The structure of complex cobordism cohomology of the Eilenberg-Maclane spectrum
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Let $MU$ be the complex bordism spectrum and let $Hmathbb{Z}$ be the Eilenberg-Maclane spectrum.
Is it know what the structure of the complex cobordism cohomology $MU^{*}(Hmathbb{Z})$ is?
EDIT: What if instead $Hmathbb{Z}$, one consider $Hmathbb{Z}/(p)$ for a prime $p$?
at.algebraic-topology homotopy-theory cobordism
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Let $MU$ be the complex bordism spectrum and let $Hmathbb{Z}$ be the Eilenberg-Maclane spectrum.
Is it know what the structure of the complex cobordism cohomology $MU^{*}(Hmathbb{Z})$ is?
EDIT: What if instead $Hmathbb{Z}$, one consider $Hmathbb{Z}/(p)$ for a prime $p$?
at.algebraic-topology homotopy-theory cobordism
Hrmm.. we know $MU_*Hmathbb{Z}=Hmathbb{Z}_*MU=mathbb{Z}[b_1,b_2,...]$, so we might hope to run the universal coefficient spectral sequence, although the structure as $MU_*$-module is somewhat complicated.
– Denis Nardin
yesterday
2
If I remember correctly, it is $0$, but I don't remember a reference off the head.
– user43326
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Let $MU$ be the complex bordism spectrum and let $Hmathbb{Z}$ be the Eilenberg-Maclane spectrum.
Is it know what the structure of the complex cobordism cohomology $MU^{*}(Hmathbb{Z})$ is?
EDIT: What if instead $Hmathbb{Z}$, one consider $Hmathbb{Z}/(p)$ for a prime $p$?
at.algebraic-topology homotopy-theory cobordism
Let $MU$ be the complex bordism spectrum and let $Hmathbb{Z}$ be the Eilenberg-Maclane spectrum.
Is it know what the structure of the complex cobordism cohomology $MU^{*}(Hmathbb{Z})$ is?
EDIT: What if instead $Hmathbb{Z}$, one consider $Hmathbb{Z}/(p)$ for a prime $p$?
at.algebraic-topology homotopy-theory cobordism
at.algebraic-topology homotopy-theory cobordism
edited yesterday
asked yesterday
user438991
1216
1216
Hrmm.. we know $MU_*Hmathbb{Z}=Hmathbb{Z}_*MU=mathbb{Z}[b_1,b_2,...]$, so we might hope to run the universal coefficient spectral sequence, although the structure as $MU_*$-module is somewhat complicated.
– Denis Nardin
yesterday
2
If I remember correctly, it is $0$, but I don't remember a reference off the head.
– user43326
yesterday
add a comment |
Hrmm.. we know $MU_*Hmathbb{Z}=Hmathbb{Z}_*MU=mathbb{Z}[b_1,b_2,...]$, so we might hope to run the universal coefficient spectral sequence, although the structure as $MU_*$-module is somewhat complicated.
– Denis Nardin
yesterday
2
If I remember correctly, it is $0$, but I don't remember a reference off the head.
– user43326
yesterday
Hrmm.. we know $MU_*Hmathbb{Z}=Hmathbb{Z}_*MU=mathbb{Z}[b_1,b_2,...]$, so we might hope to run the universal coefficient spectral sequence, although the structure as $MU_*$-module is somewhat complicated.
– Denis Nardin
yesterday
Hrmm.. we know $MU_*Hmathbb{Z}=Hmathbb{Z}_*MU=mathbb{Z}[b_1,b_2,...]$, so we might hope to run the universal coefficient spectral sequence, although the structure as $MU_*$-module is somewhat complicated.
– Denis Nardin
yesterday
2
2
If I remember correctly, it is $0$, but I don't remember a reference off the head.
– user43326
yesterday
If I remember correctly, it is $0$, but I don't remember a reference off the head.
