Arxiv:2007.09434V2 [Math.SG] 26 Mar 2021

arXiv:2007.09434v2 [math.SG] 26 Mar 2021 olo hsppri oselotterpof §,§) fulfil §3), (§2, proofs their out spell to is paper this of goal pc fitrwnn prtr ewe w representatio like two properties between basic operators intertwining of space o opc ruso h iilvBra hoyfrexpone for theory Kirillov-Bernat the or groups orbi compact coadjoint for to representations from correspondence the hs epooenwvrin fbt osrcin nteca the in constructions both of versions f new theory propose Auslander-Kostant the we in this, as many-to-one, is it when as such operations [ mirror like of theory papers symplectic precision, the and theory representation between .105]. p. edfrorpeunie esosb htw eiv stes the is believe se we that what in by versions properties prequantized Frobenius our and for need stages the establish and ioTn nvriy hnhi204,CiaadScinde Switzerland. Section Lausanne, and de China Fédérale 200240, Shanghai University, Tong Jiao [email protected] n ntewr fBrlWi n iilv[ Kirillov and Borel-Weil of work rep unitary the irreducible in of ing parametrization mere the Beyond Introduction M ujc lsicto 22)5D0 35,22D30. 53D50, 53D20, (2020) classification subject AMS * † colo ahmtclSine n iityo dcto K Education of Ministry and Sciences Mathematical of School eateto ahmtclSine,GogaSuhr Uni Southern Georgia Sciences, Mathematical of Department eodga fteppri opitotta,wieteecon these while that, out point to is paper the of goal second A ec httestaini eeidb okn ntecatego the in Hamiltonia working by given remedied a is situation “quantizes” the unfort G-module that show) one dence we than (as more which where G-spaces, Guill 1980s, Hamiltonian the of In G-modules. property unitary of categories in tors eirct swl ste“nuto nsae”property. stages” in “induction multip the and as induction well as define reciprocity we there, disappears; ambiguity ypetcIdcin rqatmIdcin and Induction, Prequantum Induction, Symplectic rbnu eirct set htidcinfo subgro a from induction that asserts reciprocity Frobenius nuto nstages in induction K78 Ind , rqatmMultiplicities Prequantum uo .Ratiu S. Tudor ai@jueuc,[email protected] [email protected], W78 H G idcn ersnainfo ugop or subgroup) a from representation a (inducing , G82 or , G83 ac ,2021 2, March rbnu reciprocity Frobenius S54 nrdcdprl ypetccntutosmatto meant constructions symplectic purely introduced ] * Abstract n rnosZiegler François and , K62 1 ahmtqe,Uiest eGnv n cl Polytechniq Ecole and Genève de Université Mathématiques, yLbo cetfi n niern optn,Shanghai Computing, Engineering and Scientific on Lab ey ,teeeit eti well-known certain a exists there ], igpoie aei [ in made promises ling si n-ooe si h oe-eltheory Borel-Weil the in as one-to-one, is ts mnadSenegetbihdaparallel a established Sternberg and emin s.I htstig n fcus expects course of one setting, that In ns). rslal rus[ groups solvable or eettosb odon risoriginat- orbits coadjoint by resentations aitna -pcs ocpuei with it capture To G-spaces. Hamiltonian padrsrcint taeajitfunc- adjoint are it to restriction and up yof ry tn §,§) ial,w lutaethe illustrate we Finally, §8). (§7, tting ta rus[ groups ntial iiysae,adetbihFrobenius establish and spaces, licity est,Saebr,G 06-03 USA. 30460-8093, GA Statesboro, versity, eoyof tegory mls xml §,§9). (§4, example implest ntl al omro h situation the mirror to fails unately ohl nsmlci emty first A geometry. symplectic in hold to -pc.Ti ae fesevi- offers paper This G-space. n prequantum tutosfi hi ups when purpose their fit structions prequantum † K62 -pcs hr this where G-spaces, , A71 Z96 F15 Hom , G ,te alshort fall they ], .9 n [ and 9] p. , S94 -spaces G frigthe (forming .T remedy To ]. parallelism §,§6) (§5, M07 ue , Notation and conventions We use a concise notation for the translation of tangent and cotangent vectors to a Lie group: for fixed g, q ∈ G, T G → T G T∗G → T∗ G (0.1) q gq resp. q gq v 7→ gv, p 7→ gp will denote the derivative of q 7→ gq, respectively its contragredient, i.e., 〈gp, v〉 = 〈p, g −1v〉. Likewise, we define vg and pg with 〈pg, v〉 = 〈p, vg −1〉. By a Hamiltonian G-space we mean the triple (X, ω, Φ) of a manifold X on which G acts, a G- invariant symplectic form ω on it, and a G-equivariant momentum map Φ : X → g∗. We identify spaces X1,X2 which are isomorphic, i.e., related by a G-equivariant diffeomorphism which transforms ω1 into ω2 and Φ1 into Φ2. If several are in play, we also use subscripts like ωX, ΦX. We recall two cardinal properties of the momentum map:

