DOCSLIB.ORG

Lie Algebras by Shlomo Sternberg

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lie Algebras by Shlomo Sternberg Lie algebras Shlomo Sternberg April 23, 2004 2 Contents 1 The Campbell Baker Hausdorff Formula 7 1.1 The problem. 7 1.2 The geometric version of the CBH formula. 8 1.3 The Maurer-Cartan equations. 11 1.4 Proof of CBH from Maurer-Cartan. 14 1.5 The differential of the exponential and its inverse. 15 1.6 The averaging method. 16 1.7 The Euler MacLaurin Formula. 18 1.8 The universal enveloping algebra. 19 1.8.1 Tensor product of vector spaces. 20 1.8.2 The tensor product of two algebras. 21 1.8.3 The tensor algebra of a vector space. 21 1.8.4 Construction of the universal enveloping algebra. 22 1.8.5 Extension of a Lie algebra homomorphism to its universal enveloping algebra. 22 1.8.6 Universal enveloping algebra of a direct sum. 22 1.8.7 Bialgebra structure. 23 1.9 The Poincar´e-Birkhoff-Witt Theorem. 24 1.10 Primitives. 28 1.11 Free Lie algebras . 29 1.11.1 Magmas and free magmas on a set . 29 1.11.2 The Free Lie Algebra LX ................... 30 1.11.3 The free associative algebra Ass(X). 31 1.12 Algebraic proof of CBH and explicit formulas. 32 1.12.1 Abstract version of CBH and its algebraic proof. 32 1.12.2 Explicit formula for CBH. 32 2 sl(2) and its Representations. 35 2.1 Low dimensional Lie algebras. 35 2.2 sl(2) and its irreducible representations. 36 2.3 The Casimir element. 39 2.4 sl(2) is simple. 40 2.5 Complete reducibility. 41 2.6 The Weyl group. 42 3 4 CONTENTS 3 The classical simple algebras. 45 3.1 Graded simplicity. 45 3.2 sl(n +1)................................ 47 3.3 The orthogonal algebras. 48 3.4 The symplectic algebras. 50 3.5 The root structures. 52 3.5.1 An = sl(n + 1). 52 3.5.2 Cn = sp(2n), n ≥ 2. 53 3.5.3 Dn = o(2n), n ≥ 3. 54 3.5.4 Bn = o(2n + 1) n ≥ 2. 55 3.5.5 Diagrammatic presentation. 56 3.6 Low dimensional coincidences. 56 3.7 Extended diagrams. 58 4 Engel-Lie-Cartan-Weyl 61 4.1 Engel’s theorem . 61 4.2 Solvable Lie algebras. 63 4.3 Linear algebra . 64 4.4 Cartan’s criterion. 66 4.5 Radical. 67 4.6 The Killing form. 67 4.7 Complete reducibility. 69 5 Conjugacy of Cartan subalgebras. 73 5.1 Derivations. 74 5.2 Cartan subalgebras. 76 5.3 Solvable case. 77 5.4 Toral subalgebras and Cartan subalgebras. 79 5.5 Roots. 81 5.6 Bases. 85 5.7 Weyl chambers. 87 5.8 Length. 88 5.9 Conjugacy of Borel subalgebras . 89 6 The simple finite dimensional algebras. 93 6.1 Simple Lie algebras and irreducible root systems. 94 6.2 The maximal root and the minimal root. 95 6.3 Graphs. 97 6.4 Perron-Frobenius. 98 6.5 Classification of the irreducible ∆. 104 6.6 Classification of the irreducible root systems. 105 6.7 The classification of the possible simple Lie algebras. 109 CONTENTS 5 7 Cyclic highest weight modules. 113 7.1 Verma modules. 114 7.2 When is dim Irr(λ) < ∞? . 115 7.3 The value of the Casimir. 117 7.4 The Weyl character formula. 121 7.5 The Weyl dimension formula. 125 7.6 The Kostant multiplicity formula. 126 7.7 Steinberg’s formula. 127 7.8 The Freudenthal - de Vries formula. 128 7.9 Fundamental representations. 131 7.10 Equal rank subgroups. 133 8 Serre’s theorem. 137 8.1 The Serre relations. 137 8.2 The first five relations. 138 8.3 Proof of Serre’s theorem. 142 8.4 The existence of the exceptional root systems. 144 9 Clifford algebras and spin representations. 147 9.1 Definition and basic properties . 147 9.1.1 Definition. 147 9.1.2 Gradation. 148 9.1.3 ∧p as a C(p) module. 148 9.1.4 Chevalley’s linear identification of C(p) with ∧p. 148 9.1.5 The canonical antiautomorphism. 149 9.1.6 Commutator by an element of p. 150 9.1.7 Commutator by an element of ∧2p. 151 9.2 Orthogonal action of a Lie algebra. 153 9.2.1 Expression for ν in terms of dual bases. 153 9.2.2 The adjoint action of a reductive Lie algebra. 153 9.3 The spin representations. 154 9.3.1 The even dimensional case. 155 9.3.2 The odd dimensional case. 158 9.3.3 Spin ad and Vρ. 159 10 The Kostant Dirac operator 163 10.1 Antisymmetric trilinear forms. 