DOCSLIB.ORG

Computing in Exceptional Groups by Bill Casselman

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Computing in Exceptional Groups by Bill Casselman Computing in exceptional groups by Bill Casselman for Tom Hales’ 60th, University of Pittsburgh, June 2018 These slides can be found at http://www.math.ubc.ca/~cass/slides/hales-bday.pdf ! This is potentially a very dull and exceedingly technical topic. I should say that it is an improved version of material I sent to Tom in email a few years ago, and which I believe he found useful. I hope to exhinit some interesting problems that deserve to be better known. Some have already been solved, but there are also some that have not yet been finished off. My main, if somewhat eccentric, claim is that we do not yet really under• stand the structure of semi•simple groups, or even semi•simple Lie alge• bras. Whether this is important or not remains to be seen, but it seems to me that sometimes these old questions come close to main stream prob• lems. 2/38 Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................ 4 2. Chevalley’s contribution ................................................. 8 3. Primary references ...................................................... 21 4. Kottwitz’ contribution ................................................... 22 5. Tits’ contribution ......................................................... 30 6. What about the group? ................................................. 36 7. More references .......................................................... 38 3/38 1. Introduction 4/38 A complex Lie group is called reductive if every continuous finite•dimensional representation decomposes into a direct sum of irreducible ones. Some reductive groups are defined very simply in terms of matrices. For example the group SLn(C) which is the group of all n × n complex matri• ces of determinant 1. Or the complex symplectic group Sp2n(C) of all of all 2n × 2n complex matrices X such that 0 −I tXJX = J J = . I 0 But in the late nineteenth century a finite number of exceptional reductive groups were found to be characterized in more abstract terms. For exam• ple, the group G2 of dimension 14, which is rather sparsely embedded in GL7(C). There are altogether five exceptional types, and for each of them certain useful matrix realizations are known, but these are difficult to work with. If I understand correctly, the classification of their Lie algebras came first. Although the terminology was different, this was in terms of what we now call root systems•. 5/38 It seems to have been L. E. Dickson who first realized that nearly all of these complex matrix groups should have analogues defined over finite fields. In particular, in a real tour de force he managed to show that there was an analogue of the smallest exceptional group, now called type G2. He constructed it in terms of its embedding into GL7, and the size of 6 6 2 G(Fq) is q (q − 1)(q − 1). The other four exceptional groups remained a mystery. n Dickson had much more trouble with fields Fq when q = 2 . It was in• evitable that in his approach small finite fields will cause difficulties. How to distinguish Sp from SO? This line of inquiry was initiated by Galois, looking for simple groups. 6/38 The situation was completely changed about 1955 when Chevalley discov• ered how to deal uniformly with reductive groups over any field, in terms of what is now called root data, a variant of the notion of root system. Chevalley’s discovery amounted to a revolution. His discovery is many years behind us, and much of the subject has by now become very familiar. There are parts of his work, however, which are now almost forgotten—partly because its more technical aspects are not necessary to work productively in the field. These aspects have be• come part of the machinery behind the curtain, so to speak. But with the possibility of using computers to carry out computations in arbitrary reductive groups, questions raised by Chevalley have come into light again, and that’s what I’ll talk about. I have to confess, however, that I do not know if this material will ever be• come part of the main stream of the subject. 7/38 2. Chevalley’s contribution 8/38 Let G be a split reductive group defined over any field F in which one knows how to do arithmetic. ◦ How can one compute in G? ◦ For that matter, how can one specify elements of G? ◦ How can one multiply them? Find inverses? There are two general methods to deal with these questions. (1) The clas• sical approach is to find a good embedding of G into somemain GLn, so every element of G is represented by a matrix. (2) Chevalley’s approach is to represent elements of G more directly in terms of the root datum that defines it. From the root datum one can define Borel subgroups B = T U and the normalizer NG(T ). Given representives w˙ of elements of W = NG(T )/T , every element of G can be factored as bwu˙ in BwU˙ . With a suitable restriction on u this becomes a unique expression with which one can work. 9/38 The first method works well for the so•called classical groups, which are characterized very nicely in terms of matrices. It has been used also for exceptional groups, although awkwardly. Finding products and inverses is easy, but relating the answer to the structure of G is not simple. In this talk I’ll discuss the second method, in particular a recent contribu• tion due to Robert Kottwitz, building on an old idea due to Jacques Tits, and implemented in programs by myself. This method is closely related to the structure of G, but it is not so easy to perform group operations. 