Show that a group of operators generates a Lie algebra

In summary: The bracket is bilinear2) The bracket is anti-commutative3) The bracket satisfies the Jacobi identity.
  • #1
russel
13
0
Hello there! Above is a problem that has to do with Lie Theory. Here it is:
The operators [itex]P_{i},J,T (i,j=1,2)[/itex] satisfy the following permutation relations:
[itex][J,P_{i}]= \epsilon_{ij}P_{ij},[P_{i},P_{j}]= \epsilon_{ij}T, [J,T]=[P_{i},T]=0[/itex]
Show that these operators generate a Lie algebra. Is that algebra a semisimple one? Also show that
[itex]e^{uJ}P_{i}e^{-uJ}=P_{i} \cos{u}+ \epsilon_{ij}P_{j} \sin{u}[/itex]

Does anyone know how to deal with it?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Changing "MATH" to "itex" will probably generate more response.
 
  • #3
Martin Rattigan said:
Changing "MATH" to "itex" will probably generate more response.
ok! I fixed it! I didn't know the exact code, sorry!
 
  • #4
You just have to prove the three things:
1) The bracket is bilinear
2) The bracket is anti-commutative
3) The bracket satisfies the Jacobi identity.

Since you're given a proposed list of generators, the bracket is defined to be the bilinear operator satisfying the properties that you're given, so 1 is already done.

Let's say I'm given two arbitrary elements A and B. Do you see how you could prove that in general, [A,B]=-[B,A] using only what you know about the Lie bracket on the generators?
 
  • #5
I think I got it! Thanks a lot! What about the last equation? How do I prove it?
 
  • #6
russel said:
I think I got it! Thanks a lot! What about the last equation? How do I prove it?

The last one is the group adjoint action. Try taking the derivative of the LHS wrt u.
This should show you how to rewrite the group adjoint as an "exponentiated commutator".
I'll let you do the rest.

Also have you proved that it's semi-simple yet?
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Simon_Tyler said:
The last one is the group adjoint action. Try taking the derivative of the LHS wrt u.
This should show you how to rewrite the group adjoint as an "exponentiated commutator".
I'll let you do the rest. Also have you proved that it's semi-simple yet?
I'll haven't had enough time, so I didn't really managed to solve it. As far as I know, a lie algebra is a semi-simple one if it is a direct sum of simple lie algebras. I will follow this path? Or should I think of a different way to prove it?
 
  • #8
Also, a semi-simple Lie algebra L satisfies [L,L]=L.
 
  • #9
Office_Shredder said:
Also, a semi-simple Lie algebra L satisfies [L,L]=L.
Oh, I see. So, I'll choose every element and see if this condition is satisfied.
 
  • #10
The [itex]L[/itex] Office Shredder is referring to is the whole algebra, not a single element. The Lie bracket of an element with itself is 0, by definition.

Look at the presentation for the algebra. Then, consider [itex]\[L,L\].[/itex] Can you get each generator from the Lie bracket of other elements?
 
  • #11
To prove that you have a lie algebra, you wave to show that your bracket is a bilinear operator, and also that the Jacobi identity holds: i.e given any arbitrary 3 operators A,B,C,
[[A,B],C]+[[B,C],A]+[[C,A],B]= 0. That would involve simple computations.
As for showing that it is semi-simple, this might actually involve some more work since you have to show that the nilradical of the group is zero.
Vignon S. Oussa
 
Last edited:
  • #12
vigvig said:
that the Jacobi identity holds: i.e given any arbitrary 3 operators A,B,C,
[[A,B],C]+[[B,C],A]+[[C,A],B]= 0. That would involve simple computations.

How do we do that in the case with 4 operators (let's say A,B,C and D) ?

[[A,B],C]+[[B,C],D]+[[C,D],A]+[[D,A],B]= 0

Is it right?
 
  • #13
maxverywell said:
How do we do that in the case with 4 operators (let's say A,B,C and D) ?

[[A,B],C]+[[B,C],D]+[[C,D],A]+[[D,A],B]= 0

Is it right?

Oops, it's wrong and I think I figure it out. It's

[[A,B],C]+[[B,C],A]+[[C,A],B]= 0

[[A,B],D]+[[B,D],A]+[[D,A],B]= 0

[[A,C],D]+[[C,D],A]+[[D,A],C]= 0

[[B,C],D]+[[C,D],B]+[[D,B],C]= 0

So now we have 4 Jacobi identities which must be satisfied to form a Lie algebra.

In case of N operators (generators of Lie group) there are [itex]\binom{N}{3}[/itex] Jacobi identities.

Am I right? Please let me know.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
That is correct
 
  • #15
Thnx! So there are a lot of work if we have many generators...
 
  • #16
Is there any other way of doing this? If we have 10 generators than there are 120 Jacobi identities that we need to prove...
 
  • #17
Just an idea...I haven't thought about the details. How about finding a Lie group that has a Lie algebra that satisfies the other requirements? Then the Jacobi identity will be automatic.
 
  • #18
Are you saying that if the following two properties are satisfied than the third is sutisfied automaticaly?

Office_Shredder said:
You just have to prove the three things:
1) The bracket is bilinear
2) The bracket is anti-commutative

3) The bracket satisfies the Jacobi identity.
 
  • #19
Ok let me show you one example:

I want to prove that the algebra of octanions with generators [tex]X_a[/tex], [tex]a=1,...,7[/tex] that sutisfy the following relation: [tex]X_a X_b=\epsilon_{abc}X_c[/tex] is Lie algebra.