163 10.2 Jacobi and Clifford. 164 10.3 Orthogonal extension of a Lie algebra. 165 2 10.4 The value of [v + ν(Casr)]0. 167 10.5 Kostant’s Dirac Operator. 169 10.6 Eigenvalues of the Dirac operator. 172 10.7 The geometric index theorem. 178 10.7.1 The index of equivariant Fredholm maps. 178 10.7.2 Induced representations and Bott’s theorem. 179 10.7.3 Landweber’s index theorem. 180 6 CONTENTS 11 The center of U(g). 183 11.1 The Harish-Chandra isomorphism. 183 11.1.1 Statement . 184 11.1.2 Example of sl(2). 184 W 11.1.3 Using Verma modules to prove that γH : Z(g) → U(h) . 185 11.1.4 Outline of proof of bijectivity. 186 11.1.5 Restriction from S(g∗)g to S(h∗)W . 187 11.1.6 From S(g)g to S(h)W . 188 11.1.7 Completion of the proof. 188 11.2 Chevalley’s theorem. 189 11.2.1 Transcendence degrees. 189 11.2.2 Symmetric polynomials. 190 11.2.3 Fixed fields. 192 11.2.4 Invariants of finite groups. 193 11.2.5 The Hilbert basis theorem. 195 11.2.6 Proof of Chevalley’s theorem. 196 Chapter 1 The Campbell Baker Hausdorff Formula 1.1 The problem. Recall the power series: 1 1 1 1 exp X = 1 + X + X2 + X3 + ··· , log(1 + X) = X − X2 + X3 + ··· . 2 3! 2 3 We want to study these series in a ring where convergence makes sense; for ex- ample in the ring of n×n matrices. The exponential series converges everywhere, and the series for the logarithm converges in a small enough neighborhood of the origin. Of course, log(exp X) = X; exp(log(1 + X)) = 1 + X where these series converge, or as formal power series. In particular, if A and B are two elements which are close enough to 0 we can study the convergent series log[(exp A)(exp B)] which will yield an element C such that exp C = (exp A)(exp B). The problem is that A and B need not commute. For example, if we retain only the linear and constant terms in the series we find log[(1 + A + ··· )(1 + B + ··· )] = log(1 + A + B + ··· ) = A + B + ··· . On the other hand, if we go out to terms second order, the non-commutativity begins to enter: 1 1 log[(1 + A + A2 + ··· )(1 + B + B2 + ··· )] = 2 2 7 8 CHAPTER 1. THE CAMPBELL BAKER HAUSDORFF FORMULA 1 1 1 A + B + A2 + AB + B2 − (A + B + ··· )2 2 2 2 1 = A + B + [A, B] + ··· 2 where [A, B] := AB − BA (1.1) is the commutator of A and B, also known as the Lie bracket of A and B. Collecting the terms of degree three we get, after some computation, 1 1 1 A2B + AB2 + B2A + BA2 − 2ABA − 2BAB] = [A, [A, B]]+ [B, [B, A]]. 12 12 12 This suggests that the series for log[(exp A)(exp B)] can be expressed entirely in terms of successive Lie brackets of A and B. This is so, and is the content of the Campbell-Baker-Hausdorff formula. One of the important consequences of the mere existence of this formula is the following. Suppose that g is the Lie algebra of a Lie group G. Then the local structure of G near the identity, i.e. the rule for the product of two elements of G sufficiently closed to the identity is determined by its Lie algebra g. Indeed, the exponential map is locally a diffeomorphism from a neighborhood of the origin in g onto a neighborhood W of the identity, and if U ⊂ W is a (possibly smaller) neighborhood of the identity such that U · U ⊂ W , the the product of a = exp ξ and b = exp η, with a ∈.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dynamic Algebras: Examples, Constructions, Applications
