Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, and Their Representations
Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, and Their Representations
Gwyn Bellamy
[email protected]
www.maths.gla.ac.uk/∼gbellamy
Abstract
These are the lecture notes for the 5M reading course ”Lie groups, Lie algebras, and their
representations” at the University of Glasgow, autumn 2015.
Contents
1 Introduction i
2 Manifolds - a refresher 2
6 Representation theory 35
8 Complete reducibility 48
dx −x dy −y
= 2 , = 2 . (1)
dt (x + y 2 )3/2 dt (x + y 2 )3/2
dr −1
= 2. (2)
dt r
i
The circle S 1 = {0 ≤ ϑ < 2π} (this is a group, ϑ1 ?ϑ2 = (ϑ1 +ϑ2 ) mod 2π) acts on R2 by rotations:
! ! !
cos ϑ − sin ϑ x x cos ϑ − y sin ϑ
ϑ · (x, y) = = .
sin ϑ cos ϑ y x sin ϑ + y cos ϑ
Then it is clear from (2) that if (x(t), y(t)) is a solution to (1), then so too is
ϑ · (x(t), y(t)) = (x(t) cos ϑ − y(t) sin ϑ, x(t) sin ϑ + y(t) cos ϑ).
Thus, the group S 1 acts on the space of solutions to this system of differential equations.
The content of these lecture notes is based to a large extent on the material in the books [5]
and [8]. Other sources that treat the material in these notes are [1], [2], [4], [9] and [7].
1
2 Manifolds - a refresher
In this course we will consider smooth real manifolds and complex analytic manifolds.
Theorem 2.1. Let M be a subset of Rn . Then, M is compact if and only if it is closed and
contained inside a closed ball B` (0) for some ` 0.
Remark 2.2. If M is some compact subspace of Rn and {Xi }i∈N a Cauchy sequence in M , then
the limit of this sequence exists in M . This fact is a useful way of showing that certain subspaces
of Rn are not compact.
2.2 Manifolds
Recall that a real n-dimensional manifold is a Hausdorff topological space M with an atlas A(M ) =
{φi : Ui → Vi | i ∈ I}, where {Ui | i ∈ I} is an open cover of M , each chart φi : Ui → Vi is a
homeomorphism onto Vi , an open subset of Rn , and the composite maps
φi ◦ φ−1
j : Vi,j → Vj,i
2
are smooth morphisms, where Vi,j = φj (Ui ∩ Uj ) ⊂ Rn and Vj,i = φi (Ui ∩ Uj ) ⊂ Rn .
Example 2.3. The circle S 1 = {(x1 , x2 ) | x21 +x22 = 1} ⊂ R2 is a manifold. We can use stereographic
projection to construct charts on S 1 . Let N = (0, 1) and S = (0, −1) be the north and south poles
respectively.
P = (x1 , x2 )
Q = (z, 0)
A line through N and P meets the x1 -axis in a unique point. This defines a map S 1 r {N } → R.
To get an explicit formula for this, the line through N and P is described by {t(x1 , x2 ) + (1 −
x1
t)(0, 1) | t ∈ R}. This implies that z = 1−x 2
. Therefore we define U1 = S 1 r {N }, V1 = R and
x1
φ1 : U1 → V1 , φ1 (x1 , x2 ) = .
1 − x2
Similarly, if we perform stereographic projection from the south pole, then we get a chart
x1
φ2 : U2 → V2 , φ2 (x1 , x2 ) = ,
x2 + 1
3
∼
The n + 1 open sets Ui = {[x0 : x1 : · · · : xn ] ∈ RPn | xi 6= 0} cover RPn . The maps φi : Ui −→ Rn ,
[x0 : x1 : · · · : xn ] 7→ ( xx0i , . . . , xbi , . . . , xxni ) define an atlas on RPn . Thus, it is a manifold.
Exercise 2.5. Check that the maps φi are well-defined i.e. only depends on the line through
(x0 , x1 , . . . , xn ). Prove that RPn is a manifold by explicitly describing the maps φj ◦ φ−1
i : φi (Ui ∩
Uj ) ⊂ Rn → φj (Ui ∩ Uj ) ⊂ Rn and checking that they are indeed smooth map.
The following theorem is extremely useful for producing explicit examples of manifolds.
Theorem 2.6. Let m < n and f : Rn → Rm , f = (f1 (x1 , . . . , xn ), . . . , fm (x1 , . . . , xn )), a smooth
map. Assume that u is in the image of f . Then f −1 (u) is a smooth submanifold of Rn , of
dimension n − m if and only if the differential
i=1,...,m
∂fi
dv f = : Rn → Rm
∂xj j=1,...,n|x=v
The proof of the above theorem is based on the inverse function theorem, which implies that
for each v in the closed set f −1 (u), there is some ` > 0 such that B` (v) ∩ f −1 (u) ' B`0 (v) for some
(n − m)-dimensional ball B`0 (v). This implies that f −1 (u) is a submanifold of Rn of dimension
(n − m). A proof of this theorem can be found in [10, Corollary 1.29].
Exercise 2.7. By considering the derivatives of f = x21 + · · · + x2n − 1, show that the (n − 1)-sphere
S n−1 ⊂ Rn is a manifold.
Exercise 2.8. Consider the smooth functions f1 = x21 + x32 − x1 x2 x3 − 1, f2 = x21 x2 x3 and f3 =
(2x2 − x33 )ex1 from R3 to R. For which of these functions is the differential dv fi always surjective
for all v ∈ fi−1 (0)? For those that are not, the closed subset fi−1 (0) is not a submanifold of R3 .
Remark 2.9. Since every point in a manifold admits an open neighborhood homeomorphic to an
open subset of Rn , for some n, they are ”especially well-behaved” topological spaces. We mention,
in particular, that a connected manifold is path connected and always admits a universal cover.
4
technicalities. Remarkably, there are several equivalent definitions of the tangent space Tm M to
M at the point m ∈ M . In this course we will see three of these definitions, and show that they
are equivalent. The first definition, which we will take as “the definition” is in terms of point
derivations.
One can easily check that if ν, µ are point derivations at m and α ∈ R, then ν + µ and αν
are point derivations at m. Thus, the set of point derivations forms a vector space. The tangent
space to M at m is defined to be the vector space Tm M of all point derivations at m. To get some
intuition for this notion, lets first consider the case where the manifold M is some just Rn . For
a = (a1 , . . . , an ) ∈ Rn , we define the point derivation va at u by
∂f ∂f
va (f ) = a1 + · · · + a n .
∂x1 x=u ∂xn x=u
∼
I claim that a 7→ va defines an isomorphism Rn → Tu Rn . One can easily check that va is a point
derivation. Also, va (xi ) = ai , which implies that the map is injective. Therefore the only thing to
check is that every point derivation at u can be written as va for some a. Let ν be an arbitrary
point derivation and set ai = ν(xi ) ∈ R. Then if a = (a1 , . . . , an ), we need to show that ν − va = 0.
It is certainly zero on each of the coordinate functions xi . Locally, every smooth function has a
Taylor expansion
X ∂kf
f (x) = (x1 − u1 )k1 · · · (xn − un )kn .
k1 k1 k
k1 ,...,kn ≥0
∂x1 ∂x2 · · · ∂xn x=u
n
Using the derivation rule for point derivations it is easy to see that ν(f ) − va (f ) = 0 too. Thus,
we can think of ∂x∂ 1 , . . . , ∂x∂n as being a basis of Tu Rn for any u ∈ Rn . In particular, it is clear that
dim Tu Rn = n for all u ∈ Rn .
Remark 2.11. The tangent space Tm M at m is a locally property of M i.e. it only sees what
happens locally on M near m. This statement can be made precise as follows. Let U ⊂ M be
5
an open neighborhood of m. Then, the fact that any smooth function f ∈ C∞ (M ) restricts to a
smooth function on U i.e. f |U ∈ C∞ (U ) means that we can define a canonical map Tm U → Tm M ,
ν 7→ νe by
νe(f ) := ν(f |U ).
This map is an isomorphism. In order to prove this, one needs to use the existence of partitions
of unity, which in this case imply that every function g ∈ C∞ (U ) can be extended to a smooth
function on M i.e. for each g ∈ C∞ (U ) there exists f ∈ C∞ (M ) such that f |U = g.
Since a manifold locally looks like Rn , and the tangent space at m only sees what happens
around m, it is not surprising that:
Proposition 2.12. If M is an n-dimensional manifold, then dim Tm M = n for all m ∈ M .
Proof. To prove the proposition, we will show that a chart ϕ : U → Rn around m defines an
∼
isomorphism of vector spaces ϕ∗ : Tm M → Tϕ(m) Rn . The definition of ϕ∗ is very simple. Given
ν ∈ Tm M a point derivation and f ∈ C∞ (Rn ) a function, we define
We leave it to the reader to check that ϕ∗ (ν) ∈ Tϕ(m) Rn is a point derivation. To show that it is
an isomorphism, it suffices to note that we also have a map ϕ−1 : Im ϕ → U and hence we can
define a map (ϕ−1 )∗ : Tϕ(m) Rn → Tm . Unpacking the definitions, one sees that (ϕ−1 )∗ ◦ ϕ∗ = id
and ϕ∗ ◦ (ϕ−1 )∗ = Id, as required. For instance,
The second definition of tangent space uses the notion of embedded curves. A curve on M is
a smooth morphism γ : (−, ) → M , where ∈ R>0 ∪ {∞}. We say that γ is a curve through
m ∈ M if γ(0) = m. Given a curve γ through m, we can construct a point derivation γ at m by
the simple rule
d
γ(f ) = (f ◦ γ) .
dt t=0
The key point here is that f ◦ γ is just a function (−, ) → R, which we can easily differentiate.
Let’s consider the case where M = Rn . If ρ : (−, ) → Rn is a curve in Rn then we can differentiate
6
m
it and get a vector ρ0 (0) ∈ Tρ(0) Rn = Rn . Concretely, if ρ(t) = (ρ1 (t), . . . , ρn (t)), then ρ0 (0) is the
point derivation
n
0
X dρi ∂
ρ (0) = |t=0 (3)
i=1
dt ∂x i
at ρ(0). For instance, consider ρ : R → R3 , ρ(t) = (t2 , 3t, 2 sin t), then ρ0 (0) = 3 ∂x∂ 2 + 2 ∂x∂ 1 .
Now the question becomes: when do two curves through m define the same point derivation?
Well we see from the definition that if γ1 ∼ γ2 if and only if
d d
(f ◦ γ1 ) = (f ◦ γ2 ) , ∀ f ∈ C∞ (M ),
dt t=0 dt t=0
then γ1 ∼ γ2 ⇔ γ 1 = γ 2 ∈ Tm M . Denote by [γ] the class of curves through m that are equivalent
to γ. The claim is that, as a set at least, the tangent space Tm M at m can be identified with the
equivalence classes of curves through m, under the above equivalence relation. By construction,
there is an injective map from the set of equivalence classes to Tm M . So we just need to show
that it is surjective i.e.
Lemma 2.13. For any ν ∈ Tm M , there exists a curve γ through m such that γ = ν.
Proof. Recall from the proof of Proposition 2.12 that, give a chart ϕ : U → Rn around m, we
∼
constructed an isomorphism ϕ∗ : Tm M → Tϕ(m) Rn , where (ϕ∗ ν)(f ) = ν(f ◦ ϕ). Let’s assume that
we can find a curve γ : (−, ) → Rn through ϕ(m) such that γ = ϕ∗ ν. Then let µ = ϕ−1 ◦ γ. We
7
have
d
µ(f ) = (f ◦ µ)
dt t=0
d −1
= (f ◦ ϕ ) ◦ γ
dt t=0
−1
= γ(f ◦ ϕ )
= (ϕ∗ ν)(f ◦ ϕ−1 ) = ν(f ◦ ϕ−1 ◦ ϕ) = ν(f ).
Thus, it suffices to assume that M = Rn and m = (m1 , . . . , mn ) ∈ Rn . In this case we have seen
that
∂ ∂
ν = ai + · · · + an
∂x1 ∂xn
for some ai ∈ R. Let γ be the curve γ(t) = (a1 t + m1 , . . . , an t + mn ). Then γ(0) = m and equation
(3) shows that γ = ν.
T M = {(m, v) | m ∈ M, v ∈ Tm M }.
The tangent bundle T M is itself a manifold and comes equipped with smooth morphisms
i : M ,→ T M , i(m) = (m, 0) and π : T M → M , π(m, v) = m.
Exercise 2.15. If M = f −1 (0) ⊂ Rn , where f : Rn → Rm , then the tangent space to M at m is
the subspace Ker(dm f : Rn → Rm ) of Tm Rn = Rn . Describe the tangent space to S n−1 = f −1 (0)
in Rn at (1, 0, . . . , 0), where f = x21 + · · · + x2n − 1.
The differential of a function f ∈ C∞ (M ), at a point m, is a linear map dm f : Tm M → R.
In terms of the first definition of a tangent space, dm f ([γ]) = (f ◦ γ)0 (0). In terms of the second
definition of a tangent space, if Xi ∈ Tφi (m) Rn , then f ◦ φ−1
i : Vi → R. Differentiating this function
gives dφi (m) (f ◦ φi ) : R → R and we define (dm f )([Xi ]) = dφi (m) (f ◦ φ−1
−1 n
i )(Xi ). Of course, one
must check that both these definitions are actually well-define i.e. independent of the choice of
representative of the equivalence class.
Let f : M → N be a smooth map between manifolds M and N . Then, for each m ∈ M , f
defines a linear map dm f : Tm M → Tf (m) M between tangents spaces, given by (dm f )([γ]) = [f ◦γ].
Since we get one such map for all points in m and they vary continuously over M , we actually get
8
a smooth map
df : T M → T N, (df )(m, [γ]) = (f (m), dm f ([γ])).
The following fact, which is a consequence of the inverse function theorem, will be useful to us
later. Let f : M → N be a smooth map between manifolds M and N such that the differential
dm f is an isomorphism at every point m ∈ M . If N is simply connected and M connected then
f is an isomorphism.
Definition 2.16. A vector field on M is a smooth morphism X : M → T M such that π◦X = idM .
The space of all vector fields on M is denoted Vect(M ).
The key point of defining a vector field is that one can differentiate functions along vector fields.
Let X be a vector field on M and f : M → R a smooth function. We define X(f )(m) = (f ◦ γ)0 (0)
for some (any) choice of curve through m such that [γ] = Xm .
Lemma 2.17. The vector field X defines a map C∞ (M ) → C∞ (M ) satisfying the product rule
9
Exercise 2.18. Let M, N and P be manifolds and f : M → N , g : N → P smooth maps. Show
that the linear map dm (g ◦ f ) : Tm M → Tg(f (m)) P equals (df (m) g) ◦ (dm f ). Hint: Using the first
definition of the tangent space, this is virtually a tautology.
