Proving Isomorphism between Lie Algebras

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
45 replies · 6K views
Ted123
Messages
428
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Let [tex]\mathfrak{g} , \mathfrak{h}[/tex] be Lie algebras over [tex]\mathbb{C}.[/tex]
(i) When is a mapping [tex]\varphi : \mathfrak{g} \to \mathfrak{h}[/tex] a homomorphism?

(ii) When are the Lie algebras [tex]\mathfrak{g}[/tex] and [tex]\mathfrak{h}[/tex] isomorphic?

(iii) Let [tex]\mathfrak{g}[/tex] be the Lie algebra with basis vectors E,F,G such that the following relations for Lie brackets are satisfied: [tex][E,F]=G,\;\;[E,G]=0,\;\;[F,G]=0.[/tex] Let [tex]\mathfrak{h}[/tex] be the Lie algebra consisting of 3x3 matrices of the form [tex]\begin{bmatrix} 0 & a & c \\ 0 & 0 & b \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex] where a,b,c are any complex numbers. The vector addition and scalar multiplication on [tex]\mathfrak{h}[/tex] are the usual operations on matrices. The Lie bracket on [tex]\mathfrak{h}[/tex] is defined as the matrix commutator: [tex][X,Y] = XY - YX[/tex] for any [tex]X,Y \in \mathfrak{h}.[/tex] Prove that the Lie algebras [tex]\mathfrak{g}[/tex] and [tex]\mathfrak{h}[/tex] are isomorphic.

The Attempt at a Solution



Firstly, is this the definition for (i):

[tex]\varphi[/tex] is a homomorphism if [tex]\varphi [x,y] = [\varphi (x) , \varphi (y) ][/tex] for all [tex]x,y\in\mathfrak{g}\,?[/tex]
What is the definition for (ii)?

For (iii) presumably I first have to show that a mapping [tex]\varphi : \mathfrak{g} \to \mathfrak{h}[/tex] is a homomorphism? If so how do I show [tex]\varphi [x,y] = [\varphi (x) , \varphi (y) ]\,?[/tex]
 
Last edited:
on Phys.org
For (i), don't you also want to demand that [itex]\phi[/itex] is linear and stuff?? That is, phi should at least be an algebra morphism.

The definition for (ii) is of course that there exists an isomorphism [itex]\phi:\mathfrak{g}\rightarrow \mathfrak{h}[/itex]. That is: a bijective homomorphism such that its inverse is also a homomorphism.

For (iii), let's not do too much first. Let's first try to figure out what the isomorphism is exactly. Any suggestions??
 
So we need to define some [tex]\varphi[/tex] which is an isomorphism. Could you help me here?
 
micromass said:
Well, you need to send a basis to a basis. So you need to send E,F and G to a basis. Do you know a basis of those 3x3-matrices?

[tex]\left\{ \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} , \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} , \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} \right\}[/tex]
 
Last edited:
micromass said:
That is a nice proposal. So we set

[tex]\phi(aE+bF+cG)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc} 0 & a & b\\ 0 & 0 & c\\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{array}\right)[/tex]

So, some questions remain:
- is it bijective?
- is it linear?
- Does it respect the commutator?

Let

[tex]E = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]
[tex]F = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]
[tex]G = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

Then [tex][E,F] = EF - FE = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} = G[/tex]

[tex][E,G] = EG - GE = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

[tex][F,G] = FG - GF = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

Does this show that the commutator is satisfied?

How do you show that [tex]\varphi[/tex] is a homomorphism? How do you show [tex]\varphi [x,y] = [\varphi (x) , \varphi (y) ][/tex] for all [tex]x,y\in\mathfrak{g}\,?[/tex]
 
Last edited:
micromass said:
Well, take x=aE+bF+cG and take y=a'E+b'F+c'G. Try to work out both

[tex]\varphi [aE+bF+cG,a^\prime E+b^\prime F+c^\prime G][/tex]

and

[tex][\varphi(aE+bF+cG),\varphi(a^\prime E+ b^\prime F+c^\prime G][/tex]

Use the properties of the commutator and the definition of [itex]\varphi[/itex].

OK, so:

[tex]\varphi ( [x,y] ) = \varphi ( xy - yx)[/tex]
[tex]= \varphi \left( \begin{bmatrix} 0 & a & c \\ 0 & 0 & b \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} 0 & a' & c' \\ 0 & 0 & b' \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} - \begin{bmatrix} 0 & a' & c' \\ 0 & 0 & b' \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix} 0 & a & c \\ 0 & 0 & b \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} \right)[/tex]
[tex]= \varphi \left( \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & ab' - a'b \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} \right) = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & ab' - a'b \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]
[tex]= \begin{bmatrix} 0 & a & c \\ 0 & 0 & b \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} 0 & a' & c' \\ 0 & 0 & b' \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} - \begin{bmatrix} 0 & a' & c' \\ 0 & 0 & b' \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} 0 & a & c \\ 0 & 0 & b \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]
[tex]= \varphi (x) \varphi (y) - \varphi (y) \varphi (x) = [\varphi (x) , \varphi (y) ][/tex]

Therefore [tex]\varphi[/tex] is a homomorphism?
 
