Parametrization manifold of SL(2,R)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the parametrization of the special linear group SL(2,R), specifically how its elements can be expressed as the product of a symmetric matrix and a rotation matrix. The symmetric matrix is parameterized by the hyperboloid defined by the equation z² - x² - y² = 1, while the rotation matrix is represented by the standard form K = [[cos(φ), -sin(φ)], [sin(φ), cos(φ)]] with φ in [0, 2π). The Iwasawa decomposition is also mentioned, where G = ANK, with A as a diagonal matrix and N as an upper triangular matrix. The discussion highlights the need for a clear coordinate transformation between the hyperboloid and the symmetric matrix representation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lie groups and their properties
  • Familiarity with the special linear group SL(2,R)
  • Knowledge of matrix decomposition techniques, specifically Iwasawa decomposition
  • Basic concepts of hyperbolic geometry and rotation matrices
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the Iwasawa decomposition in detail, focusing on its applications in Lie groups
  • Explore the geometric interpretation of hyperboloids and their relation to symmetric matrices
  • Learn about coordinate transformations between different geometric representations
  • Study the properties of unimodular matrices and their significance in linear algebra
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students studying Lie groups, linear algebra, and geometric interpretations of matrix representations.

Wledig
Messages
69
Reaction score
1
I'm reading a book on Lie groups and one of the first examples is on SL(2,R). It says that every element of it can be written as the product of a symmetric matrix and a rotation matrix, which I can see, but It also makes the assertion that the symmetric matrix can be parameterized by a hyperboloid with equation given by ## z^2 - x^2 - y^2 = 1##, while the rotation matrix is parameterized by a point on a circle. I guess the rotation matrix being parameterized by a point on a circle kind of makes sense intuitively, but I can't see how the hyperboloid can possibly parameterize the symmetric matrix. What am I missing here? If anyone can demonstrate the parametrization for the rotation matrix in a rigorous way aswell, I'd be glad.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Wledig said:
I'm reading a book on Lie groups and one of the first examples is on SL(2,R). It says that every element of it can be written as the product of a symmetric matrix and a rotation matrix, which I can see, but It also makes the assertion that the symmetric matrix can be parameterized by a hyperboloid with equation given by ## z^2 - x^2 - y^2 = 1##, while the rotation matrix is parameterized by a point on a circle. I guess the rotation matrix being parameterized by a point on a circle kind of makes sense intuitively, but I can't see how the hyperboloid can possibly parameterize the symmetric matrix. What am I missing here? If anyone can demonstrate the parametrization for the rotation matrix in a rigorous way aswell, I'd be glad.
Can you show the decomposition? I know of the Iwasawa decomposition into a product diagonal times upper triangle times rotation.

The rotation part is easy: A rotation matrix is of the form ##K = \begin{bmatrix}\cos \varphi & -\sin \varphi \\ \sin \varphi & \cos \varphi\end{bmatrix}## which is parameterized by ##\varphi \in [0,2\pi )##.

The Iwasawa decomposition is ##G=ANK## with ##A=\begin{bmatrix}e^t&0\\ 0 & e^{-t}\end{bmatrix}\; , \;N=\begin{bmatrix}1&x\\0&1\end{bmatrix}\,.## Of course I could consider ##AN## but this isn't symmetric.
 
Thanks for your reply. I think I should've mentioned this but the book also states that both matrices are unimodular. So we could have
## A=\begin{bmatrix}a&c\\ c & b\end{bmatrix}\ ## and ## K = \begin{bmatrix}\cos \varphi & -\sin \varphi \\ \sin \varphi & \cos \varphi\end{bmatrix} ## so that the product AK yields a matrix with determinant equal to that of the symmetric matrix which is 1 by the unimodular condition. The big question is how to relate the symmetric matrix to the hyperboloid though.
 
I see, book would've done me a favor writing the equation in this second manner. Still, I guess I should've noticed that it was just a silly transformation. Thanks again for clarifying things.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K