Exercise 2.19. Since S 2 ⊂ R3 , we can define the function f : S 2 → R by saying that it is the
restriction of 2x1 −x22 +x1 x3 . Recall the description of the tangent space T(1,0,0) S 2 given in exercise
2.15. Describe d(1,0,0) f : T(1,0,0) S 2 → R.
Similarly, let g : R3 → R2 be the function f = (f1 (x1 , x2 , x3 ), f2 (x1 , x2 , x3 )), where f1 (x1 , x2 , x3 ) =
x32 x1 − x3 sin x1 and f2 (x1 , x2 , x3 ) = ex3 x2 − cos x2 . What is is the linear map d(0,π,1) g : R3 → R2 ?
Definition 2.20. A vector field X on M is said to be complete if, for all m ∈ M , the maximal
integral curve through m with respect to X is defined on the whole of R.
Exercise 2.21. Let X be the vector field x1 ∂x∂ 1 − (2x1 + 1) ∂x∂ 2 on R2 . Construct an integral curve
γ for X through (a, b) ∈ R2 . Is X complete?
10
3 Lie groups and Lie algebras
In this section we introduce the stars of the show, Lie groups and Lie algebras.
Definition 3.1. The group (G, m, e) is said to be a Lie group if G is a manifold such that both
the multiplication map m, and inversion g 7→ g −1 , are smooth maps G × G → G, and G → G
respectively.
1. Using the fact that ig : G ,→ G × G, ig (h) = (g, h), is a smooth map, show that Lg : G → G
is a smooth map.
2. Using part (1), show that if U ⊂ G is an open subset and g ∈ G, then gU is also open in G.
11
Hints: In part 1. use the fact that the composite of two smooth maps is smooth. In parts 2. and
3. recall that a map f : X → Y between topological spaces is continuous if and only if f −1 (U ) is
open, resp. f −1 (C) is closed, in X for all U ⊂ Y open, resp. C ⊂ Y closed.
Assume that the Lie group G is connected. Then, as the following proposition shows, one can
tell a great deal about the group by considering the various neighborhoods of the identity.
Proposition 3.7. Let G be a connected Lie group and U an open neighborhood of the identity.
Then the elements of U generate G.
Proof. Recall that G connected implies that the only non-empty closed and open subset of G is
G itself. Since the map g → g −1 is smooth, U −1 = {g −1 | g ∈ U } is open in G. Thus, U ∩ U −1
is also open. It is non-empty because e ∈ U ∩ U −1 . Replacing U by this intersection we may
assume that g −1 ∈ U if and only if g ∈ U . By exercise 3.6, if g ∈ U then gU is open in U . Hence
S
U · U = g∈U gU is open in G. This implies by induction that H = {g1 · · · gk | gi ∈ U } is an
open subset of G. But it’s easy to check that H is also a subgroup of G. Therefore, to show that
H = G, it suffices to show that H is closed in G.
Let C = G r H. Since H is open in G, C is closed. We assume that C 6= ∅. Notice that if
g ∈ C, then gH ⊂ C and hence H ⊂ g −1 C, a closed subset of G. Thus, H is contained in the
intersection C 0 = g∈C g −1 C. The arbitrary intersection of closed sets is closed, thus C 0 is closed.
T
Theorem 3.8. Let G and H be Lie groups, with G connected. Then a morphism f : G → H is
uniquely defined by the linear map de f : Te G → Te H.
What this really means is that if f, g : G → H are morphisms of Lie groups then f = g if and
only if de f = de g. The proof of Theorem 3.8 is given in section 4; see Corollary 4.20.
Exercise 3.9. Let G = R× (=: R r {0}), where the multiplication comes from the usual multipli-
cation on R. Show that the map φ : G → G, φ(x) = xn is a homomorphism of Lie groups. What
is Te G? Describe de φ : Te G → Te G.
12
Naturally, one can ask, as a converse to Theorem 3.8, which linear maps Te G → Te H extend
to a homomorphism of groups G → H? Surprisingly, there is a precise answer to this question.
But before it can be given we will need to introduce the notion of Lie algebras and describe the
Lie algebra that is associated to each Lie group.
f
G / H (5)
Ad(g) Ad(f (g))
G / H
f
13
So we can being our linear approximation process by differentiating diagram (5) at the identity,
to get a commutative diagram of linear maps
de f
Te G / Te H (6)
de Ad(g) de Ad(f (g))
Te G / Te H
de f
f ×f
G×G / H ×H (7)
Ad Ad
G / H.
f
The temptation now is just to differentiate this diagram at (e, e). But this is not quite the right
thing to do. Instead, we differentiate each entry of Ad, resp. of f × f , separately to get a bilinear
map. You may not have see the definition of bilinear before. As a remainder,
Definition 3.12. Let k be a field and U, V and W k-vector spaces. A map b : U × V → W is said
to be bilinear if both b(u, −) : V → W and b(−, v) : U → W are linear maps, ∀ u ∈ U, v ∈ V , i.e.
for all u1 , u2 ∈ U, v1 , v2 ∈ V, α, β, γ, δ ∈ k.
14
for a smooth map f : Rn → R.
Thus, we get a commutative diagram of bilinear maps
b(e,e) f ×f
Te G × Te G / Te H × Te H (8)
b(e,e) Ad b(e,e) Ad
Te G / Te H.
de f
Notice that only the biderivative of f at the identity appears in the above diagram. We have no
need to know what f does away from the identity. To make the notation less cumbersome we fix
g = Te G and h = Te H. Then [−, −]G := b(e,e) Ad : g × g → g is a bilinear map. This is the Lie
bracket on the vector space g. Thus, we have shown
Proposition 3.14. Let f : G → H be a morphism of Lie groups. Then, the linear map de f : g → h
preserves brackets i.e.
This leads us to the following key result, which is one of the main motivations in the definition
of Lie algebras.
Theorem 3.15. Let G and H be Lie groups, with G simply connected. Then a linear map g → h
is the differential of a homomorphism G → H if and only if it preserves the bracket, as in (9).
The proof of Theorem 3.15 will be given in section 4; see Theorem 4.18.
Example 3.16. As an example to keep some grasp on reality, we’ll consider the case G = GL(V ),
where V is some n-dimensional real vector space (so V ' Rn ). Then, for matrices A, B ∈ GL(V ),
Ad(A)(B) = ABA−1 is really just naive matrix conjugation. For G = GL(V ), the tangent space
Te GL(V ) equal End(V ), the space of all linear maps V → V (after fixing a basis of V , End(V )
2
is just the space of all n by n matrices over R so that End(V ) ' Rn ). If A ∈ GL(V ) and
Y ∈ End(V ), then differentiating Ad with respect to B in the direction of Y gives
Thus, d(A,1) Ad is just the usual conjugation action of A on End(V ). Next, for each Y ∈ End(V ),
we want to differential the map A 7→ d(A,1) Ad(Y ) = AY A−1 at 1 ∈ GL(V ). This will give a linear
15
map ad(Y ) : End(V ) → End(V ). If X, Y ∈ End(V ), then (1 + X)−1 = 1 − X + 2 X 2 − · · · . So,
(1 + X)Y (1 − X + 2 X 2 − · · · ) − Y
ad(Y )(X) = lim
→0
XY − Y X + 2 · · ·
= lim = XY − Y X.
→0
Lemma 3.18. The map ad preserves brackets i.e. ad([X, Y ]G ) = [ad(X), ad(Y )]E , where [A, B]E :=
AB − BA is the bracket on End(g).
Remark 3.19. One can check that ad(Y )(X) = ad(X)(Y ) = [X, Y ]G for all X, Y ∈ g.
Definition 3.20. Let k be a field and g a k-vector space. Then g is said to be a Lie algebra if
there exists a bilinear map [−, −] : g × g → g, called the Lie bracket, such that
16
Exercise 3.21. Assume that char k 6= 2. Show that the first axiom in the definition of a Lie algebra
is equivalent to the condition [X, X] = 0 for all X ∈ g.
Example 3.22. Let M be a manifold. Then the space Vect(M ) of vector fields on M is a Lie
algebra via the rule
[X, Y ] := X ◦ Y − Y ◦ X,
where X ◦ Y is the vector field that acts on C∞ (M ) by first applying Y and then applying X.
Example 3.23. Let V be a k-vector space and gl(V ) = End(V ) the space of all linear maps V → V .
Then, as we have already seen, gl(V ) is a Lie algebra, the general linear Lie algebra, with bracket
[F, G] = F ◦ G − G ◦ F . If V is n-dimensional, then we may identify gl(V ) with gl(n, k), the Lie
algebra of n × n matrices, where the bracket of two matrices A and B is just the commutator
[A, B] = AB − BA. The Lie algebra gl(n, k) contains many interesting Lie subalgebras such as
n(n, k) the Lie algebra of all strictly upper triangular matrices or b(n, k) the Lie algebra of upper
triangular matrices.
Exercise 3.24. Prove that gl(n, k) is a Lie algebra, and that b(n, k) and n(n, k) are Lie subalgebras
of gl(n, k).
Proof. The bracket is bilinear by construction. Therefore we need to check that it is anti-symmetric
and satisfies the Jacobi identity. By exercise 3.21, to check that the first axiom holds it suffices
to show that [X, X] = 0 for all X ∈ g.
Recall from the first definition of tangent spaces that an element X ∈ g can be written γ 0 (0)
for some γ : (−, ) → G. Let Y = ρ0 (0) be another element in g. We can express the bracket of
X and Y in terms of γ and ρ. First, for each t ∈ (−, ) and g ∈ G, Ad(γ(t))(g) = γ(t)gγ(t)−1 .
Then, taking g = ρ(s) and differentiating ρ to get Y ,
d −1
(de Ad(γ(t)))(Y ) = γ(t)ρ(s)γ(t) |s=0 .
ds
Thus,
d −1
ad(X)(Y ) = γ(t)ρ(s)γ(t) |s=0 |t=0 .
ds
17
In particular,
d d −1
[X, X] = ad(X)(X) = γ(t)γ(s)γ(t) |s=0 |t=0
dt ds
d d
= γ(s) |s=0 |t=0
dt ds
d
= X |t=0 = 0.
dt
We have implicitly used the fact that γ(t)γ(s) = γ(s)γ(t) for all s, t. This is proved in Lemma 4.6
below.
Using the anti-symmetric property of the bracket, the Jacobi identity is equivalent to the
identity [X, [Y, Z]] − [Y, [X, Z]] = [[X, Y ], Z] for all X, Y, Z ∈ g. Recall that ad(X)(Y ) = [X, Y ].
Therefore the above identity can be written [ad(X) ◦ ad(Y ) − ad(Y ) ◦ ad(X)](Z) = ad([X, Y ])(Z),
which would follow from the identity ad(X) ◦ ad(Y ) − ad(Y ) ◦ ad(X) = ad([X, Y ]) in End(g). But
this is exactly the statement of Lemma 3.18 that ad preserves brackets.
Exercise 3.27. Let l ⊂ g be an ideal. Check that the bracket on g/l is well-defined and that g/l is
indeed a Lie algebra.
Exercise 3.28. Let l be a Lie subalgebra of g such that [g, g] ⊂ l. Show that l is an ideal and that
the quotient g/l is abelian.
Exercise 3.29. Show that n(2, k) is a one-dimensional ideal in b(2, k). More generally, show that
n(n, k) is an ideal in b(n, k). What are the dimensions of b(n, k) and n(n, k)? Is the quotient
b(n, k)/n(n, k) abelian?
18
3.7 Lie algebras of small dimension
Let g be a one-dimensional Lie algebra. Then g = k{X} for any 0 6= X ∈ g. What is the bracket
on g? The fact that the bracket must be anti-symmetric implies that [X, X] = 0. Therefore the
bracket is zero and g is unique up to isomorphism.
When dim g = 2, let X1 , X2 be some basis of g. If the bracket on g is not zero, then the only
non-zero bracket can be [X1 , X2 ] = −[X2 , X1 ] and hence [g, g] is a one dimensional subspace of g.
Let Y span this subspace. Let X be any element not in [g, g] so that X, Y is also a basis of g.
Then [X, Y ] must be a non-zero element in [g, g], hence it is a multiple of Y . By rescaling X, we
may assume that [X, Y ] = Y . This uniquely defines the bracket on g (and one can easily check
that the bracket does indeed make g into a Lie algebra). Thus, up to isomorphism there are only
two Lie algebras of dimension two.
In dimension three there are many more examples, but it is possible to completely classify
them. The most important three dimensional Lie algebra is sl(2, C), the subalgebra of gl(2, C)
consisting of matrices of trace zero.
Exercise 3.30. Let
! ! !
0 1 0 0 1 0
E= , F = , H= ,
0 0 1 0 0 −1
Show that {E, F, H} is a basis of sl(2, C). Calculate [H, E], [H, F ] and [E, F ].
19
4 The exponential map
In this section, we define the exponential map. This allows us to go back from the Lie algebra of
a Lie group to the group itself.
Now let X ∈ Vect(G) be a vector field on G. Since X is uniquely defined by its action on C∞ (G),
we can define an action of G on Vect(G) by
It might seem a bit strange that I’ve just decided to put in the (−)−1 into equation (10), but this
is necessary to ensure that both C∞ (G) and Vect(G) become left G-modules. The vector field X
is said to be left invariant if g · X = X for all g ∈ G. We denote by VectL (G) ⊂ Vect(G) the
subspace of all left invariant vector fields.
Exercise 4.1. Show that VectL (G) is a Lie subalgebra of Vect(G).
Lemma 4.2. Let G be a Lie group. The map X 7→ Xe defines an isomorphism of vector spaces
∼
VectL (G) −→ g.
Proof. Let X ∈ VectL (G). We will show that X is unique defined by its value Xe at e. Let g, h ∈ G
and f ∈ C∞ (G). First we consider the differential dh (g · f ) : Th G → R. Since (g · f )(h) = f (g −1 h),
we have g · f = f ◦ Lg−1 , where Lg : G → G is defined by Lg (h) = gh. Thus, dh (g · f ) =
dg−1 h f ◦ dh Lg−1 . Then,
Since X is assumed to be left invariant, this implies that (dh f )(Xh ) = (dh f ) ◦ (dg−1 h Lg )(Xg−1 h )
20
for all f ∈ C∞ (G). Hence
Xh = (dg−1 h Lg )(Xg−1 h ), ∀ g, h ∈ G. (12)
In particular, taking h = g shows that Xg = (de Lg )(Xe ) i.e. X is uniquely defined by Xe . Thus,
the map X 7→ Xe is injective.
Conversely, for each X ∈ g, define the vector field Xe on G by X eg = (de Lg )(X). This means
e )(h) = (dh f )(de Lh (X)) for all f ∈ C∞ (G). It is left as an exercise to check that X
that X(f e
belongs to VectL (G).
Remark 4.4. One can actually show that the isomorphism X 7→ Xe of Lemma 4.2 is an isomor-
phism of Lie algebras.
