, we consider the analog of formal groups with coefficients belonging to a Hopf algebra. We also study some example of a formal group over a Hopf algebra, which generalizes the formal group of geometric cobordisms.

Recently some important connections between the Landweber-Novikov algebra and the formal group of geometric cobordisms were established 222B. I. Botvinnik, V. M. Bukhshtaber, S. P. Novikov, S. A. Yuzvinskii Algebraicheskie aspekti teorii umnojenii v kompleksnikh kobordizmakh // UMN. – 2000. – T. 55, 4. S. 5–24..

Let $`(H,\mu ,\eta ,\mathrm{\Delta },\epsilon ,S)`$ be a (topological) Hopf algebra over ring $`R`$ (where $`\mu :H\underset{R}{\widehat{}}HH`$ is multiplication, $`\eta :RH`$ is unit, $`\mathrm{\Delta }:HH\underset{R}{\widehat{}}H`$ is diagonal (comultiplication), $`\epsilon :HR`$ is counit, and $`S:HH`$ is antipode).

###### Definition 15.

A formal series $`𝔉(x1,1x)H\underset{R}{\widehat{}}H[[x1,1x]]`$ is called a formal group over the Hopf algebra $`(H,\mu ,\eta ,\mathrm{\Delta },\epsilon ,S)`$ if the following conditions hold:

* (associativity)

$$((id_H\mathrm{\Delta })𝔉)(x11,1𝔉(x1,1x))=$$

$$((\mathrm{\Delta }id_H)𝔉)(𝔉(x1,1x)1,11x);$$
* (unit)

$$((id_H\epsilon )𝔉)(x1,0)=x1,$$

$$((\epsilon id_H)𝔉)(0,1x)=1x;$$
* (inverse element) there exists the series $`\mathrm{\Theta }(x)H[[x]]`$ such that

$$((\mu (id_HS))𝔉)(x,\mathrm{\Theta }(x))=0=((\mu (Sid_H))𝔉)(\mathrm{\Theta }(x),x).$$

If for a formal group $`𝔉(x1,1x)`$ over a commutative and cocommutative Hopf algebra $`H`$ the equality $`𝔉(x1,1x)=𝔉(1x,x1)`$ holds, then it is called commutative. Below we shall deal only with the commutative case.

###### Remark 16.

Note that a formal group $`𝔉(x1,1x)`$ over Hopf algebra $`H`$ over ring $`R`$ defines the formal group (in the usual sense) $`F(x1,1x)R[[x1,1x]]`$ over the ring $`R`$ in the following way. By $`F(x1,1x)`$ denote the series $`((\epsilon \epsilon )𝔉)(x1,1x).`$ If we identify $`R\underset{R}{}R`$ and $`R,`$ we may assume that $`F(x1,1x)R[[x1,1x]].`$ Note that for any coalgebra $`H`$ the diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}H& \stackrel{\mathrm{\Delta }}{}& H\underset{R}{\widehat{}}H\\ \epsilon & & \epsilon \epsilon \\ R& \stackrel{}{}& RR\end{array}$$
(2)
is commutative. Using (2) and condition 1) of Definition 15, we get $`F(x11,1F(x1,1x))=F(F(x1,1x)1,11x).`$ Similarly the conditions $`F(x1,0)=x1`$ and $`F(0,1x)=1x`$ may be verified. It is well known, that the existence of the inverse element (in the case of usual formal groups) follows from the proved conditions. However this may be deduced from the condition 3) of Definition 15 in the standard way. Moreover, the inverse element $`\theta (x)`$ in the formal group $`F(x1,1x)`$ is equal to $`(\epsilon (\mathrm{\Theta }))(x).`$

Therefore we may consider the formal group $`𝔉(x1,1x)`$ over Hopf algebra $`H`$ as an extension of the usual formal group $`F(x1,1x)`$ by the Hopf algebra $`H.`$

###### Remark 17.

By definition, put $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(x)=𝔉(x1,1x),\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }(x)=0,\stackrel{~}{S}(x)=\mathrm{\Theta }(x)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_H=\mathrm{\Delta },\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_H=\epsilon ,\stackrel{~}{S}_H=S.`$ We claim that $`(H[[x]],\stackrel{~}{\mu },\stackrel{~}{\eta },\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }},\stackrel{~}{\epsilon },\stackrel{~}{S})`$ is the Hopf algebra (here $`\stackrel{~}{\mu },\stackrel{~}{\eta }`$ are evidently extensions of $`\mu ,\eta `$). Indeed, the commutativity of the diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}H[[x]]& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{}& H[[x]]\underset{R}{\widehat{}}H[[x]]\\ \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}& & id_{H\left[\left[x\right]\right]}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\\ H[[x]]\underset{R}{\widehat{}}H[[x]]& \stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}id_{H[[x]]}}{}& H[[x]]\underset{R}{\widehat{}}H[[x]]\underset{R}{\widehat{}}H[[x]]\end{array}$$
(3)
follows from the equations

$$(id_{H[[x]]}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})(𝔉(x1,1x))=((id_H\mathrm{\Delta })𝔉)(x11,1𝔉(x1,1x))=$$

$$((\mathrm{\Delta }id_H)𝔉)(𝔉(x1,1x)1,11x)=(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}id_{H[[x]]})(𝔉(x1,1x)).$$

The commutativity of the diagram

follows from the equations

$$((id_{H[[x]]}\stackrel{~}{\epsilon })\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})(x)=((id_H\epsilon )𝔉)(x1,1\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }(x))=x1,$$

$$((\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }id_{H[[x]]})\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})(x)=((\epsilon id_H)𝔉)(\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }(x)1,1x)=1x.$$

The axiom of antipode

$$(\stackrel{~}{\mu }(id_{H[[x]]}\stackrel{~}{S})\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})(x)=(\stackrel{~}{\mu }(\stackrel{~}{S}id_{H[[x]]})\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})(x)=(\stackrel{~}{\eta }\stackrel{~}{\epsilon })(x)=0$$

follows from the condition 3) of Definition 15.