– user43326
yesterday
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
11
down vote
One can prove that $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{F}_p,MU)$ is contractible. We know that $Hmathbf{F}_p$ is dissonant (Theorem 4.7 of Ravenel's "Localization with Respect to Certain Periodic Homology Theories"), but $MU$ is harmonic (Theorem 4.2 of that paper). Since dissonant spectra (resp. harmonic spectra) are by definition $E$-acyclic (resp. local) for the spectrum $E = bigvee_p E_p$, where $E_p = bigvee_{0leq n<infty} K(n)$, the claim follows. (I just realized that this is Corollary 4.10 of Ravenel's paper.)
It is, however, not the case that $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{Z},MU)$ is contractible. (What I wrote previously was incorrect.) The spectrum $Hmathbf{Z}$ is not dissonant, so we cannot immediately apply the above argument. Since $MU$ is harmonic, there is, however, an equivalence between $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{Z},MU)$ and $mathrm{Map}(L_E Hmathbf{Z},MU)$. We therefore need to understand $L_E Hmathbf{Z}$. By the discussion at this question, we can conclude that $L_{E_p} Hmathbf{Z} simeq Hmathbf{Q}_p$. It therefore suffices to understand $MU^ast(Hmathbf{Q})$. But $Hmathbf{Q}$ is the colimit of multiplication by $2,3,5,7,cdots$ on the sphere, so $MU^ast(Hmathbf{Q})$ admits a description in terms of $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,5,7,cdots$ on $pi_ast MU$. In particular, the $lim^1$ term is $mathrm{Ext}^1_mathbf{Z}(mathbf{Q,Z}) cong widehat{mathbf{Z}}/mathbf{Z}$.
1
I don't think that the last bit of this is right. $MU^0(Hmathbb{Q}_p)$ is not a ring. We can write $Hmathbb{Q}=Smathbb{Q}$ as the telescope of multiplication by $2,3,4,5,dotsc$ on $H$ or on $S$. From the first description together with $F(H/n,MU)=0$ we get $F(H,MU)=F(Hmathbb{Q},MU)=F(Smathbb{Q},MU)$. The second description relates $[Smathbb{Q},MU]_*$ to $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,4,dotsc$ on $pi_*(MU)$. Here $lim^0=0$ but $lim^1$ involves $text{Ext}(mathbb{Q},mathbb{Z})=widehat{mathbb{Z}}/mathbb{Z}$.
– Neil Strickland
yesterday
@NeilStrickland you're right, thanks! I'll edit my answer.
– skd
yesterday
4
Just a general comment that this isn't so "chromatic": It's a theorem of Margolis that maps out of $Hmathbb{F}_p$ to a bounded below spectrum of finite type are the same as maps of modules over the Steenrod algebra on cohomology into $mathcal{A}^*$; this is already enough to show that $MU^*(Hmathbb{F}_p) = 0$. Then the sequence $mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Q} to mathbb{Q}/mathbb{Z}$ tells you that $Y^*mathrm{H}mathbb{Z}$ will always be a humongous sum of $mathrm{Ext}(mathbb{Q}, ?)$'s if $Y^*(Hmathbb{F}_p)$ vanishes for all $p$. TY Lin's paper on duality and EM spectra has more on this.
– Dylan Wilson
yesterday
Good to know, thanks @DylanWilson!
– skd
yesterday
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
11
down vote
One can prove that $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{F}_p,MU)$ is contractible. We know that $Hmathbf{F}_p$ is dissonant (Theorem 4.7 of Ravenel's "Localization with Respect to Certain Periodic Homology Theories"), but $MU$ is harmonic (Theorem 4.2 of that paper). Since dissonant spectra (resp. harmonic spectra) are by definition $E$-acyclic (resp. local) for the spectrum $E = bigvee_p E_p$, where $E_p = bigvee_{0leq n<infty} K(n)$, the claim follows. (I just realized that this is Corollary 4.10 of Ravenel's paper.)