ω (0.2) (a) Ker(DΦ(x )) = g(x ) (b) Im(DΦ(x )) = ann(gx ). The ﬁrst is the orthogonal relative to ω of the tangent space g(x ) to the orbit G(x ), x ∈ X; the second ∗ is the annihilator in g of the stabilizer Lie subalgebra gx ⊂ g.

1 Symplectic Induction

Given a closed subgroup H ⊂ G and a Hamiltonian H-space (Y, ωY, Ψ), [K78] constructs an induced Hamiltonian G-space as follows. Let ̟ denote the canonical 1-form on T∗G given by ̟(δp) = 〈p, δq〉, ∗ ∗ where δp ∈ Tp(T G), δq =π∗(δp) ∈ Tπ(p)G, and π :T G → G is the canonical projection. Endow N := ∗ −1 T G × Y with the symplectic form ω := d̟ + ωY and the G × H-action (g, h)(p, y) = (gph , h(y)), where h(y) denotes the action of h ∈ H on y ∈ Y. This action admits the equivariant momentum map φ × ψ : N → g∗ × h∗,

−1 φ(p, y) = pq ∗ (1.1) −1 (p ∈ Tq G). ψ(p, y) = Ψ(y) − q p |h The induced manifold is, by deﬁnition, the Marsden-Weinstein reduced space of N at 0 ∈ h∗, i.e.

G −1 (1.2) IndH Y := N//H = ψ (0)/H. In more detail: the action of H is free and proper (because it is free and proper on the factor T∗G, where it is the right action of H regarded as a subgroup of the group T∗G [B72, §III.1.6]); so ψ is a −1 submersion (0.2b), ψ (0) is a submanifold, and (1.2) is a manifold; moreover ω|ψ−1(0) degenerates exactly along the H-orbits (0.2a), so it is the pull-back of a uniquely deﬁned symplectic form, ωN//H, on the quotient. Furthermore, the G-action commutes with the H-action and preserves ψ−1(0), and its momentum map φ is constant on H-orbits. Passing to the quotient, we obtain the required G-action G G ∗ on IndH Y and momentum map ΦN//H : IndH Y → g . Note that since ψ is a submersion and H acts freely, (1.2) has dimension equal to dim(N) − 2 dim(H), i.e.

G (1.3) dim(IndH Y) = 2 dim(G/H) + dim(Y).

2 Symplectic Induction in Stages

(2.1) Theorem (Stages). If H ⊂ K ⊂ G are closed subgroups of the Lie group G, then

G K G IndK IndH Y = IndH Y.

2 Mr N j1 j ψ¯−1(0) 3 j

−1 s −1 π1 (φ¯ × ψ¯) (0) ψ (0)

M//H π j2

1 ¯ − π ΦM//H(0) 3

π2

(M//H)//Kt N//H

Figure 1: Construction of the isomorphism t.

∗ ∗ Proof. Let (N, ω, φ × ψ) be as in §1 and consider M = T G × T K × Y with 2-form ωM = d̟T∗G + d̟T∗K + ωY and G × K × H-action

(2.2) (g, k, h)(p,¯p, y) = (gpk −1, kph¯ −1, h(y)).