    Dynamic Algebras: Examples, Constructions, Applications Vaughan Pratt∗ Dept. of Computer Science, Stanford, CA 94305 Abstract Dynamic algebras combine the classes of Boolean (B ∨ 0 0) and regu- lar (R ∪ ; ∗) algebras into a single finitely axiomatized variety (BR 3) resembling an R-module with “scalar” multiplication 3. The basic result is that ∗ is reflexive transitive closure, contrary to the intuition that this concept should require quantifiers for its definition. Using this result we give several examples of dynamic algebras arising naturally in connection with additive functions, binary relations, state trajectories, languages, and flowcharts. The main result is that free dynamic algebras are residu- ally finite (i.e. factor as a subdirect product of finite dynamic algebras), important because finite separable dynamic algebras are isomorphic to Kripke structures. Applications include a new completeness proof for the Segerberg axiomatization of propositional dynamic logic, and yet another notion of regular algebra. Key words: Dynamic algebra, logic, program verification, regular algebra. This paper originally appeared as Technical Memo #138, Laboratory for Computer Science, MIT, July 1979, and was subsequently revised, shortened, retitled, and published as [Pra80b]. After more than a decade of armtwisting I. N´emeti and H. Andr´eka finally persuaded the author to publish TM#138 itself on the ground that it contained a substantial body of interesting material that for the sake of brevity had been deleted from the STOC-80 version. The principal changes here to TM#138 are the addition of footnotes and the sections at the end on retrospective citations and reflections. ∗This research was supported by the National Science Foundation under NSF grant no.
    [Show full text]
  • Modules and Lie Semialgebras Over Semirings with a Negation Map 3
    MODULES AND LIE SEMIALGEBRAS OVER SEMIRINGS WITH A NEGATION MAP GUY BLACHAR Abstract. In this article, we present the basic definitions of modules and Lie semialgebras over semirings with a negation map. Our main example of a semiring with a negation map is ELT algebras, and some of the results in this article are formulated and proved only in the ELT theory. When dealing with modules, we focus on linearly independent sets and spanning sets. We define a notion of lifting a module with a negation map, similarly to the tropicalization process, and use it to prove several theorems about semirings with a negation map which possess a lift. In the context of Lie semialgebras over semirings with a negation map, we first give basic definitions, and provide parallel constructions to the classical Lie algebras. We prove an ELT version of Cartan’s criterion for semisimplicity, and provide a counterexample for the naive version of the PBW Theorem. Contents Page 0. Introduction 2 0.1. Semirings with a Negation Map 2 0.2. Modules Over Semirings with a Negation Map 3 0.3. Supertropical Algebras 4 0.4. Exploded Layered Tropical Algebras 4 1. Modules over Semirings with a Negation Map 5 1.1. The Surpassing Relation for Modules 6 1.2. Basic Definitions for Modules 7 1.3. -morphisms 9 1.4. Lifting a Module Over a Semiring with a Negation Map 10 1.5. Linearly Independent Sets 13 1.6. d-bases and s-bases 14 1.7. Free Modules over Semirings with a Negation Map 18 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Invariant Differential Operators 1. Derivatives of Group Actions
    (October 28, 2010) Invariant differential operators Paul Garrett [email protected] http:=/www.math.umn.edu/~garrett/ • Derivatives of group actions: Lie algebras • Laplacians and Casimir operators • Descending to G=K • Example computation: SL2(R) • Enveloping algebras and adjoint functors • Appendix: brackets • Appendix: proof of Poincar´e-Birkhoff-Witt We want an intrinsic approach to existence of differential operators invariant under group actions. n n The translation-invariant operators @=@xi on R , and the rotation-invariant Laplacian on R are deceptively- easily proven invariant, as these examples provide few clues about more complicated situations. For example, we expect rotation-invariant Laplacians (second-order operators) on spheres, and we do not want to write a formula in generalized spherical coordinates and verify invariance computationally. Nor do we want to be constrained to imbedding spheres in Euclidean spaces and using the ambient geometry, even though this succeeds for spheres themselves. Another basic example is the operator @2 @2 y2 + @x2 @y2 on the complex upper half-plane H, provably invariant under the linear fractional action of SL2(R), but it is oppressive to verify this directly. Worse, the goal is not merely to verify an expression presented as a deus ex machina, but, rather to systematically generate suitable expressions. An important part of this intention is understanding reasons for the existence of invariant operators, and expressions in coordinates should be a foregone conclusion. (No prior acquaintance with Lie groups or Lie algebras is assumed.) 