My proof is the following:

1) [tex][X_a, X_b]=X_a X_b-X_b X_a=2\epsilon_{abc}X_c[/tex]

2) [tex]\epsilon_{abc}=-\epsilon_{bac}[/tex]

3) [tex][[X_a, X_b],X_c]=[X_a X_b, X_c]-[X_b X_a, X_c]=[X_a, X_c]X_b+X_a [X_b,X_c]-[X_b, X_c]X_a-X_b[X_a, X_c]=X_a X_c X_b - X_c X_a X_b + ...=0[/tex]

because [tex]X_i X_j X_k = 0[/tex] for [tex]i\neq j \neq k[/tex]

Is it correct?
 
  • #20
maxverywell said:
Are you saying that if the following two properties are satisfied than the third is sutisfied automaticaly?
No, that would be a false claim. I'm thinking along these lines: Suppose that they're all satisfied. Then the bracket defines a Lie algebra, and we can try to find a group that has that Lie algebra as the tangent space at the identity element. If you find such a group, the claim you're trying to prove must be true.

I haven't tried to solve your problem with this method or any other. It's just the first idea that occurred to me.
 
  • #21
Bi-linearity doesn't mean you can pull out elements of the Lie algebra:

[tex] [X_a X_b, X_c] \neq X_a[X_b,X_c][/tex]
 
  • #22
Bilinearity does however mean that if you expand arbitrary vectors in a basis, you can pull the coefficients out of the brackets:

[tex][X,[Y,Z]]=[X_iE_i,[Y_jE_j,Z_kE_k]]=X_iY_jZ_k[E_i,[E_j,E_k]][/tex]

If we have already proved that the Jacobi identity holds when only basis vectors are involved, we can rewrite this as

[tex]=X_iY_jZ_k(-[E_j,[E_k,E_i]]-[E_k,[E_i,E_j]])=-[Y,[Z,X]]-[Z,[X,Y]][/tex]

So if the Jacobi identity holds when only basis vectors are involved, it holds for three arbitrary vectors.

Edit: I don't think he was "pulling things out". Looks like he was using an identity that holds for commutators.
 
  • #23
Office_Shredder said:
Bi-linearity doesn't mean you can pull out elements of the Lie algebra:

[tex] [X_a X_b, X_c] \neq X_a[X_b,X_c][/tex]

No I'm not pulling out elements like you did.

[tex][X_a X_b, X_c] = X_a[X_b,X_c]+[X_a, X_c] X_b[/tex]
 
  • #24
Reffering to the initial problem, could someone thoroughly explain how to prove that this Lie algebra is a semi-simple one?
 
  • #25
russel said:
Reffering to the initial problem, could someone thoroughly explain how to prove that this Lie algebra is a semi-simple one?

Use the Cartan criterion (i.e prove that the Killing form is nondegenerate).
 
Last edited:
  • #26
First of all, substitute X1=P1, X2=P2, X3=J and X4=T.
Find the structure constants of the Lie algebra [tex]C_{ij}^k[/tex], e.g [tex]C_{12}^3=1[/tex], [tex]C_{13}^2=-1[/tex] etc.
Then use them to constract the Cartan metric [tex]g_{ij}[/tex] and try to prove that [tex]det(g)\neq 0[/tex].

P.S. SEMFE?
 
Last edited:
  • #27
russel said:
Also show that
[itex]e^{uJ}P_{i}e^{-uJ}=P_{i} \cos{u}+ \epsilon_{ij}P_{j} \sin{u}[/itex]

For this one, define:

[tex]f_1(u)=e^{uJ}P_{1}e^{-uJ}[/tex]

Take the Maclaurin series expansion of [tex]f_1(u)[/tex]:

[tex]f_1(u)=P_1+[J,P_1]u+\frac{1}{2!}[J,[J,P_1]u^2+\cdot\cdot\cdot[/tex]

[tex]f_1(u)=P_1+\frac{1}{2!}P_2 u-P_1 u^2+\cdot\cdot\cdot=P_1-\frac{1}{2!}P_1 u^2+\cdot\cdot\cdot+P_2 u-\frac{1}{3!}P_2 u^3+\cdot\cdot\cdot[/tex]

[tex]f_1(u)=P_1 \cos u+P_2\sin u[/tex]

Do the same for [tex]f_2(u)[/tex].
 
Last edited:

1. What is a Lie algebra?

A Lie algebra is a mathematical structure that studies the algebraic properties of continuous transformations, such as rotations and translations. It is an extension of the concept of a group, and is used in many areas of mathematics and physics.

2. How are Lie algebras related to groups of operators?

A Lie algebra is generated by a set of operators which satisfy certain algebraic properties. These operators are usually associated with a group, and the Lie algebra captures the algebraic structure of the group. In other words, the Lie algebra describes the infinitesimal behavior of the group.

3. What does it mean for a group of operators to generate a Lie algebra?

A group of operators is said to generate a Lie algebra if the algebraic properties of the group are captured by the Lie algebra. This means that the group can be understood in terms of the Lie algebra, and the Lie algebra is a more fundamental object for studying the group.

4. How can we show that a group of operators generates a Lie algebra?

In order to show that a group of operators generates a Lie algebra, we need to demonstrate that the operators satisfy the defining properties of a Lie algebra. These properties include closure, associativity, and the existence of a zero element, among others. By showing that the operators satisfy these properties, we can prove that they generate a Lie algebra.

5. What are some applications of Lie algebras?

Lie algebras have many applications in mathematics and physics. In mathematics, they are used to study continuous symmetries and differential equations. In physics, they are used to describe the fundamental forces of nature and the behavior of particles. They are also used in fields such as computer vision, robotics, and control theory.

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
854
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
816
Replies
27
Views
966
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
617
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
9
Views
3K
Back
Top