1\rangle}\ : \ L F_n\circ \dots\circ L F_1 \ \Longrightarrow \ 
L(F_n\circ\dots\circ F_1)$$ inductively by setting $${\langle F_n,F_{n-1},\dots, F_1\rangle}\ = \ 
 {\langle F_n F_{n-1},F_{n-2},\dots, F_1\rangle}\circ
({\langle F_n,F_{n-1}\rangle}\star (L F_{n-1}\circ\dots\circ L F_1))\,$$ assuming that all iterated composites of adjacent functors are left derivable. Proposition \[prop:derived cocycle\] implies that we could have instead ‘spliced’ at any other intermediate spot in the composition; more generally, we could have ‘collected adjacent factors’ in any way we like, and get the same result. More precisely, if for $i\leq j$ we write $$F_{[j,i]}\ = \ F_j\circ F_{j-1}\circ\dots\circ F_i\,$$ and we set ${\langle F_k\rangle}=\operatorname{Id}_{L F_k}$, then for all sequences of numbers $1\leq m_1< m_2 <\dots < m_k < n$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
 &{\langle F_n,\dots, F_1\rangle}\ = \\ 
 &\quad{\langle F_{[n,m_k+1]},\dots, F_{[m_2,m_1+1]}, F_{[m_1,1]}\rangle}
\circ
\left( {\langle F_n,\dots,F_{m_k+1}\rangle}\star \dots\star{\langle F_{m_1},\dots,F_1\rangle}\right) \.  \end{aligned}$$

The next Theorem \[thm:weak equivalence\] is a homotopy invariance statement for proper equivariant stable homotopy theory; it says, roughly speaking, that this homotopy theory only depends on the Lie group ‘up to multiplicative weak equivalence’. In the context of [*compact*]{} Lie groups, this statement does not have much content: as we recall in the next proposition, every multiplicative weak equivalence between compact Lie groups is already an isomorphism.

\[prop:compact rigid\] Let $\alpha:K{\longrightarrow}
1\rangle}\: \ L F_n\circ \dots\circ L F_1 \ \Longrightarrow \ 
 L(F_n\circ\dots\circ F_1)$$ inductively by setting $ $ { \langle F_n, F_{n-1},\dots, F_1\rangle}\ = \ 
  { \langle F_n F_{n-1},F_{n-2},\dots, F_1\rangle}\circ 
 ({ \langle F_n, F_{n-1}\rangle}\star (L F_{n-1}\circ\dots\circ L F_1))\,$$ assuming that all iterated composites of adjacent functors are leave derivable. Proposition \[prop: derive cocycle\ ] implies that we could have instead ‘ spliced ’ at any early intermediate spot in the composition; more by and large, we could have ‘ collected adjacent factors ’ in any manner we like, and get the like result. More precisely, if for $ i\leq j$ we write $ $ F_{[j, i]}\ = \ F_j\circ F_{j-1}\circ\dots\circ F_i\,$$ and we set $ { \langle F_k\rangle}=\operatorname{Id}_{L F_k}$, then for all sequences of issue $ 1\leq m_1 < m_2 < \dots < m_k < n$, we have $ $ \begin{aligned } 
  & { \langle F_n,\dots, F_1\rangle}\ = \\ 
  & \quad{\langle F_{[n, m_k+1]},\dots, F_{[m_2,m_1 + 1 ] }, F_{[m_1,1]}\rangle } 
 \circ 
 \left ({ \langle F_n,\dots, F_{m_k+1}\rangle}\star \dots\star{\langle F_{m_1},\dots, F_1\rangle}\right) \.   \end{aligned}$$ 

 The next Theorem \[thm: weak equivalence\ ] is a homotopy invariance statement for proper equivariant static homotopy theory; it says, roughly talk, that this homotopy theory only depend on the Lie group ‘ up to multiplicative weak equality ’. In the context of [ * compact * ] { } Lie groups, this statement does not have much content: as we echo in the next proposition, every multiplicative weak equivalence between compact Lie groups is already an isomorphism. 

