We have the relation
dn+1∘hn+hn−1∘dn=1Bn(17)
for every n⩾1.
Let x∈Bn; we have
(dn+1∘hn)(x)=(dn+1∘dn+21)(e⊗x)
=(dn+10∘dn+21)(e⊗x)−i=2∑n+2(−1)i(dn+1i−1∘dn+21)(e⊗x)
so, by formula (6),
(dn+1∘hn)(x)=(dn+10∘dn+20)(e⊗x)−i=2∑n+2(−1)i(dn+11∘dn+2i)(e⊗x)
But we have
(dn+10∘dn+20)(e⊗x)=ε(e)x=x
by property (ii) of Proposition 5 of VIII, p. 236 and, for i⩾2,
dn+2i(e⊗x)=e⊗dni−2(x)
which gives
(dn+1∘hn)(x)=x−dn+11(e⊗dn(x))=x−hn−1∘dn(x)
and therefore formula (17).
We can finish the proof of Proposition 6 using Lemma 5. Let n be an integer ⩾1 and f an element of Cn(A,P). By construction, we have
αn−1(γn(f))=αn(f)∘hn−1(18)
and, consequently, by formulas (9) and (18),
αn(∂n−1(γn(f))+γn+1(∂n(f)))=αn−1(γn(f))∘dn+αn+1(∂n(f))∘hn
=αn(f)∘hn−1∘dn+αn(f)∘dn+1∘hn
=αn(f)
where the last equality follows from (17). Since αn is bijective, the proposition follows.
Bourbaki sets the proof directly after the statement, and the corpus does not separate them, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.
Nothing.