1. Derivatives of group actions: Lie algebras For example, as usual let > SOn(R) = fk 2 GLn(R): k k = 1n; det k = 1g act on functions f on the sphere Sn−1 ⊂ Rn, by (k · f)(m) = f(mk) with m × k ! mk being right matrix multiplication of the row vector m 2 Rn.
    [Show full text]
  • Minimal Dark Matter Models with Radiative Neutrino Masses
    Master’s thesis Minimal dark matter models with radiative neutrino masses From Lagrangians to observables Simon May 1st June 2018 Advisors: Prof. Dr. Michael Klasen, Dr. Karol Kovařík Institut für Theoretische Physik Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster Contents 1. Introduction 5 2. Experimental and observational evidence 7 2.1. Dark matter . 7 2.2. Neutrino oscillations . 14 3. Gauge theories and the Standard Model of particle physics 19 3.1. Mathematical background . 19 3.1.1. Group and representation theory . 19 3.1.2. Tensors . 27 3.2. Representations of the Lorentz group . 31 3.2.1. Scalars: The (0, 0) representation . 35 1 1 3.2.2. Weyl spinors: The ( 2 , 0) and (0, 2 ) representations . 36 1 1 3.2.3. Dirac spinors: The ( 2 , 0) ⊕ (0, 2 ) representation . 38 3.2.4. Majorana spinors . 40 1 1 3.2.5. Lorentz vectors: The ( 2 , 2 ) representation . 41 3.2.6. Field representations . 42 3.3. Two-component Weyl spinor formalism and van der Waerden notation 44 3.3.1. Definition . 44 3.3.2. Correspondence to the Dirac bispinor formalism . 47 3.4. The Standard Model . 49 3.4.1. Definition of the theory . 52 3.4.2. The Lagrangian . 54 4. Component notation for representations of SU(2) 57 4.1. SU(2) doublets . 59 4.1.1. Basic conventions and transformation of doublets . 60 4.1.2. Dual doublets and scalar product . 61 4.1.3. Transformation of dual doublets . 62 4.1.4. Adjoint doublets . 63 4.1.5. The question of transpose and conjugate doublets .
    [Show full text]
  • LECTURE 12: LIE GROUPS and THEIR LIE ALGEBRAS 1. Lie
    LECTURE 12: LIE GROUPS AND THEIR LIE ALGEBRAS 1. Lie groups Definition 1.1. A Lie group G is a smooth manifold equipped with a group structure so that the group multiplication µ : G × G ! G; (g1; g2) 7! g1 · g2 is a smooth map. Example. Here are some basic examples: • Rn, considered as a group under addition. • R∗ = R − f0g, considered as a group under multiplication. • S1, Considered as a group under multiplication. • Linear Lie groups GL(n; R), SL(n; R), O(n) etc. • If M and N are Lie groups, so is their product M × N. Remarks. (1) (Hilbert's 5th problem, [Gleason and Montgomery-Zippin, 1950's]) Any topological group whose underlying space is a topological manifold is a Lie group. (2) Not every smooth manifold admits a Lie group structure. For example, the only spheres that admit a Lie group structure are S0, S1 and S3; among all the compact 2 dimensional surfaces the only one that admits a Lie group structure is T 2 = S1 × S1. (3) Here are two simple topological constraints for a manifold to be a Lie group: • If G is a Lie group, then TG is a trivial bundle. n { Proof: We identify TeG = R . The vector bundle isomorphism is given by φ : G × TeG ! T G; φ(x; ξ) = (x; dLx(ξ)) • If G is a Lie group, then π1(G) is an abelian group. { Proof: Suppose α1, α2 2 π1(G). Define α : [0; 1] × [0; 1] ! G by α(t1; t2) = α1(t1) · α2(t2). Then along the bottom edge followed by the right edge we have the composition α1 ◦ α2, where ◦ is the product of loops in the fundamental group, while along the left edge followed by the top edge we get α2 ◦ α1.