10/38 In truth, I have already deceived you. It turns out that computing in the group reduces quickly to computing in its Lie algebra. (This was already known to Chevalley.) I shall probably say little about the group, and a lot about the Lie algebra. It is in the Lie algebra that the principal and inter• esting difficulties arise. 11/38 The most interesting part of the subject originates with Chevalley. Suppose g to be a semi•simple Lie algebra over C. Chevalley explained how to assign a Z•structure to g, one which led (famously) in turn to his construction of split groups over arbitrary fields. Choose a frame (epinglage)´ for g, which is to say a triple (b, t, {eα}α∈∆). All choices are equivalent. For each α there exists a good copy of sl2, mapping 0 1 0 0 1 0 7→ e , 7→ e , 7→ h . 0 0 α −1 0 −α 0 −1 α There exists a unique involution θ acting as −I on t and mapping each eα t to e−α. For classical Lie algebras this takes x to − x. θ One can find elements eλ in gλ such that eλ = e−λ. These are unique up to sign. They make up part of an invariant integral basis. 12/38 If λ, µ, λ + µ are all roots, then [eλ, eµ] = Nλ,µeλ+µ for some structure constant Nλ,µ. Theorem. (Chevalley) For an invariant integral basis Nλ,µ = ±(pλ,µ + 1) . Here pλ,µ is the string constant: pλ,µ = 0 p = 0 1 µ λ,µ µ λ λ pλ,µ = 0 1 2 pλ,µ = 0 1 2 3 µ µ λ λ 13/38 Chevalley’s theorem is (literally) wonderful. Corresponding to λ is an em• bedding of Q into G: t 7−→ exp(teλ) . Chevalley’s theorem implies that Nλ,µNλ,λ+µ ...Nλ, m λ µ exp(ad )e = tm · ( −1) + · e teλ µ m! mλ+µ m X≥0 makes sense. It is a finite series, and equal to exp(teλ)eµ exp(−teλ) . With a little work, this makes the string lattice spanned by the emλ+µ into a representation of SL2(Z), and eventually allows you to define G(Z). 14/38 Already, I can bring up my first mystery. Chevalley’s results eventually lead to a construction of a smooth group scheme defined over Z asso• ciated to every root datum. This was begun by Chevalley himself, elab• orated by Demazure and Grothendieck in SGA 3, and has most recently been redone in some very thorough lecture notes by Brian Conrad (based on his lectures at a summer school in Luminy, 2011 that was devoted to updating SGA 3). One part of this business is existence—constructing a split reductive group scheme over Z corresponding to a given root datum. At the AMS Boulder conference of 1965, Kostant proposed an elegant and direct construction of the affine ring of this scheme. Unfortunately, he did not give details. In his Yale lecture notes Robert Steinberg appar• ently used Kostant’s ideas in order to construct the group G as an alge• braic group. (Curiously, as far as I can see, neither Kostant nor Steinberg refers to the other.) I find Steinberg’s discussion unsatisfying, and Conrad doesn’t say much about it. Is Kostant’s construction correct? Conrad tells me this is highly unlikely, but I don’t think anybody really knows one way or the other. 15/38 I can even bring up my second mystery, although it lies further afield. The involution θ determines a Z•structure on G, but also a maximal compact subgroup K of G(R). In some sense, the groups K and Γ = G(Z) are hence tied together. (This is a fact that is transparently true for p•adic groups.) There should be a strong version of this assertion in terms of Arthur’s partition of Γ\G/K. There are questions, too, about the fine structure of this partition when G is not split.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lie Group and Geometry on the Lie Group SL2(R)
    INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR Lie group and Geometry on the Lie Group SL2(R) PROJECT REPORT – SEMESTER IV MOUSUMI MALICK 2-YEARS MSc(2011-2012) Guided by –Prof.DEBAPRIYA BISWAS Lie group and Geometry on the Lie Group SL2(R) CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the project entitled “Lie group and Geometry on the Lie group SL2(R)” being submitted by Mousumi Malick Roll no.-10MA40017, Department of Mathematics is a survey of some beautiful results in Lie groups and its geometry and this has been carried out under my supervision. Dr. Debapriya Biswas Department of Mathematics Date- Indian Institute of Technology Khargpur 1 Lie group and Geometry on the Lie Group SL2(R) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I wish to express my gratitude to Dr. Debapriya Biswas for her help and guidance in preparing this project. Thanks are also due to the other professor of this department for their constant encouragement. Date- place-IIT Kharagpur Mousumi Malick 2 Lie group and Geometry on the Lie Group SL2(R) CONTENTS 1.Introduction ................................................................................................... 4 2.Definition of general linear group: ............................................................... 5 3.Definition of a general Lie group:................................................................... 5 4.Definition of group action: ............................................................................. 5 5. Definition of orbit under a group action: ...................................................... 5 6.1.The general linear