Example 4.5. Let G = (R× , ·). Then T G = R× ×R and Vect(G) = {f ∂x ∂
| f ∈ C∞ (R× )}. If α ∈ R×
and f ∈ C∞ (G), then the group R× acts on C∞ (R× ) by (α · f )(p) = f (α−1 p) e.g. α · xn = αn xn
since
(α · xn )(β) = xn (α−1 β) = (α−1 β)n .
∂ ∂ ∂
= α−n+1 xn ∂x
∂
. This implies that VectL (R× ) =
Thus, α · f ∂x = α(α · f ) ∂x ; for instance α · xn ∂x
∂
R{x ∂x }.
Lemma 4.6. The integral curve ϕX is defined on the whole of R. Moreover, it is a homomorphism
of Lie groups R → G i.e. ϕ(s + t) = ϕ(s)ϕ(t) for all s, t ∈ R.
Proof. Choose s, t ∈ J such that s + t also belongs to J. Then we claim that ϕ(s + t) = ϕ(s)ϕ(t).
Fix s and let t vary in a some small open set J0 ⊂ J containing 0 such that s + t still belongs to J.
21
Then α(t) = ϕ(s + t) and β(t) = ϕ(s)ϕ(t) are curves in G such that α(0) = β(0). Differentiating,
α(t)0 = ϕ(s + t)0 = ν(X)ϕ(s+t) = ν(X)α(t) . To calculate β(t)0 , we first write β(t) = (Lϕ(s) ◦ ϕ)(t).
Then,
where we have used (12) in the last equality but one. Thus, they are both integral curves for ν(X)
through the point ϕ(s). By uniqueness of integral curves, they are equal.
We can use the equality ϕ(s + t) = ϕ(s)ϕ(t) to extend ϕ to the whole of R: for each s, t ∈ J
such that s + t is not in J, set ϕ(s + t) = ϕ(s)ϕ(t). The uniqueness property of integral curves
shows that this is well-defined.
The uniqueness of ϕX implies that ϕsX (t) = ϕX (st) for all s, t ∈ R (since the derivatives with
respect to t of ϕsX (t) and ϕX (st) at 0 are equal). Hence
exp(X) − exp(0)
(d0 exp)(X) = lim
→0
ϕX (1) − ϕ0 (1)
= lim
→0
ϕX () − ϕX (0)
= lim
→0
0
= ϕX (0) = X,
where we have used the fact that ϕ0 (t) = ϕX (0) = e for all t ∈ R. Thus, the derivative d0 exp of
exp at 0 ∈ g is just the identity map.
In the case of G = GL(n, R) and hence g = gl(n, R), the exponential map can be explicitly
written down, it is just the usual exponential map
∞
X Xi
exp(X) = .
i=0
i!
22
The same formula applies for any closed subgroup G of GL(n, R). This function behaves much
the same way as the exponential function ex : R → R× . However, it is not true that exp(X + Y )
equals exp(X) exp(Y ) in general - see subsection 4.6 for more.
Lemma 4.8. Let xn , x ∈ Rn r {0} with limn→∞ xn = 0. Then, limn→∞ [xn ] = [x] if and only if
there exist positive integers an such that limn→∞ an xn = x.
Proof. If such integers exist then clearly limn→∞ [xn ] = [x] since [an xn ] = [xn ] for all n. Conversely,
assume that limn→∞ [xn ] = [x]. To say that limn→∞ an xn = x means that the distance ||an xn − x||
between an xn and x becomes arbitrarily small as n → ∞. For each n choose a positive integer an
such that |an − ||x||x||n || | < 1. If v, w ∈ Rn and α, β ∈ R then the triangle inequality implies that
Theorem 4.9 (Cartan’s Theorem). Let G be a Lie group and H a closed subgroup. Then H is a
submanifold of G. Hence H is a Lie subgroup of G.
Proof. We begin by noting that it suffices to construct some open neighborhood U of e in G such
23
that H ∩ U is a closed submanifold of U . Assuming this, then for each h ∈ H, hU is an open
neighborhood of h in G such that H ∩ hU = h(H ∩ U ) is a closed submanifold.
We fix a norm || · || on the vector space g. The key to the proof of Cartan’s Theorem is to
choose carefully a candidate subspace W ⊂ g for the Lie algebra of H. The space W is defined
to be all w ∈ g such that either w = 0 or there exists a sequence {wn } in g such that wn 6= 0,
exp(wn ) ∈ H, wn → 0 and [wn ] → [w].
We will show:
1. exp(W ) ⊆ H.
2. W is a subspace of g.
24
The differential d0 φ is just the identity map on g. Therefore there is some neighborhood U of 0 in g
such that φ is a diffeomorphism from U onto φ(U ). Clearly, φ(U ∩W ) ⊂ φ(U )∩φ(W ) ⊂ H ∩φ(U ).
Therefore, we need to show that H ∩ φ(U ) is contained in φ(U ∩ W ).
Assume that this is not the case. Then, in every open neighbourhood Un of 0 in g there exist
(vn , wn ) ∈ V ⊕ W such that φ(vn + wn ) ∈ H but vn 6= 0. In particular, exp(vn ) ∈ H. We take
T
U1 ⊃ U2 ⊃ · · · such that n Un = {0}, so that {vn } is a sequence converging to 0. Since the unit
sphere S in V is compact, there exists some v ∈ V r {0} and subsequence {vn0 } of {vn } such that
[vn0 ] → [v] (this is the result from metric spaces saying that every sequence in a compact space has
a convergent subsequence). But this implies that v ∈ W ; a contradiction.
Remark 4.10. We’ve actually shown in the proof of Theorem 4.9 that there is some neighborhood
U of e in G such that U ∩ H = exp(h) ∩ U for any closed subgroup H of G.
Example 4.11. As a consequence, the following are Lie groups
since they are all subgroups of GL(n, R) defined as the zeros of some polynomial equations.
Exercise 4.12. Using the criterion of example 2.6, show directly that B(n, R), N (n, R) and T (n, R)
are submanifolds of GL(n, R).
The analogue of Cartan’s Theorem holds for closed subgroups of GL(n, C); they are complex
Lie subgroups.
Theorem 4.13 (S. Lie). Let g be a finite dimensional, real Lie algebra. Then, there exists a unique
simply connected Lie group G whose Lie algebra is g. Moreover, if G0 is any other connected Lie
group with Lie algebra g, then G0 is a quotient of G.
25
Recall that a covering map f : M → N is a map such that every n ∈ N is contained in some
open neighborhood U with f −1 (U ) a disjoint union of open sets, each mapping homeomorphically
onto U . Before we prove the theorem, we require some preparatory results. A covering map always
satisfies the path lifting property: if γ : [0, 1] → N is a path with n = γ(0) and m is a lift of n,
then there is a unique path γ̃ : [0, 1] → M lifting γ such that γ̃(0) = m (we say that γ̃ is a lift of
γ if f ◦ γ̃ = γ). Using the path lifting property one can easily show that
Lemma 4.14. Assume that M is simply connected and let g : Z → N be a smooth morphism from
a simply connected manifold Z sending z to n. Then there exists a unique morphism g̃ : Z → M ,
sending z to m such that f ◦ g̃ = g.
An easy, but important consequence of Lemma 4.14 is that every Lie group admits a simply
connected cover.
Proof. We first assume that H is a simply connected manifold. Define the map α : H × H → G
by α(h1 , h2 ) = ϕ(h1 )ϕ(h2 )−1 . By Lemma 4.14, there exists a unique map α0 : H × H → H such
that α0 (e0 , e0 ) = e0 and ϕ ◦ α0 = α. Then we define h−1 := α0 (e0 , h) and h1 · h2 = α0 (h1 , h−1
2 ) for
h, h1 , h2 ∈ H. This defines smooth morphisms H → H and H × H → H resp. and one can use
the uniqueness of the lift α to show that this makes H into a group.
The proof of the following proposition follows easily from the proof of Cartan’s Theorem,
Theorem 4.9.
Proposition 4.16. Let G be a Lie group with Lie algebra g and h a Lie subalgebra of g. Then
the subgroup H generated by exp(h) is a closed, Lie subgroup of G, whose Lie algebra is h.
We also note:
Proof. This is simply the case of rewriting the map φ in a clever way. Recall that we have
Lg : G → G, Lg (u) = gu. Fix g ∈ G and define ϕ : G → H by ϕ(u) = φ(g)φ(u). We can rewrite
26
this as ϕ = Lφ(g) ◦ φ. This implies that de ϕ = dφ(g) Lφ(g) ◦ de φ is an isomorphism. On the other
hand, ϕ also equals u 7→ φ(gu), which we can write as ϕ = φ ◦ Lg . Therefore, de ϕ = dg φ ◦ de Lg .
Since both de ϕ and de Lg are invertible linear maps, this implies that dg φ is too.
Proof of Theorem 4.13. The key to Theorem 4.13 is Ado’s Theorem, Theorem 7.27, which says
that there exists some n 0 such that g is a Lie subalgebra of gl(n, R). Therefore Proposition
4.16 implies that there is some connected, closed Lie subgroup G0 ⊂ GL(n, R) with Lie G0 = g.
Let ϕ : G → G be the universal cover of G0 . Proposition 4.15 says that we can endow G with the
structure of a Lie group such that ϕ is a quotient of Lie groups. Moreover, de ϕ : g → g is the
identity.
Thus, it suffices to show that if G0 is another simply connected Lie group with Lie algebra
g then G0 ' G. To show this, we consider the product G × G0 . It’s Lie algebra is g ⊕ g and
the diagonal copy g∆ of g in g ⊕ g is a Lie subalgebra. Therefore Proposition 4.16 implies that
there is some connected, closed Lie subgroup K ⊂ G × G0 such that Lie K = g∆ . The maps
φ1 : K ,→ G × G0 G and φ2 : K ,→ G × G0 G0 are homomorphisms of Lie groups whose
differential at the identity is the identity map on g. Thus, we have maps φi between Lie groups
whose differential is an isomorphism on Lie algebras. Hence, Lemma 4.17 implies that dk φi is an
isomorphism for all k ∈ K. Now, we have maps φi : K → G, G0 between connected manifolds,
where G and G0 are simply connected. As mentioned at the end of section 2.3, this implies that
each φi is an isomorphism. Hence we may identify K ' G ' G0 .
Theorem 4.18. Let G and H be Lie groups with G simply connected, and let g and h be their
Lie algebras. A linear map µ : g → h is the differential of a morphism φ : G → H if and only if
µ is a map of Lie algebras.
Proof. We showed in Proposition 3.14 that if µ is the differential of a homomorphism then it must
be a map of Lie algebras. Therefore we need to show the existence of φ, knowing that µ is a map
of Lie algebras.
We will deduce the theorem from Proposition 4.16, applied to G × H. The Lie algebra of
G × H is just g × h. Let Γµ = {(X, µ(X)) | X ∈ g} ⊂ g × h be the graph of µ. Then the fact that
µ is a map of Lie algebras is equivalent to saying that Γµ is a Lie subalgebra of g × h. Let K be
27
the subgroup of G × H generated by exp(Γµ ). By Proposition 4.16, K is a closed Lie subgroup of
G × H.
Projection from G × H onto G is a homomorphism of Lie groups. Therefore the composite
η : K ,→ G×H → G is also a homomorphism. The differential de η is just the projection map from
Γµ to g, which is an isomorphism. Thus, we have a map η between Lie groups whose differential
is an isomorphism on Lie algebras. We note that since exp(Γµ ) is the image of a connected space
under a continuous map, it is connected. Therefore, exp(Γµ ) is contained in K 0 , the connected
component of K containing e. Thus, K = K 0 is connected. Hence, Lemma 4.17 implies that
dk η is an isomorphism for all k. Now, we have a map η : K → G between connected manifolds,
where G is simply connected. As mentioned at the end of section 2.3, this implies that η is an
isomorphism. Hence we may identify G ' K.
Since G is simply connected, Theorem 4.13 implies that this must be an isomorphism. Hence
G ' K → H is a map of Lie groups whose differential is µ.
Remark 4.19. The map φ constructed in the proof of Theorem 4.18 is unique. To see this, assume
we are given another map ϕ : G → H such that de ϕ = µ. Let Γϕ ⊂ G × H be the graph
{(g, ϕ(g)) ∈ G × H | g ∈ G} of ϕ. Since ϕ is a homomorphism of Lie groups, Γϕ is a Lie subgroup
of G × H. The Lie algebra of Γϕ equals the Lie algebra Γµ of K ⊂ G × H. This implies that
exp(Γµ ) is contained in Γϕ and hence K ⊂ Γϕ . But both K and Γϕ are connected Lie groups of
the same dimension, hence they are equal. Since both ϕ and φ are defined to be projection from
K = Γϕ onto H, ϕ = φ.
Now the proof of Theorem 3.8 is an easy corollary.
Corollary 4.20. Let G and H be Lie groups, with G connected. Then a morphism f : G → H is
uniquely defined by the linear map de f : Te G → Te H.
28
identity in G, then an inverse to exp is given by
∞
X (g − e)i
log(g) = (−1)i+1 ∈ g ⊂ gl(n, R).
i=1
i
X ? Y = log(exp(X) exp(Y ))
If we unpack this, being careful to remember that X and Y don’t necessarily commute, then we
get 2
Y2
X
exp(X) exp(Y ) = e + (X + Y ) + + XY + + ···
2 2
and
(X + Y )2 X2 Y2
X ? Y = (X + Y ) + − + + XY + + ···
2 2 2
1
= X + Y + [X, Y ] + · · ·
2
We see that X ?Y up to quadratic terms only depends on linear combinations of X, Y and brackets
of X and Y . Remarkably, this is true for all higher terms too. The resulting formula is called the
Campbell-Hausdorff formula.
Exercise 4.21. Calculate the degree three term of the Campbell-Hausdorff formula for X ? Y .
The key point of the Campbell-Hausdorff formula is that it shows that the product in G ⊂
GL(n, R) can be described, at least in some neighborhood of the identity, completely in terms of
the Lie bracket on g.
29
5 The classical Lie groups and their Lie algebras
In this section we describe the classical Lie groups. By Cartan’s Theorem, every closed subgroup
of GL(n, R) or GL(n, C) is a real (resp. complex) Lie group. Using this fact we can produce many
interesting new examples.
these are the special linear group, special orthogonal group, orthogonal linear group, symplectic
30
group, special unitary group and unitary group, respectively. Their Lie algebras are
Let us show that the Lie algebra of SL(n, R) is sl(n, R). If M is a submanifold of Rk defined,
as in example 2.6, by the series of equations f1 = · · · = fr = 0 and m ∈ M , then Tm M is the
subspace of Tm Rk = Rk defined by
k fi (m + v) − fi (m)
Tm M = v ∈ R lim = 0, ∀ i = 1, . . . , r = Ker(dm F : Tm Rk → T0 Rr ),
→0
where Sn is the symmetric group on n letter. In the limit → 0 only the term 1 in the numerator
will matter, all higher i terms will go to zero. If we take an arbitrary term in the sum (14),
corresponding to some σ 6= 1, then there must be i and j such that σ(i) 6= i and σ(j) 6= j. For
each such term in det(In + A), bi,σ(i) bj,σ(j) will contribute a 2 . Thus,
and
det(In + A) − det(In ) = Tr(A) + 2 (· · · ).
