The remote server returned an unexpected response: (400) Bad Request.
This is another post in a series on various components to the solution of Hilbert’s fifth problem. One interpretation of this problem is to ask for a purely topological classification of the topological groups which are isomorphic to Lie groups. (Here we require Lie groups to be finite-dimensional, but allow them to be disconnected.)
There are some obvious necessary conditions on a topological group in order for it to be isomorphic to a Lie group; for instance, it must be Hausdorff and locally compact. These two conditions, by themselves, are not quite enough to force a Lie group structure; consider for instance a -adic field
for some prime
, which is a locally compact Hausdorff topological group which is not a Lie group (the topology is locally that of a Cantor set). Nevertheless, it turns out that by adding some key additional assumptions on the topological group, one can recover Lie structure. One such result, which is a key component of the full solution to Hilbert’s fifth problem, is the following result of von Neumann:
Theorem 1 Let
be a locally compact Hausdorff topological group that has a faithful finite-dimensional linear representation, i.e. an injective continuous homomorphism
into some linear group. Then
can be given the structure of a Lie group. Furthermore, after giving
this Lie structure,
becomes smooth (and even analytic) and non-degenerate (the Jacobian always has full rank).
This result is closely related to a theorem of Cartan:
Theorem 2 (Cartan’s theorem) Any closed subgroup
of a Lie group
, is again a Lie group (in particular,
is an analytic submanifold of
, with the induced analytic structure).
Indeed, Theorem 1 immediately implies Theorem 2 in the important special case when the ambient Lie group is a linear group, and in any event it is not difficult to modify the proof of Theorem 1 to give a proof of Theorem 2. However, Theorem 1 is more general than Theorem 2 in some ways. For instance, let be the real line
, which we faithfully represent in the
-torus
using an irrational embedding
for some fixed irrational
. The
-torus can in turn be embedded in a linear group (e.g. by identifying it with
, or
), thus giving a faithful linear representation
of
. However, the image is not closed (it is a dense subgroup of a
-torus), and so Cartan’s theorem does not directly apply (
fails to be a Lie group). Nevertheless, Theorem 1 still applies and guarantees that the original group
is a Lie group.
(On the other hand, the image of any compact subset of under a faithful representation
must be closed, and so Theorem 1 is very close to the version of Theorem 2 for local groups.)
The key to building the Lie group structure on a topological group is to first build the associated Lie algebra structure, by means of one-parameter subgroups.
Definition 3 A one-parameter subgroup of a topological group
is a continuous homomorphism
from the real line (with the additive group structure) to
.
Remark 1 Technically,
is a parameterisation of a subgroup
, rather than a subgroup itself, but we will abuse notation and refer to
as the subgroup.
In a Lie group , the one-parameter subgroups are in one-to-one correspondence with the Lie algebra
, with each element
giving rise to a one-parameter subgroup
, and conversely each one-parameter subgroup
giving rise to an element
of the Lie algebra; we will establish these basic facts in the special case of linear groups below the fold. On the other hand, the notion of a one-parameter subgroup can be defined in an arbitrary topological group. So this suggests the following strategy if one is to try to represent a topological group
as a Lie group:
It turns out that this strategy indeed works to give Theorem 1 (and variants of this strategy are ubiquitious in the rest of the theory surrounding Hilbert’s fifth problem).
Below the fold, I record the proof of Theorem 1 (based on the exposition of Montgomery and Zippin). I plan to organise these disparate posts surrounding Hilbert’s fifth problem (and its application to related topics, such as Gromov’s theorem or to the classification of approximate groups) at a later date.
— 1. One-parameter subgroups of linear groups —Let us first understand the one-parameter subgroups of linear groups . Here, we can take advantage of the matrix exponential
defined for any complex matrix
, where
is the Lie algebra of
, i.e. the space of
complex matrices with the usual Lie bracket
. One easily verifies that for any such matrix
, the map
is a one-parameter subgroup of
. Conversely, these are the only such groups:
Proposition 4 Let
be a one-parameter subgroup of
. Then there exists a (unique) matrix
such that
for
.