 \[prop: compact rigid\ ] Let $ \alpha: K{\longrightarrow }
1\ranhle}\ : \ L F_n\circ \dots\circ U F_1 \ \Longrightatriw \ 
L(F_i\circ\dofs\circ F_1)$$ inductively by setting $${\langpe F_n,F_{n-1},\eots, F_1\rangle}\ = \ 
 {\langle F_n F_{n-1},F_{n-2},\dlts, F_1\rantle}\cmrc
({\langle F_n,F_{n-1}\raifle}\star (L F_{n-1}\cjvc\dotv\rirc L F_1))\,$$ assumikg that all iterated compmsktzs of adjacent functors are left deryvable. Lrlposition \[prop:qerineq codjcoe\] implies that we could have insteav ‘spliced’ at anu other intermediate spot ln tje composition; morf generally, we siuld have ‘coulected adjacent factots’ in any way we like, and get thd samz result. Motz prfwisely, if fir $i\lvq j$ we write $$F_{[j,i]}\ = \ F_b\circ F_{k-1}\circ\dots\circ N_i\,$$ anv we set ${\langle F_k\rangle}=\o'eratorname{Id}_{L F_k}$, thgn for all szquences of numbers $1\lwq m_1< m_2 <\gots < m_k < n$, de gate $$\gegin{apigied}
 &{\langle R_n,\dots, F_1\rantle}\ = \\ 
 &\quad{\langle F_{[m,m_h+1]},\eots, F_{[m_2,m_1+1]}, F_{[m_1,1]}\rahgle}
\ciwc
\jeft( {\langle F_n,\dots,F_{m_k+1}\rangle}\star \dots\stag{\lanfle F_{m_1},\dots,F_1\rangle}\right) \.  \end{aligned}$$

The next Jheorem \[thi:weak equivalence\] is a homotopy invariance statemant fkf pxiper dwulvariant stable homotopy theory; it says, roughjg xpvaking, that this momotopy theory onky drkends on the Lke grobl ‘hp to multiplicatige weak equicalence’. Ig thr context of [*compact*]{} Lie griups, this stctenent does not have much conteut: as ee revall in the next proposntion, svery multiolicative deak equivalence benweet compacu Lie groups is alweady an msomoxphism.