    [Show full text]
  • Cohomology Theory of Lie Groups and Lie Algebras
    COHOMOLOGY THEORY OF LIE GROUPS AND LIE ALGEBRAS BY CLAUDE CHEVALLEY AND SAMUEL EILENBERG Introduction The present paper lays no claim to deep originality. Its main purpose is to give a systematic treatment of the methods by which topological questions concerning compact Lie groups may be reduced to algebraic questions con- cerning Lie algebras^). This reduction proceeds in three steps: (1) replacing questions on homology groups by questions on differential forms. This is accomplished by de Rham's theorems(2) (which, incidentally, seem to have been conjectured by Cartan for this very purpose); (2) replacing the con- sideration of arbitrary differential forms by that of invariant differential forms: this is accomplished by using invariant integration on the group manifold; (3) replacing the consideration of invariant differential forms by that of alternating multilinear forms on the Lie algebra of the group. We study here the question not only of the topological nature of the whole group, but also of the manifolds on which the group operates. Chapter I is concerned essentially with step 2 of the list above (step 1 depending here, as in the case of the whole group, on de Rham's theorems). Besides consider- ing invariant forms, we also introduce "equivariant" forms, defined in terms of a suitable linear representation of the group; Theorem 2.2 states that, when this representation does not contain the trivial representation, equi- variant forms are of no use for topology; however, it states this negative result in the form of a positive property of equivariant forms which is of interest by itself, since it is the key to Levi's theorem (cf.
    [Show full text]
  • Interview with Henri Cartan, Volume 46, Number 7
    fea-cartan.qxp 6/8/99 4:50 PM Page 782 Interview with Henri Cartan The following interview was conducted on March 19–20, 1999, in Paris by Notices senior writer and deputy editor Allyn Jackson. Biographical Sketch in 1975. Cartan is a member of the Académie des Henri Cartan is one of Sciences of Paris and of twelve other academies in the first-rank mathe- Europe, the United States, and Japan. He has re- maticians of the twen- ceived honorary doc- tieth century. He has torates from several had a lasting impact universities, and also through his research, the Wolf Prize in which spans a wide va- Mathematics in 1980. riety of areas, as well Early Years as through his teach- ing, his students, and Notices: Let’s start at the famed Séminaire the beginning of your Cartan. He is one of the life. What are your founding members of earliest memories of Bourbaki. His book Ho- mathematical inter- mological Algebra, writ- est? ten with Samuel Eilen- Cartan: I have al- berg and first published ways been interested Henri Cartan’s father, Élie Photograph by Sophie Caretta. in 1956, is still in print in mathematics. But Cartan. Henri Cartan, 1996. and remains a standard I don’t think it was reference. because my father The son of Élie Cartan, who is considered to be was a mathematician. I had no doubt that I could the founder of modern differential geometry, Henri become a mathematician. I had many teachers, Cartan was born on July 8, 1904, in Nancy, France. good or not so good.
    [Show full text]
  • Title: Algebraic Group Representations, and Related Topics a Lecture by Len Scott, Mcconnell/Bernard Professor of Mathemtics, the University of Virginia
    Title: Algebraic group representations, and related topics a lecture by Len Scott, McConnell/Bernard Professor of Mathemtics, The University of Virginia. Abstract: This lecture will survey the theory of algebraic group representations in positive characteristic, with some attention to its historical development, and its relationship to the theory of finite group representations. Other topics of a Lie-theoretic nature will also be discussed in this context, including at least brief mention of characteristic 0 infinite dimensional Lie algebra representations in both the classical and affine cases, quantum groups, perverse sheaves, and rings of differential operators. Much of the focus will be on irreducible representations, but some attention will be given to other classes of indecomposable representations, and there will be some discussion of homological issues, as time permits. CHAPTER VI Linear Algebraic Groups in the 20th Century The interest in linear algebraic groups was revived in the 1940s by C. Chevalley and E. Kolchin. The most salient features of their contributions are outlined in Chapter VII and VIII. Even though they are put there to suit the broader context, I shall as a rule refer to those chapters, rather than repeat their contents. Some of it will be recalled, however, mainly to round out a narrative which will also take into account, more than there, the work of other authors. §1. Linear algebraic groups in characteristic zero. Replicas 1.1. As we saw in Chapter V, §4, Ludwig Maurer thoroughly analyzed the properties of the Lie algebra of a complex linear algebraic group. This was Cheval­ ey's starting point.
