I am trying to understand this mathematical physics paper by A. Kapustin, which assumes knowledge of bordism invariants of smooth compact manifolds: https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.1467v3
For example, some non-trivial unoriented bordism groups are $$ \Omega^O_2 = \mathbb{Z}_2,\qquad\Omega^O_4 = \mathbb{Z}_2\oplus \mathbb{Z}_2\quad\textrm{and}\quad \Omega^O_5 = \mathbb{Z}_2$$
In the paper, Kapustin does not write explicit formulas for these invariants. However, he formulates the actions of the corresponding physical systems studied (pages 10-11). From those formulas, I expect the corresponding bordism invariants to be computed as integrals of cup products of Stiefel-Whitney classes.
Explicitly for the three groups above
$$n_2 = \int w_1^2 $$
$$n_4^{(1)} = \int w_1^4\quad\textrm{and}\quad n_4^{(2)} = \int w_2^2$$
$$n_5 =\int w_2 w_3$$
where all the products/powers are cup product, i.e. $w_2^2 = w_2 \smile w_2$ etc., and the Stiefel-Whitney class $w_q \in H^q(M,\mathbb{Z}_2)$ is a q-cocycle that "somehow" describes the topology of the manifold via its tangent bundle.
Given a triangulation of a manifold, together with a q-cocycle on each q-skeleton, it is clear to me how to compute the cup products and the integrals.
However, what is very unclear to me is how a triangulated manifold is equipped with the q-cocycles that characterize the tangent bundle in the first place. I understand that there should be some canonical choice (perhaps up to coboundary), but how does one explicitly construct this?
For example, let's say that I take $\mathbb{R}P^4$ or $\mathbb{C}P^2$ (which should correspond to different non-trivial elements of $\Omega_4^O$) - or perhaps some more trivial but lower-dimensional examples - with some triangulations. Then how can I define the corresponding 1-cocycles and 2-cocycles (i.e. a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ numbers of each 1-simplex resp. 2-simplex, which are subject to the cocycle condition) that characterize the tangent bundle?
It's really peculiar that this simple trick also works (although difficult to visualize...) in higher dimensions. Thank you for mentioning this!
– Tomáš Bzdušek Apr 15 '20 at 14:50