Lie's theorem

From testwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

In mathematics, specifically the theory of Lie algebras, Lie's theorem states that,[1] over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero, if Ο€:𝔀→𝔀𝔩(V) is a finite-dimensional representation of a solvable Lie algebra, then there's a flag V=V0βŠƒV1βŠƒβ‹―βŠƒVn=0 of invariant subspaces of Ο€(𝔀) with codimVi=i, meaning that Ο€(X)(Vi)βŠ†Vi for each Xβˆˆπ”€ and i.

Put in another way, the theorem says there is a basis for V such that all linear transformations in Ο€(𝔀) are represented by upper triangular matrices.[2] This is a generalization of the result of Frobenius that commuting matrices are simultaneously upper triangularizable, as commuting matrices generate an abelian Lie algebra, which is a fortiori solvable.

A consequence of Lie's theorem is that any finite dimensional solvable Lie algebra over a field of characteristic 0 has a nilpotent derived algebra (see #Consequences). Also, to each flag in a finite-dimensional vector space V, there correspond a Borel subalgebra (that consist of linear transformations stabilizing the flag); thus, the theorem says that Ο€(𝔀) is contained in some Borel subalgebra of 𝔀𝔩(V).[1]

Counter-example

For algebraically closed fields of characteristic p>0 Lie's theorem holds provided the dimension of the representation is less than p (see the proof below), but can fail for representations of dimension p. An example is given by the 3-dimensional nilpotent Lie algebra spanned by 1, x, and d/dx acting on the p-dimensional vector space k[x]/(xp), which has no eigenvectors. Taking the semidirect product of this 3-dimensional Lie algebra by the p-dimensional representation (considered as an abelian Lie algebra) gives a solvable Lie algebra whose derived algebra is not nilpotent.

Proof

The proof is by induction on the dimension of 𝔀 and consists of several steps. (Note: the structure of the proof is very similar to that for Engel's theorem.) The basic case is trivial and we assume the dimension of 𝔀 is positive. We also assume V is not zero. For simplicity, we write Xβ‹…v=Ο€(X)(v).

Step 1: Observe that the theorem is equivalent to the statement:[3]

  • There exists a vector in V that is an eigenvector for each linear transformation in Ο€(𝔀).

Indeed, the theorem says in particular that a nonzero vector spanning Vnβˆ’1 is a common eigenvector for all the linear transformations in Ο€(𝔀). Conversely, if v is a common eigenvector, take Vnβˆ’1 to be its span and then Ο€(𝔀) admits a common eigenvector in the quotient V/Vnβˆ’1; repeat the argument.

Step 2: Find an ideal π”₯ of codimension one in 𝔀.

Let D𝔀=[𝔀,𝔀] be the derived algebra. Since 𝔀 is solvable and has positive dimension, D𝔀≠𝔀 and so the quotient 𝔀/D𝔀 is a nonzero abelian Lie algebra, which certainly contains an ideal of codimension one and by the ideal correspondence, it corresponds to an ideal of codimension one in 𝔀.

Step 3: There exists some linear functional Ξ» in π”₯βˆ— such that

VΞ»={v∈V|Xβ‹…v=Ξ»(X)v,X∈π”₯}

is nonzero. This follows from the inductive hypothesis (it is easy to check that the eigenvalues determine a linear functional).

Step 4: VΞ» is a 𝔀-invariant subspace. (Note this step proves a general fact and does not involve solvability.)

Let Yβˆˆπ”€, v∈VΞ», then we need to prove Yβ‹…v∈VΞ». If v=0 then it's obvious, so assume vβ‰ 0 and set recursively v0=v,vi+1=Yβ‹…vi. Let U=span{vi|iβ‰₯0} and β„“βˆˆβ„•0 be the largest such that v0,…,vβ„“ are linearly independent. Then we'll prove that they generate U and thus Ξ±=(v0,…,vβ„“) is a basis of U. Indeed, assume by contradiction that it's not the case and let mβˆˆβ„•0 be the smallest such that vmβˆ‰βŸ¨v0,…,vβ„“βŸ©, then obviously mβ‰₯β„“+1. Since v0,…,vβ„“+1 are linearly dependent, vβ„“+1 is a linear combination of v0,…,vβ„“. Applying the map Ymβˆ’β„“βˆ’1 it follows that vm is a linear combination of vmβˆ’β„“βˆ’1,…,vmβˆ’1. Since by the minimality of m each of these vectors is a linear combination of v0,…,vβ„“, so is vm, and we get the desired contradiction. We'll prove by induction that for every nβˆˆβ„•0 and X∈π”₯ there exist elements a0,n,X,…,an,n,X of the base field such that an,n,X=Ξ»(X) and

Xβ‹…vn=βˆ‘i=0nai,n,Xvi.