\[prup:cokpact wigid\] Let $\wlpha:K{\longrightarrow}
1\rangle}\ : \ L F_n\circ \dots\circ L \Longrightarrow L(F_n\circ\dots\circ F_1)$$ by setting $${\langle F_n F_1\rangle}\circ ({\langle F_n,F_{n-1}\rangle}\star F_{n-1}\circ\dots\circ L F_1))\,$$ that all iterated composites of adjacent are left derivable. Proposition \[prop:derived cocycle\] implies that we could have instead ‘spliced’ any other intermediate spot in the composition; more generally, we could have ‘collected factors’ any we and get the same result. More precisely, if for $i\leq j$ we write $$F_{[j,i]}\ = \ F_{j-1}\circ\dots\circ F_i\,$$ and we set ${\langle F_k\rangle}=\operatorname{Id}_{L F_k}$, for all sequences of $1\leq m_1< m_2 <\dots < < we have &{\langle F_1\rangle}\ \\ &\quad{\langle F_{[n,m_k+1]},\dots, F_{[m_1,1]}\rangle} \circ \left( {\langle F_n,\dots,F_{m_k+1}\rangle}\star \dots\star{\langle F_{m_1},\dots,F_1\rangle}\right) \. \end{aligned}$$ The next Theorem \[thm:weak equivalence\] is a homotopy statement for stable homotopy it roughly that this homotopy depends on the Lie group ‘up equivalence’. In the context of [*compact*]{} Lie groups, statement does have much content: as we recall the next proposition, every multiplicative weak equivalence between Lie groups is already an isomorphism. \[prop:compact rigid\] Let $\alpha:K{\longrightarrow}
1\rangle}\ : \ L F_n\circ \dots\circ L F_1 \ \LoNgrightarrOw \ 
L(F_n\CirC\doTs\Circ f_1)$$ indUctively by settINg $${\laNgle F_n,F_{n-1},\dots, F_1\rangle}\ = \ 
 {\lanGle F_n f_{n-1},f_{N-2},\dotS, f_1\rAngle}\Circ
({\lanGLe f_N,f_{n-1}\rAnGlE}\stAr (l f_{n-1}\Circ\dOts\Circ L F_1))\,$$ aSsuming thaT alL iTerated compoSItEs of adjaceNt fUnctors are leFt dErivabLe. proPOsitiOn \[pRop:deRived cOCycle\] iMplies thaT wE Could hAVe insteAD ‘SpLiceD’ at any other intermEDiATe spot in the comPositiOn; MOrE GEneRalLy, we could hAvE ‘collECted adjACeNT FActORs’ in any way we lIke, and get thE SamE resulT. MOre PReciseLy, if fOr $I\Leq J$ we write $$F_{[j,i]}\ = \ f_j\ciRc F_{j-1}\circ\dOts\cirC f_i\,$$ and we SEt ${\langlE F_k\ranGle}=\OpeRatoRNaMe{id}_{L f_k}$, THen FOr All SEquEnces of nUmBeRs $1\leq M_1< m_2 <\doTS < M_K < N$, we hAve $$\BegiN{aligNed}
 &{\langle F_n,\doTs, F_1\RangLE}\ = \\ 
 &\quAd{\lanGle F_{[n,M_k+1]},\doTs, f_{[m_2,m_1+1]}, F_{[m_1,1]}\Rangle}
\Circ
\lEfT( {\langle F_n,\dots,F_{m_K+1}\ranGle}\star \doTs\sTaR{\laNgLe F_{m_1},\dOTs,F_1\ranGle}\RigHt) \.  \end{alIgned}$$

ThE NexT THEOReM \[thm:weak equivalencE\] iS A HoMotopy inVarianCE sTaTEment for PrOpeR equIVArianT staBLe Homotopy Theory; IT sAyS, roughlY sPeakinG, tHat ThiS homoTOpy tHeory oNly depenDs on tHE Lie group ‘up to mULtiplicative wEAk EQUiVAlenCe’. IN the context Of [*coMPact*]{} lie gROuPs, tHIs staTemenT dOEs NOt have much content: as We Recall In the Next propositiOn, every mulTIPLicative Weak EQuIValence between CompaCt Lie groupS Is alreadY an isOmorphisM.

\[prop:compACT rigid\] LeT $\alPha:k{\loNgrIGHtArrow}
1\rangle}\ : \ L F_n\circ\dots\circ  L F_ 1 \  \L on grig htar row \ 
L(F_n\c i rc\d ots\circ F_1)$$ induct ively  b y  set t in g $${ \langle F_ n , F_{ n- 1} ,\d ot s ,F_1\r ang le}\ =\ 
 {\lang leF_ n F_{n-1},F_ { n- 2},\dots,F_1 \rangle}\cir c
( {\lang le  F_ n ,F_{n -1} \rang le}\st a r (L F _{n-1}\ci rc \ dots\c i rc L F_ 1 ) )\ ,$$assuming that all it e rated composit es ofad j ac e n t f unc tors are l ef t der i vable.P ro p o s iti o n \[prop:deri ved cocycle \ ] i mplies  t hat we cou ld ha ve ins tead ‘splic ed’at any ot her in t ermedia t e spotin the  co mpo siti o n;  m ore  g e ner a ll y,w e c ould hav e‘c ollec teda d j a cent  fa ctor s’ in  any way we l ike , an d  ge t the  same  res ul t. Mo re pre cisel y,  if for $i\leqj$ w e write $ $F_ {[ j,i ]} \ = \ F_j\ci rcF_{ j-1}\ci rc\dots \ cir cF _ i \, $$ and we set ${\l an g l eF_k\rang le}=\o p er at o rname{Id }_ {LF_k} $ ,  then  for al l sequen ces of nu mb ers $1\ le q m_1<  m _2<\d ots < m_k< n$,we have$$\be g in{aligned}
 & { \langle F_n,\ d ot s ,  F _ 1\ra ngl e}\ = \\ 
&\qu a d{\l angl e  F _{[ n ,m_k+ 1]},\ do t s, F_{[m_2,m_1+1]}, F_ {[ m_1,1] }\ran gle}
\circ
\l eft( {\lan g l e  F_n,\do ts,F _ {m _ k+1}\rangle}\s tar \ dots\star{ \ langle F _{m_1 },\dots, F_1\rangl e } \right)\. \e nd{ ali g n ed }$$

