Cartan/Weyl basis. Please check I understand it properly

  • Thread starter Thread starter bartadam
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Basis
bartadam
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
I have a six dimensional lie algebra. I checked it was semi-simple by checking if the killing form was not invertible. I found a set of two (I think) maximally commuting elements which I called H1 and H2 and found their matrix representation by calculating the structure constants.

I have put these matrices into maple and calculated
H=aH_1+bH_1

and calculated the eigenvalues of H and got four (as expected) eigenvalues as follows,...

\sqrt{2}i(a+b),\ -\sqrt{2}(a+b),\ \sqrt{2}(a-b)\ and\ -\sqrt{2}i(a-b)

So I think the commutators are as follows
[\stackrel{\rightarrow}{H},E^{\pm \alpha}]=\pm\sqrt{2}i(1,1)E^{\pm\alpha}
[\stackrel{\rightarrow}{H},E^{\pm \beta}]=\pm\sqrt{2}i(1,-1)E^{\pm\beta}

plus all the others which follow from cartan weyl procedure. Where \stackrel{\rightarrow}{H}=(H_1,H_2)

This makes the algebra A1+A1=D2 as it has two orthogonal root spaces of A1.

Am I doing this properly?

Unfortunately I have not calculated the generators E^{\alpha} to check the above because the algebra in the basis which I derived it is is such that calculating these is horrifically tedious if you understand me. Are the generators just going to be the dot product of the eigenvectors with the original basis?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thread 'Determine whether ##125## is a unit in ##\mathbb{Z_471}##'
This is the question, I understand the concept, in ##\mathbb{Z_n}## an element is a is a unit if and only if gcd( a,n) =1. My understanding of backwards substitution, ... i have using Euclidean algorithm, ##471 = 3⋅121 + 108## ##121 = 1⋅108 + 13## ##108 =8⋅13+4## ##13=3⋅4+1## ##4=4⋅1+0## using back-substitution, ##1=13-3⋅4## ##=(121-1⋅108)-3(108-8⋅13)## ... ##= 121-(471-3⋅121)-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24(471-3⋅121## ##=121-471+3⋅121-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24⋅471+72⋅121##...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top