Proof: Uniqueness follows from the differential identity
so we turn to existence. The basic idea here is to take logarithms. By the inverse function theorem, is a homeomorphism between a neighbourhood of the origin in
, and a neighbourhood of the identity in
. Thus, for sufficiently small
, we can write
for all
and a continuous function
. In particular we have
for , and thus by the local homeomorphism properties of the exponential
Iterating this we see that
for all ; using the homomorphism nature of
and the laws of exponentiation (and the local homeomorphism properties of the exponential) we have
for all dyadic rationals . By continuity we thus have
for all , where
. This gives
for all
, and by applying the homomorphism property of
we conclude that
for all
, and the claim follows.
Now we see the extent to which we can transfer Proposition 4 to the groups appearing in Theorem 1, namely locally compact Hausdorff topological groups with a faithful linear representation
. Every one-parameter subgroup
of course induces a one-parameter subgroup
that takes values in the image
of
; from faithfulness, we see that
is uniquely determined by
. In the converse direction, one would like to say that every one-parameter subgroup
taking values in
, factors through
in this manner. This is not quite true as stated; for instance, if
is
with the discrete topology, and
is the inclusion map, then only the trivial one-parameter subgroup
will factor through
. However, we can fix this by strengthening the hypothesis “
takes values in
” slightly:
Lemma 5 Let
,
,
be as in Theorem 1, let
be a compact neighbourhood of
, and let
be a one-parameter subgroup. Then
factors through
(i.e.
for some one-parameter subgroup
) if and only if
for some
.
Proof: The “only if” is immediate from continuity of , so we turn to the “if” part. As
is continuous,
is compact. The restriction
is then a continuous bijection from a compact space to a Hausdorff one, and is therefore a homeomorphism (since it maps closed (hence compact) subsets of
to compact (hence closed) subsets of
).
For future reference, we note that this already shows that is first-countable, and hence metrisable, thanks to the Birkhoff-Kakutani theorem as discussed earlier.
Since , we see from the homomorphism property that
. As
is faithful, we thus have
for some homomorphism
, with
. As
is a homeomorphism from
to
, we conclude that
is continuous on
, and hence (by the homomorphism property of
) is continuous on all of
, and the claim follows.
Exercise 1 If we make the additional assumption that
is
-compact, show that any one-parameter subgroup
taking values in
factors through
. (Hint: use the Baire category theorem.)
Henceforth we take to be as in the above lemma; it is convenient to take
to be symmetric,
. By Lemma 5 and Proposition 4, we see that there is a one-to-one correspondence between the space
of one-parameter subgroups
of
, and those matrices
with the property that
for all sufficiently small
, by identifying
with the unique matrix
for which
for all
. Let
denote the set of all such
that arise in this manner.
Lemma 6
is a Lie subalgebra of
.
Proof: It is clear that contains the origin, and by composing one-parameter subgroups with dilations
of the real line, we see that it is also closed under scalar multiplication. Now we show that
is closed under addition. Let
, then we have
for all sufficiently small
. In particular, for sufficiently large natural numbers
, we have
We wish to show that lies in
for all sufficiently small
. The idea is to use the formula
where . If we had that
for all sufficiently small
, uniformly for an infinite sequence of
, then the claim would follow from the compact (hence closed) nature of
.
From (1) and Proposition 4, we see that go to zero as
, which implies that for any fixed
, we have
for all sufficiently large
. If we had
for all sufficiently large
and all
, we would be done (using symmetry of
to then get the negative values of
); so suppose that this is not the case. Then we can find a sequence of
, and a sequence
of natural numbers going to infinity with
, such that
for all
Remark 2 One can view the integers
as the “escape times” associated to the
. The concept of escape time (and its reciprocal, which one can view as an “escape norm” that measures how deeply nested a given point is inside a fixed neighbourhood of the identity) turns out to be of major importance throughout the theory of Hilbert’s fifth problem; this should become clearer in subsequent posts on this problem.