This admits the equivariant momentum map φ × φ¯ × ψ¯ :M → g∗ × k∗ × h∗:

φ(p,¯p, y) = pq −1 −1 −1 (2.3)  φ¯ (p,¯p, y) = p¯q¯ − q p |k  −1 ψ¯(p,¯p, y) = Ψ(y) − q¯ p¯ |h

∗ ∗  for (p,¯p) ∈ Tq G × Tq¯K. Deﬁne r : M → N by r(p,¯p, y) = (pq¯, y) and consider the commutative diagram in Fig. 1, where we have written j1, j2, j3 and π1, π2, π3 for the inclusion and projection maps ∗ K G K involved in constructing the reduced spaces M//H = T G × IndH Y, (M//H)//K = IndK IndH Y, and G ¯ N//H = IndH Y; also j , π are the obvious inclusion and restriction, and ΦM//H is the momentum map for the residual K-action on M//H. The map r ◦ j1 ◦ j satisﬁes

ψ((r ◦ j1 ◦ j )(p,¯p, y)) = ψ(pq¯, y) −1 =Ψ(y) − (qq¯) pq¯|h −1 −1 (2.4) =Ψ(y) − q¯ (q p) |kq¯|h −1 =Ψ(y) − q¯ p¯ |h since φ¯ (p,¯p, y) = 0 = 0 since ψ¯(p,¯p, y) = 0.

−1 So r ◦j1 ◦j takes values in ψ (0), i.e., there is a map s as indicated in Fig. 1. Moreover, s is onto since −1 one veriﬁes that (p, y) 7→ (p,(q p) |k, y) provides a right inverse. The map s is equivariant relative to the G × K × H-action on (φ¯ × ψ¯)−1(0) and the G × H-action on ψ−1(0):

s((g, k, h)(p,¯p, y)) = r(gpk −1, kph¯ −1, h(y)) = (gpqh¯ −1, h(y)) (2.5) = (g, h)(pq¯, y) = (g, h)(s(p,¯p, y)).

3 Hence s descends to a G-equivariant surjection t as indicated in Fig. 1. Furthermore, one checks without trouble that the ﬁbers of s are precisely the K-orbits in its domain. As π2 ◦ π collapses these orbits to points, it follows that t is bijective, hence a diffeomorphism by [B67, 5.9.6]. The relation ∗ ∗ φ= r φ implies that t relates the momentum maps for G: Φ(M//H)//K = t ΦN//H, so there only remains ∗ to see that ω(M//H)//K = t ωN//H. To this end we compute

∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ (s j3 ̟T G)(δp, δp¯, δy) = ̟T G(δ[pq¯]) = 〈pq¯, δ[qq¯]〉 1 1 (2.6) = 〈p, δq〉 + 〈q − p,[δq¯]¯q − 〉 since δ[qq¯] = [δq]¯q + q[δq¯] = 〈p, δq〉 + 〈p¯, δq¯〉 since φ¯ (p,¯p, y) = 0

= ̟T∗G(δp) + ̟T∗K(δp¯).

∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ Taking exterior derivatives and adding ωY we obtain s j3 ωN = j j1 ωM or, equivalently (by commu- ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ tativity of the diagram and deﬁnition of the reduced 2-forms), π π2 t ωN//H = π π2 ω(M//H)//K. Since π2 ◦ π is a submersion, we are done.

3 Symplectic Frobenius Reciprocity

It is quite rare for an induced Hamiltonian G-space to be homogeneous or a fortiori a coadjoint orbit (by which we mean that its momentum map is 1-1 onto an orbit). In fact we have the following, where ΦN//H is the momentum map for the induced space (1.2).

(3.1) Proposition. Let (Y, ωY, Ψ) be a Hamiltonian H-space.