    [Show full text]
  • Theory of Lie Groups I
    854 NATURE December 20. 1947 Vol. t60 Theory of lie Groups, I deficiency is especially well treated, and the chapters By Claude Chevalley. (Princeton Mathematical on feeding experiments contain one of the best Series.) Pp. xii + 217. (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton reasoned discussions on the pros and cons of the University Press; London: Oxford University paired-feeding technique. In the author's view this Press, 1946.) 20s. net. method would appear to find its largest usefulness N recent years great advances have been made in in comparisons in which food consumption is not I our knowledge of the fundamental structures of markedly restricted by the conditions imposed, and analysis, particularly of algebra and topology, and in which the measure is in terms of the specific an exposition of Lie groups from the modern point effect of the nutrient under study, instead of the more of view is timely. This is given admirably in the general measure of increase in weight. It is considered book under review, which could well have been called that there are many problems concerning which the "Lie Groups in the Large". To make such a treatment use of separate experiments of both ad libitum and intelligible it is necessary to re-examine from the new controlled feeding will give much more information point of view such subjects as the classical linear than either procedure alone. groups, topological groups and their underlying The chapters on growth, reproduction, lactation topological spaces, and analytic manifolds. Excellent and work production are likewise excellent. In its accounts of these, with the study of integral manifolds clarity and brevity this work has few equals.
    [Show full text]
  • On Chevalley's Z-Form
    Indian J. Pure Appl. Math., 46(5): 695-700, October 2015 °c Indian National Science Academy DOI: 10.1007/s13226-015-0134-7 ON CHEVALLEY’S Z-FORM M. S. Raghunathan National Centre for Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology, Mumbai 400 076, India e-mail: [email protected] (Received 28 October 2014; accepted 18 December 2014) We give a new proof of the existence of a Chevalley basis for a semisimple Lie algebra over C. Key words : Chevalley basis; semisimple Lie algebras. 1. INTRODUCTION Let g be a complex semisimple Lie algebra. In a path-breaking paper [2], Chevalley exhibitted a basis B of g (known as Chevalley basis since then) such that the structural constants of g with respect to the basis B are integers. The basis moreover consists of a basis of a Cartan subalgebra t (on which the roots take integral values) together with root vectors of g with respect to t. The structural constants were determined explicitly (up to signs) in terms of the structure of the root system of g. Tits [3] provided a more elegant approach to obtain Chevalley’s results which essentially exploited geometric properties of the root system. Casselman [1] used the methods of Tits to extend the Chevalley theorem to the Kac-Moody case. In this note we prove Chevalley’s theorem through an approach different from those of Chevalley and Tits. Let G be the simply connected algebraic group corresponding to g. Let T be a maximal torus (the Lie subalgebra t corresponding to it is a Cartan subalgebra of G).
    [Show full text]
  • Gerhard Hochschild (1915/2010) a Mathematician of the Xxth Century
    GERHARD HOCHSCHILD (1915/2010) A MATHEMATICIAN OF THE XXth CENTURY WALTER FERRER SANTOS Abstract. Gerhard Hochschild’s contribution to the development of mathematics in the XX century is succinctly surveyed. We start with a personal and mathematical biography, and then consider with certain detail his contributions to algebraic groups and Hopf algebras. 1. The life, times and mathematics of Gerhard Hochschild 1.1. Berlin and South Africa. Gerhard Paul Hochschild was born on April 29th, 1915 in Berlin of a middle class Jewish family and died on July 8th, 2010 in El Cerrito where he lived after he moved to take a position as professor at the University of California at Berkeley in 1958. His father Heiner was an engineer working as a patent attonery and in search of safety sent Gerhard and his older brother Ulrich, to Cape Town in May of 1933. The boys were some of the many germans escaping from the Nazis that were taking over their native country. The first 18 years of his life in Germany were not uneventful. In 1924 his mother Lilli was diagnosed with a lung ailment and sent –together with his younger son Gerhard that was then nine years old– to a sanatorium in the Alps, near Davos. Later in life he commented to the author that reading in Der Zauberberg (The Magic Mountain) by Thomas Mann, about Hans Castorp –Mann’s main character in the book– he evoked his own personal experiences. Castorp was transported away from his ordered and organized family life to pay a visit to his cousin interned also in a sanatorium in Davos.