###### Remark 18.

We may rewrite the conditions 1), 2), 3) of Definition 15 in terms of series $`𝔉(x1,1x)`$ in the next way. Let

$$\underset{i,j0}{}A_{i,j}x^ix^j=$$

$$\underset{i,j0}{}(\underset{k}{}a_{i,j}^kb_{i,j}^k)x^ix^jH\underset{R}{\widehat{}}H[[x1,1x]]$$

be the series $`𝔉(x1,1x).`$ Then the condition 1) is equivalent to the following equality:

$$\underset{i,j0}{}(\underset{k}{}a_{i,j}^k\mathrm{\Delta }(b_{i,j}^k))x^i𝔉(x1,1x)^j=$$

$$\underset{i,j0}{}(\underset{k}{}\mathrm{\Delta }(a_{i,j}^k)b_{i,j}^k)𝔉(x1,1x)^ix^j$$

The condition 2) is equivalent to

$$\underset{k}{}a_{i,0}^k\epsilon (b_{i,0}^k)=0,\mathrm{if}i1,\underset{k}{}a_{1,0}^k\epsilon (b_{1,0}^k)=1,$$

$$\underset{k}{}\epsilon (a_{0,j}^k)b_{0,j}^k=0,\mathrm{if}j1,\underset{k}{}\epsilon (a_{0,1}^k)b_{0,1}^k=1.$$

The condition 3) also may be rewritten in terms of series.

Let us consider some examples of defined objects.

###### Example 19.

(Trivial extension) Let $`F(x1,1x)`$ be a formal group (in the usual sense) over a ring $`R,`$ and $`(H,\mu ,\eta ,\mathrm{\Delta },\epsilon ,S)`$ be a Hopf algebra over the same ring $`R.`$ Then $`𝔉(x1,1x)=((\eta \eta )F)(x1,1x)H\underset{R}{\widehat{}}H[[x1,1x]]`$ is the formal group over the Hopf algebra $`H`$ (recall that we identify $`R\underset{R}{}R`$ and $`R`$).

###### Example 20.

Now we construct a nontrivial extension $`𝔉(x1,1x)`$ of the formal group of geometric cobordisms $`F(x1,1x)\mathrm{\Omega }_U^{}(pt)[[x1,1x]]`$ by the Hopf algebra $`\mathrm{\Omega }_U^{}(Gr).`$ For this let us consider the map (see page 13) $`\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}\times \widehat{Gr}_{m,mn}\stackrel{\widehat{\varphi }_{kl,mn}}{}\widehat{Gr}_{km,klmn},`$ $`(km,ln)=1.`$ By $`x_{km,ln}`$ denote the cobordism’s class in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_U^2(\widehat{Gr}_{km,klmn})`$ such that its restriction to every fiber of the bundle

$$\begin{array}{ccc}P^{km1}& & \widehat{Gr}_{km,klmn}\\ & & \\ & & Gr_{km,klmn}\end{array}$$
(4)
is the standard generator in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_U^2(P^{km1}).`$ Let $`x_{k,l}`$ and $`x_{m,n}`$ be analogously elements in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_U^2(\widehat{Gr}_{k,l})`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_U^2(\widehat{Gr}_{m,mn})`$ respectively. Then we obtain that

$$\widehat{\varphi }_{kl,mn}^{}(x_{km,ln})=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{0ik1}{0jm1}}{}A_{i,j}_{kl,mn}(x_{k,l})^i(x_{m,n})^j,$$

where $`A_{i,j}_{kl,mn}\mathrm{\Omega }_U^{2(1ij)}(Gr_{k,kl}\times Gr_{m,mn}).`$ Applying the functor of unitary cobordisms to the following injective system of the spaces and their maps

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\widehat{Gr}_{p,pq}\times \widehat{Gr}_{t,tu}& \stackrel{\widehat{\varphi }_{pq,tu}}{}& \widehat{Gr}_{pt,pqtu}\\ & & \\ \widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}\times \widehat{Gr}_{m,mn}& \stackrel{\widehat{\varphi }_{kl,mn}}{}& \widehat{Gr}_{km,klmn}.\end{array}$$
(5)
(under the conditions $`kp,lq,mt,nu,`$and $`(pt,qu)=1`$), we obtain the formal series

$$𝔉(x1,1x)=$$

$$\underset{i,j0}{}A_{i,j}x^ix^j\mathrm{\Omega }_U^{}(Gr)\underset{\mathrm{\Omega }_U^{}(pt)}{\widehat{}}\mathrm{\Omega }_U^{}(Gr)[[x1,1x]]$$

such that $`i_{kl}^{}A_{i,j}=A_{i,j}_{k,l}`$ for injection $`i_{kl}:Gr_{k,kl}Gr`$ (for every pair $`\{k,l\}`$ such that $`(k,l)=1`$).

By $`R`$ and $`H`$ denote the ring $`\mathrm{\Omega }_U^{}(pt)`$ and the Hopf algebra $`\mathrm{\Omega }_U^{}(Gr)`$ (over the ring $`\mathrm{\Omega }_U^{}(pt)`$) respectively (recall that we consider the space $`Gr`$ with the $`H`$-group structure, induced by the multiplication of FBSP).

###### Proposition 21.

The series $`𝔉(x1,1x)`$ is the formal group over the Hopf algebra $`H.`$

Proof. To prove $`((id_H\mathrm{\Delta })𝔉)(x11,1𝔉(x1,1x))=((\mathrm{\Delta }id_H)𝔉)(𝔉(x1,1x)1,11x),`$ we need the following commutative diagram ($`(kmt,lnu)=1`$):

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}\times \widehat{Gr}_{m,mn}\times \widehat{Gr}_{t,tu}& & \widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}\times \widehat{Gr}_{mt,mntu}\\ & & \\ \widehat{Gr}_{km,klmn}\times \widehat{Gr}_{t,tu}& & \widehat{Gr}_{kmt,klmntu}.\end{array}$$
(6)
To prove $`((id_H\epsilon )𝔉)(x1,0)=x1,`$ we need the following commutative diagram ($`(km,ln)=1`$):

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}\times \widehat{Gr}_{m,mn}& & \widehat{Gr}_{km,klmn}\\ & & \\ \widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}\times P^{m1}& & \widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}\times \{pt\},\end{array}$$
(7)
where right-hand vertical arrow is the standard inclusion.

To prove $`((\mu (id_HS))𝔉)(x,\mathrm{\Theta }(x))=0,`$ let us construct the fiber map $`\widehat{\nu }:\widehat{Gr}\widehat{Gr}`$ such that the following two conditions are satisfied:

* the restriction of $`\widehat{\nu }`$ to any fiber ($`P^{\mathrm{}}`$) is the inversion in the $`H`$-group $`P^{\mathrm{}}`$;
* $`\widehat{\nu }`$ covers the $`\nu :GrGr`$ (where $`\nu `$ is the inversion in the $`H`$-group $`Gr`$).