31
We’ll also show Lie Sp(n, R) = sp(n, R), just to make sure we get the hang of things. This one
is much easier:
But clearly,
32
5.3 The quaternions
The complex numbers C are a field, which can also be thought of as a two-dimensional vector
space over R. One can ask if there are other field that are finite dimensional vector spaces over R.
Strangely, the answer is no. However, if one considers skew-fields i.e. real vector spaces that are
also rings (but not necessarily commutative) such that every non-zero element is invertible, then
there does exist one other example.
The quaternions are a four-dimensional real vector space H = R ⊕ Ri ⊕ Rj ⊕ Rk that are also
a ring, where multiplication is defined by
i2 = j2 = k2 = ijk = −1.
Exercise 5.5. Show that every element in H× := H r {0} is invertible. By giving explicit equations
for multiplication, show that H× is a real Lie group.
The complex conjugation on C extends to a conjugation on H by a + bi + cj + dk = a − bi −
cj − dk.
Exercise 5.6. Show that uu = a2 + b2 + c2 + d2 if u = a + bi + cj + dk.
As a complex vector space H = C ⊕ Cj, so that z + wbj = z − wj for z, w ∈ C. The group
H× acts on H on the right, u 7→ uv for u ∈ H and v ∈ H× . The subgroup of H× consisting of all
element v such that vv = 1 is denoted S 1 (H).
Exercise 5.7. 1. Thinking of elements u in H as row vectors of length two, describe the action
×
of v ∈ H on u as a 2 by 2 complex matrix A(v) so that u 7→ uA(v). Hint: First show that
if z ∈ C ⊂ H, then jz = zj.
33
Exercise 5.9. Show that the map C× ×SL(n, C) → GL(n, C), (λ, A) 7→ λA, is surjective. Describe
its kernel. Describe the corresponding homomorphism of Lie algebras.
34
6 Representation theory
In this section, we introduce representations of Lie algebras. For simplicity, we will assume that
g is a complex Lie algebra.
6.2 Modules
As in the literature, we will often use the equivalent language of modules. A g-module is a vector
space V together with a bilinear action map − · − : g × V → V such that
[X, Y ] · v = X · (Y · v) − Y · (X · v) ∀ X, Y ∈ g, v ∈ V.
Exercise 6.2. Let ρ : g → gl(V ) be a representation. Show that V is a g-module with action map
X · v = ρ(X)(v). Conversely, if V is a g-module, define ρ : g → End(V ) by ρ(X)(v) = X · v.
Show that ρ is actually a representation. Check that this defines a natural equivalence between
g-representations and g-modules.
Remark 6.3. For those of you who are comfortable with the language of categories, both repre-
sentations of a Lie algebra g and the collection of all g-modules form categories; in fact they are
abelian categories. Then exercise 6.2 is really saying that these two categories are equivalent.
6.3 Morphisms
A morphism of g-modules is a linear map φ : V1 → V2 such that φ(X · v) = X · φ(v) for all X ∈ g
and v ∈ V i.e. φ commutes with the action of g.
If φ : V1 → V2 is an invertible morphism of g-modules then φ is said to be an isomorphism of
g-modules.
Exercise 6.4. Let φ : V1 → V2 be an isomorphism of g-modules. Show that φ−1 : V2 → V1 is also
a morphism of g-modules.
35
6.4 Simple modules
Let V be a g-module. A subspace W of V is said to be a submodule of V if the action map
· : g × V → V restricts to an action map · : g × W → W . Equivalently, if X · w belongs to W for
all X ∈ g and w ∈ W . We say that W is a proper submodule of V if 0 6= W ( V .
Given a particular Lie algebra g, one of the first things that one would want to work out as a
representation theorist is a way to describe all the simple g-modules. This is often possible (but
difficult).
Lemma 6.6 (Schur’s Lemma). Let V be a simple, finite dimensional g-module. Then every
g-module endomorphism of V is just a multiple of the identity i.e. Endg (V ) = C.
Proposition 6.9. Let V be a simple m-module and W a simple l-module. Then V ⊗W is a simple
(m ⊕ l)-module.
Using only the Schur’s lemma, the proof of proposition 6.9 is quite difficult. We break it into
a series of lemmata.
36
Lemma 6.10. Let V be a simple m-module and v1 , v2 ∈ V such that v1 is not proportional to v2 .
Then the smallest submodule of V ⊕ V containing (v1 , v2 ) is V ⊕ V .
Proof. Let U be the smallest submodule of V ⊕ V containing (v1 , v2 ). The inclusion map i : U ,→
V ⊕ V is a module homomorphism, as are the two projection maps p1 , p2 : V ⊕ V → V . Therefore
maps p1 ◦ i, p2 ◦ i : U → V are also homomorphisms. Since V is simple, U non-zero and p1 ◦ i
a non-zero map, it must be surjective. Now the kernel of p1 ◦ i is contained in the kernel of p1 ,
which equals {0} ⊕ V , a simple module. Therefore, either the kernel of p1 ◦ i is {0} and U ' V ,
or it is {0} ⊕ V , in which case U = V ⊕ V . Let’s assume that the kernel of p1 ◦ i is zero so that
∼
p1 ◦ i : U −→ V . Its inverse will be written φ : V → U . The map p2 ◦ i will also be an isomorphism
∼ ∼
U −→ V . Hence p2 ◦ i ◦ φ is an isomorphism V −→ V . Since V is simple, Schur’s lemma implies
that p2 ◦ i ◦ φ is some multiple of the identity map. But p2 ◦ i ◦ φ applied to v1 is p2 ◦ i(v1 , v2 ) = v2 .
By assumption, v2 is not proportional to v1 , so p2 ◦ i ◦ φ can’t be a multiple of the identity. This
is a contraction. Hence U = V ⊕ V .
Lemma 6.11. Let V be a simple m-module and W a simple l-module. The smallest (m ⊕ l)-
submodule of V ⊗ W containing a pure tensor v ⊗ w 6= 0 is V ⊗ W .
Proof of Proposition 6.9. Let u be any non-zero element in V ⊗ W and U the smallest (m ⊕ l)-
submodule of V ⊗ W containing u. Then we need to show that U = V ⊗ W . If we knew that
0 6= v ⊗ w ∈ U , then the result would follow from Lemma 6.11. Let u = ki=1 vi ⊗ wi . After
P
rewriting, we may assume that v1 , . . . , vk are linearly independent. Moreover, we may also assume
that no pair wi1 , wi2 is proportional (if wi2 = αwi1 , then vi1 ⊗ w1 + vi2 ⊗ wi2 = (vi1 + αvi2 ) ⊗ wi1 ).
Replacing u by another element of U if necessary, we may also assume that k is minimal satisfying
the above properties. If k = 1 then we are done. So we assume that k > 1 and construct an
element in U of ”smaller length”. Since v1 , . . . , vk are linearly independent, we can define an
injective l-module homomorphism ψ : W ⊕ · · · ⊕ W → V ⊗ W , (w10 , . . . , wk0 ) 7→ ki=1 vi ⊗ wi0 .
P
Then u is the image of w := (w1 , . . . , wk ) under this map. If w0 is any element in the smallest
l-submodule W 0 of W ⊕ · · · ⊕ W containing w, then ψ(w0 ) belongs to U . So it suffices to show
37
that there is some non-zero element w0 in W 0 , with at least one coordinate 0. In this case ψ(w0 )
will be a sum of less that k terms. We consider the projection of W 0 onto W ⊕ W ⊕ {0} ⊕ · · · .
This is a l-submodule of W ⊕ W containing (w1 , w2 ). But we assumed that w1 and w2 are not
proportional. Hence Lemma 6.10 implies that this projection must be the whole of W ⊕ W . In
particular, (w1 , 0) is in the image of the projection. Let w0 be some element in W 0 projecting onto
(w1 , 0). This element has at least one coordinate zero, as required.
Exercise 6.12. Let V and W be finite dimensional g-modules and HomC (V, W ) the space of linear
maps from V to W . Show that the rule
We say that V is a direct sum of weight spaces for H. If v ∈ V belongs to a single Vα then we say
that v is a weight vector.
Exercise 6.13. If v ∈ Vα , show that E · v ∈ Vα+2 and F · v ∈ Vα−2 .
Notice that if Vα 6= 0 but Vα+2 = 0 then the exercise implies that E · v = 0 for all v ∈ Vα . A
non-zero weight vector v ∈ V is call highest weight if E · v = 0 and H · v = αv.
Exercise 6.14. Let V be a finite dimensional g-module. Show that V contains a highest weight
vector v0 . Set v−1 = 0 and vi = i!1 F i · v0 for i ≥ 0. If v0 has weight α, by induction on i show that
1. H · vi = (α − 2i)vi ,
2. E · vi = (α − i + 1)vi−1 ,
3. F · vi = (i + 1)vi+1 .
38
Let V be as in exercise 6.14. Since H · vi = (α − 2i)vi the vectors vi are all linearly independent
(they live in different weight spaces). But V is assumed to be finite dimensional, hence there exists
some N 0 such that vN 6= 0 but vN +1 = 0. Consider equation (2) of exercise 6.14. We’ve said
that vN +1 = 0 but vN 6= 0. This implies that α − N = 0 i.e. α = N is a positive integer. Since V
is assumed to be simple, but contains v0 , the vectors v0 , . . . , vN are a basis of V and each weight
space VN −2i for i = 0, . . . , N is one-dimensional with basis vi . Moreover, dim V = N + 1. Thus,
we have shown:
Theorem 6.15. Let V be a simple, finite dimensional sl(2, C)-module, with highest weight of
weight α. Then,
1. α is a positive integer N .
2. dim V = N + 1 and the non-zero weight spaces of V are VN , VN −2 , . . . , V−N , each of which
is one-dimensional.
3. Conversely, for any positive integer N there exists a unique simple sl(2, C)-module V (N )
with highest weight of weight N .
Exercise 6.16. Recall from exercise 3.30 that the elements E, F and H can be written as particular
2 × 2 matrices. In representation theoretic terms, this means that sl(2, C) has a natural two-
dimensional representation, the ”vectorial representation”. Is this representation simple? If so, it
is isomorphic to V (N ) for some N . What is N ?
Exercise 6.17. We’ve also seen that sl(2, C) acts on itself by the adjoint action ad : sl(2, C) →
gl(sl(2, C)). Is the adjoint representation simple? If so, what is N in this case? Explicitly write
the highest weight vector in terms of E, F and H.
39
7 The structure of Lie algebras
In this section we introduce the notion of semi-simple, solvable and nilpotent Lie algebras. The
main result of the section says that every Lie algebra is built up, in some precise way, from a
semi-simple and a solvable Lie algebra (Levi’s Theorem). Moreover, every semi-simple Lie algebra
is a direct sum of simple Lie algebras. In order to simplify the proofs we will fix k = C, the
complex numbers (what is really needed for all of the results of this section to hold is that k be
algebraically closed of characteristic zero).
Exercise 7.4. Show that every nilpotent Lie algebra is solvable. Give an example of a solvable Lie
algebra that is not nilpotent. Hint: Try dim g = 2.
Exercise 7.5. Show that each piece gn of the lower central series is an ideal in g. Is the same true
of the pieces gn of the derived series? Hint: what does the Jacobi identity tell you in this case?
Exercise 7.6. Let g be a Lie algebra and I, J solvable ideals of g.
40
2. Using the fact that (I + J)/I ' J/I ∩ J, show that I + J is a solvable ideal of g.
Lemma 7.7. Let g be a finite dimensional Lie algebra. Then g contains a unique maximal solvable
ideal. It is denoted rad g, and called the solvable radical of g.
P
Proof. Let I = i Ii be the sum of all solvable ideals of g. Since g is finite dimensional, I is
certainly finite dimensional. Thus, there exists finitely many solvable ideals I1 , . . . , Ik such that
I = I1 + · · · + Ik . Inductively applying exercise 7.6, I is a solvable ideal. It is clearly the unique
maximal one.
Notice that Lemma 7.7 implies that g is semi-simple if and only if its solvable radical rad g is
zero.
since X, [X, Y ] ∈ l implies that X(w) = [X, Y ](w) = 0. Hence Y (W ) ⊂ W . Since Y is a nilpotent
endomorphism of V and preserves W , it is a nilpotent endomorphism of W . Thus, there exists
some 0 6= w ∈ W such that Y (w) = 0.
41
What is Engel’s theorem really saying? Here are two important corollaries of his theorem.
Exercise 7.10. Let n be a Lie algebra such that n/z(n) is nilpotent. Show that n is nilpotent.
Corollary 7.11. Let n be a finite dimensional Lie algebra. If every element in n is ad-nilpotent,
then n is nilpotent.
Proof. We may consider l := ad(n) ⊂ gl(n). Our hypothesis says that l consists of nilpotent
endomorphisms. Therefore, by Theorem 7.9, there exists 0 6= m ∈ n such that [n, m] = 0 i.e.
z(n) 6= 0. If n consists of ad-nilpotent elements, then clearly n/z(n) does too. Hence, by induction,
we may assume that n/z(n) is a nilpotent Lie algebra. Then the corollary follows from exercise
7.10.
Recall that n(n, k) denotes the Lie subalgebra of gl(n, k) consisting of all strictly upper-
triangular matrices. In order to concretely understand the meaning of Engel’s Theorem we intro-
duce the notion of flags in V . A flag V q in V is a collection
0 = V0 ( V1 ( V2 ( · · · ( Vk ⊂ V
of nested subspaces of V . We say that the flag V q is complete if dim Vi /Vi−1 = 1 i.e. it’s not
possible to insert any more subspaces into the flag. If one fixes a basis {e1 , . . . , en } of V then the
standard complete flag is V q , where Vi = Span{e1 , . . . , ei }. The following lemma is clear.
1. The endomorphism X ∈ gl(n, C) belongs to n(n, C) if and only if X(Vi ) ⊂ Vi−1 for all i.
2. The endomorphism X ∈ gl(n, C) belongs to b(n, C) if and only if X(Vi ) ⊂ Vi for all i.
Notice that every complete flag in V is the standard complete flag of V with respect to some
basis of V .
Corollary 7.13. Let l be a subalgebra of gl(V ), for some finite dimensional vector space V . If
l consists of nilpotent endomorphisms then there exists a basis of V such that l ⊂ n(n, k); where
n = dim V .
Proof. By Lemma 7.12, it suffices to show that there exists a complete flag V q of V such that
X(Vi ) ⊂ Vi−1 for all X ∈ l. Let v be as in Theorem 7.9 and set V1 = C{v} ⊂ V . Then l acts on
V /V1 , again by nilpotent endomorphisms, hence by induction, there is a complete flag V q = (0 ⊂
V 1 ⊂ · · · ⊂ V n−1 = V /V1 ) in V /V1 such that l(V i ) ⊂ V i−1 for all i. Let Vi := {v ∈ V | v ∈ V i−1 },
for i = 2, . . . , n. Then l(Vi ) ⊂ Vi−1 as required.