(a) A coadjoint orbit O of G intersects Im(ΦN//H) ⇔ O |h := {m |h : m ∈ O} intersects Im(Ψ). G (b) If IndH Y is homogeneous under G, then Y is homogeneous under H. G (c) If IndH Y is a coadjoint orbit of G, then Y is a coadjoint orbit of H. −1 G Proof. (a): This re-expresses Im(ΦN//H) = φ(ψ (0)) (1.1). (b): Assume G is transitive on IndH Y and ∗ let y1, y2 ∈ Y. Pick mi ∈ g such that Ψ(yi ) = mi|h. Then the H-orbits xi = H(mi , yi ) are points in (1.2). So transitivity says that x1 = g(x2), i.e.

−1 (3.2) (m1, y1) = (gm2h , h(y2)) forsome h ∈ H.

In particular y1 = h(y2), as claimed. (c): Assume further that ΦN//H is injective and suppose Ψ(y1) = Ψ(y2). Then we can pick m1 = m2 above. Since ΦN//H(xi ) = mi it follows, by injectivity, that x1 = x2, i.e., we have (3.2) with g = e. But then h = e and hence y1 = y2, as claimed. G O If Y is a coadjoint orbit, (3.1a) says that IndH Y “involves” just those orbits whose projection in h∗ contains Y. Guillemin and Sternberg [G82, §6] proposed to measure the “multiplicity” of this O G involvement by the (possibly empty) space HomG( ,IndH Y), where we write suggestively − (3.3) HomG(X1,X2) := (X1 × X2)//G, − ∗ − i.e., the Marsden-Weinstein reduction of X1 ×X2 at 0 ∈ g ; here X1 is the Hamiltonian G-space X1 with its 2-form and momentum map replaced by their negatives, and we regard (3.3) simply as a set. Then (3.1a) can be reﬁned by the following analog of Frobenius’s theorem [B85, III.6.2], already found in [G83, Thm 2.2] when both X and Y are coadjoint orbits. (3.4) Theorem (Frobenius reciprocity). If X is a Hamiltonian G-space and Y a Hamiltonian H-space, then G G HomG(X, IndH Y) = HomH(ResH X,Y).

4 G (3.5) Remarks. Here ResH X means X regarded as a Hamiltonian H-space, and “=” means only a natural bijection as sets. We believe (but haven’t proved) that both sides are automatically isomorphic as diffeological spaces with diffeological 2-forms as discussed in [S85, §2.5], [I13, §6.38], [K16]. Note also that, by the symmetry of (3.3), we may equally write Frobenius reciprocity in the form G G HomG (IndH Y,Z) = HomH(Y, ResH Z). Proof. For bookkeeping reasons, soon to become clear, rename G also as K. Consider the spaces N = X− ×Y with H-action h(x , y) = (h(x ), h(y)),and M = X− ×T∗K×Y with K×H-action (k, h)(x ,¯p, y) = (k(x ), kph¯ −1, h(y)). Their equivariant momentum maps are ψ : N → h∗,

(3.6) ψ(x , y) =Ψ(y) − Φ(x ) |h and φ¯ × ψ¯ :M → k∗ × h∗,

φ¯(x ,¯p, y) = p¯q¯−1 − Φ(x ) (3.7) (¯p ∈ T∗K) −1 q¯ ψ¯(x ,¯p, y) = Ψ(y) − q¯ p¯ |h where Φ and Ψ are the equivariant momentum maps of X and Y, respectively. Deﬁning r :M → N by r(x ,¯p, y) = (¯q −1(x ), y) now sets us up for a proof using the same previous diagram (Fig. 1). Indeed, we have again this time

−1 ψ((r ◦ j1 ◦ j )(x ,¯p, y)) = ψ(¯q (x ), y) −1 =Ψ(y) − Φ(¯q (x )) |h −1 (3.8) =Ψ(y) − q¯ Φ(x )¯q |h by equivariance −1 =Ψ(y) − q¯ p¯ |h since φ¯ (x ,¯p, y) = 0 = 0 since ψ¯(x ,¯p, y) = 0, so there is a map s as indicated in Fig. 1. Again, s is onto since (x , y) 7→ (x , Φ(x ), y) provides a right inverse, and s is equivariant relative to the K × H-action on (φ¯ × ψ¯)−1(0) and the H-action on ψ−1(0):

s((k, h)(x ,¯p, y)) = r(k(x ), kph¯ −1, h(y)) = ((kqh¯ −1)−1(k(x )), h(y)) (3.9) = (h(¯q −1(x )), h(y)) = h(s(x ,¯p, y)). So the ﬁbers of s are again the K-orbits and s descends again to a bijection t as required and indicated in Fig. 1.