    [Show full text]
  • Algebra + Homotopy = Operad
    Symplectic, Poisson and Noncommutative Geometry MSRI Publications Volume 62, 2014 Algebra + homotopy = operad BRUNO VALLETTE “If I could only understand the beautiful consequences following from the concise proposition d 2 0.” —Henri Cartan D This survey provides an elementary introduction to operads and to their ap- plications in homotopical algebra. The aim is to explain how the notion of an operad was prompted by the necessity to have an algebraic object which encodes higher homotopies. We try to show how universal this theory is by giving many applications in algebra, geometry, topology, and mathematical physics. (This text is accessible to any student knowing what tensor products, chain complexes, and categories are.) Introduction 229 1. When algebra meets homotopy 230 2. Operads 239 3. Operadic syzygies 253 4. Homotopy transfer theorem 272 Conclusion 283 Acknowledgements 284 References 284 Introduction Galois explained to us that operations acting on the solutions of algebraic equa- tions are mathematical objects as well. The notion of an operad was created in order to have a well defined mathematical object which encodes “operations”. Its name is a portemanteau word, coming from the contraction of the words “operations” and “monad”, because an operad can be defined as a monad encoding operations. The introduction of this notion was prompted in the 60’s, by the necessity of working with higher operations made up of higher homotopies appearing in algebraic topology. Algebra is the study of algebraic structures with respect to isomorphisms. Given two isomorphic vector spaces and one algebra structure on one of them, 229 230 BRUNO VALLETTE one can always define, by means of transfer, an algebra structure on the other space such that these two algebra structures become isomorphic.
    [Show full text]
  • Free Lie Algebras
    Linear algebra: Free Lie algebras The purpose of this sheet is to fill the details in the algebraic part of the proof of the Hilton-Milnor theorem. By the way, the whole proof can be found in Neisendorfer's book "Algebraic Methods in Unstable Homotopy Theory." Conventions: k is a field of characteristic 6= 2, all vector spaces are positively graded vector spaces over k and each graded component is finite dimensional, all associative algebras are connected and augmented. If A is an associative algebra, then I(A) is its augmentation ideal (i.e. the kernel of the augmentation morphism). Problem 1 (Graded Nakayama Lemma). Let A be an associative algebra and let M be a graded A-module such that Mn = 0, for n 0. (a) If I(A) · M = M, then M = 0; (b) If k ⊗AM = 0, then M = 0. Problem 2. Let A be an associative algebra and let V be a vector subspace of I(A). Suppose that the augmentation ideal I(A) is a free A-module generated by V . Prove that A is isomorphic to T (V ). A Problem 3. Let A be an associative algebra such that Tor2 (k; k) = 0. Prove that A is isomorphic to the tensor algebra T (V ), where V := I(A)=I(A)2 { the module of indecomposables. Problem 4. Let L be a Lie algebra such that its universal enveloping associative algebra U(L) is isomorphic to T (V ) for some V . Prove that L is isomorphic to the free Lie algebra L(V ). Hint: use a corollary of the Poincare-Birkhoff-Witt theorem which says that any Lie algebra L canonically injects into U(L).