42
You may think, based on Corollaries 7.11 and 7.13, that if l is a nilpotent subalgebra of gl(V ),
then one can always find a basis of V such that l ⊂ n(n, C). But this is not the case. Consider
for instance the subalgebra h of gl(n, C) consisting of all diagonal matrices. This is abelian and
hence nilpotent. It is not possible to change the basis of Cn such that this algebra sits in n(n, C).
The point here is that even though h is nilpotent, the element in h are not nilpotent matrices.
Theorem 7.14. Let V be a finite dimensional k-vector space and s a solvable subalgebra of gl(V ).
If V 6= 0 then there exists a common eigenvector for all endomorphisms in s.
We should first say what it actually means for s to have a common eigenvector. This means
that there exists 0 6= v in V and scalars αX for every X ∈ s such that X(v) = αX v.
Proof. The structure of the proof of Lie’s Theorem is identical to the proof of Engel’s Theorem,
but the justification of each step is slightly different.
The proof is again by induction on dim s. If dim s = 1 then the claim is trivial. Therefore we
assume that dim s > 1. Since s is assumed to be solvable [s, s] is a proper ideal of s; or is zero. In
either case, the Lie algebra s/[s, s] is abelian and hence every subspace of this Lie algebra is an
ideal. Take a subspace of codimension one and let n denote its pre-image in s. Then n is an ideal
in s of codimension one. By induction, there exists a joint eigenvector 0 6= v ∈ V for n i.e. there
is some linear function λ : n → C such that X(v) = λ(X)v for all X ∈ n.
Consider the subspace W = {w ∈ V | X(w) = λ(X)w ∀ X ∈ n} of V . We’ve shown that it’s
non-zero. Lemma 7.15 below says that W is a s-submodule of V . If we choose some Y ∈ s r n (
so that s = C · Y ⊕ n as a vector space), then Y (W ) ⊂ W . Hence there exists some 0 6= w ∈ W
that is an eigenvector for Y ; this w is an eigenvector for all elements in s.
43
Proof. Let w ∈ W be non-zero. To show that Y (w) belongs to W , we need to show that
X(Y (w)) = λ(X)Y (w) for all X ∈ n. We have
where we have used the fact that [X, Y ] ∈ n because n is an ideal. Therefore we need to show
that λ([X, Y ]) = 0 i.e. λ([s, n]) = 0.
The proof of this fact is a very clever trick using the trace of an endomorphism. Let U be the
subspace of V spanned by all w, Y (w), Y 2 (w), . . . . Clearly, Y (U ) ⊂ U . We claim that U is also a
n-submodule of V i.e. X(U ) ⊂ U for all X ∈ n. Certainly X(w) = λ(X)w ∈ U and equation (16)
implies that X(Y (w)) ∈ U . So we assume by induction that X(Y k (w)) ∈ U for all k < n. Then,
Since X, [X, Y ] ∈ n, X(Y n−1 (w)) and [X, Y ](Y n−1 (w)) belong to U . Thus, X(Y n (w)) also belongs
to U . In fact the above argument shows inductively that X(Y n (w)) = λ(X)Y n (W )+ terms
involving only Y k (w) for k < n. Thus, there is a basis of U such that X is upper-triangular
with λ(X) on the diagonals. In particular, Tr(X|U ) = λ(X) dim U . This applies to [X, Y ] too,
Tr([X, Y ]|U ) = λ([X, Y ]) dim U . But the trace of the commutator of two endomorphisms is zero.
Hence1 λ([X, Y ]) = 0.
Notice that the proof of Lemma 7.15 shows that if V is a one-dimensional s-module, then
[s, s] · V = 0.
Again, just as in corollary 7.13, Lie’s Theorem, together with Lemma 7.12, immediately implies:
Corollary 7.16. Let V be a finite dimensional k-vector space and s a solvable subalgebra of gl(V ).
Then, there exists a basis of V such that s is a subalgebra of b(n, k) i.e. we can simultaneously
put every element of s in upper triangular form.
The proof of corollary 7.16 is essentially the same as the proof of corollary 7.13.
Corollary 7.17. Let s ⊂ gl(V ) be a solvable Lie algebra. Then [s, s] consists of nilpotent endo-
morphisms in gl(V ). In particular, [s, s] is a nilpotent Lie algebra.
1
Notice that we are using here the fact that the characteristic of our field is zero. The lemma is false in positive
characteristic (as is Lie’s Theorem).
44
Proof. By Corollary 7.16, we may assume that s ⊂ b(n, C). Then, [s, s] ⊂ [b(n, C), b(n, C)] =
n(n, C). Hence [s, s] consists of nilpotent endomorphisms of V . The second statement then follows
from Corollary 7.11 of Engel’s Theorem.
Definition 7.18. The Killing form on g is the bilinear form κ : g × g → C defined by κ(X, Y ) =
Tr(ad(X) ◦ ad(Y )).
Since Tr(AB) = Tr(BA) for any two square matrices, the Killing form is symmetric i.e.
κ(X, Y ) = κ(Y, X).
Exercise 7.19. Let g = sl(2, C) with the usual basis {E, F, H}.
1. Calculate explicitly the adjoint representation of g in terms of the basis {E, F, H}.
Exercise 7.20. A bilinear form β on g is said to be associative if β([X, Y ], Z) = β(X, [Y, Z]) for
all X, Y, Z ∈ g. Show that the Killing form is associative.
The following key (but difficult) result shows that the Killing form can be used to tell if a
given Lie algebra is solvable or not.
Theorem 7.21 (Cartan’s criterion). Let V be a finite dimensional vector space and g ⊂ gl(V ) a
Lie algebra. If Tr(X, Y ) = 0 for all X, Y ∈ g then g is solvable.
Corollary 7.24. Let g be a finite dimensional Lie algebra. Then g is semi-simple if and only if
its Killing form κ is non-degenerate.
45
Proof. Let S be the radical of the Killing form κ.
First we assume that the solvable radical rad g of g is zero. Since κ(S, S) = 0, Cartan’s criterion
together with exercise 8.12 implies that S is a solvable Lie algebra. But S is also an ideal in g.
Hence it is contained in the solvable radical of g. Thus, it is zero.
Conversely, assume that S = 0. Since every solvable ideal of g contains a non-zero abelian
ideal, it suffices to show that every abelian ideal l of g is contained in S. Let l be one such ideal.
Let x ∈ l and y ∈ g. Then (ad x) ◦ (ad y) is a map g → g → l, and hence (ad x ◦ ad y)2 maps g to
zero. Hence ad x ◦ ad y is a nilpotent endomorphism. This implies that
κ(x, y) = Tr(ad x ◦ ad y) = 0,
Thus, there must exists a unique i such that [gi , h] = h. But since gi is also simple and [gi , h] 6= 0,
this implies that [gi , h] = gi .
In the proof of Theorem 7.25, we have shown that if g is semi-simple then g = [g, g].
46
7.5 Levi’s Theorem and Ado’s Theorem
In this final section we state, without proof, two further important structure theorems about Lie
algebras.
Theorem 7.26 (Levi). Let g be a finite dimensional Lie algebra and r its radical. Then there
exists a semi-simple subalgebra l of g such that g = r ⊕ l as an l-module.
Most of the example of Lie algebras we will encounter in the course are subalgebras of gl(V )
for some finite dimensional vector space V . Ado’s Theorem says that this is not a coincidence.
Theorem 7.27 (Ado). Every finite dimensional Lie algebra admits a faithful, finite dimensional
representation.
That is, given any g, we can always find some finite dimensional vector space V such that g is
a subalgebra of gl(V ).
47
8 Complete reducibility
In this section, we state and prove Weyl’s complete reducibility theorem for semi-simple Lie
algebras.
Theorem 8.2. Let g be a simple Lie algebra. Then, every finite dimensional representation of g
is completely reducible.
Remark 8.3. The decomposition of a completely reducible g-module need not be unique. For
instance, consider the extreme example where g = 0 so that a g-module is just a vector space. Any
such module is always completely reducible: this is just the statement that any finite dimensional
vector space can be expressed as the direct sum of one-dimensional subspaces. But there are many
ways to decompose a vector space into a direct sum of one-dimensional subspaces.
Weyl’s Theorem is a truly remarkable, and to me surprising, result. It is also very useful.
When g is not semi-simple, the statement of the theorem is simply not true. Also, even when
g is semi-simple, the assumption that V is finite dimensional is crucial. It is false for infinite
dimensional representations. It is very useful to rephrase the notion of complete reducibility in
terms of complements.
Lemma 8.4. A finite dimensional g-module V is completely reducible if and only if every submod-
ule W ⊂ V admits a complement i.e. there exists a submodule W 0 ⊂ V such that V = W ⊕ W 0 .
Proof. Assume first that every submodule of V admits a complement. In order to use induction on
dim V , let us show that submodules inherit this property i.e. if W ⊂ V is a submodule and U ⊂ W
another submodule then U admits a complement in W . We can certainly find a complement U 00
to U in V . We claim that U 0 := U 00 ∩ W is a complement to U in W . Being the intersection of two
submodules, it is a submodule, and U 0 ∩ U = {0}. So it suffices to show that U 0 + U = W . Let
w ∈ W . Then w = u + u00 , where u ∈ U and u00 ∈ U 00 . But u00 = w − u ∈ W since u, w ∈ W . Hence
u00 ∈ U 0 and U + U 0 = W . Therefore, it follows by induction on dim V , that if every submodule
of V admits a complement in V then V is completely reducible.
Now assume that V = V1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Vk for some simple submodules of V . Let W be an arbitrary
submodule. Notice that if V 0 is a simple submodule of V then either V 0 ⊕ W is a submodule of
V or V 0 ⊂ W - if V 0 6⊂ W then V 0 ∩ W is a proper submodule of V 0 hence V 0 ∩ W = 0 and
48
V 0 ⊕ W ⊂ V . Now, since V = V1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Vk , there must exist i1 such that Vi1 6⊂ W . Hence
Vi1 ⊕ W ⊂ V . If Vi ⊕ W ( V then again there is some i2 such that Vi2 ∩ (Vi1 ⊕ W ) = 0 i.e.
Vi2 ⊕ Vi1 ⊕ W ⊂ V . Continuing in this way, we eventually get
V = Vir ⊕ · · · ⊕ Vi1 ⊕ W
• If g = C{X} with the trivial bracket, the we can consider the two-dimensional g-module
V = C{e1 , e2 }, where X · e2 = e1 and X · e1 = 0. Then V1 = C{e1 } is a g-submodule of
V . Any complimentary subspace to V in V1 is of the form V2 = C{e2 + βe1 }. But then
X ·(e2 +βe1 ) = e1 means that none of these subspaces is a g-submodule. So no decomposition
V = V1 ⊕ V2 exists.
0 0 0 0 0 0
In order to prove Weyl’s Theorem, we will need the notion of the Casimir element in End(V ).
Let g be a semi-simple Lie algebra. Let β be some symmetric, non-degenerate associative bilinear
form on g. Then, if we fix a basis X1 , . . . , Xn of g, there exists a unique ”dual basis” Y1 , . . . , Yn of g
such that β(Xi , Yj ) = δi,j . A g-module V is said to be faithful if the action morphism ρ : g → gl(V )
is injective.
Lemma 8.5. Let g be a simple Lie algebra and V a g-module. Then either V is faithful or X ·v = 0
for all X ∈ g and v ∈ V .
Proof. Let ρ : g → gl(V ) be the action morphism. Then Ker ρ is an ideal in g. Since g is simple
it has no proper ideals. Therefore, either Ker ρ = {0} i.e. V is faithful, or Ker ρ = g i.e. X · v = 0
for all X ∈ g and v ∈ V .
49
Let V be a faithful g-module. Since each ρ(X), for X ∈ g, is an endomorphism of V , we can
define βV (X, Y ) = Tr(ρ(X)ρ(Y )). The fact that V is faithful implies, by Cartan’s Criterion, that
βV is non-degenerate. The Casimir of V is defined to be
n
X
ΩV = ρ(Xi )ρ(Yi ),
i=1
where the Xi and Yi are dual basis with respect to the form βV . The whole point of defining the
Casimir is:
Proof. First let X ∈ g and write [X, Xi ] = nj=1 ai,j Xj for some ai,j ∈ C. Similarly, [X, Yi ] =
P
Pn
j=1 bi,j Yj . Then,
n
X n
X
ai,j = ai,k βV (Xk , Yj ) = βV ([X, Xi ], Yj ) = −βV (Xi , [X, Yj ]) = −bj,k βV (Xi , Yk ) = −bj,i .
k=1 k=1
Now, using the fact that [XY, Z] = [X, Z]Y + X[Y, Z] in End(V ), we have
" n
#
X
[ΩV , ρ(X)] = ρ(Xi )ρ(Yi ), X
i=1
n
X
= [ρ(Xi ), ρ(X)]ρ(Yi ) + ρ(Xi )[ρ(Yi ), ρ(X)]
i=1
n
X
= ρ([Xi , X])ρ(Yi ) + ρ(Xi )ρ([Yi , X])
i=1
n
X
=− ai,j ρ(Xj )ρ(Yi ) + bi,j ρ(Xi )ρ(Yj ) = 0
i=1,j
Exercise 8.7. Let V be a finite dimensional complex vector space and X ∈ EndC (V ). Prove that
50
Vα , where Vα = {v ∈ V | (X − α)N · v = 0, for N 0.}.
L
V = α∈C
Lemma 8.4 implies that, in order to prove Weyl’s Theorem, it suffices to show that if V is a
g-module and W a submodule, then there exists a complementary g-submodule W 0 to W in V .
That is, V = W ⊕ W 0 as g-modules.
Exercise 8.8. Let g be a semi-simple Lie algebra and V = C · e a one-dimensional g-module. Show
that X · e = 0 for all X ∈ g. Hint: use the fact that g = [g, g].
We begin by proving Weyl’s Theorem in a special case. The general case reduces easily to this
special case.
Lemma 8.9. Let V be a g-module and W a submodule of codimension one. Then there exists a
one-dimensional complementary g-submodule W 0 to W in V .
Proof. Since each Vα is a g-module and Wα a submodule, the quotient is a g-module. We have
L
V /W = α∈C Vα /Wα . Since dim V /W = 1, there is exactly one α for which Vα 6= Wα . For this α,
dim Vα /Wα = 1. Now exercise 8.8 says that X · [v] = 0 for all X ∈ g and [v] ∈ Vα /Wα . Since ΩV is
expressed in terms of the ρ(X), ΩV acts as zero on the quotient. On the other hand, Ω acts with
generalized eigenvalue α on Vα /Wα . Hence α = 0. This completes the proof of the claim.