4 An Example

A basic shortcoming in the analogy of (3.4) with representation theory is that it cannot mirror cases where more than one representation “quantizes” a given Hamiltonian G-space or H-space. To make this assertion precise, we restrict attention to the case where X is a coadjoint orbit of a type I solvable Lie group G, endowed with its Kirillov-Kostant-Souriau 2-form ωX. In that setting “quantization” is well-deﬁned by the theory of Auslander and Kostant [A71] where, we recall:

• X has irreducible unitary representations attached to it iff the de Rham cohomology class [ωX] 2 belongs to H (X, Z) (in particular if ωX is exact). • If so, and if G is simply connected, then X has as many representations attached to it as there are homomorphisms (a.k.a. characters) from the fundamental group π1(X) to the circle group T.

5 This can be summed up by saying that the unitary dual Gb is parametrized by prequantized coadjoint orbits in the sense of Section 5 below. (One should beware that this can fail beyond the solvable f context [R82, T83]: the minimal nilpotent coadjoint orbit of SL3(R) has four prequantum bundles but only three representations attached to it.) The simplest example where (3.4) falls short is then as follows. In the solvable group G′ of all upper triangular matrices of the form eia 0 0 b 1 e f a, e, f ∈ R (4.1) g ′ =   1 a b ∈ C,  1   write G for the normal subgroup in which e = 0 and H for the subgroup of G in which a ∈ 2πZ. Identify g′∗ with R × C × R2 by writing (p, q, s, t) for the value at the identity of the 1-form

(4.2) pda + Re(¯qdb) − sde − tdf . The coadjoint action of G′ leaves the hyperplane t = 1 invariant and acts there by

p p + e + Re(ibqeia ) q qeia (4.3) g ′   =   . s s + a 1  1      Likewise, identify g∗ with triples (p, q, t) and h∗ with pairs (q, t) so that the projections g′∗ → g∗ → h∗ become (p, q, s, t) 7→ (p, q, t) 7→ (q, t) and the coadjoint actions are by appropriate restrictions of ′ ′ (4.3). Then the coadjoint orbit X = G (ˇc)ofc ˇ = (0,1,0,1) projects onto the orbit X = G(ˇc |g) and is its universal covering:

′ is 2 X = (p,e , s,1):(p, s) ∈ R , ωX′ = dp ∧ ds = d(pds), ↓ (4.4) dq dq X = (p, q,1):(p, q) ∈ R × T , ω = dp ∧ = d p . X iq iq So there is a single representation attached to X′, and a circle worth of representations attached to X. Moreover, one checks (or ﬁnds by [Z14] applied to the normal subgroup Ho) that ′ G ′ G (4.5) X = IndH cˇ |h , and likewise X = IndH′ cˇ |h′ where H′ is the normal subgroup of G′ in which a = 0. So symplectic Frobenius reciprocity (3.4) gives the relation ′ ′ G ′ G ′ HomG(X, ResG X ) = HomH cˇ|h , ResH X ′ ∗ −1 (4.6) = (X →h ) (ˇc |h)/H = {a point} between X and the restriction of X′. But this fact is of little use for representation theory, as it fails to predict into which of the representations attached to X the representation attached to X′ will split (when restricted to G). As one knows, this should be ﬁxed by working instead with prequantum spaces in the sense of the next section.