    [Show full text]
  • Mathematical Communities
    II~'~lvi|,[~]i,~.~|[.-~-nl[,~.],,n,,,,.,nit[:;-1 Marjorie Senechal, Editor ] Nicolas Bourbaki, 1935-???? vided for self-renewal: from time to If you are a mathematician working to- time, younger mathematicians were in- The Continuing day, you have almost certainly been in- vited to join and older members re- fluenced by Bourbaki, at least in style signed, in accordance with mandatory and spirit, and perhaps to a greater ex- "retirement" at age fifty. Now Bourbaki Silence of tent than you realize. But if you are a itself is nearly twenty years older than student, you may never have heard of any of its members. The long-running it, him, them. What or who is, or was, Bourbaki seminar is still alive and well Bourbaki- Bourbaki? and living in Paris, but the voice of Check as many as apply. Bourbakl Bourbaki itself--as expressed through An Interview with is, or was, as the case may be: its books--has been silent for fifteen years. Will it speak again? Can it speak 9the discoverer (or inventor, if you again? prefer) of the notion of a mathemat- Pierre Cartier, Pierre Cartier was a member of ical structure; Bourbaki from 1955 to 1983. Born in 9one of the great abstractionist move- June 18, 1997 Sedan, France in 1932, he graduated ments of the twentieth century; from the l~cole Normale Supdrieure in 9 a small but enormously influential Marjorie Senechal Paris, where he studied under Henri community of mathematicians; Caftan. His thesis, defended in 1958, 9 acollective that hasn't published for was on algebraic geometry; since then fifteen years.
    [Show full text]
  • The University of Chicago Symmetry and Equivalence
    THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO SYMMETRY AND EQUIVALENCE RELATIONS IN CLASSICAL AND GEOMETRIC COMPLEXITY THEORY A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE BY JOSHUA ABRAHAM GROCHOW CHICAGO, ILLINOIS JUNE 2012 To my parents, Jerrold Marvin Grochow and Louise Barnett Grochow ABSTRACT This thesis studies some of the ways in which symmetries and equivalence relations arise in classical and geometric complexity theory. The Geometric Complexity Theory program is aimed at resolving central questions in complexity such as P versus NP using techniques from algebraic geometry and representation theory. The equivalence relations we study are mostly algebraic in nature and we heavily use algebraic techniques to reason about the computational properties of these problems. We first provide a tutorial and survey on Geometric Complexity Theory to provide perspective and motivate the other problems we study. One equivalence relation we study is matrix isomorphism of matrix Lie algebras, which is a problem that arises naturally in Geometric Complexity Theory. For certain cases of matrix isomorphism of Lie algebras we provide polynomial-time algorithms, and for other cases we show that the problem is as hard as graph isomorphism. To our knowledge, this is the first time graph isomorphism has appeared in connection with any lower bounds program. Finally, we study algorithms for equivalence relations more generally (joint work with Lance Fortnow). Two techniques are often employed for algorithmically deciding equivalence relations: 1) finding a complete set of easily computable invariants, or 2) finding an algorithm which will compute a canonical form for each equivalence class.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2002.01446V3 [Math.GR] 12 Jun 2021
    TWISTED CONJUGACY CLASSES IN TWISTED CHEVALLEY GROUPS SUSHIL BHUNIA, PINKA DEY, AND AMIT ROY ABSTRACT. Let G be a group and ϕ be an automorphism of G. Two elements x, y ∈ G are said to be ϕ-twisted conjugate if y = gxϕ(g)−1 for some g ∈ G. We say that a group G has the R∞-property if the number of ϕ-twisted conjugacy classes is infinite for every automorphism ϕ of G. In this paper, we prove that twisted Chevalley groups over a field k of characteristic zero have the R∞-property as well as the S∞-property if k has finite transcendence degree over Q or Aut(k) is periodic. 1. INTRODUCTION Let G be a group and ϕ be an automorphism of G. Two elements x, y of G are −1 said to be twisted ϕ-conjugate, denoted by x ∼ϕ y, if y = gxϕ(g) for some g ∈ G. Clearly, ∼ϕ is an equivalence relation on G. The equivalence classes with respect to this relation are called the ϕ-twisted conjugacy classes or the Reidemeister classes of ϕ. If ϕ = Id, then the ϕ-twisted conjugacy classes are the usual conjugacy classes. The ϕ-twisted conjugacy class containing x ∈ G is denoted by [x]ϕ. The Reidemeister number of ϕ, denoted by R(ϕ), is the number of all ϕ-twisted conjugacy classes. A group G has the R∞-property if R(ϕ) is infinite for every automorphism ϕ of G. The Reidemeister number is closely related to the Nielsen number of a selfmap of a manifold, which is homotopy invariant.