It is, however, not the case that $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{Z},MU)$ is contractible. (What I wrote previously was incorrect.) The spectrum $Hmathbf{Z}$ is not dissonant, so we cannot immediately apply the above argument. Since $MU$ is harmonic, there is, however, an equivalence between $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{Z},MU)$ and $mathrm{Map}(L_E Hmathbf{Z},MU)$. We therefore need to understand $L_E Hmathbf{Z}$. By the discussion at this question, we can conclude that $L_{E_p} Hmathbf{Z} simeq Hmathbf{Q}_p$. It therefore suffices to understand $MU^ast(Hmathbf{Q})$. But $Hmathbf{Q}$ is the colimit of multiplication by $2,3,5,7,cdots$ on the sphere, so $MU^ast(Hmathbf{Q})$ admits a description in terms of $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,5,7,cdots$ on $pi_ast MU$. In particular, the $lim^1$ term is $mathrm{Ext}^1_mathbf{Z}(mathbf{Q,Z}) cong widehat{mathbf{Z}}/mathbf{Z}$.
1
I don't think that the last bit of this is right. $MU^0(Hmathbb{Q}_p)$ is not a ring. We can write $Hmathbb{Q}=Smathbb{Q}$ as the telescope of multiplication by $2,3,4,5,dotsc$ on $H$ or on $S$. From the first description together with $F(H/n,MU)=0$ we get $F(H,MU)=F(Hmathbb{Q},MU)=F(Smathbb{Q},MU)$. The second description relates $[Smathbb{Q},MU]_*$ to $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,4,dotsc$ on $pi_*(MU)$. Here $lim^0=0$ but $lim^1$ involves $text{Ext}(mathbb{Q},mathbb{Z})=widehat{mathbb{Z}}/mathbb{Z}$.
– Neil Strickland
yesterday
@NeilStrickland you're right, thanks! I'll edit my answer.
– skd
yesterday
4
Just a general comment that this isn't so "chromatic": It's a theorem of Margolis that maps out of $Hmathbb{F}_p$ to a bounded below spectrum of finite type are the same as maps of modules over the Steenrod algebra on cohomology into $mathcal{A}^*$; this is already enough to show that $MU^*(Hmathbb{F}_p) = 0$. Then the sequence $mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Q} to mathbb{Q}/mathbb{Z}$ tells you that $Y^*mathrm{H}mathbb{Z}$ will always be a humongous sum of $mathrm{Ext}(mathbb{Q}, ?)$'s if $Y^*(Hmathbb{F}_p)$ vanishes for all $p$. TY Lin's paper on duality and EM spectra has more on this.
– Dylan Wilson
yesterday
Good to know, thanks @DylanWilson!
– skd
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
11
down vote
One can prove that $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{F}_p,MU)$ is contractible. We know that $Hmathbf{F}_p$ is dissonant (Theorem 4.7 of Ravenel's "Localization with Respect to Certain Periodic Homology Theories"), but $MU$ is harmonic (Theorem 4.2 of that paper). Since dissonant spectra (resp. harmonic spectra) are by definition $E$-acyclic (resp. local) for the spectrum $E = bigvee_p E_p$, where $E_p = bigvee_{0leq n<infty} K(n)$, the claim follows. (I just realized that this is Corollary 4.10 of Ravenel's paper.)
It is, however, not the case that $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{Z},MU)$ is contractible. (What I wrote previously was incorrect.) The spectrum $Hmathbf{Z}$ is not dissonant, so we cannot immediately apply the above argument. Since $MU$ is harmonic, there is, however, an equivalence between $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{Z},MU)$ and $mathrm{Map}(L_E Hmathbf{Z},MU)$. We therefore need to understand $L_E Hmathbf{Z}$. By the discussion at this question, we can conclude that $L_{E_p} Hmathbf{Z} simeq Hmathbf{Q}_p$. It therefore suffices to understand $MU^ast(Hmathbf{Q})$. But $Hmathbf{Q}$ is the colimit of multiplication by $2,3,5,7,cdots$ on the sphere, so $MU^ast(Hmathbf{Q})$ admits a description in terms of $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,5,7,cdots$ on $pi_ast MU$. In particular, the $lim^1$ term is $mathrm{Ext}^1_mathbf{Z}(mathbf{Q,Z}) cong widehat{mathbf{Z}}/mathbf{Z}$.