5 Prequantum G-spaces

Following [S70], we call prequantum manifold a manifold X˜ with a contact 1-form ̟ whose Reeb vector ﬁeld generates a circle group action. We recall that ̟ contact means that Ker(d̟) is 1-dimensional

6 and transverse to Ker(̟); its Reeb vector ﬁeld, i, on X˜ is deﬁned by

(5.1) i(˜x ) ∈ Ker(d̟) and ̟(i(˜x)) = 1 ∀ x˜ ∈ X.˜ Then (X,˜ d̟) is a presymplectic manifold whose null leaves are the orbits of the circle group T = U(1) acting on X˜ and d̟ descends to a symplectic form ω on the leaf space X = X˜/T. If a Lie group G acts on X˜ and preserves ̟, then it commutes with T and the equivariant momentum map Φ : X˜ → g∗, (5.2) 〈Φ(˜x),Z〉 = ̟(Z(˜x)), descends to a momentum map Φ : X → g∗, making (X, ω, Φ) a Hamiltonian G-space prequantized by the prequantum G-space (X,˜ ̟). We do not distinguish between two spaces X˜1, X˜2 which are isomorphic, i.e., related by a G- equivariant diffeomorphism which transforms ̟1 into ̟2. (If several are in play, we may also use subscripts like ̟X˜, iX˜, ΦX˜, etc.) We recall three basic constructions in the prequantum category: (5.3) Prequantum dual. ([S70, 18.47].) We write X˜− for the G-space equal to X˜ but with opposite

1-form −̟X˜ (and consequently opposite Reeb ﬁeld and T-action). It prequantizes the dual G-space (X−, −ω, −Φ).

(5.4) Prequantum product. ([S70, 18.52].) If X˜1 and X˜2 are prequantum G-spaces, then X˜1 × X˜2 (with diagonal G-action) is a T2-space in which the action of the anti-diagonal Δ= {(z −1, z ) : z ∈ T} has as its orbits the characteristic leaves of the 1-form ̟1 + ̟2. Hence this descends to the quotient X˜1 ⊠ X˜2 := (X˜1 × X˜2)/Δ as a 1-form making it a prequantization of the symplectic product X1 × X2. In ˜− ˜ view of (5.3), the Δ-action on X1 × X2 is z (˜x1,˜x2) = (z (˜x1), z (˜x2)). (5.5) Prequantum reduction. ([L01, Thm 2].) Assume G acts freely and properly on X,˜ and consider the level L := Φ−1(0). By the very deﬁnition (5.2) of Φ and its being a momentum map, we have g(˜x) ⊂ Ker(̟|L) ∩ Ker(d̟|L). Since ̟|L is also G-invariant, it follows (see [S70, 5.21]) that it descends to a contact 1-form on the quotient X˜//G := Φ−1(0)/G. This prequantizes the symplectic reduction X//G =Φ−1(0)/G.

6 Prequantum Induction

˜ Given a closed subgroup H ⊂ G and a prequantum H-space (Y, ̟Y˜) whose momentum map (5.2) G ˜ we denote Ψ, we propose to construct an induced prequantum G-space IndH Y as follows. Consider ˜ ∗ ˜ ∗ the prequantum (G × H)-space N = T G × Y with 1-form ̟T G + ̟Y˜ and action (g, h)(p,˜y) = (gph −1, h(˜y)). This action has the equivariant momentum map φ × ψ : N˜ → g∗ × h∗,

−1 φ(p,˜y) = pq ∗ (6.1) −1 (p ∈ Tq G). ψ(p,˜y) = Ψ(˜y) − q p |h The same arguments as with (1.2), then, show that G ˜ ˜ −1 (6.2) IndH Y := N//H = ψ (0)/H (prequantum reduction (5.5)) is naturally a prequantum G-space which prequantizes the symplecti- cally induced manifold (1.2).

7 Prequantum Induction in Stages

(7.1) Theorem (Stages). If H ⊂ K ⊂ G are closed subgroups of the Lie group G, then G K ˜ G ˜ IndK IndH Y = IndH Y.

7 Proof. The proof is mutatis mutandis the same as for (2.1), only simpler. We just switch to working with restrictions and push-forwards of the 1-form ̟(δp, δp¯, δy˜) = 〈p, δq〉 + 〈p¯, δq¯〉 + ̟Y˜(δy˜) on M˜ = T∗G × T∗K × Y˜ instead of the 2-form ω on M.