Let us remember that $`𝒫^{k1}\underset{Gr_{k,kl}}{\times }𝒬^{l1}`$ is the canonical FBSP over $`Gr_{k,kl}`$ and we have denoted by $`\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}`$ the bundle space $`𝒫^{k1}.`$ Let $`\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}^{}`$ ($`\widehat{Gr}^{}`$) be the bundle space of the ”second half” $`𝒬^{l1}`$ of the canonical FBSP over $`Gr_{k,kl}`$ ($`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}^{}`$ respectively).

First note that there exists the fiber isomorphism $`\widehat{\nu }_{k,l}^{}:\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}\widehat{Gr}_{l,lk}^{}`$ that covers the inverse map $`\nu _{k,l}:Gr_{k,kl}Gr_{l,lk}`$ (in other words, the map $`\nu _{k,l}`$ takes each subalgebra $`A_kM_k()`$ in the $`M_{kl}()`$ to its centralizer $`Z_{M_{kl}()}(A_k)M_l()`$ in the $`M_{kl}()`$). Let $`c_{l,k}:\widehat{Gr}_{l,lk}^{}\widehat{Gr}_{l,lk}^{}`$ be the fiber map such that the following two conditions are satisfied:

* $`c_{l,k}`$ covers the identity mapping of the base $`Gr_{l,lk};`$
* the restriction of $`c_{l,k}`$ to any fiber $`P^{k1}`$ is the complex conjugation.

Let $`\widehat{\nu }_{k,l}:\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}\widehat{Gr}_{l,lk}^{}`$ be the composition $`c_{l,k}\widehat{\nu }_{k,l}^{}.`$ It is easy to prove that the map $`\widehat{\nu }=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}\widehat{\nu }_{k,l}:\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(l,k)=1}}{lim}\widehat{Gr}_{l,lk}^{}`$ is required. In particular, there exists the fiber isomorphism between $`\widehat{Gr}`$ and $`\widehat{Gr}^{}.`$

The map $`\widehat{\nu }`$ defines (by the same way, as $`\widehat{\varphi }`$ in the beginning of the example) the formal series $`\mathrm{\Theta }(x)H[[x]]`$ (note that $`\epsilon (\mathrm{\Theta })(x)=\theta (x),`$ where $`\theta (x)R[[x]]`$ is the inverse element in the group of geometric cobordisms).

Now we claim that $`((\mu (id_HS))𝔉)(x,\mathrm{\Theta }(x))=0.`$ Indeed, this follows from the next commutative diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}\widehat{Gr}& \stackrel{diag}{}& \widehat{Gr}\times \widehat{Gr}& \stackrel{id\times \widehat{\nu }}{}& \widehat{Gr}\times \widehat{Gr}& \stackrel{\widehat{\varphi }}{}& \widehat{Gr}\\ & & & & & & \\ Gr& \stackrel{diag}{}& Gr\times Gr& \stackrel{id\times \nu }{}& Gr\times Gr& \stackrel{\varphi }{}& Gr\end{array}$$
(8)
(we see that the composition $`\widehat{\varphi }(id\times \widehat{\nu })diag`$ is homotopic (in class of fiber homotopies) to the map $`\widehat{Gr}pt\widehat{Gr}`$). $`\mathrm{}`$

In section 1 we considered the map $`\kappa :\stackrel{~}{Gr}P^{\mathrm{}}.`$ It is the direct limit of the fiber maps (see p. 1)

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\stackrel{~}{Gr}_{k,kl}& \stackrel{\kappa _{k,l}}{}& P^{kl1}\\ & & \\ Gr_{k,kl}& & pt.\end{array}$$
(9)
It defines (in the same way, as $`\widehat{\varphi }`$ and $`\widehat{\nu }`$ above) the formal series

$$𝔊(x,y)=\underset{i,j0}{}B_{i,j}x^iy^jH[[x,y]].$$

###### Proposition 22.

$`𝔊(x,y)=((\mu (id_HS))𝔉)(x,y),`$ i. e.

$$B_{i,j}=\underset{k}{}a_{i,j}^kS(b_{i,j}^k).$$

Proof. Recall that in the proof of Proposition 21 the fiber maps $`\widehat{\nu }_{k,l}^{}:\widehat{Gr}_{k,kl}\widehat{Gr}_{l,lk}^{}`$ were defined. By $`\widehat{\nu }^{}`$ denote the direct limit $`\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{}{(k,l)=1}}{lim}\widehat{\nu }_{k,l}^{}:\widehat{Gr}\widehat{Gr}.`$ Note that $`\widehat{\nu }^{}`$ covers the inversion $`\nu :GrGr`$ in the $`H`$-group $`Gr.`$

Now the proof follows from the next composition of the bundle maps:

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}\stackrel{~}{Gr}& & \widehat{Gr}\times \widehat{Gr}& \stackrel{id\times \widehat{\nu }^{}}{}& \widehat{Gr}\times \widehat{Gr}& \stackrel{\widehat{\varphi }}{}& \widehat{Gr}\\ & & & & & & \\ Gr& \stackrel{diag}{}& Gr\times Gr& \stackrel{id\times \nu }{}& Gr\times Gr& \stackrel{\varphi }{}& Gr.\end{array}$$
(10)
We see that the upper composition in fact is the map $`\stackrel{~}{Gr}P^{\mathrm{}}`$ and it coincides with the map $`\kappa .`$ Let $`y`$ be $`\widehat{\nu }^{}{}_{}{}^{}(x).`$ The upper composition gives $`x𝔉(x1,1x)((id_HS)𝔉)(x1,1y)((\mu (id_HS))𝔉)(x1,1y).`$ Without loss of sense we may write $`x`$ and $`y`$ instead of $`x1`$ and $`1y`$ respectively. $`\mathrm{}`$

The series $`𝔊(x,y)`$ has the following interesting property.

###### Proposition 23.

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }𝔊)(𝔉(x1,1x),((SS)𝔉)(y1,1y))=$$

$$F(𝔊(x,y)1,1𝔊(x,y)),$$

where $`F(x,y)R[[x,y]]`$ is the formal group of geometric cobordisms.

Proof. We give two variants of the proof.

1).”Topological proof” follows from the commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}P^{kl1}\times P^{mn1}& & P^{klmn1}\\ & & \\ \stackrel{~}{Gr}_{k,kl}\times \stackrel{~}{Gr}_{m,mn}& & \stackrel{~}{Gr}_{km,klmn}\end{array}$$
(11)
($`(km,ln)=1`$) combining with the decomposition of the map $`\kappa ,`$ which was obtained in previous proof.

