Passing from a topological space to its homology groups is something like abelianization. For example H1=π1/[π1,π1]. But this principle makes sense even literally: (as follows from Dold–Thom theorem) {homology groups of X} = homotopy type of Z[X] — topological abelian group freely generated by points of X.
To get standard definition one should pass from topological space to simpicial set before applying Z[-]. Canonical way to do so is to apply functor (-)Δ adjoint to geometric realization (that is [n]->C(Simp[n];X) where Simp[n] is standard n-dimensional symplex). Resulting simpicial abelian group Z[XΔ] can be (by Dold–Kahn equivalence) considered as a complex; and this is the singular complex of X. This, BTW, explains why Dold–Thom theorem is obvious (modulo Dold–Kahn theory).
What's wrong with this picture is complete lack of connection with standard framework of spectra. Of course, now one can recover Eilenberg–Maclane spectrum as Z[Sn]. But looking only on the spectrum it's unclear (to me, at least) why (for the corresponding homology theory) there exists dg-lifting (aka chain complex).
The test question here is to find analogue of this picture for some extraordinary (co)homology theory. Probably the simplest case is complex K-theory. What is the analogue of singular complex for K-theory? (E.g. what is algebraic description of stable homotopy category Bousfield-localized in KU?)
03/19/12 PHD comic: 'Inspiration'
6 hours ago