8 Prequantum Frobenius Reciprocity

The three constructions (5.3–5.5) put together furnish us with a notion of the intertwiner space of two prequantum G-spaces,

˜ ˜ ˜− ⊠ ˜ (8.1) HomG(X1, X2) := (X1 X2)//G. Freeness and properness of the last G-action are not assumed and we again regard (8.1) as just a set. (8.2) Theorem (Frobenius reciprocity). If X˜ is a prequantum G-space and Y˜ a prequantum H-space, then ˜ G ˜ G ˜ ˜ HomG(X,IndH Y) = HomH(ResH X, Y). Proof. With Δ as in (5.4), deﬁne r˜ in the following commutative diagram by r˜(˜x, p,˜y) = (q −1(˜x),y ˜), ∗ where p ∈ Tq G:

r˜ M˜ := X˜− × T∗G × Y˜ ˜ N˜ := X˜− × Y˜

mod Δ mod Δ

(8.3) r M˜ := X˜− ⊠ T∗G × Y˜ ˜ N˜ := X˜− ⊠ Y˜

mod (T2/Δ) mod (T2/Δ)

r M := X− × T∗G × Y N := X− × Y.

Then r˜ descends, as indicated, to a mapr ˜ and a map r which is the one in our proof of (3.4). Now each ﬂoor of this diagram supports a horizontal copy of Fig. 1 giving rise to the appropriate tilded versions of s and t; a straightforward diagram chase checks that ˜t :(M˜ //H)//G → N˜//H is the required bijection.

9 An Example (Reprise)

Recall the coadjoint orbits X =∼ R × T and X′ =∼ R2 of (4.4). Referring to [S70, 18.117, 18.133, 18.134] as well as [K70, Thm 5.1.1] and performing direct veriﬁcations, one ﬁnds: • There is a unique prequantum G′-space prequantizing X′, namely dz (9.1) X˜′ = X′ × T ∋ (p, s, z ) with ̟ = pds + iz with G′-action (uniquely lifted from (4.3) to preserve ̟)

p p + e + Re(ibei(s+a)) (9.2) g ′ s  =  s + a  . i(s+a) z z ei Re be −se−f    

8 • There is a circle worth of inequivalent prequantum G-spaces over X, namely all dq dz (9.3) X˜ = X × T ∋ (p, q, z ) with ̟ = (p +λ) + λ λ iq iz

where λ1, λ2 ∈ R give equivalent prequantizations iff they differ by an integer (cf. [A59, K06]), and the G-action on X˜λ (uniquely lifted from that on X to preserve ̟λ) reads

p p + Re(ibqeia ) (9.4) g q =  qeia  . ia z z ei Re bqe −λa−f     Moreover, from (4.5) and the sentence following (6.2) one deduces without trouble that

′ ˜ G ˜′ G ′ (9.5) Xλ = IndH Tλ and X = IndH′ T

−iλa i[Re(b)−f ] ′ where Tλ is the unit circle on which H acts by the character χλ(h) = e e , and T is the unit circle on which H′ acts by the character χ′(h ′) = ei[Re(b)−f ] (notation (4.1)). Consequently (8.2) gives

′ ′ Hom (X˜ , ResG X˜′) = Hom (T , ResG X˜′) (9.6) G λ G H λ H = a single circle,

as one easily computes from (8.1′ , 9.2). This replaces (4.6) and “predicts” that once restricted to G, the G ′ ˜′ irreducible representation IndH′ χ (attached to X by Auslander-Kostant [A71]) splits into the direct G ˜ integral over λ ∈ R/Z of the irreducible representations IndH χλ (attached to Xλ) with multiplicity 1; this prediction is correct and can be checked directly.

References

[A59] Yakir Aharonov and David Bohm, Signiﬁcance of electromagnetic potentials in the quantum theory. Phys. Rev. (2) 115 (1959) 485–491.

[A71] Louis Auslander and Bertram Kostant, Polarization and unitary representations of solvable Lie groups. Invent. Math. 14 (1971) 255–354.

[B67] Nicolas Bourbaki, Variétés différentielles et analytiques. Fascicule de résultats. Paragraphes 1 à 7. Hermann, Paris, 1967.