    [Show full text]
  • Armand Borel 1923–2003
    Armand Borel 1923–2003 A Biographical Memoir by Mark Goresky ©2019 National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions expressed in this memoir are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences. ARMAND BOREL May 21, 1923–August 11, 2003 Elected to the NAS, 1987 Armand Borel was a leading mathematician of the twen- tieth century. A native of Switzerland, he spent most of his professional life in Princeton, New Jersey, where he passed away after a short illness in 2003. Although he is primarily known as one of the chief archi- tects of the modern theory of linear algebraic groups and of arithmetic groups, Borel had an extraordinarily wide range of mathematical interests and influence. Perhaps more than any other mathematician in modern times, Borel elucidated and disseminated the work of others. family the Borel of Photo courtesy His books, conference proceedings, and journal publica- tions provide the document of record for many important mathematical developments during his lifetime. By Mark Goresky Mathematical objects and results bearing Borel’s name include Borel subgroups, Borel regulator, Borel construction, Borel equivariant cohomology, Borel-Serre compactification, Bailey- Borel compactification, Borel fixed point theorem, Borel-Moore homology, Borel-Weil theorem, Borel-de Siebenthal theorem, and Borel conjecture.1 Borel was awarded the Brouwer Medal (Dutch Mathematical Society), the Steele Prize (American Mathematical Society) and the Balzan Prize (Italian-Swiss International Balzan Foundation). He was a member of the National Academy of Sciences (USA), the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Philosophical Society, the Finnish Academy of Sciences and Letters, the Academia Europa, and the French Academy of Sciences.1 1 Borel enjoyed pointing out, with some amusement, that he was not related to the famous Borel of “Borel sets." 2 ARMAND BOREL Switzerland and France Armand Borel was born in 1923 in the French-speaking city of La Chaux-de-Fonds in Switzerland.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cohomology of Left-Invariant Elliptic Involutive Structures On
    The cohomology of left-invariant elliptic involutive structures on compact Lie groups Max Reinhold Jahnke∗ [email protected] Department of Mathematics Federal University of São Carlos, SP, Brazil. December 2, 2019 Abstract Inspired by the work of Chevalley and Eilenberg on the de Rham cohomology on compact Lie groups, we prove that, under certain algebraic and topological conditions, the cohomology associated to left-invariant elliptic, and even hypocomplex, involutive structures on compact Lie groups can be computed by using only Lie algebras, thus reducing the analytical problem to a purely algebraic one. The main tool is the Leray spectral sequence that connects the result obtained Chevalley and Eilenberg to a result by Bott on the Dolbeault cohomology of a homogeneous manifold. 1 Introduction The initial motivation for this work was an article by Chevalley and Eilenberg [7], where it is proved that the de Rham cohomology of a compact Lie group can be studied by using only left-invariant forms, thus reducing the study of the cohomology to a purely algebraic problem. This led us to question whether something similar could be done to study the cohomology associated with general involutive structures defined on compact Lie groups. It is clear that the involutive structures must have algebraic properties from the Lie group. Therefore it is natural to restrict our attention to involutive structures that are invariant by the action of the group, these are called left-invariant involutive structures. Some particular cases of left-invariant involutive structures, as well as involutive structures that are invariant by the group actions in homogeneous spaces, have been studied previously.
    [Show full text]