1
I don't think that the last bit of this is right. $MU^0(Hmathbb{Q}_p)$ is not a ring. We can write $Hmathbb{Q}=Smathbb{Q}$ as the telescope of multiplication by $2,3,4,5,dotsc$ on $H$ or on $S$. From the first description together with $F(H/n,MU)=0$ we get $F(H,MU)=F(Hmathbb{Q},MU)=F(Smathbb{Q},MU)$. The second description relates $[Smathbb{Q},MU]_*$ to $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,4,dotsc$ on $pi_*(MU)$. Here $lim^0=0$ but $lim^1$ involves $text{Ext}(mathbb{Q},mathbb{Z})=widehat{mathbb{Z}}/mathbb{Z}$.
– Neil Strickland
yesterday
@NeilStrickland you're right, thanks! I'll edit my answer.
– skd
yesterday
4
Just a general comment that this isn't so "chromatic": It's a theorem of Margolis that maps out of $Hmathbb{F}_p$ to a bounded below spectrum of finite type are the same as maps of modules over the Steenrod algebra on cohomology into $mathcal{A}^*$; this is already enough to show that $MU^*(Hmathbb{F}_p) = 0$. Then the sequence $mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Q} to mathbb{Q}/mathbb{Z}$ tells you that $Y^*mathrm{H}mathbb{Z}$ will always be a humongous sum of $mathrm{Ext}(mathbb{Q}, ?)$'s if $Y^*(Hmathbb{F}_p)$ vanishes for all $p$. TY Lin's paper on duality and EM spectra has more on this.
– Dylan Wilson
yesterday
Good to know, thanks @DylanWilson!
– skd
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
11
down vote
up vote
11
down vote
One can prove that $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{F}_p,MU)$ is contractible. We know that $Hmathbf{F}_p$ is dissonant (Theorem 4.7 of Ravenel's "Localization with Respect to Certain Periodic Homology Theories"), but $MU$ is harmonic (Theorem 4.2 of that paper). Since dissonant spectra (resp. harmonic spectra) are by definition $E$-acyclic (resp. local) for the spectrum $E = bigvee_p E_p$, where $E_p = bigvee_{0leq n<infty} K(n)$, the claim follows. (I just realized that this is Corollary 4.10 of Ravenel's paper.)
It is, however, not the case that $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{Z},MU)$ is contractible. (What I wrote previously was incorrect.) The spectrum $Hmathbf{Z}$ is not dissonant, so we cannot immediately apply the above argument. Since $MU$ is harmonic, there is, however, an equivalence between $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{Z},MU)$ and $mathrm{Map}(L_E Hmathbf{Z},MU)$. We therefore need to understand $L_E Hmathbf{Z}$. By the discussion at this question, we can conclude that $L_{E_p} Hmathbf{Z} simeq Hmathbf{Q}_p$. It therefore suffices to understand $MU^ast(Hmathbf{Q})$. But $Hmathbf{Q}$ is the colimit of multiplication by $2,3,5,7,cdots$ on the sphere, so $MU^ast(Hmathbf{Q})$ admits a description in terms of $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,5,7,cdots$ on $pi_ast MU$. In particular, the $lim^1$ term is $mathrm{Ext}^1_mathbf{Z}(mathbf{Q,Z}) cong widehat{mathbf{Z}}/mathbf{Z}$.
One can prove that $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{F}_p,MU)$ is contractible. We know that $Hmathbf{F}_p$ is dissonant (Theorem 4.7 of Ravenel's "Localization with Respect to Certain Periodic Homology Theories"), but $MU$ is harmonic (Theorem 4.2 of that paper). Since dissonant spectra (resp. harmonic spectra) are by definition $E$-acyclic (resp. local) for the spectrum $E = bigvee_p E_p$, where $E_p = bigvee_{0leq n<infty} K(n)$, the claim follows. (I just realized that this is Corollary 4.10 of Ravenel's paper.)