[B72] , Groupes et algèbres de Lie. Chapitre II: Algèbres de Lie libres. Chapitre III: Groupes de Lie. Hermann, Paris, 1972.

[B85] Theodor Bröcker and Tammo tom Dieck, Representations of Compact Lie Groups, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 98. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1985.

[F15] Hidenori Fujiwara and Jean Ludwig, Harmonic Analysis on Exponential Solvable Lie Groups. Springer Monographs in Mathematics. Springer, Tokyo, 2015.

[G82] Victor Guillemin and Shlomo Sternberg, Geometric quantization and multiplicities of group representations. Invent. Math. 67 (1982) 515–538.

[G83] , The Frobenius reciprocity theorem from a symplectic point of view. Lecture Notes in Math. 1037 (1983) 242–256.

[I13] Patrick Iglesias-Zemmour, Diffeology, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 185. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2013.

9 [K16] Yael Karshon and Jordan Watts, Basic forms and orbit spaces: a diffeological approach. SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. 12 (2016) Paper No. 026, 19.

[K06] Hans A. Kastrup, Quantization of the canonically conjugate pair angle and orbital angular momentum. Phys. Rev. A (3) 73 (2006) 052104, 26.

[K78] David A. Kazhdan, Bertram Kostant, and Shlomo Sternberg, Hamiltonian group actions and dynamical systems of Calogero type. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 31 (1978) 481–507.

[K62] Aleksandr A. Kirillov, Unitary representations of nilpotent Lie groups. Uspekhi Mat. Nauk 17 (1962) 57–110.

[K70] Bertram Kostant, Quantization and unitary representations. I. Prequantization. Lecture Notes in Math. 170 (1970) 87–208.

[L01] Frank Loose, Reduction in contact geometry. J. Lie Theory 11 (2001) 9–22.

[M07] Jerrold E. Marsden, Gerard Misiołek, Juan-Pablo Ortega, Matthew Perlmutter, and Tudor S. Ratiu, Hamil- tonian Reduction by Stages. Lecture Notes in Math. 1913 (2007) 1–519.

[R82] John H. Rawnsley and Shlomo Sternberg. On representations associated to the minimal nilpotent coadjoint orbit of SL(3, R). Amer. J. Math. 104 (1982) 1153–1180.

[S54] Jean-Pierre Serre, Représentations linéaires et espaces homogènes kählériens des groupes de Lie com- pacts (d’après Armand Borel et André Weil). In Séminaire Bourbaki, Vol. 2, Exp. No. 100, 1–8. Secrétariat mathématique, Paris, 1954.

[S94] Irina M. Shchepochkina, The orbit method in restriction and induction problems for solvable Lie groups. Selecta Math. 13 (1994) 305–355.

[S70] Jean-Marie Souriau, Structure des systèmes dynamiques. Dunod, Paris, 1970. (Reprint: Éditions Jacques Gabay, Sceaux, 2008. Translation: Structure of Dynamical Systems. A Symplectic View of Physics. Progress in Mathematics, vol. 149. Birkhäuser, Boston, 1997.)

[S85] , Un algorithme générateur de structures quantiques. In Élie Cartan et les mathématiques d’aujourd’hui (Lyon, 25–29 juin 1984), Astérisque, vol. Hors Série, pp. 341–399. Soc. Math. France, Paris, 1985.

[T83] Pierre Torasso. Quantiﬁcation géométrique, opérateurs d’entrelacement et représentations unitaires de f (SL)3(R). Acta Math. 150 (1983) 153–242.

[W78] Alan Weinstein, A universal phase space for particles in Yang-Mills ﬁelds. Lett. Math. Phys. 2 (1978) 417–420.

[Z96] François Ziegler, Méthode des orbites et représentations quantiques. Ph.D. thesis, Université de Provence, Marseille, 1996. arXiv:1011.5056

[Z14] , Symplectic Mackey theory. 2014. arXiv:1410:7950v1

Funding

T. R. was partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number 11871334] and by the Swiss National Science Foundation [NCCR SwissMAP].