2). By $`\stackrel{~}{S}^{}`$ denote the homomorphism $`\widehat{\nu }^{}{}_{}{}^{}:H[[x]]H[[y]]`$ (recall that $`\widehat{\nu }^{}{}_{}{}^{}_{H}^{}=S:HH,`$ where $`S`$ is the antipode). Let us consider the following composition of homomorphisms of Hopf algebras:

$$H[[x]]\stackrel{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{}H[[x]]\underset{R}{\widehat{}}H[[x]]\stackrel{id\stackrel{~}{S}^{}}{}H[[x]]\underset{R}{\widehat{}}H[[y]]\stackrel{(\mu )}{}H[[x,y]],$$

where $`(\mu )`$ is the homomorphism, induced by multiplication

$$\mu :H\underset{R}{\widehat{}}HH.$$

It follows from the axiom of antipode

$$\mu (id_HS)\mathrm{\Delta }=\eta \epsilon $$

that

$$(\mu )(id_{H[[x]]}\stackrel{~}{S}^{})\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_H=\eta \epsilon .$$

Hence there exists the homomorphism of Hopf algebras

$$(\eta ):R[[x]]H[[x,y]]$$

such that the following diagram

is commutative (here $`(\epsilon )`$ is the homomorphism, induced by $`\epsilon `$). Note that

$$(\eta )(x)=𝔊(x,y).$$

This completes the proof that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{R[[x]]}(x)=F(x1,1x),$$

where $`F(x1,1x)R[[x1,1x]]`$ is the formal group of geometric cobordisms. $`\mathrm{}`$

It is very important that we consider the maps $`\widehat{\varphi },\widehat{\nu },`$ and $`\kappa `$ as fiber maps in this example. Otherwise instead of $`𝔉(x1,1x)`$ we obtain the usual formal group of geometric cobordisms because the $`H`$-space $`\widehat{Gr}`$ is isomorphic to the $`H`$-space $`BSU_{}\times P^{\mathrm{}}`$ (see Proposition 14).

It is well known333Quillen D. On the formal group low of unoriented and complex cobordism theory, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 75:6 (1969), 1293–1298., that the formal group of geometric cobordisms is the universal formal group.

###### Conjecture 24.

The formal group $`𝔉(x1,1x)`$ is the universal object in the category of formal groups over a (topological) Hopf algebras.

Let $`R^{}`$ be a ring and $`F^{}(x1,1x)`$ be a formal group over $`R^{}.`$ Note that we may consider the $`R^{}`$ as the Hopf algebra over $`R^{}`$ with respect to the $`\mathrm{\Delta }_R^{}:R^{}R^{}\underset{R^{}}{}R^{},`$ $`\eta _R^{}=\epsilon _R^{}=S_R^{}=id_R^{}:R^{}R^{}.`$ If $`\chi :HR^{}`$ is a homomorphism of the Hopf algebras from $`(H,\mu ,\eta ,\mathrm{\Delta },\epsilon ,S)`$ to $`(R^{},\mu _R^{},\eta _R^{},\mathrm{\Delta }_R^{},\epsilon _R^{},S_R^{}),`$ then $`\chi =(\chi \eta )\epsilon =\chi _R\epsilon .`$ Hence there exists the natural bijection $`Hom_{Hopfalg.}(H,R^{})Hom_{Ring}(R,R^{}).`$ Therefore the Conjecture implies the universal property of the formal group of geometric cobordisms.

The author is grateful to professor E. V. Troitsky for constant attention to this work, and to professors V. M. Manuilov and A. S. Mishchenko for useful discussions.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Target-Space duality (or T-duality) is the one of the dualities set of superstring theory which can be viewed already at the perturbative level. As it has been pointed out in papers by Kikkawa and Yamasaki  and Sakai and Senda  it arises the formal symmetry of quantum effective potential of free toroidally compactified string theory under interchange of a torus radii with their inverse. In its turn this phenomenon occurs in the firstly quantized string theory by virtue of symmetry of the $`\mathrm{𝗆𝖺𝗌𝗌}^2`$ operator under $`R1/R`$ interchange supplemented by interchange of Kaluza-Klein and winding modes arising under compactification. The next important step was made in paper by Nair, Shapere, Strominger and Wilczek  where this symmetry was justified in the interacting case as well, and therefore received the status of exact symmetry of firstly quantized string theory. However only after the seminal papers by Buscher  it became clear that at the level of classical string dynamics this symmetry is realized as impossibility to differentiate (special kind of or so-called dual) backgrounds with (one or many) isometry directions in which string propagates. Connection between such kind of backgrounds coming from the target-space metric, the 2-form antisymmetric tensor field and the dilaton is given by the set of Buscher’s formulae 444The analog of these formulas for the target-space metric was derived independently by Hitchin, Karlhede, Lindström and Roček in  addressed to investigation of $`d`$-dimensional non-linear sigma-model. .

Consideration of the long-wave limit of superstring theory corresponding to supergravity action also leads to the establishing the symmetry between dimensionally reduced dual theories  and allows to exhibit more clearly the space-time interpretation of the duality transformations as ones acting only on the matter fields and leaving the gravitational sector unchanged. Also, the target-space geometry adapted to the T-duality transformations was constructed in .

What concerns supersymmetric string theory, the T-duality transformations were intensively investigated in the NSR (worldsheet SUSY) formulation (see, for instance  and Refs. therein), although the absence of direct connection between worldsheet and target-space supersymmetries, which can be established with application of the CFT technique , hampered the problem of getting the T-duality rules for the space-time fermions (see, however, ). This drawback naturally overcomes in the manifestly target-space supersymmetric formulation of the GS superstring, however the progress in the construction of T-duality rules in the GS formulation  was achieved only recently.

Therefore, superstring and supergravity encourage the exact symmetry under the T-duality transformations. Moreover, as it has been pointed out in literature (see e.g. ) the sum of supergravity action and fundamental superstring source action should be T-duality covariant. The goal of this communication is to push forward this observation and to establish the invariance of dual theories under the T-duality transformations for the toy model of closed bosonic string being the source for gravity and 2-form antisymmetric tensor field. Because our consideration is pure bosonic we will to refer in what follows this bulk configuration as low energy quantum string theory effective action  or effective action for shortness. It is clear that such a configuration is the part of the bosonic sector of supergravity being the superstring theory effective action. Another point of our consideration consists in the restriction of our analysis to the pure classical frames. It means that we shall not consider the dilaton appearance in the string action and, consequently, in the set of the T-duality rules, because it is well-known that the dilaton shift appearing in the Buscher’s formulae can be described correctly only in the frame of quantum approach ,  (and Refs. therein). However, since supergravity contains the information about quantum corrections of the worldsheet, we have to take into account the dilaton shift as far as the effective action will be considered.