    [Show full text]
  • CLIFFORD ALGEBRAS Property, Then There Is a Unique Isomorphism (V ) (V ) Intertwining the Two Inclusions of V
    CHAPTER 2 Clifford algebras 1. Exterior algebras 1.1. Definition. For any vector space V over a field K, let T (V ) = k k k Z T (V ) be the tensor algebra, with T (V ) = V V the k-fold tensor∈ product. The quotient of T (V ) by the two-sided⊗···⊗ ideal (V ) generated byL all v w + w v is the exterior algebra, denoted (V ).I The product in (V ) is usually⊗ denoted⊗ α α , although we will frequently∧ omit the wedge ∧ 1 ∧ 2 sign and just write α1α2. Since (V ) is a graded ideal, the exterior algebra inherits a grading I (V )= k(V ) ∧ ∧ k Z M∈ where k(V ) is the image of T k(V ) under the quotient map. Clearly, 0(V )∧ = K and 1(V ) = V so that we can think of V as a subspace of ∧(V ). We may thus∧ think of (V ) as the associative algebra linearly gener- ated∧ by V , subject to the relations∧ vw + wv = 0. We will write φ = k if φ k(V ). The exterior algebra is commutative | | ∈∧ (in the graded sense). That is, for φ k1 (V ) and φ k2 (V ), 1 ∈∧ 2 ∈∧ [φ , φ ] := φ φ + ( 1)k1k2 φ φ = 0. 1 2 1 2 − 2 1 k If V has finite dimension, with basis e1,...,en, the space (V ) has basis ∧ e = e e I i1 · · · ik for all ordered subsets I = i1,...,ik of 1,...,n . (If k = 0, we put { } k { n } e = 1.) In particular, we see that dim (V )= k , and ∅ ∧ n n dim (V )= = 2n.
    [Show full text]
  • On Minimally Free Algebras
    Can. J. Math., Vol. XXXVII, No. 5, 1985, pp. 963-978 ON MINIMALLY FREE ALGEBRAS PAUL BANKSTON AND RICHARD SCHUTT 1. Introduction. For us an "algebra" is a finitary "universal algebra" in the sense of G. Birkhoff [9]. We are concerned in this paper with algebras whose endomorphisms are determined by small subsets. For example, an algebra A is rigid (in the strong sense) if the only endomorphism on A is the identity id^. In this case, the empty set determines the endomorphism set E(A). We place the property of rigidity at the bottom rung of a cardinal-indexed ladder of properties as follows. Given a cardinal number K, an algebra .4 is minimally free over a set of cardinality K (K-free for short) if there is a subset X Q A of cardinality K such that every function f\X —-> A extends to a unique endomorphism <p e E(A). (It is clear that A is rigid if and only if A is 0-free.) Members of X will be called counters; and we will be interested in how badly counters can fail to generate the algebra. The property "«-free" is a solipsistic version of "free on K generators" in the sense that A has this property if and only if A is free over a set of cardinality K relative to the concrete category whose sole object is A and whose morphisms are the endomorphisms of A (thus explaining the use of the adverb "minimally" above). In view of this we see that the free algebras on K generators relative to any variety give us examples of "small" K-free algebras.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 7 - Complete Reducibility of Representations of Semisimple Algebras
    Lecture 7 - Complete Reducibility of Representations of Semisimple Algebras September 27, 2012 1 New modules from old A few preliminaries are necessary before jumping into the representation theory of semisim- ple algebras. First a word on creating new g-modules from old. Any Lie algebra g has an action on a 1-dimensional vector space (or F itself), given by the trivial action. Second, any action on spaces V and W can be extended to an action on V ⊗ W by forcing the Leibnitz rule: for any basis vector v ⊗ w 2 V ⊗ W we define x:(v ⊗ w) = x:v ⊗ w + v ⊗ x:w (1) One easily checks that x:y:(v ⊗ w) − y:x:(v ⊗ w) = [x; y]:(v ⊗ w). Assuming g has an action on V , it has an action on its dual V ∗ (recall V ∗ is the vector space of linear functionals V ! F), given by (v:f)(x) = −f(x:v) (2) for any functional f : V ! F in V ∗. This is in fact a version of the \forcing the Leibnitz rule." That is, recalling that we defined x:(f(v)) = 0, we define x:f 2 V ∗ implicitly by x: (f(v)) = (x:f)(v) + f(x:v): (3) For any vector spaces V , W , we have an isomorphism Hom(V; W ) ≈ V ∗ ⊗ W; (4) so Hom(V; W ) is a g-module whenever V and W are. This can be defined using the above rules for duals and tensor products, or, equivalently, by again forcing the Leibnitz rule: for F 2 Hom(V; W ), we define x:F 2 Hom(V; W ) implicitly by x:(F (v)) = (x:F )(v) + F (x:v): (5) 1 2 Schur's lemma and Casimir elements Theorem 2.1 (Schur's Lemma) If g has an irreducible representation on gl(V ) and if f 2 End(V ) commutes with every x 2 g, then f is multiplication by a constant.