The n=0 case is straightforward since Xβ‹…v0=Ξ»(X)v0. Now assume that we have proved the claim for some nβˆˆβ„•0 and all elements of π”₯ and let X∈π”₯. Since π”₯ is an ideal, it's [X,Y]∈π”₯, and thus

Xβ‹…vn+1=Yβ‹…(Xβ‹…vn)+[X,Y]β‹…vn=Yβ‹…βˆ‘i=0nai,n,Xvi+βˆ‘i=0nai,n,[X,Y]vi=a0,n,[X,Y]v0+βˆ‘i=1n(aiβˆ’1,n,X+ai,n,[X,Y])vi+Ξ»(X)vn+1,

and the induction step follows. This implies that for every X∈π”₯ the subspace U is an invariant subspace of X and the matrix of the restricted map Ο€(X)|U in the basis Ξ± is upper triangular with diagonal elements equal to Ξ»(X), hence tr(Ο€(X)|U)=dim(U)Ξ»(X). Applying this with [X,Y]∈π”₯ instead of X gives tr(Ο€([X,Y])|U)=dim(U)Ξ»([X,Y]). On the other hand, U is also obviously an invariant subspace of Y, and so

tr(Ο€([X,Y])|U)=tr([Ο€(X),Ο€(Y)]|U])=tr([Ο€(X)|U,Ο€(Y)|U])=0

since commutators have zero trace, and thus dim(U)Ξ»([X,Y])=0. Since dim(U)>0 is invertible (because of the assumption on the characteristic of the base field), Ξ»([X,Y])=0 and

Xβ‹…(Yβ‹…v)=Yβ‹…(Xβ‹…v)+[X,Y]β‹…v=Yβ‹…(Ξ»(X)v)+Ξ»([X,Y])v=Ξ»(X)(Yβ‹…v),

and so Yβ‹…v∈VΞ».

Step 5: Finish up the proof by finding a common eigenvector.

Write 𝔀=π”₯+L where L is a one-dimensional vector subspace. Since the base field is algebraically closed, there exists an eigenvector in VΞ» for some (thus every) nonzero element of L. Since that vector is also eigenvector for each element of π”₯, the proof is complete. β—»

Consequences

The theorem applies in particular to the adjoint representation ad:𝔀→𝔀𝔩(𝔀) of a (finite-dimensional) solvable Lie algebra 𝔀 over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero; thus, one can choose a basis on 𝔀 with respect to which ad(𝔀) consists of upper triangular matrices. It follows easily that for each x,yβˆˆπ”€, ad([x,y])=[ad(x),ad(y)] has diagonal consisting of zeros; i.e., ad([x,y]) is a strictly upper triangular matrix. This implies that [𝔀,𝔀] is a nilpotent Lie algebra. Moreover, if the base field is not algebraically closed then solvability and nilpotency of a Lie algebra is unaffected by extending the base field to its algebraic closure. Hence, one concludes the statement (the other implication is obvious):[4]

A finite-dimensional Lie algebra 𝔀 over a field of characteristic zero is solvable if and only if the derived algebra D𝔀=[𝔀,𝔀] is nilpotent.

Lie's theorem also establishes one direction in Cartan's criterion for solvability:

If V is a finite-dimensional vector space over a field of characteristic zero and π”€βŠ†π”€π”©(V) a Lie subalgebra, then 𝔀 is solvable if and only if tr(XY)=0 for every Xβˆˆπ”€ and Y∈[𝔀,𝔀].[5]

Indeed, as above, after extending the base field, the implication β‡’ is seen easily. (The converse is more difficult to prove.)

Lie's theorem (for various V) is equivalent to the statement:[6]

For a solvable Lie algebra 𝔀 over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero, each finite-dimensional simple 𝔀-module (i.e., irreducible as a representation) has dimension one.

Indeed, Lie's theorem clearly implies this statement. Conversely, assume the statement is true. Given a finite-dimensional 𝔀-module V, let V1 be a maximal 𝔀-submodule (which exists by finiteness of the dimension). Then, by maximality, V/V1 is simple; thus, is one-dimensional. The induction now finishes the proof.

The statement says in particular that a finite-dimensional simple module over an abelian Lie algebra is one-dimensional; this fact remains true over any base field since in this case every vector subspace is a Lie subalgebra.[7]

Here is another quite useful application:[8]

Let 𝔀 be a finite-dimensional Lie algebra over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero with radical rad(𝔀). Then each finite-dimensional simple representation Ο€:𝔀→𝔀𝔩(V) is the tensor product of a simple representation of 𝔀/rad(𝔀) with a one-dimensional representation of 𝔀 (i.e., a linear functional vanishing on Lie brackets).

By Lie's theorem, we can find a linear functional Ξ» of rad(𝔀) so that there is the weight space VΞ» of rad(𝔀). By Step 4 of the proof of Lie's theorem, VΞ» is also a 𝔀-module; so V=VΞ». In particular, for each X∈rad(𝔀), tr(Ο€(X))=dim(V)Ξ»(X). Extend Ξ» to a linear functional on 𝔀 that vanishes on [𝔀,𝔀]; Ξ» is then a one-dimensional representation of 𝔀. Now, (Ο€,V)≃(Ο€,V)βŠ—(βˆ’Ξ»)βŠ—Ξ». Since Ο€ coincides with Ξ» on rad(𝔀), we have that VβŠ—(βˆ’Ξ») is trivial on rad(𝔀) and thus is the restriction of a (simple) representation of 𝔀/rad(𝔀). β—»

See also

References

Template:Reflist

Sources