To reach the goal we analyse two different approaches which lead to the result. The first approach is the standard one and it demonstrates the role of worldvolume duality in establishing the T-duality invariance in the bulk. The second approach we propose is based on the gauging of the translational invariance along isometry direction simultaneously in the bulk and in the source parts of the effective action with source. This forces us, in particular, to introduce new additional target-space field instead of worldvolume one as it is made in the first case.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we give a brief review of derivation of the Buscher’s formulae in the standard sigma-model-like  and gauged sigma-model-like  approaches. Section 3 devoted to the recalling the T-duality rules in Kaluza-Klein picture , which simplify calculations (see, for instance,  for non-Abelian case, and Ref. , where such kind of transformations arise in the geometry of a target-space adapted to the presence of isometries) and in Section 4 we outline the application of these rules to the gauged-sigma-model. After these preliminaries in Section 5 we demonstrate the invariance between dual effective theories in presence of the fundamental string source. Discussion of the obtained results and concluding remarks are collected in the last section.

## 2 T-duality in bosonic string theory

Consider Polyakov’s action for bosonic (closed) string

$$S=d^2\xi \sqrt{\gamma }\gamma ^{ij}_iX^{\underset{¯}{m}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{n}}g_{\underset{¯}{mn}}(X).$$
(1)
To reach T-dual action, let’s suppose that we have an isometry direction, say $`X^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$ 555This notation rises to the notations of Ref.  and we would like to keep it suggesting that there will not be a confusion between isometry and time-like coordinates. , and evidently

$$S=d^2\xi \sqrt{\gamma }\gamma ^{ij}(_iX^{\underset{¯}{0}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{0}}g_{\underset{¯}{00}}+_iX^{\underset{¯}{0}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}+_iX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{0}}g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{0}}+_iX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}).$$
(2)
After that one can write down (2) in the first order form ,  as

$$S=d^2\xi [\sqrt{\gamma }\gamma ^{ij}(C_iC_jg_{\underset{¯}{00}}+C_i_jX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}+_iX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}C_jg_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{0}}+_iX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}})$$

$`2ϵ^{ij}C_i_j\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}].`$ (3)
Eq. of motion for $`\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$ field enforces the curl free condition for worldvolume variables $`C_i`$, and, therefore, locally

$$C_i=_i\stackrel{~}{X}^{\underset{¯}{(0)}}.$$
(4)
Strictly speaking $`\stackrel{~}{X}^{\underset{¯}{(0)}}`$ is different from $`X^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$. However, we can always sew their by virtue of the invariance of (2) under $`X^{\underset{¯}{0}}X^{\underset{¯}{0}}+const`$, so it can be supposed that $`C_i=_iX^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$ and the action (2) is recovered.

Another story begins if one integrates out the new variables $`C_i`$. To see it, it is convenient to record the action (2) in the form of

$$S=_^2dX^{\underset{¯}{m}}dX^{\underset{¯}{n}}g_{\underset{¯}{mn}}$$
(5)
and to make the same procedure as in (3). Therefore

$$S=_^2CCg_{\underset{¯}{00}}+CdX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}+dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}Cg_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{0}}+dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}2Cd\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}.$$
(6)
Integrating out the $`C`$ field we derive

$$\frac{\stackrel{}{\delta }}{\delta C}=Cg_{\underset{¯}{00}}+dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}d\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}=0,$$

$$C=\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}(i_0gd\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}),C=\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}(i_0gd\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}})$$
(7)
and

$$S=_^2dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}i_0gi_0g+\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}d\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}d\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}+\frac{2}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}i_0gd\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}.$$
(8)
Important point is that the action (8) written in the dual with respect to the $`C`$ field variables $`d\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$ still allows for eq. (4), however it becomes “Bianchi identity” for the solution to the equation of motion for $`C`$ following from the original action  (see also Refs.  and ).

It is easy to see that this action is equivalent to the string action propagating in dual background, which is parameterized by the coordinates $`\stackrel{~}{X}^{\underset{¯}{m}}=(X^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}},\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}})`$, with the NS 2-form potential $`\stackrel{~}{B}^{(2)}`$, i.e.

$$S=_^2d\stackrel{~}{X}^{\underset{¯}{m}}d\stackrel{~}{X}^{\underset{¯}{n}}\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{mn}}+2\stackrel{~}{B}^{(2)},$$
(9)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}=g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}},\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}=\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}},$$

$$\stackrel{~}{B}_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{m}}^{(2)}=\stackrel{~}{B}_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{0}}^{(2)}=\frac{g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}},\stackrel{~}{B}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}^{(2)}=0.$$
(10)
Therefore, target-space duality switches the pure gravitational background to the dual background with gravity and the NS 2-form gauge field. However, if we start from a string in the background of the NS two-form field $`B^{(2)}`$

$$S=_^2dX^{\underset{¯}{m}}dX^{\underset{¯}{n}}g_{\underset{¯}{mn}}+2B^{(2)}$$
(11)
and apply the scheme noticed above again, we arrive at

$$S=_^2dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}i_0gi_0g+\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}(d\widehat{X}+i_0B)(d\widehat{X}+i_0B)$$

$$+\frac{2}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}i_0g(d\widehat{X}+i_0B)+dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}B_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}^{(2)},$$
(12)
which is the action for the string in dual background

$$S=_^2d\stackrel{~}{X}^{\underset{¯}{m}}d\stackrel{~}{X}^{\underset{¯}{n}}\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{mn}}+2\stackrel{~}{B}^{(2)}$$
(13)
with

$$\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}=g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}(g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}i_0B_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}^{(2)}i_0B_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}^{(2)}),\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}=\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}},$$

$$\stackrel{~}{B}^{(2)()}=B^{(2)()}+\frac{i_0g}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}i_0B^{(2)},i_0\stackrel{~}{B}^{(2)}=\frac{i_0g}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}},i_0B^{(2)}=\frac{i_0\stackrel{~}{g}}{\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}},$$
(14)
where $`i_0gdX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}`$, $`i_0BdX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}B_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}`$ and $`B^{(2)()}\frac{1}{2}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}B_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}^{(2)}`$.