It is, however, not the case that $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{Z},MU)$ is contractible. (What I wrote previously was incorrect.) The spectrum $Hmathbf{Z}$ is not dissonant, so we cannot immediately apply the above argument. Since $MU$ is harmonic, there is, however, an equivalence between $mathrm{Map}(Hmathbf{Z},MU)$ and $mathrm{Map}(L_E Hmathbf{Z},MU)$. We therefore need to understand $L_E Hmathbf{Z}$. By the discussion at this question, we can conclude that $L_{E_p} Hmathbf{Z} simeq Hmathbf{Q}_p$. It therefore suffices to understand $MU^ast(Hmathbf{Q})$. But $Hmathbf{Q}$ is the colimit of multiplication by $2,3,5,7,cdots$ on the sphere, so $MU^ast(Hmathbf{Q})$ admits a description in terms of $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,5,7,cdots$ on $pi_ast MU$. In particular, the $lim^1$ term is $mathrm{Ext}^1_mathbf{Z}(mathbf{Q,Z}) cong widehat{mathbf{Z}}/mathbf{Z}$.
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
skd
1,6861623
1,6861623
1
I don't think that the last bit of this is right. $MU^0(Hmathbb{Q}_p)$ is not a ring. We can write $Hmathbb{Q}=Smathbb{Q}$ as the telescope of multiplication by $2,3,4,5,dotsc$ on $H$ or on $S$. From the first description together with $F(H/n,MU)=0$ we get $F(H,MU)=F(Hmathbb{Q},MU)=F(Smathbb{Q},MU)$. The second description relates $[Smathbb{Q},MU]_*$ to $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,4,dotsc$ on $pi_*(MU)$. Here $lim^0=0$ but $lim^1$ involves $text{Ext}(mathbb{Q},mathbb{Z})=widehat{mathbb{Z}}/mathbb{Z}$.
– Neil Strickland
yesterday
@NeilStrickland you're right, thanks! I'll edit my answer.
– skd
yesterday
4
Just a general comment that this isn't so "chromatic": It's a theorem of Margolis that maps out of $Hmathbb{F}_p$ to a bounded below spectrum of finite type are the same as maps of modules over the Steenrod algebra on cohomology into $mathcal{A}^*$; this is already enough to show that $MU^*(Hmathbb{F}_p) = 0$. Then the sequence $mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Q} to mathbb{Q}/mathbb{Z}$ tells you that $Y^*mathrm{H}mathbb{Z}$ will always be a humongous sum of $mathrm{Ext}(mathbb{Q}, ?)$'s if $Y^*(Hmathbb{F}_p)$ vanishes for all $p$. TY Lin's paper on duality and EM spectra has more on this.
– Dylan Wilson
yesterday
Good to know, thanks @DylanWilson!
– skd
yesterday
add a comment |
1
I don't think that the last bit of this is right. $MU^0(Hmathbb{Q}_p)$ is not a ring. We can write $Hmathbb{Q}=Smathbb{Q}$ as the telescope of multiplication by $2,3,4,5,dotsc$ on $H$ or on $S$. From the first description together with $F(H/n,MU)=0$ we get $F(H,MU)=F(Hmathbb{Q},MU)=F(Smathbb{Q},MU)$. The second description relates $[Smathbb{Q},MU]_*$ to $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,4,dotsc$ on $pi_*(MU)$. Here $lim^0=0$ but $lim^1$ involves $text{Ext}(mathbb{Q},mathbb{Z})=widehat{mathbb{Z}}/mathbb{Z}$.
– Neil Strickland
yesterday
@NeilStrickland you're right, thanks! I'll edit my answer.
– skd
yesterday
4
Just a general comment that this isn't so "chromatic": It's a theorem of Margolis that maps out of $Hmathbb{F}_p$ to a bounded below spectrum of finite type are the same as maps of modules over the Steenrod algebra on cohomology into $mathcal{A}^*$; this is already enough to show that $MU^*(Hmathbb{F}_p) = 0$. Then the sequence $mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Q} to mathbb{Q}/mathbb{Z}$ tells you that $Y^*mathrm{H}mathbb{Z}$ will always be a humongous sum of $mathrm{Ext}(mathbb{Q}, ?)$'s if $Y^*(Hmathbb{F}_p)$ vanishes for all $p$. TY Lin's paper on duality and EM spectra has more on this.