    [Show full text]
  • LIE GROUPS and ALGEBRAS NOTES Contents 1. Definitions 2
    LIE GROUPS AND ALGEBRAS NOTES STANISLAV ATANASOV Contents 1. Definitions 2 1.1. Root systems, Weyl groups and Weyl chambers3 1.2. Cartan matrices and Dynkin diagrams4 1.3. Weights 5 1.4. Lie group and Lie algebra correspondence5 2. Basic results about Lie algebras7 2.1. General 7 2.2. Root system 7 2.3. Classification of semisimple Lie algebras8 3. Highest weight modules9 3.1. Universal enveloping algebra9 3.2. Weights and maximal vectors9 4. Compact Lie groups 10 4.1. Peter-Weyl theorem 10 4.2. Maximal tori 11 4.3. Symmetric spaces 11 4.4. Compact Lie algebras 12 4.5. Weyl's theorem 12 5. Semisimple Lie groups 13 5.1. Semisimple Lie algebras 13 5.2. Parabolic subalgebras. 14 5.3. Semisimple Lie groups 14 6. Reductive Lie groups 16 6.1. Reductive Lie algebras 16 6.2. Definition of reductive Lie group 16 6.3. Decompositions 18 6.4. The structure of M = ZK (a0) 18 6.5. Parabolic Subgroups 19 7. Functional analysis on Lie groups 21 7.1. Decomposition of the Haar measure 21 7.2. Reductive groups and parabolic subgroups 21 7.3. Weyl integration formula 22 8. Linear algebraic groups and their representation theory 23 8.1. Linear algebraic groups 23 8.2. Reductive and semisimple groups 24 8.3. Parabolic and Borel subgroups 25 8.4. Decompositions 27 Date: October, 2018. These notes compile results from multiple sources, mostly [1,2]. All mistakes are mine. 1 2 STANISLAV ATANASOV 1. Definitions Let g be a Lie algebra over algebraically closed field F of characteristic 0.
    [Show full text]
  • A Localization Argument for Characters of Reductive Lie Groups: an Introduction and Examples Matvei Libine
    This is page 375 Printer: Opaque this A localization argument for characters of reductive Lie groups: an introduction and examples Matvei Libine In Honor of Jacques Carmona ABSTRACT In this article I describe my recent geometric localization argument dealing with actions of noncompact groups which provides a geometric bridge between two entirely different character formulas for reductive Lie groups and answers the question posed in [Sch]. A corresponding problem in the compact group setting was solved by N. Berline, E. Getzler and M. Vergne in [BGV] by an application of the theory of equivariant forms and, particularly, the fixed point integral localization formula. This localization argument seems to be the first successful attempt in the direction of build- ing a similar theory for integrals of differential forms, equivariant with respect to actions of noncompact groups. I will explain how the argument works in the SL(2, R) case, where the key ideas are not obstructed by technical details and where it becomes clear how it extends to the general case. The general argument appears in [L]. Ihavemade every effort to present this article so that it is widely accessible. Also, although characteristic cycles of sheaves is mentioned, I do not assume that the reader is familiar with this notion. 1 Introduction For motivation, let us start with the case of a compact group. Thus we consider a connected compact group K and a maximal torus T ⊂ K . Let kR and tR denote the Lie algebras of K and T respectively, and k, t be their complexified Lie algebras. Let π be a finite-dimensional representation of K , that is π is a group homomorphism K → Aut(V ).
    [Show full text]