Another way to get the same result is to consider the isometry gauging procedure . To recall, remind that as we have pointed above the action (3) possesses the invariance under the constant shift in the $`X^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$ direction, i.e. under $`X^{\underset{¯}{0}}X^{\underset{¯}{0}}+const`$. Let us now to require the invariance of the action under the local shift with some arbitrary function $`f(X^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}})`$. In this case the invariance is spoiled by the terms constructed out the differentials of new function $`f(X^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}})`$. To compensate this contribution it is necessary to extend usual derivative with vector field as

$$DX^{\underset{¯}{m}}=dX^{\underset{¯}{m}}+Ck^{\underset{¯}{m}},$$
(15)
where $`k^{\underset{¯}{m}}`$ is the Killing vector in the isometry direction. Then, in the so-called adapted frame where $`k^{\underset{¯}{m}}=\delta _{\underset{¯}{0}}^{\underset{¯}{m}}`$ the covariant derivative $`DX^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$ is inert under $`\delta X^{\underset{¯}{0}}=f`$ supported by $`\delta C=dϵ`$ with local parameter $`ϵ(X^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}})`$. Therefore, in this picture the action (6) becomes

$$S=_^2DX^{\underset{¯}{m}}DX^{\underset{¯}{n}}g_{\underset{¯}{mn}}2Cd\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}.$$
(16)
Equation of motion for the $`\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$ gives the curl free condition for the field $`C`$ and therefore, locally we can solve it as $`C=d\stackrel{~}{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$. By virtue of the gauge symmetry for the vector field $`C`$ we can fix the gauge $`C=0`$ or $`X^{\underset{¯}{0}}=0`$. In both cases the action (16) reduces to the action (5) (either in terms of $`(X^{\underset{¯}{0}},X^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}})`$ coordinates or $`(\stackrel{~}{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}},X^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}})`$ ones). In its turn the integration over the $`C`$ field in the adapted coordinate frame leads after imposing the gauge fixing $`X^{\underset{¯}{0}}=0`$ to the Buscher’s rules (10).

## 3 T-duality in Kaluza-Klein picture

As it has been outlined in Introduction, at the level of firstly quantized string theory T-duality deals with compactification and interchange of Kaluza-Klein (KK) and winding modes. Let’s analyse this picture from the point of view of T-duality rules (14). Namely, the first rule for $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}`$ can be represented as

$$\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}i_0B_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}^{(2)}i_0B_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}^{(2)}=g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}$$

$$\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}\frac{i_0\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}}{\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}}\frac{i_0\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}}{\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}}=g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}g_{\underset{¯}{00}}\frac{i_0g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}\frac{i_0g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}}{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}},$$
(17)
where we have used the rules for other fields. The expressions in both sides of (17) are nothing but the elements $`\widehat{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}`$ and $`\widehat{\stackrel{~}{g}}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}`$ of the metric tensor matrix decomposition

$$\overline{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\widehat{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}:=g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\frac{1}{g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}}i_0g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}i_0g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\hfill & \hfill g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}\frac{i_0g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}}{g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}}\\ g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}\frac{i_0g_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}}{g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}}\hfill & \hfill g_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}\end{array}\right),$$

$$\overline{\stackrel{~}{g}}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\widehat{\stackrel{~}{g}}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}:=\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}}i_0\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}i_0\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\hfill & \hfill \stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}\frac{i_0\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}}{\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}}\\ \stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}\frac{i_0\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}}{\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}}\hfill & \hfill \stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{0}\underset{¯}{0}}\end{array}\right),$$

respecting to the following KK backgrounds 666Strictly speaking, these are effective “KK backgrounds” since their form is derived from $`D`$-dimensional line elements $`d\overline{s}^2=\overline{g}_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}dX^{\underset{¯}{m}}dX^{\underset{¯}{n}}`$ and $`d\overline{\stackrel{~}{s}}^2=\overline{\stackrel{~}{g}}_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}dX^{\underset{¯}{m}}dX^{\underset{¯}{n}}`$ by extracting $`X^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$ coordinate and rearranging the terms in T-duality invariant combinations.

$$d\overline{s}^2=\widehat{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}+g_{\underset{¯}{00}}(dX^{\underset{¯}{0}}+A)(dX^{\underset{¯}{0}}+A)$$
(18)
and

$$d\overline{\stackrel{~}{s}}^2=\widehat{\stackrel{~}{g}}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}+\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}(dX^{\underset{¯}{0}}+\stackrel{~}{A})(dX^{\underset{¯}{0}}+\stackrel{~}{A})$$
(19)
with $`A=i_0g/g_{\underset{¯}{00}}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{A}=i_0\stackrel{~}{g}/\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}`$. Therefore, in the KK picture T-duality rules look like ,

$$\widehat{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}=\widehat{\stackrel{~}{g}}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}},g_{\underset{¯}{00}}=\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}},$$

$$\stackrel{~}{B}^{(2)}=B^{(2)}+Ai_0B^{(2)},$$

$$A=i_0\stackrel{~}{B}^{(2)},\stackrel{~}{A}=i_0B^{(2)}$$
(20)
and read off the interchange of the KK and winding modes. Apparently that $`g_{\underset{¯}{00}}`$ determines the length of the internal circle, and therefore there is also $`R1/R`$.

## 4 Gauged sigma-model representation and T-duality

Let’s turn the attention to the gauged sigma-model representation of string action (eq. (16)). One of the powerful points of such a representation consists in the possibility to arrive at the result of integration over $`C`$ field (eqs. (8) and (12)) effectively without performing the integration. To this end let us regard the field $`C`$ (or $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ in dual picture) as additional worldvolume field (as it should be), and starting from the dual string action

$$S=_^2DX^{\underset{¯}{m}}DX^{\underset{¯}{n}}\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}+2\stackrel{~}{B}^{(2)}(D)2\stackrel{~}{C}d\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}$$
(21)
rewrite it as

$$S=_^2[dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}\widehat{\stackrel{~}{g}}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}+\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}(dX^{\underset{¯}{0}}+\stackrel{~}{C}+\frac{i_0\stackrel{~}{g}}{\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}})(dX^{\underset{¯}{0}}+\stackrel{~}{C}+\frac{i_0\stackrel{~}{g}}{\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{00}}})$$

$$+2\stackrel{~}{B}^{(2)}(d)+2i_0\stackrel{~}{B}^{(2)}(dX^{\underset{¯}{0}}+\stackrel{~}{C})2\stackrel{~}{C}d\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}].$$
(22)
Now solving for the equation for $`\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$

$$\stackrel{~}{C}=dy,(canbegaugedout)$$

and applying the T-duality rules (20) we are left with expression (12) (in the coinciding original and dual coordinates basis), which was obtained from the original string action (1)–(3) by use of equation of motion for the $`C`$ field, i.e.