Ted123 said:
OK, so:

[tex]\varphi ( [x,y] ) = \varphi ( xy - yx)[/tex]

No, since you don't know that [itex][x,y]=xy-yx[/itex]. You know nothing about the Lie bracket in [itex]\mathfrak{g}[/itex], except [E,F]=G, [E,G]=[F,G]=0. So use these relations to calculate

[tex][aE+bF+cG,a^\prime E+b^\prime F+c^\prime G][/tex]
 
micromass said:
No, since you don't know that [itex][x,y]=xy-yx[/itex]. You know nothing about the Lie bracket in [itex]\mathfrak{g}[/itex], except [E,F]=G, [E,G]=[F,G]=0. So use these relations to calculate

[tex][aE+bF+cG,a^\prime E+b^\prime F+c^\prime G][/tex]

OK, so using the bilinearity property of the Lie bracket and the property that [x,x] = 0 for all [tex]x\in\mathfrak{g}[/tex] together with those 3 relations I get:

[tex]\varphi ( [x,y] ) = \varphi ( (ab' - a'b)G ) = \varphi \left( \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & ab' - a'b \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} \right)[/tex] and from here the calculation continues like it did in my last attempt.

Does this now show that [tex]\varphi[/tex] is a homomorphism?
 
micromass said:
Yes, this is ok!

So do I have to show that [itex]\varphi[/itex] is also a linear transformation?

i.e. [itex]\varphi ( x + y) = \varphi (x) + \varphi (y)[/itex] for all [itex]x,y\in\mathfrak{g}[/itex]

and [itex]\varphi (\alpha x) = \alpha \varphi (x)[/itex] for all [itex]\alpha \in\mathbb{C} , x\in\mathfrak{g}\,?[/itex]

Then this shows [itex]\varphi[/itex] is a homomorphism. Then how do I show that it is a bijective map to show [itex]\varphi[/itex] is an isomorphism? After this the question is answered is it not?
 
micromass said:
Well, try to show that the function is injective and surjective. This is the last thing you need to do.

Don't I have to show that it is linear (i.e. a linear transformation) to complete the proof of it being a homomorphism or is this clear already?
 
micromass said:
Ah yes! But isn't that trivial?

Yeah it is.

Did I have to include the bit below in the argument? (Is it correct that I'm using the Lie bracket commutator in h to show that it satisifes the relations in g?)

[tex]E = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]
[tex]F = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]
[tex]G = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

[tex][E,F] = EF - FE = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} = G[/tex]

[tex][E,G] = EG - GE = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

[tex][F,G] = FG - GF = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]


Also are there any theorems that I can appeal to to show that a homomorphism is an isomorphism rather than go through the injective/surjective proofs from first principles? Things like the Group and Ring theory theorems.
 
Ted123 said:
Yeah it is.

Did I have to include the bit below in the argument? (Is it correct that I'm using the Lie bracket commutator in h to show that it satisifes the relations in g?)

[tex]E = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]
[tex]F = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]
[tex]G = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

[tex][E,F] = EF - FE = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix} = G[/tex]

[tex][E,G] = EG - GE = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

[tex][F,G] = FG - GF = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{bmatrix}[/tex]

Yes, this is good.

Also are there any theorems that I can appeal to to show that a homomorphism is an isomorphism rather than go through the injective/surjective proofs from first principles? Things like the Group and Ring theory theorems.

I suppose there are also isomorphism theorems for Lie algebra's, but they're of no use here. It's very easy to show injective/surjective in this case!
 
micromass said:
Yes, this is good.



I suppose there are also isomorphism theorems for Lie algebra's, but they're of no use here. It's very easy to show injective/surjective in this case!

Isn't [itex]\varphi[/itex] the identity function?
 
micromass said:
No: E,F and G are not matrices in general.

OK.

There is one further question.

Give an example of a Lie algebra [itex]\mathfrak{f}[/itex] over the field [itex]\mathbb{C}[/itex] such that the dimension of [itex]\mathfrak{f}[/itex] is 3 but [itex]\mathfrak{f}[/itex] is not isomorphic to [itex]\mathfrak{g}[/itex] and [itex]\mathfrak{h}[/itex]. Show that your example meets the required conditions.
 
Ted123 said:
OK.

There is one further question.

Give an example of a Lie algebra [itex]\mathfrak{f}[/itex] over the field [itex]\mathbb{C}[/itex] such that the dimension of [itex]\mathfrak{f}[/itex] is 3 but [itex]\mathfrak{f}[/itex] is not isomorphic to [itex]\mathfrak{g}[/itex] and [itex]\mathfrak{h}[/itex]. Show that your example meets the required conditions.

And, what do you think?
 
micromass said:
And, what do you think?

Special linear lie algebra [itex]\mathfrak{sl}_3(\mathbb{C})\,?[/itex]
 
micromass said:
That doesn't have dimension 3 if I recall correctly.

Try some trivial Lie bracket.

How about [itex]\mathbb{C}^3[/itex], the Lie algebra consisting of 3x1 column vectors with entries in [itex]\mathbb{C}[/itex] ?
 
micromass said:
With which Lie bracket?

Commutator: [X,Y] = XY - YX for all [itex]X,Y \in \mathbb{C}^3[/itex]
 
micromass said:
OK, but how is multiplication defined in [itex]\mathbb{C}^3[/itex]??

Oh yeah, it's not!

Can you suggest a lie bracket that would work?