– Dylan Wilson
yesterday
Good to know, thanks @DylanWilson!
– skd
yesterday
1
1
I don't think that the last bit of this is right. $MU^0(Hmathbb{Q}_p)$ is not a ring. We can write $Hmathbb{Q}=Smathbb{Q}$ as the telescope of multiplication by $2,3,4,5,dotsc$ on $H$ or on $S$. From the first description together with $F(H/n,MU)=0$ we get $F(H,MU)=F(Hmathbb{Q},MU)=F(Smathbb{Q},MU)$. The second description relates $[Smathbb{Q},MU]_*$ to $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,4,dotsc$ on $pi_*(MU)$. Here $lim^0=0$ but $lim^1$ involves $text{Ext}(mathbb{Q},mathbb{Z})=widehat{mathbb{Z}}/mathbb{Z}$.
– Neil Strickland
yesterday
I don't think that the last bit of this is right. $MU^0(Hmathbb{Q}_p)$ is not a ring. We can write $Hmathbb{Q}=Smathbb{Q}$ as the telescope of multiplication by $2,3,4,5,dotsc$ on $H$ or on $S$. From the first description together with $F(H/n,MU)=0$ we get $F(H,MU)=F(Hmathbb{Q},MU)=F(Smathbb{Q},MU)$. The second description relates $[Smathbb{Q},MU]_*$ to $lim^0$ and $lim^1$ of multiplication by $2,3,4,dotsc$ on $pi_*(MU)$. Here $lim^0=0$ but $lim^1$ involves $text{Ext}(mathbb{Q},mathbb{Z})=widehat{mathbb{Z}}/mathbb{Z}$.
– Neil Strickland
yesterday
@NeilStrickland you're right, thanks! I'll edit my answer.
– skd
yesterday
@NeilStrickland you're right, thanks! I'll edit my answer.
– skd
yesterday
4
4
Just a general comment that this isn't so "chromatic": It's a theorem of Margolis that maps out of $Hmathbb{F}_p$ to a bounded below spectrum of finite type are the same as maps of modules over the Steenrod algebra on cohomology into $mathcal{A}^*$; this is already enough to show that $MU^*(Hmathbb{F}_p) = 0$. Then the sequence $mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Q} to mathbb{Q}/mathbb{Z}$ tells you that $Y^*mathrm{H}mathbb{Z}$ will always be a humongous sum of $mathrm{Ext}(mathbb{Q}, ?)$'s if $Y^*(Hmathbb{F}_p)$ vanishes for all $p$. TY Lin's paper on duality and EM spectra has more on this.
– Dylan Wilson
yesterday
Just a general comment that this isn't so "chromatic": It's a theorem of Margolis that maps out of $Hmathbb{F}_p$ to a bounded below spectrum of finite type are the same as maps of modules over the Steenrod algebra on cohomology into $mathcal{A}^*$; this is already enough to show that $MU^*(Hmathbb{F}_p) = 0$. Then the sequence $mathbb{Z} to mathbb{Q} to mathbb{Q}/mathbb{Z}$ tells you that $Y^*mathrm{H}mathbb{Z}$ will always be a humongous sum of $mathrm{Ext}(mathbb{Q}, ?)$'s if $Y^*(Hmathbb{F}_p)$ vanishes for all $p$. TY Lin's paper on duality and EM spectra has more on this.
– Dylan Wilson
yesterday
Good to know, thanks @DylanWilson!
– skd
yesterday
Good to know, thanks @DylanWilson!
– skd
yesterday
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f315320%2fthe-structure-of-complex-cobordism-cohomology-of-the-eilenberg-maclane-spectrum%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Hrmm.. we know $MU_*Hmathbb{Z}=Hmathbb{Z}_*MU=mathbb{Z}[b_1,b_2,...]$, so we might hope to run the universal coefficient spectral sequence, although the structure as $MU_*$-module is somewhat complicated.
– Denis Nardin
yesterday
2
If I remember correctly, it is $0$, but I don't remember a reference off the head.
– user43326
yesterday