$$S=_^2_{|_{KKTdualityrules}}^{dualgaug.s.mod.}=_^2_{|_{\frac{\delta ^{orig.}}{\delta C}=0}}^{orig.}.$$
(23)
Actually, this statement is trivial, because it says about equivalence of the original theory written in terms of dual variables (after resolving for the equation of motion for $`C`$ field) to its dual theory written in terms of the same variables (after application of T-duality rules). However, this notion becomes crucial in the consideration of T-duality in the effective action constructed out the part of the bosonic sector of supergravity with the fundamental string as a source.

## 5 Effective action with a string source and T-duality

After preliminaries made in the sections before we are in position to consider the model describing the effective action with string as a source for gravity and 2-form antisymmetric tensor field. This action has the following form

$$S=_^De^{2\varphi }\left[\frac{1}{(D2)!}R^{\underset{¯}{a}_1\underset{¯}{a}_2}E^{\underset{¯}{a}_3}\mathrm{}E^{\underset{¯}{a}_D}ϵ_{\underset{¯}{a}_1\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{a}_D}+\frac{1}{2}d\varphi d\varphi +\frac{1}{2}H^{(3)}H^{(3)}\right]$$

$$\frac{1}{2}_^Dd^Dx\sqrt{g}\frac{\delta ^D(xX(\xi ))}{\sqrt{g}}_^2d^2\xi [\sqrt{\gamma }\gamma ^{ij}_iX^{\underset{¯}{m}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{n}}g_{\underset{¯}{mn}}(x)+ϵ^{ij}_iX^{\underset{¯}{m}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{n}}B_{\underset{¯}{n}\underset{¯}{m}}^{(2)}],$$
(24)
where $`H^{(3)}=dB^{(2)}`$ and the wedge product is assumed. The variation of this action over $`g_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}`$ and $`B_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}^{(2)}`$ leads to the Einstein equation for gravity with the dilaton and the NS 2-form gauge field in the presence of matter source and to the equation for the NS 2-form field strength with the string source

$$R_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}\frac{1}{2}Rg_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}\frac{1}{2}(_{\underset{¯}{m}}\varphi _{\underset{¯}{n}}\varphi \frac{1}{2}g_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}(\varphi )^2)\frac{1}{4}(H_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{p}\underset{¯}{q}}^{(3)}H_{\underset{¯}{n}}^{(3)\underset{¯}{p}\underset{¯}{q}}\frac{1}{6}g_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}H^{(3)2})=e^{2\varphi }T_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}},$$
(25)
$$()^{(D4)}_{\underset{¯}{m}}(e^{2\varphi }\sqrt{g}H^{(3)\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}\underset{¯}{p}})=_^Dd^Dx\sqrt{g}\frac{\delta ^D(xX(\xi ))}{\sqrt{g}}_^2d^2\xi ϵ^{ij}_iX^{\underset{¯}{n}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{p}}$$
(26)
with $`T_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}`$ being the energy-momentum tensor of the string

$$T^{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}=_^D\frac{\delta ^D(xX(\xi ))}{\sqrt{g}}d^2\xi \sqrt{\gamma }\gamma ^{ij}_iX^{\underset{¯}{m}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{n}}.$$

Now try to implement the consideration above to the case of the effective action (24). There are at least two different ways to establish the T-duality covariance.

Following the first way, it is necessary to write down the source part of the action (24) in the first order form by use of worldvolume field $`C_i`$. Then, integrating out the $`C`$ field, one arrives at the T-duality transformations (14). In its turn, the bulk part of the action propagates in the background defined by the line element

$$d\overline{s}^2=\overline{g}_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}dX^{\underset{¯}{m}}dX^{\underset{¯}{n}}=\widehat{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}+g_{\underset{¯}{00}}(dX^{\underset{¯}{0}}+A)(dX^{\underset{¯}{0}}+A).$$

Therefore, we should put it down in the KK manner, apply the rules (20) which is equivalent to (14) together with the dilaton shift (cf. eq. (30)) and lift it up. This sequence leads to desired result (cf. eq. (31)).

The second way allows one to realize the gauged sigma-model-like technique at the level of whole action (24) in uniform way having in mind that string propagates in special background allowing for the isometry directions. To this end, as in the sections before, extend the derivatives to the covariant ones, i.e.

$$dX^{\underset{¯}{m}}DX^{\underset{¯}{m}}=dX^{\underset{¯}{m}}+Ck^{\underset{¯}{m}}$$

with target-space additional field $`C(X^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}})`$, and insert it into the action 777In (27) $`C_i`$ is a pullback of the bulk one-form $`C`$, i.e. $`C_i=D_iX^{\underset{¯}{m}}C_{\underset{¯}{m}}_iX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}C_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}`$ since in the adapted coordinate frame $`i_kC=0`$. :

$$S=_^De^{2\varphi }\left[\frac{1}{(D2)!}R^{\underset{¯}{a}_1\underset{¯}{a}_2}(D)E^{\underset{¯}{a}_3}(D)\mathrm{}E^{\underset{¯}{a}_D}(D)ϵ_{\underset{¯}{a}_1\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{a}_D}+\frac{1}{2}D\varphi D\varphi +\frac{1}{2}H^{(3)}(D)H^{(3)}(D)\right]$$

$$\frac{1}{2}_^Dd^Dx\sqrt{g}\frac{\delta ^D(xX(\xi ))}{\sqrt{g}}\times $$

$$_^2d^2\xi [\sqrt{\gamma }\gamma ^{ij}D_iX^{\underset{¯}{m}}D_jX^{\underset{¯}{n}}g_{\underset{¯}{mn}}(x)+ϵ^{ij}D_iX^{\underset{¯}{m}}D_jX^{\underset{¯}{n}}B_{\underset{¯}{n}\underset{¯}{m}}^{(2)}2ϵ^{ij}C_i_j\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}].$$
(27)
The curl free field $`C`$ does not spoil the field content of the original theory. This is due to the symmetry under the local shifts in the isometry direction which gives a possibility to fix either $`C=0`$ or $`X^{\underset{¯}{0}}=0`$ gauge. As in the case of the gauged sigma-model representation of string action (16), eq. (27) reduces to the eq. (24).