To complete the proof of the lemma, it suffices to show by induction that dim V0 < dim V
since W0 ⊂ V0 is a submodule of codimension one. But Lemma 8.6 says that Tr(ΩV ) = dim g 6= 0.
Hence there exists at least one α 6= 0 such that Vα 6= 0.
51
Finally, we are in a position to prove Weyl’s Theorem in complete generality. Thus, let V be a
g-module and W a proper submodule. Recall from exercise 6.12 that HomC (V, W ) is a g-module,
where
(X · f )(v) = X · f (v) − f (X · v), ∀ X ∈ g, v ∈ V, f ∈ HomC (V, W ). (17)
Define
U = {f ∈ HomC (V, W ) | f |W = λIdW for some λ ∈ C.}
and U 0 = {f ∈ HomC (V, W ) | f |W = IdW }. Then it is an easy exercise, left to the reader, that
U 0 and U are g-submodules of HomC (V, W ). There is a natural map U → HomC (W, W ) given by
f 7→ f |W − IdW . Clearly the image is a one-dimensional subspace of HomC (W, W ); this is actually
a homomorphism of g-modules. Moreover, the kernel is precisely U 0 . Thus, U 0 has codimension
one in U . Lemma 8.9 says that there is a complementary one-dimensional submodule U 00 to U 0 in
U . Choose 0 6= φ ∈ U 00 . Then φ|W = IdW .
Claim 8.11. The map φ is a homomorphism of g-modules.
Proof. Since U 00 is one-dimensional, X · φ = 0 for all X ∈ g. Equation (17) implies that this means
that φ is a homomorphism of g-modules.
The fact that φ|W = IdW means that φ is a surjective map. The kernel Ker φ is the comple-
mentary g-submodule to W in V .
Exercise 8.12. Let g = C{x, y} with [x, y] = y be the unique non-abelian solvable 2-dimensional
Lie algebra. Show that the adjoint representation of g is not completely reducible.
Theorem 8.14. Let g be a semi-simple Lie algebra. Then, every finite dimensional representation
of g is completely reducible.
Proof. Recall from Theorem 7.25 that g = g1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ gk , where each gi is simple. We prove the
claim by induction on k. The case k = 1 is Theorem 8.2.
52
Write g = g1 ⊕ m, where m = g2 ⊕ · · · ⊕ gk . We may assume that every finite dimensional
m-module is completely reducible. Since g1 is simple, V = V1n1 ⊕· · ·⊕Vrnr , where the Vi are simple,
pairwise non-isomorphic g1 -modules. We define a map Homg1 (Vi , V ) ⊗ Vi → V by (φ, v) 7→ φ(v).
By exercise 8.13, Homg1 (Vi , V ) is a m-module. Hence Homg1 (Vi , V ) ⊗ Vi is a g-module. Then the
map Homg1 (Vi , V ) ⊗ Vi → V is a homomorphism of g-modules. This extends to an isomorphism
of g-modules
∼
(Homg1 (V1 , V ) ⊗ V1 ) ⊕ · · · ⊕ (Homg1 (Vr , V ) ⊗ Vr ) −→ V.
Since each Homg1 (Vi , V ) is a completely reducible m-module, we can decompose each Homg1 (Vi , V )⊗
Vi into a direct sum of simple g-modules.
Exercise 8.15. In the proof of Theorem 8.14, show that the map Homg1 (Vi , V ) ⊗ Vi → V is a
homomorphism of g-modules. Show that (Homg1 (V1 , V ) ⊗ V1 ) ⊕ · · · ⊕ (Homg1 (Vr , V ) ⊗ Vr ) → V is
an isomorphism.
53
9 Cartan subalgebras and Dynkin diagrams
In this section we begin on the classification of simple, complex Lie algebras. Throughout, g will
be a simple Lie algebra over C.
Now let g be a finite dimensional Lie algebra. We say that X ∈ g is semi-simple, resp. nilpotent,
if ad(X) ∈ End(g) is semi-simple, resp. is nilpotent.
Proof. Let X ∈ h. We need to show that adh (X) = 0. Since adg (X) is semi-simple and adg (h) ⊂ h,
adh (X) is also semi-simple. So it suffices to show that adh (X) has no non-zero eigenvalues i.e. if
Y ∈ h r {0} such that ad(X)(Y ) = aY , then a = 0. Assume that a 6= 0.
Since Y ∈ h too, we may diagonalize ad(Y ). That is, there exists a basis X1 , . . . , Xn of h and
αi ∈ C such that ad(Y )(Xi ) = αi Xi . We may assume that X1 = Y and hence α1 = 0. Therefore,
there exist unique ui ∈ C such that X = u1 Y + u2 X2 + · · · un Xn . But then,
In particular, Lemma 9.3 implies that every Cartan subalgebra of g is abelian. For any subal-
gebra m of g, we denote by Ng (m) the normalizer {X ∈ g | [X, m] ⊂ m} of m in g.
54
Exercise 9.4. Show that the normalizer Ng (m) of a subalgebra m is itself a subalgebra of g.
Moreover, show that Ng (m) = g if and only if m is an ideal in g.
A key property of Cartan subalgebras is that they equal their normalizers i.e. if X ∈ g such
that [X, h] ⊂ h, then X ∈ h.
Since each element h in h is semi-simple, g will decompose into a direct sum of eigenspaces
L
g = α gα , where [h, X] = αX for all X ∈ gα . In fact, since h is abelian, we can simultaneously
decompose g into eigenspaces for all h ∈ h. This means that
M
g = g0 ⊕ gα
α∈h∗ r{0}
where gα = {X ∈ g | [h, X] = α(h)X, ∀h ∈ h}. Since g is finite dimensional, there are only
finitely many α ∈ h∗ r {0} such that gα 6= 0. This set R ⊂ h∗ is called the set of roots of g. Since
h is abelian, h ⊂ g0 ; this is actually an equality g0 = h by Proposition 9.5.
Corollary 9.6. Let h be a Cartan subalgebra of g and α, β ∈ R ∪ {0}. The Killing form defines
a non-degenerate pairing between gα and g−α , and κ(gα , gβ ) = 0 if α + β 6= 0. In particular, κ|h
is non-degenerate.
55
Lemma 9.7. Let R be the roots of g with respect to h.
1. If α ∈ R then −α ∈ R.
Proof. Part (1) is a direct consequence of Corollary 9.6. If R does not span h∗ then there exists
some h ∈ h such that α(h) = 0 for all α ∈ R (this follows from the fact that if U ⊆ h∗ is a subspace
then dim U + dim U ⊥ = dim h, where U ⊥ = {h ∈ h | u(h) = 0, ∀u ∈ U }). But this means that
[h, gα ] = 0 for all α. Since [h, h] = 0 too, this implies that [h, g] = 0 i.e. h belongs to the centre
z(g) of g. But g is semi-simple so ζ(g) = 0.
The following proposition tells us that every semi-simple g is ”built up” from a collection of
copies of sl(2, C) that interact in some complex way.
1. There exist elements Eα in gα and Fα in g−α such that Eα , Fα and Hα := [Eα , Fα ] span a
copy sα of sl(2, C) in g.
2tα
2. Hα = κ(tα ,tα )
, where tα was defined above.
Since [X, Y ] − κ(X, Y )tα belongs to h and κ|h is non-degenerate, it suffices to show that κ([X, Y ] −
κ(X, Y )tα , h) = 0 for all h ∈ h. But
Hence
κ([X, Y ] − κ(X, Y )tα , h) = κ(tα , h)κ(X, Y ) − κ(tα , h)κ(X, Y ) = 0,
as required.
Claim 9.9. κ(tα , tα ) = α(tα ) is non-zero.
Proof. Assume otherwise, then [tα , X] = [tα , Y ] = 0 for all X ∈ gα and Y ∈ g−α . By Corollary
9.6 we can choose X, Y such that κ(X, Y ) = 1. Then s = C{X, Y, tα } ' adg (s) is a solvable
subalgebra of g. By Corollary 7.17, this implies that C adg (tα ) = [adg (s), adg (s)] consists of
56
nilpotent endomorphisms. That is, adg (tα ) is nilpotent. Since tα ∈ h, adg (tα ) is also semi-simple
i.e. tα = 0. This is a contradiction. Hence α(tα ) 6= 0. This completes the proof of the claim.
Now choose any 0 6= Eα ∈ gα and find Fα ∈ g−α such that κ(Eα , Fα ) = κ(tα2,tα ) . Set Hα =
2tα
κ(tα ,tα )
. Then the fact that [X, Y ] = κ(X, Y )tα implies that {Eα , Fα , Hα } is an sl2 -triple.
Corollary 9.10. For each α ∈ R, we have dim gα = 1 and ±α are the only multiplies of α in R.
Proof. We will consider the decomposition of g as a sα -module. We already know what the simple
sα -modules look like; they are the V (n) described in section 6.6.
Let M be the space spanned by all gcα , where c ∈ C, and h. Then M is a sα -submodule of g.
The classification of simple sl(2, C)-modules, together with Weyl’s complete reducibility theorem
implies that the weights of Hα on M are all integers; if cα ∈ R then cα(Hα ) = 2c ∈ Z. Now
h = Ker α ⊕ CHα . This implies that Ker α is a sα -submodule on which it acts trivially. Thus, we
can decompose M = sα ⊕ Ker α ⊕ M 0 for some sα -submodule M 0 . Notice that M0 = h, so M00 = 0
i.e. all the Hα weights in M 0 are odd. This implies already that dim gα = 1. Also, we see that 2α
cannot be a root in R i.e. for any root in R, twice that root is never a root. Now if 21 α were a
root then 2 21 α = α cannot possibly be a root. So actually 21 α isn’t a root either. One can deduce
from this that ±α are the only multiplies of α in R.
Finally, we turn to asking how sα acts on those weight spaces gβ for β 6= ±α. By studying this
action, we will deduce:
Proof. The space gβ will be part of some simple sα -module V (n) say. Since Eα · gβ ⊂ gβ+α and
Fα · gβ ⊂ gβ−α , there will be some r, s ≥ 0 such that V (n) = gβ+rs ⊕ · · · ⊕ gβ−sα . Notice that all the
weights β + rα, β + (r − 1)α, . . . , β − sα are roots in R. Moreover, the fact that dim gβ = 1 implies
that if β +tα ∈ R then r ≥ t ≥ −s (otherwise consider the sα -module generated by gβ+tα ). We call
β +rα, β +(r −1)α, . . . , β −sα the α-string through β. In this case n = (β +rα)(Hα ) = β(Hα )+2r.
Now, as a subspace of V (n), gβ = V (n)k , where k = β(Hα ). Thus, β(Hα ) ∈ Z. Moreover, V (n)−k
will also be a non-zero weight space gγ for some γ ∈ R. What’s this γ? Well, it must be in the
α-string through β so γ = β + qα for some q and γ(Hα ) = −β(Hα ). Since α(Hα ) = 2, we see that
γ = β − β(Hα )α.
Recall that we have used the Killing form to identify h∗ with h, α ↔ tα . Therefore we can
define a non-degenerate symmetric bilinear form (−, −) on h∗ by (α, β) = κ(tα , tβ ). Notice that
57
(α, α) = κ(tα , tα ). Then, Lemma 9.11 says
2(β, α) 2(β, α)
∈ Z, β− α ∈ R, ∀ α, β ∈ R.
(α, α) (α, α)
{M ∈ gl(n, R) | M T M = Id}.
1. s(α) = −α,
2. For all x ∈ E,
2(x, α)
s(x) = x − α.
(α, α)
58
Exercise 9.14. Let M be an orthogonal transformation of E, with dim E = 2. Fixing an orthonor-
mal basis of E, show that there is a unique θ ∈ [0, 2π) such that
! !
cos θ − sin θ cos θ sin θ
M= , or M = .
sin θ cos θ sin θ − cos θ
Deduce that every orthogonal transformation of E is either a rotation or reflection. How can one
easily distinguish the two cases?
4. If α, β ∈ R then
2(α, β)
hβ, αi :=
(α, α)
belongs to Z.
Of course, this definition is chosen precisely so that Lemma 9.7, Corollary 9.10 and Lemma
9.11 imply that:
Proposition 9.16. Let g be a semi-simple Lie algebra and h a Cartan subalgebra. The decom-
position of g into h weight spaces defines a root system R, in the abstract sense of Definition
9.15.
Exercise 9.17. Let α 6= ±β ∈ R, for some root system R. Show that sα sβ is a rotation of E. Hint:
decompose E = R{α, β} ⊕ Hα ∩ Hβ and consider sα sβ acting on R{α, β}. Use exercise 9.14.
2(β, α) ||β||
hβ, αi = =2 cos θ,
(α, α) ||α||
59
A1 × A1 β A2 β
α α
and hence hβ, αihα, βi = 4 cos2 θ. If α, β ∈ R, then the fourth axiom implies that 4 cos2 θ is a
positive integer. Since 0 ≤ cos2 θ ≤ 1, we have 0 ≤ hβ, αihα, βi ≤ 4. Hence the only possible
values of hα, βi are:
hβ, αi hα, βi θ
π
0 0 2
π
1 1 3
2π
−1 −1 3
1 2 ?
3π
(19)
−1 −2 4
π
1 3 6
−1 −3 ??
1 4 0
−1 −4 π
What about hβ, αi = hα, βi = ±2?
Exercise 9.18. What are the angles θ in (?) and (??)?
From this, it is possible to describe the rank two root systems.
Exercise 9.19. Write out all the roots in R(B2 ) as linear combinations of the roots α and β.
Proof. By axiom (3) of a root system every sα maps the finite set R into itself. Therefore, there
is a group homomorphism W → SN , where N = |R|. This map is injective: if w ∈ W such that
60
B2 G2
β
β
α α
its action on R is trivial then, in particular, w fixes a basis of E. Hence w acts trivially on E i.e.
w = 1.
Pn+1 n+1
Pn+1
Exercise 9.21. Let E = {x = i=1 xi i ∈ R | i=1 xi = 0}, where {1 , . . . , n+1 } is the
n+1
standard basis of R with (i , j ) = δi,j . Let R = {i − j | 1 ≤ i 6= j ≤ n + 1}.
3. By considering the action of the reflections si −j on the basis {1 , . . . , n+1 } of Rn+1 , show
that the Weyl group of R is isomorphic to Sn+1 .
Definition 9.22. Let R be a root system. A set of simple roots for R is a subset ∆ ⊂ R such
that
1. ∆ is a basis of E.
P
2. Each β ∈ R can be written as β = α∈∆ mα α, where all mα are positive integers, or all are
negative integers.
61
The problem with the above definition is that it’s not at all clear that a given root system
contains a set of simple roots. However, one can show:
3. For any two sets of simple roots ∆, ∆0 , there exists a w ∈ W such that w(∆) = ∆0 .
In fact the Weyl group W acts simply transitively on the collections of all sets of simple roots.
