Is that the definition of a lie group?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the definition and properties of Lie groups, particularly focusing on their relationship with differentiable manifolds and the conditions that must be satisfied for a group to be classified as a Lie group. Participants explore the mathematical rigor behind these definitions and the implications of differentiability in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that a Lie group is defined as a group that satisfies the conditions of a differentiable manifold.
  • Others argue that the group's multiplication and inverse operations must also respect the differentiable structure of the manifold.
  • A participant elaborates that both the multiplication and inverse operations of a Lie group are not only differentiable but infinitely differentiable, and even real analytic.
  • One participant attempts to clarify the relationship between differentiable structures and manifolds, suggesting that a differentiable structure can only exist on a topological manifold.
  • Another participant challenges this assertion, stating that differentiable structures can be applied to more general spaces, although they are well-behaved on topological manifolds.
  • There is a discussion about whether a Lie group could be defined simply as a topological group with analytic group operations, with some support for this simplification.
  • A participant expresses appreciation for the insights shared and acknowledges the complexity of the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definitions and properties of differentiable structures and their application to Lie groups. There is no consensus on the sufficiency of defining a Lie group solely as a topological group with analytic operations, indicating ongoing debate and exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Some statements made by participants contain assumptions that may not be universally accepted, such as the nature of differentiable structures and their applicability beyond topological manifolds. The discussion reflects a range of interpretations and levels of rigor in defining mathematical concepts.

davi2686
Messages
33
Reaction score
2
I learned a lie group is a group which satisfied all the conditions of a diferentiable manifold. that is the real rigour definition or just a simplified one?

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
... and the group's multiplication respects the differential structure
 
Suppose the Lie group is on the manifold M. Then not just the multiplication: (g, h) → gh

mult: M × M → M​

but also the operation of taking an element to its inverse: g → g-1

inv: M → M​

are both differentiable.

And note that saying a mapping is differentiable is the normal way to express that the mapping "respects the differentiable structure" of a manifold. In the first case, this refers to the differentiable structure of the product manifold M × M.

In fact, every Lie group's operations mult and inv are not only differentiable, but infinitely differentiable, which means that in local coordinates, every partial derivative of any order, including all mixed partials, is itself differentiable with respect to all coordinates. (Even more can be said: mult and inv are even real analytic, meaning locally expressible in terms of convergent power series.)
 
Thanks very much Wrobel and Zinq.

So let me see if i understand,

(1) a differentiable structure is a map of a set into itself where this map is k-differentiable,

(2) this implies that set is also a manifold (if k=infinite a differentiable manifold)

(3) and if that set also a group, so we have a lie group.

the three satatements above are right?
 
To answer your questions:

(1) A differentiable structure (DS) is something different. It is possible to have a DS only on a topological space that is a topological manifold (usually defined as a Hausdorff space such that every point has a neighborhood that is topologically equivalent to an open set in Euclidean space Rn (where n is the same for the whole space).

Given that M is a topological manifold M as above, a differentiable structure is designed so that differentiability makes sense on this manifold. Here is what it is, precisely: It is a collection of nonempty open sets Vj of M such that their union j Vj is equal to all of M, and for each index j there is a mapping

hj: Vj → Rn

that is a homeomorphism onto its image, such that for any Vi and Vj with a nonempty intersection Vi ∩ Vj, the mapping

hij = hi o hj -1: hj(Vi ∩ Vj) → hi(Vi ∩ Vj)

(as a mapping from part of Rn to part of Rn) is differentiable.

A manifold together with a differentiable structure on it is a differentiable manifold.

This may seem complicated, but it is part of understanding what a Lie group is. And when you are familiar with it, it will seem simple. For more information, see these notes: http://www2.math.uu.se/~khf/Otter.pdf.(2) As you can see from (1), yes, a differentiable structure can only be on a manifold. But: If all the maps hij in (1) are Cr (r times differentiable) then M is called a Cr manifold. A Cr manifold is automatically a Ck manifold for all k ≤ r. A differentiable manifold is just a C1 manifold. (But it might be a Cr manifold for r > 1.) A smooth manifold means it is a Cr manifold for all r ≥ 1, or in other words all the maps hij are infinitely differentiable (C). All Lie groups are in fact C by a very deep theorem due to Deane Montgomery, Andrew Gleason and others, completed about 1952. (Not that you asked, but something even stronger is true: All Lie groups are real analytic (Cω) manifolds, which means that all the maps hij can be expressed by power series with real coefficients.)

(3) Yes, sort of. If a differentiable manifold has a group structure on it and the group operations of multiplication and inverse on it are continuous in its topology, then it is a Lie group. The casual phrasing of your (3) is not precise enough to include this possibility.
——————————————————————————————

To elaborate on that last sentence: Consider the circle (curve) as a topological space. It is the same cardinality as the real line. This mean that using a bijection of the circle to the real line, you could put the additive structure of the reals (as the Lie group ) on the circle if you wanted to. This group structure would not make the circle into a Lie group, since its multiplication and inverse mappings would be discontinuous on the circle as a topological space.
 
Last edited:
zinq said:
It is possible to have a DS only on a topological space that is a topological manifold

Uh, that is not necessarily true. But it is true that things are well-behaved only on topological manifolds. A differentiable structure can be put on very general spaces however. https://arxiv.org/abs/0807.1704
 
Thanks, micromass. You are right. (I actually knew that but was trying to keep things simple.)
 
micromass said:
Uh, that is not necessarily true. But it is true that things are well-behaved only on topological manifolds. A differentiable structure can be put on very general spaces however. https://arxiv.org/abs/0807.1704
Mathematicians have a strange kind of humor: "Convenient Category". Considering axiom 3 of Chen-spaces and the following examples I'm curious to see what will be left under so much generalization.

Btw.: Couldn't we just say: "A Lie Group is a topological group with analytic group operations."?
 
fresh_42 said:
Mathematicians have a strange kind of humor: "Convenient Category". Considering axiom 3 of Chen-spaces and the following examples I'm curious to see what will be left under so much generalization.

Surprisingly much actually...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42
  • #10
"Btw.: Couldn't we just say: 'A Lie Group is a topological group with analytic group operations.' ?"

Yes, we could. But mathematicians (like me) usually prefer to define something initially with the fewest necessary conditions, and then state the interesting and worthwhile consequences of that definition as theorems — it is more informative that way.

Then you know that anytime you encounter the thing with its more spartan definition, you will have the thing with all its nice consequences. (It might be more difficult to know, initially, that you have something with all those nice consequences to begin with.)
 
Last edited:
  • #11
zinq said:
But mathematicians (like me) usually prefer ...
Well, someone should tell him.
 
  • #12
Please feel free to elaborate on that comment, fresh_42.
 
  • #13
Thanks very much to all, especially Zinq. I am think its time to read carefully your last answer to me and read the notes you had linked before playing thoughtless questions. I am really appreciate your help it helped me a LOT, thanks.
.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: zinq

Similar threads

  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K