The next T heor em  \[thm: wea k equiv ale nce \]isahomotopyinvarian ce  s ta te men t for proper e qu iva ri ant  stab l e homo topytheo ry ;i t s ays, ro u gh l y  spe ak in g, t hat  t his h omot o pytheoryonly depe nds on t he  L ie grou p ‘up to mult ip licative w ea k e quival e n ce’. Inthe context of [*compac t *]{} Li e g roups , th is statem ent  doesnot have m uch co ntent :asw e  reca l l  i n t he  next prop o s iti on, e ve ry m ultipli cative weak equiva l enc e between com pac t Li e gr oup s  i s  al re a dya n  isomorphism.
\[prop:com pa c trigid\] Le t  $\ al pha:K{\ longrig htarr o w}
1\rangle}\ :_\ L_F_n\circ \dots\circ L F_1_\ \Longrightarrow_\_
L(F_n\circ\dots\circ F_1)$$_inductively_by setting $${\langle_F_n,F_{n-1},\dots, F_1\rangle}\ =_\ 
 {\langle F_n_F_{n-1},F_{n-2},\dots, F_1\rangle}\circ
({\langle F_n,F_{n-1}\rangle}\star_(L_F_{n-1}\circ\dots\circ L F_1))\,$$ assuming that all iterated composites of adjacent functors are left derivable._Proposition_\[prop:derived cocycle\]_implies_that_we could have instead ‘spliced’_at any other intermediate spot_in the_composition; more generally, we could have ‘collected adjacent_factors’_in any way_we like, and get the same result. More precisely,_if for $i\leq j$ we write_$$F_{[j,i]}\ = \_F_j\circ_F_{j-1}\circ\dots\circ_F_i\,$$ and we set_${\langle F_k\rangle}=\operatorname{Id}_{L F_k}$, then for all_sequences of numbers $1\leq m_1< m_2_<\dots < m_k < n$, we have_$$\begin{aligned}
 &{\langle F_n,\dots, F_1\rangle}\ = \\_
 &\quad{\langle F_{[n,m_k+1]},\dots, F_{[m_2,m_1+1]}, F_{[m_1,1]}\rangle}
\circ
\left(_{\langle F_n,\dots,F_{m_k+1}\rangle}\star_\dots\star{\langle F_{m_1},\dots,F_1\rangle}\right) \.  \end{aligned}$$

The_next Theorem \[thm:weak_equivalence\] is_a homotopy invariance_statement for proper equivariant stable homotopy_theory; it says,_roughly speaking, that this homotopy theory_only_depends on the_Lie_group_‘up to_multiplicative weak equivalence’._In_the context_of_[*compact*]{} Lie groups, this statement does_not_have much content: as we recall in_the next proposition, every_multiplicative_weak equivalence between compact_Lie groups is already an_isomorphism.

\[prop:compact rigid\] Let $\alpha:K{\longrightarrow}