The construction of all ∆’s is quite easy, the difficulty is in showing that the sets constructed are
indeed sets of simple roots and that the properties of Theorem 9.23 are satisfied. Recall that Hα
S
denotes the hyperplane in E perpendicular to α. The open subset E r α∈R Hα is a union of
connected components. The components are called the Weyl chambers of R. If P is one of these
chambers then choose some γ ∈ P . Notice that (γ, α) 6= 0 for all α ∈ R. We define R(γ)+ to
be all α such that (γ, α) > 0 and R(γ)− similarly, so that R = R(γ)+ t R(γ)− . The sets R(γ)±
are independent of the choice of γ. Then we say that α ∈ R(γ)+ is decomposable if there exist
β1 , β2 ∈ R(γ)+ such that α = β1 + β2 . Otherwise α is said to be indecomposable. The set of all
indecomposable roots in R(γ)+ is denoted ∆(γ). Then, ∆(γ) is a set of simple roots in R and
the construction we have described is in fact a bijection between the Weyl chambers of R and the
collection of sets of simple roots. In particular, the Weyl group acts simply transitively on the set
of Weyl chambers.
Example 9.24. The root system of type G2 has 12 Weyl chambers. This implies that the Weyl
group has order 12. On the other hand, the picture in figure 9.24 shows that the group generated
by the reflections sα and sβ is the set of symmetries either hexagon. This group (which must be
contained in the Weyl group) has order 12 too, thus W (G2 ) equals the group of symmetries of the
hexagon. It is called the dihedral group of order 12.
Exercise 9.25. How many Weyl chambers are there for the root system of type B2 ? For each
chamber describe the corresponding set of simple roots.
62
G2
needed to recover the Lie algebra g. It is this fact that allows us to completely classify the simple
Lie algebras.
We proceed as follows. Give a roots system R, fix a set of simple roots ∆ and order them:
∆ = {α1 , . . . , α` }. Then define the Cartan matrix of ∆ to be the ` × ` matrix whose (i, j)th entry
is hαi , αj i.
Example 9.26. The rank two root systems have Cartan matrix:
! ! ! !
2 0 2 −1 2 −2 2 −1
A1 × A1 ; A2 ; B2 ; G2 .
0 2 −1 2 −1 2 −3 2
The following proposition implies that a root system R is uniquely defined up to isomorphism
by its Cartan matrix.
Proof. Since ∆ and ∆0 define a basis of E and E 0 respectively, Φ extends uniquely to an isomor-
phism φ : E → E 0 . For each α ∈ ∆, φ ◦ sα ◦ φ−1 = sφ(α) since sα is uniquely defined by what it
does on ∆. By Theorem 9.23, W is generated by the reflections in ∆. Therefore φ ◦ W φ−1 = W 0 .
Theorem 9.23 also says that for each α ∈ R, there is some w ∈ W such that w(α) ∈ ∆. Therefore
φ(α) = φ(w)−1 (φ(w(α))) ∈ R0 i.e. φ(R) ⊂ R. Similarly, φ−1 (R0 ) ⊂ R. Thus, φ(R) = R0 .
63
Now given a Cartan matrix, define the Dynkin diagram of R to be the graph with ` vertices
labeled by the ` simples roots α1 , . . . , α` and with hαi , αj ihαj , αi i edges between vertex αi and αj .
Finally to encode whether a simple root is long or short, we decorate the double and triple edges
with an arrow pointing towards the shorter roots.
Example 9.28. The rank two root systems have Dynkin diagrams:
A1 × A1 ; A2 ; B2 ; G2 ;
Exercise 9.29. Calculate the Cartan matrix associated to the Dynkin diagram
F4
Exercise 9.30. What is the Dynkin diagram associated to the root system of exercise 9.21?
64
10 The classification of simple, complex Lie algebras
Based solely on the definition of root system and Cartan matrix, it is possible to completely classify
the possible Dynkin diagrams that can arise. The proof of the classification theorem involves only
elementary combinatorial arguments, but it is rather long and tedious.
Theorem 10.1. Let D be a connected Dynkin diagram. Then D belongs to the list:
An
Bn
Cn
Dn
G2
F4
E6
E7
E8
The Dynkin diagrams of type An , Bn , Cn and Dn correspond to the classical complex Lie
algebras sl(n + 1, C), so(2n + 1, C), sp(2n, C) and so(2n, C) respectively.
Of course one has to then show that the Dynkin diagrams of Theorem 10.1 do come from some
root system. This is done by explicitly constructing the root system in each case (for the classical
types one can do this just by choosing a Cartan subalgebra and explicitly decomposing the Lie
algebra with respect to the Cartan subalgebra).
65
10.1 Constructing Lie algebras from roots systems
Let R be a root system. Serre described how to construct a semi-simple Lie algebra from R such
that R is the root system of g. This is done by giving g in terms of generators and relations.
Let ∆ ⊂ R be a choice of simple roots, ∆ = {α1 , . . . , α` }. Then g will be generated by elements
H1 , . . . , H` , E1 , . . . , E` and F1 , . . . , F` . Now we need to give all nessecary relations amongst the
generators H1 , . . . , F` , in addition to the anti-symmetry and Jacobi relation that all Lie algebras
satisfy.
Theorem 10.2 (Serre). Let g be the complex Lie algebra generated by H1 , . . . , H` , E1 , . . . , E` and
F1 , . . . , F` and satisfying the relations
where In ∈ GL(n, C) is the identity matrix. Concretely, the symplectic Lie algebra sp(2n) is
defined to be the set of all A ∈ gl(2n, C) such that AT · Jn + Jn · A = 0. Let h ⊂ sp(2n) denote
the set of diagonal matrices.
66
(a) Check that dim h = n.
!
a b
(b) Writing A = , where a, b, c, d ∈ gl(n, C), show that A ∈ sp(2n) if and only if
c d
bT = b, cT = c and aT = −d. What is the dimension of sp(2n)?
(c) Using part (b), decompose sp(2n) into a direct sum of weight spaces for h. Deduce that h is
a Cartan subalgebra of sp(2n).
(d) (Harder) Using (c), write down the root system of sp(2n).
Theorem 10.6 says that if I’m given two Cartan subalgebras h and h0 of g then there exists
some g ∈ G such that h0 = Ad(g)(h). Thus, Ad(g) is an automorphism of g sending the h-weight
decomposition of g into the h0 -weight decomposition. This means that the isomorphism Ad(g) :
h → h0 (which is an isometry since the Killing form satisfies κ(Ad(g)(X), Ad(g)(Y )) = κ(X, Y ))
maps the root system R(h) bijectively onto R(h0 ). The second choice we made was a choice of
simple roots ∆ in R. We’ve seen in Theorem 9.23 that for any two ∆, ∆0 ⊂ R there is an element
w in the Weyl group W such that w(∆) = ∆0 . Thus, the worst that can happen is that the Dynkin
diagram of ∆ differs by an automorphism from the Dynkin diagram of ∆0 . Hence, up to Dynkin
automorphisms, the Dynkin diagram is uniquely defined by g.
Summarizing, the classification result says:
67
Theorem 10.7. A simple Lie algebra g is uniquely defined, up to isomorphism, by its Dynkin
diagram. Moreover, for each connected Dynkin diagram, there exists a simple Lie algebra with
that Dynkin diagram.
Hence, up to isomorphism, there are four infinite series (type An , Bn , Cn and Dn ) of simple Lie
algebras - these are the Lie algebras of classical type, and five exceptional Lie algebras (type G2 ,
F4 , E6 , E7 and E8 ).
68
11 Weyl’s character formula
We’ve seen in the previous two sections that the key to classifying semi-simple complex Lie algebras
is to chose a Cartan subalgebra h of g and decompose g, via the adjoint representation, as a h-
module. We can apply the same idea to g-modules i.e. given a g-module V , we can consider it
as a h-module and ask for its decomposition. First, we describe the classification of simple, finite
dimensional g-modules.
the subspace n+ is a nilpotent Lie subalgebra. The subalgebra n− is defined similarly, so that
g = n+ ⊕ h ⊕ n− . Since we have fixed a Cartan subalgebra h of g, every finite dimensional
g-module admits a weight space decomposition.
M
V = Vλ
λ∈h∗
the fact that V is simple implies that this subspace is the whole of V .
Lemma 11.2. Let V be a finite dimensional g-module. Then V contains a highest weight vector.
L
Proof. Let b+ = h α∈R+ gα = h ⊕ n+ . Then, since [h, n+ ] = n+ and n+ is nilpotent, b+ is a
solvable subalgebra of g. Lie’s Theorem implies that V contains a common eigenvector v for b+
i.e. there exists λ : b+ → C, a linear functional, such that X · v = λ(X)v for all X ∈ b+ . It suffices
to show that λ(X) = 0 for all X ∈ n+ . Let X ∈ gα ⊂ n+ . Then α 6= 0 implies that there exists
1
some H ∈ h such that α(H) 6= 0. This implies that α(H) [H, X] = X and hence [h, n+ ] = n+ . But
then
1 1
λ(X)v = X · v = λ(H)λ(X)v − λ(X)λ(H)v = 0.
α(H) α(H)
69
Hence λ(X) = 0, as required i.e. v is a highest weight vector.
If ∆ = {β1 , . . . , β` }, then by Proposition 9.8, there exist sl2 -triples {Ei , Fi , Hi } in g such that
Ei is a basis of gβi . Since the elements in ∆ are a basis of h∗ , the set {H1 , . . . , H` } is a basis of
h. The set of all λ ∈ h∗ such that λ(Hi ) ∈ Z, for all i, is denoted P . It is a Z-lattice in h∗ , and
is called the weight lattice of g. Let P + = {λ ∈ P | λ(Hi ) ∈ Z+ ∀ i}; elements of P + are called
dominant integral weights. Notice that
As an example, consider the simple Lie algebra g(B3 ) of type B3 . If E is the three dimensional
real vector space with basis 1 , 2 , 3 then {β1 = 1 − 2 , β2 = 2 − 3 , β3 = 3 } is a set of simple
roots and R = {±i , ±(i ± j ) | 1 ≤ i 6= j ≤ 3} is the set of all roots.
Exercise 11.3. Describe the set of positive roots with respect to {β1 , β2 , β3 }. What is the dimension
of g(B3 )?
A weight λ = λ1 1 +λ2 2 +λ3 3 will be dominant integral if and only if hλ, β1 i = λ1 −λ2 , hλ, β2 i =
λ2 − λ3 , and hλ, β3 i = 2λ3 are all positive integers i.e. λ1 − λ2 , λ2 − λ3 , 2λ3 ∈ Z≥0 . The Weyl group
W of type B3 is generated by the three reflections
0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
sβ1 = 1 0 0 , sβ2 = 1 0 0 , sβ3 = 1 0 0 .
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1
It has 3!23 = 48 elements. The 3! comes from the fact that sβ1 and sβ2 generate a subgroup
isomorphic to S3 .
In the example of R = {i − j | 1 ≤ i 6= j ≤ n + 1}, the root system of type An , an element
λ1 (1 − 2 ) + · · · + λn (n − n+1 ) belongs to P + if and only if 2λi − λi−1 − λi+1 ∈ Z≥0 for all i.
Exercise 11.5. Prove Lemma 11.4. Hint: first check that the lemma holds for sl2 -modules. Next,
note that it suffices to check for each i = 1, . . . , ` that Vµ 6= 0 implies µ(Hi ) ∈ Z and for (2) that
λ(Hi ) ≥ 0. Deduce this from the sl2 case.
A g-module M is called highest weight if it is generated by some highest weight vector m ∈ Mλ .
70
11.2 Verma modules
Next we will define certain ”universal” highest weight modules. These are called Verma modules.
Let Y1 , . . . , YN be a weight basis of n− . Since n− is nilpotent, we may order the Yi so that
[Yi , Yj ] ∈ C{Yk | k > i} for all i ≤ j. Choose some λ ∈ h∗ and let C{vλ } be the one-dimensional
b+ -module such that n+ · vλ = 0 and H · vλ = λ(H)vλ for all H ∈ h. Let ∆(λ) be the (infinite
dimensional!) vector space with basis given by Yi1 Yi2 · · · Yik vλ , where (i1 ≤ i2 ≤ · · · ≤ ik ) is a
k-tuple of element from {1, . . . , N }. We say that the length of the basis element Yi1 Yi2 · · · Yik vλ is
k.
Proof. The proof is by induction on the length of the basis element. The only element of length
zero is vλ . We define n+ · vλ = 0, H · vλ = λ(H)vλ and Yi · vλ = Yi vλ . Now we assume that
we’ve defined the action of g on all basis elements of length less than k. First we consider
∆(λ) as a module over n− i.e. over the Yi . We’d like to define this in the most stupid way:
Yi · (Yi1 Yi2 · · · Yik vλ ) = Yi Yi1 Yi2 · · · Yik vλ . But if i > i1 , this won’t be a basis element because the
subscripts i, i1 , . . . have to be ordered. So we set
(
Yi Yi1 Yi2 · · · Yik vλ if i ≤ i1
Yi · (Yi1 Yi2 · · · Yik vλ ) =
Yi1 · (Yi · (Yi2 · · · Yik vλ )) + [Yi , Yi1 ] · (Yi2 · · · Yik vλ ) if i > i1 .
Using the fact that we have ordered the Yi so that [Yi , Yj ] ∈ C{Yk | k > i} for all i ≤ j, show that
the above rule makes ∆(λ) into a n− -module. The action of b+ is easier to define:
It is a direct check to see that the above rules do indeed make ∆(λ) into a g-module. This check
is not so obvious since one really needs to check that all the relations of Theorem 10.2 hold.
Each of the basis elements Yi1 Yi2 · · · Yik vλ is a weight vector with weight −αi1 − · · · − αik , where
Yi ∈ g−αi and αi ∈ R+ . Here is the key fact about Verma modules that we need.
Lemma 11.7. Let λ ∈ h∗ . The Verma module ∆(λ) has a unique simple quotient V (λ) i.e. if
∆(λ) V and ∆(λ) V 0 for some simple g-modules V and V 0 then V ' V 0 .
Proof. Let’s call the maps ∆(λ) V and ∆(λ) V 0 , φ and φ0 respectively. First, we claim
that φ(vλ ) is a highest weight vector in V , that generates V as a g-module, and similarly for
φ0 (vλ ) ∈ V 0 .
71
Since φ is surjective, V is spanned by φ(Yi1 Yi2 · · · Yik vλ ). But notice that our rule for the
g-action on ∆(λ) means that Yi1 Yi2 · · · Yik vλ = Yi1 · (Yi2 · (· · · (Yik · vλ ) · · · ) and hence
Thus, φ(vλ ) generates V . If X ∈ b+ then X · φ(vλ ) = φ(X · vλ ), so it is clear that φ(vλ ) is also a
highest weight vector.