Consider now the first line of eq. (27) and drop out for the moment the curl free condition for $`C`$. Then, the background line element is defined by $`d\overline{s}^2=DX^{\underset{¯}{m}}DX^{\underset{¯}{n}}\overline{g}_{\underset{¯}{m}\underset{¯}{n}}`$ that is equivalent to the following KK-type representation

$$d\overline{s}^2=\widehat{g}_{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{m}}}dX^{\underset{¯}{\overset{~}{n}}}+g_{\underset{¯}{00}}(dX^{\underset{¯}{0}}+C+A)(dX^{\underset{¯}{0}}+C+A).$$
(28)
Therefore, the symbol $`_{grav.+dil.+NS2.}^{(D)}(D)`$ notifies that the first line of (27) is the compressed expression for theory propagating in the KK-background (28) and having therefore the form 888In (29) $`H^{(3)}=H^{(3)}+d(i_0B^{(2)})A`$ and the Hodge star is the $`(D1)`$-dimensional operator.

$$S=d^{(D1)}xe^{2\varphi }\sqrt{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}\sqrt{g}R+_{^{(D1)}}e^{2\varphi }\sqrt{g_{\underset{¯}{00}}}[\frac{1}{2}d\varphi d\varphi +\frac{1}{2}d(\mathrm{log}|g_{\underset{¯}{00}}|)d(\mathrm{log}|g_{\underset{¯}{00}}|)$$

$$+\frac{1}{2}g_{\underset{¯}{00}}d(C+A)d(C+A)+\frac{1}{2}H^{(3)}H^{(3)}+\frac{1}{2}g_{\underset{¯}{00}}^1d(i_0B^{(2)})d(i_0B^{(2)})].$$
(29)
Following our strategy it is necessary to find a solution to the equation of motion for the $`C`$ field and to insert it into the action. But as it has been pointed out in Section 2 the equation $`C=dy`$ still holds. Therefore, effectively, (29) does not depend on $`C`$ and we return to the situation discussed previously in the free case. After insertion of the solution for the $`C`$ equation of motion (7) and application of the KK T-duality rules, which, as previously mentioned, have to be completed by the dilaton shift

$$\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\varphi \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}|g_{\underset{¯}{00}}|,$$
(30)
the action (27) converts into

$$S=_^De^{2\stackrel{~}{\varphi }}\left[\frac{1}{(D2)!}\stackrel{~}{R}^{\underset{¯}{a}_1\underset{¯}{a}_2}E^{\underset{¯}{a}_3}\mathrm{}E^{\underset{¯}{a}_D}ϵ_{\underset{¯}{a}_1\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{a}_D}+\frac{1}{2}d\stackrel{~}{\varphi }d\stackrel{~}{\varphi }+\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{H}^{(3)}\stackrel{~}{H}^{(3)}\right]$$

$$\frac{1}{2}_^Dd^Dx\sqrt{g}\frac{\delta ^D(xX(\xi ))}{\sqrt{g}}_^2d^2\xi [\sqrt{\gamma }\gamma ^{ij}_iX^{\underset{¯}{m}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{n}}\stackrel{~}{g}_{\underset{¯}{mn}}(x)+ϵ^{ij}_iX^{\underset{¯}{m}}_jX^{\underset{¯}{n}}\stackrel{~}{B}_{\underset{¯}{n}\underset{¯}{m}}^{(2)}].$$
(31)
Hence, T-duality indeed is the symmetry of the string effective action with a string source.

## 6 Discussion and conclusions

Thus, we have demonstrated that T-duality still holds for the system comprising the part of the bosonic sector of supergravity and the fundamental string source following two ways. The first one is the standard way and it shows the influence of worldvolume duality to the target-space fields. The second way emphasizes the role of isometry in T-duality consideration and gives the possibility to realize in uniform manner the statement that both bulk and string parts of the effective action with source propagate in background with isometry 999Other aspects of space-time symmetry gauging in application e.g. to the KK dimensional reduction can be found in .. However, following this way, we have to consider additional target-space field rather than the worldvolume one. Due to this fact one has also to take into consideration the bulk contribution to the equation of motion for this new field. It looks surprisingly that establishing the invariance under the T-duality transformations sends in common to the uncoupling string case. At first glance one can expect to arrive to much more complicated problem especially in the part of evaluation of the solution to the equation of motion for the $`C`$ field deriving from the action (27). However, let’s analyse the problem from another point of view. As in the case of uncoupling string, reviewed in Section 4, one can start from the consideration of the action (31). Then, inserting the extended derivatives and gauging out the $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ field, after application of T-duality rules we arrive at the intermediate result, which is schematically the same as it was sketched in eq. (23) 101010This result remains the same for regarding $`C`$ as the bulk field as well.. Important point is that the KK gravity part in the l.h.s. of this picture does not contain any dependence on $`d\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$ being dual to the $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ field. On the other hand, in view of (23), the KK gravity part in the r.h.s. is also free from the dependence on $`d\widehat{X}^{\underset{¯}{0}}`$, but already with taking into account the solution to the equation of motion for the $`C`$ field. Therefore, we conclude that no contribution comes from the KK gravity part to the equation of motion for the $`C`$ field and therefore we can consider that $`C=dy`$ holds as the “Bianchi identity” for the equation of motion for its dual.

Although our consideration is restricted to the case of one isometry direction, the proposed construction generalizes straightforwardly to the case of arbitrary number of commuting isometries. In view of gauging isometries technique we may expect also that this scheme can be extended to the non-Abelian case.

Another interesting problem is to apply this scheme to the case of open string and D-branes and to evaluate the T-duality power for the effective action in presence of the D-branes sources. Also it should be very attractive to realize completely supersymmetric picture of supergravity coupling with superstring as a source and to demonstrate the invariance under the (super) T-duality transformations. We hope to return to these problems in the forthcoming publications.

Acknowledgements. We are grateful to Mario Tonin and Pier-Alberto Marchetti for interest to this work, and to Igor Bandos for discussion and fruitful comments. We would like to thank Ian Jack and Igor Rudychev for pointing out our attention on Refs. , , and all the colleagues for their encouragement. This work is supported in part by the Ukrainian Ministry of Science and Education Grant N 2.5.1/52. Special thanks to Nadezhda Sevritkina for encouragement and kind help.