Let M = M 0 ⊂∆(λ) M 0 be the sum of all g-submodules of ∆(λ) such that M 0 ∩ ∆(λ)λ = 0
P
(equivalently, the λ weight space Mλ0 of M 0 is zero). Then M is a g-submodule of ∆(λ) such that
Mλ = 0 i.e. it is a proper submodule. To show that V and V 0 are isomorphic, it suffices to show
that Ker φ = Ker φ0 = M . Since φ(vλ ) 6= 0 and the λ-weight space of ∆(λ) is spanned by vλ , φ
∼
restricts to an isomorphism ∆(λ)λ −→ Vλ . Thus, Ker φ ∩ ∆(λ)λ = 0 and hence Ker φ ⊂ M . This
means that the non-zero g-module ∆(λ)/M is a quotient of V = ∆(λ)/ Ker φ. But V is simple.
Hence ∆(λ)/M = V and M = Ker φ. The same argument applies to φ0 .
Exercise 11.8. Let V be a finite dimensional g-module with highest weight vector v of weight
λ ∈ P + . Show that vλ 7→ v extends uniquely to a g-module homomorphism ∆(λ) → V . This
explains why ∆(λ) is the universal highest weight module with weight λ. Hint: read carefully
through the proof of Lemma 11.7.
Proof. By Lemma 11.2, there exists at least one highest weight vector, v say, in V . If λ is the weight
of v then we have shown that λ ∈ P + . By exercise 11.8, there exists a non-zero homomorphism
∆(λ) → V , vλ 7→ v. But then Lemma 11.7 says that V ' V (λ) as required.
Now take λ, µ ∈ h∗ , λ 6= µ. Since isomorphisms will map highest weight vectors to highest
weight vectors, it suffices to show that V (λ) does not contain a highest weight vector of weight
µ. We know that V (λ) is a quotient of ∆(λ) and all non-zero weight spaces in ∆(λ) have weight
72
λ−αi1 −· · ·−αik for some αi ∈ R+ . Since V (λ) is a quotient of ∆(λ), the same applies to it. There
are two cases to consider: the first is where there exist i1 , . . . , ik such that λ − µ = αi1 + · · · + αik
and the second, when we can’t find any such αi . In the second case, there can’t be any highest
weight in V (λ) of weight µ so there’s nothing to show.
So we assume λ − µ = αi1 + · · · + αik and there is some v ∈ V (λ) of weight µ. Then, by exercise
11.8, there is a non-zero map ∆(µ) → V (λ), vµ 7→ v. It is surjective. Hence the weights of V (λ)
must also be of the form µ − αj1 − · · · − αjl for some j’s. In particular λ = µ − αj1 − · · · − αjl and
hence
αi1 + · · · + αik = −αj1 − · · · − αjl . (20)
But recall that we have fixed simple roots β1 , . . . , β` . This means that every α ∈ R+ can be written
as α = `i=1 ni βi for some positive integers ni . Moreover, {β1 , . . . , β` } are a basis of h∗ so such an
P
expression is unique. This means that αi1 + · · · + αik can also be uniquely written as `i=1 ni βi
P
for some positive integers ni . But it also means that −αj1 − · · · − αjl can be uniquely written as
P`
i=1 −mi βi for some positive integers mi . Thus, equation 20 implies that λ = µ, contradicting
our initial assumptions.
In fact, it is not so difficult to show (see e.g. [8, Theorem 22.2]) that V (λ) is finite dimensional
for all λ ∈ P + . Thus, λ 7→ V (λ) defines a bijection
∼
P + −→ { Isomorphism classes of simple, f.d. g-modules.}.
73
then we extend this rule by linearity to all expressions. Now given V , define
X
Ch(V ) = (dim Vλ )eλ .
λ∈P
Define ρ = 12 α∈R+ α; ρ is called the half sum of positive roots. In the example of B3 , considered
P
in the previous section, ρ = 52 1 + 32 2 + 21 3 . Finally, we need one extra ingredient in order to give
Weyl’s formula. Recall that we can define the sign function on permutations in the symmetric
group; a permutation is even if and only if it can be written as a product of an even number of
transpositions. This generalizes to an arbitrary Weyl group. Fix a set of simple roots ∆ and recall
from Theorem 9.23 that W is generated by the set {sα | α ∈ ∆}. We define the length `(σ) of
σ ∈ W to be the length of σ, written as a minimal product of elements from {sα | α ∈ ∆}. Then
sgn(σ) := (−1)`(σ) , generalizing the sign function on symmetric groups.
Theorem 11.10 (Weyl). Let V (λ) be the simple g-module with highest weight λ ∈ P + . Then
w(λ+ρ)
P
w∈W sgn(w)e
Ch V (λ) = P w(ρ)
.
w∈W sgn(w)e
To illustrate how to use Weyl’s character formula, we’ll consider the simple Lie algebra sl(3, C)
of type A2 . As per usual, it is easier when dealing with root systems of type A to consider the
simple sl(n, C)-module V as a simple gl(n, C)-module. This can be done by making the central
element Id ∈ gl(n, C) act by a fixed scalar (which we are free to choose).
We have ρ = 1 − 3 and
X
sgn(w)ew(ρ) = x1 x−1 −1 −1 −1 −1 −1
3 − x2 x3 − x1 x3 − x1 x2 + x 1 x2 + x2 x3 .
w∈S3
Let’s consider the simple gl(3, C)-module with highest weight (2, 1, 0). I claim that the character
of V ((2, 1, 0)) equals x21 x2 + x21 x3 + x22 x1 + x22 x3 + x23 x1 + x23 x2 + 2x1 x2 x3 . To show this, we note
that
X
sgn(w)ew(3,1,−1) = x31 x2 x−1 3 −1 3 −1 3 −1 3 −1 3 −1
3 − x2 x1 x3 − x3 x 2 x1 − x1 x3 x2 + x2 x3 x1 + x3 x1 x2 .
w∈S3
74
Exercise 11.11. Using Weyl’s formula, show that Ch V ((1, 1, 1)) = x1 x2 x3 , where V ((1, 1, 1)) is
the irreducible gl(3, C)-module with highest weight (1, 1, 1).
Exercise 11.12. Let E be the two dimensional real vector space with basis 1 , 2 then {β1 =
1 − 2 , β2 = 2 } is a set of simple roots and R = {±i , ±(i ± j ) | 1 ≤ i 6= j ≤ 2} is the set of all
roots for B2 .
(a) Show that a weight λ = λ1 1 + λ2 2 will be dominant integral if and only if λ2 ∈ 12 Z≥0 and
λ1 − λ2 ∈ Z≥0 . Also show that ρ = 32 1 + 12 2 .
(c) Finally, calculate Ch(V (1, 0)), Ch(V (1, 1)) and Ch(V (3, 1)). What is the dimension of these
modules?
Exercise 11.13. The root system for sl2 (i.e. type A1 ) is {±21 } and if ∆ = {21 }, then P + = n1 ,
where n ∈ Z≥0 . What is the Weyl group? For all n ≥ 0, calculate Ch V (n). How does this
compare to Theorem 6.15?
75
12 Appendix: Quotient vector spaces
12.1 The definition
Let F be a field and V a vector space. Let W be a subspace of V . Then, we form the quotient
space
V /W = {[v] | v ∈ V, and [v] = [v 0 ] iff v − v 0 ∈ W . }.
Proof. It is already clear that it is an abelian group. So we just need to define α[v] for α ∈ F and
[v] ∈ V /W , and check that this makes V /W into a vector space.
We define α[v] = [αv]. To see that this is well-define, let [v] = [v 0 ]. Then v − v 0 ∈ W and hence
α(v − v 0 ) = αv − αv 0 ∈ W and thus [αv] = [αv 0 ]. Hence it is well-defined.
To make sure that this makes V /W into a vector space, we need to check that α([v] + [v 0 ]) =
α[v] + α[v 0 ]. But
One way to think about the quotient space V /W (though I would argue, the wrong way!) is
in terms of complimentary subspaces. Recall that a compliment to W is a subspace W 0 of V such
that
• W0 + W = V
• W 0 ∩ W = {0}.
Lemma 12.2. Let W 0 be a compliment to W in V . Then the quotient map defines an isomorphism
φ : W 0 → V /W .
76
w0 ∈ W 0 and w ∈ W such that v = w + w0 . This implies that v − w0 = w ∈ W and hence [v] = [w0 ]
in V /W i.e. φ(w0 ) = [v]. So φ is surjective.
Now assume that w0 ∈ Ker φ. This means that [w0 ] = [0] i.e. w0 ∈ W . But then w0 ∈ W 0 ∩W =
{0}. Hence w0 = 0, which means that Ker φ = {0}. So φ is injective.
∼
But φ : W 0 −→ V /W . Hence dim W 0 = dim V /W . Thus, we see that
12.2 Basis of V /W
Assume now that V is finite dimensional.
Lemma 12.3. Let v1 , . . . , vk ∈ V such that [v1 ], . . . , [vk ] is a basis of V /W and let w1 , . . . , w` be
a basis of W . Then v1 , . . . , vk , w1 , . . . , w` is a basis of V .
i.e. v = α1 v1 + · · · + αk vk + β1 w1 + · · · β` w` . So v1 , . . . , vk , w1 , . . . , w` span V .
Next, assume that α1 , . . . , αk , β1 , . . . , β` ∈ F such that α1 v1 + · · · + αk vk + β1 w1 + · · · β` w` = 0.
This means that
Notice that we didn’t really have to prove linear independence in the above proof. If we
know that v1 , . . . , vk , w1 , . . . , w` span, then the fact that dim V = dim V /W + dim W implies that
dim V = k + l and hence any spanning set of V with k + l elements must be a basis.
77
Lemma 12.4. If v1 , . . . , vk ∈ V such that [v1 ], . . . , [vk ] is a basis of V /W , then W 0 = C{v1 , . . . , vk }
is a compliment to W in V .
12.3 Endomorphisms of V /W
Some times linear maps V → V also define for us linear maps V /W → V /W . Let X : V → V be
a linear map.
Proof. First we show that X is well-defined and then check that it is linear. So we need to check
that if [v] = [v 0 ] then X([v]) = X([v 0 ]). But [v] = [v 0 ] iff v − v 0 ∈ W . Since X(W ) ⊆ W , we have
X(v − v 0 ) = X(v) − X(v 0 ) ∈ W and hence
as required.
So now we just check that it is linear. This is easy:
78
We’ll do an example just to get a feel for things. Let’s take V = C4 and
?
0
? 0
0
W = 0 ,
W = ,
?
0
?
0 0
0 0
where W 0 is a compliment to W in V . Since v1 = and v2 = are a basis of W 0 , [v1 ]
1
0
0 1
and [v2 ] are a basis of V /W . Let
4 2 −1 6
0 1 0 6
X= .
0 0 2 −3
0 0 0 2
Thus, X([v1 ]) = 2[v1 ] and X([v2 ]) = −3[v1 ] + [v2 ]. This implies that
!
2 −3
X= .
0 2
(−, −) : V × V → F
such that
79
1. (u + v, w) = (u, w) + (v, w) and (u, v + w) = (u, v) + (u, w) for all u, v, w ∈ V .
The bilinear form is said to be symmetric if (u, v) = (v, u) for all u, v ∈ V . We do not assume
(−, −) is symmetric in general. The radical of (−, −) is defined to be
We say that the bilinear form (−, −) is non-degenerate if rad (−, −) = {0}.
The dual of a vector space V is defined to be the space V ∗ of all linear maps λ : V → F.
Lemma 12.6. If V is finite dimensional, then V ∗ is finite dimensional and dim V = dim V ∗ .
Proof. Let n = dim V . Fixing a basis of V , every element of V ∗ can be uniquely written as a 1×n-
matrix i.e. a row vector. It is clear that the space of row vectors of length n is n-dimensional.
The following lemma shows the relationship between dual vector spaces and bilinear forms.
Lemma 12.7. If V is equipped with a non-degenerate bilinear form (−, −), then the form defines
a canonical isomorphism φ : V → V ∗ given by
Proof. For fixed u, the fact that (−, −) is bilinear implies that φ(u) is a linear map i.e. φ(u) ∈ V ∗ .
Moreover, bilinearity also implies that φ : V → V ∗ is a linear map. The kernel of φ is clearly
rad (−, −). Therefore, since we have assumed that (−, −) is non-generate, φ is injective. On the
other hand, Lemma 12.6 says that dim V = dim V ∗ . Therefore φ must be an isomorphism.
Lemma 12.8. Let V be a finite dimensional vector space, (−, −) a non-degenerate bilinear form
on V and W a subspace of V . Then we have a canonical isomorphism
∼
W ⊥ −→ (V /W )∗
80
Proof. We define ψ : W ⊥ → (V /W )∗ by ψ(u)([v]) = (u, v). Let us check that this is well-defined
i.e. ψ(u)([v]) = ψ(u)([v 0 ]) if [v] = [v 0 ]. We have [v] = [v 0 ] if and only if v − v 0 ∈ W . But then
(u, v − v 0 ) = 0 for all u ∈ W ⊥ . Hence (u, v) = (u, v 0 ) and ψ(u)([v]) = ψ(u)([v 0 ]).
Next we show that (V /W )∗ can be identified with the subspace U of V ∗ consisting of all λ such
that W ⊂ Ker λ i.e. λ(W ) = 0. If λ ∈ U then we can define λ0 ∈ (V /W )∗ by λ0 ([v]) = λ(v). Just as
in the previous paragraph, it is easy to check that this is well-defined. Now let v1 , . . . , v` , w1 , . . . , wk
be the basis of V defined in Lemma 12.3. Given ν ∈ (V /W )∗ , we define λ(vi ) = ν([vi ]) and
λ(wj ) = 0 for all i, j. Then λ extends uniquely by linearity to an element of V ∗ . Since λ(wj ) = 0
∼
for all j, λ belongs to U . By construction, λ0 = ν. Hence U −→ (V /W )∗ .
Finally, we note that, if φ is the isomorphism of Lemma 12.7, then
81
References
[1] A. Baker. Matrix groups. Springer Undergraduate Mathematics Series. Springer-Verlag London Ltd.,
London, 2002. An introduction to Lie group theory.
[2] R. W. Carter. Lie algebras of finite and affine type, volume 96 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced
Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.
[4] K. Erdmann and M. J. Wildon. Introduction to Lie algebras. Springer Undergraduate Mathematics
Series. Springer-Verlag London Ltd., London, 2006.
[5] W. Fulton and J. Harris. Representation theory, volume 129 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics.
Springer-Verlag, New York, 1991. A first course, Readings in Mathematics.
[6] V. Guillemin and S. Sternberg. Symplectic techniques in physics. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, second edition, 1990.
[7] B. C. Hall. Lie groups, Lie algebras, and representations, volume 222 of Graduate Texts in Mathe-
matics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003. An elementary introduction.
[8] J. E. Humphreys. Introduction to Lie Algebras and Representation Theory. Springer-Verlag, New
York, 1972. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Vol. 9.
[9] A. Kirillov, Jr. An introduction to Lie groups and Lie algebras, volume 113 of Cambridge Studies in
Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008.
82