By passing to a subsequence if necessary we may assume that converges to some limit
. If
, then (by a variant of (2)) we would have
and
both converging to the identity in
, which contradicts
staying out of
for sufficiently large
(recall that
is homeomorphic to
). So we have
) we have
for all
where , shows that
is closed under Lie bracket; we leave the details as an exercise to the reader. Thus
is a Lie subalgebra of
as claimed.
We have now located a good candidate for the “Lie algebra” of
, which one can then try to “exponentiate” to create Lie group structure for
. Indeed it is clear from construction that
is contained in
. However, we have not yet shown that
is “big enough” to cover all of
. Indeed, at this point it is conceivable that this Lie algebra could well be the trivial Lie algebra, even if
is highly non-trivial. To prevent this scenario from happening, we need a way to generate non-trivial one-parameter subgroups. Such subgroups can be extracted from sequences in
converging to the identity by a compactness argument. Let us first illustrate this idea in a simple case:
Lemma 7 If
is not discrete, then
is non-trivial.
Proof: If is not discrete, then there exists a sequence
of group elements distinct from the group identity
, which nevertheless converge to the identity. (As remarked in the proof of Lemma 5,
is necessarily metrisable.) Then
converges to the matrix identity, but will always be distinct from the identity. Now let
be a symmetric compact neighbourhood of the identity in
that is small enough that
contains no non-trivial subgroups. Then for each
,
must eventually escape
for some
. Let
be the first natural number for which
escapes
(or equivalently, for which
escapes
). Since
converges to the identity, we see that
must go to infinity, and the distance between
and the boundary
of
must go to zero. By compactness, we may then pass to a subsequence such that
converges to an element of
; if
is small enough, we can write this element as
for some small
; this must be non-zero, as the identity is not a boundary point of
. Using logarithms, we then see (if
is small enough) that for any
, that
converges to
. As
lies in the compact set
, we thus conclude that
for all
, and thus
, and the claim follows.
A similar argument now gives
Proposition 8 There exists a compact neighbourhood
of the identity in
, and a compact neighbourhood
of zero in
, such that
.
Proof: The basic idea is to first “quotient out” from
and then apply the Lemma 7 argument to the quotient space.
We turn to the details. Let be a compact neighbourhood of zero in
. If the claim failed, then there exists a sequence
of group elements
converging to zero such that
for any
. Since
is close to zero for large
, we thus have
for some
that goes to zero as
.
Split as a vector space direct sum
for some complementary subspace
(not necessarily a Lie algebra). From the inverse function theorem, we can then write
where
and
both go to zero. Since
, we also have
for
large enough.
Let be a small compact neighbourhood of the identity in
. For each
, we have
for
small enough, thanks to Lemma 5. In particular,
avoids the compact set
for
small enough. If
is a compact neighbourhood of the origin in
, we can conclude that there exists a
such that
avoids
for all
and all
; by a continuity argument, we conclude that
for all
and all
. In particular, we have
for sufficiently large
. Letting
shrink to zero, we conclude that for sufficiently large
, we have
for some
converging to the identity in
.
We now have
where goes to zero. Since
is non-zero for large
,
is also non-zero for large
.
Now we can repeat the arguments used to prove Lemma 7. As in that lemma, we pick a symmetric neighbourhood of
small enough to contain no nontrivial subgroups, and let
be the first integer for which
escapes
. As before, by passing to a subsequence we may assume that there is a non-zero
such that
for all
. Since
is the exponential of a small element of
, the same is true for
(which, recall, has not yet escaped
) for
small enough, and we conclude that
for
small enough. This implies that
has non-trivial intersection with
, a contradiction.
From the above proposition we see that is locally isomorphic to
. But
is locally an analytic manifold, and from the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula we see that multiplication and inversion are smooth (and even analytic) operations on
locally near the origin. This gives a left-invariant (say) smooth (and even analytic) structure on
with the group operations smooth near the origin. A continuity argument then shows that the group operations remain smooth on the identity connected component
of
. This already gives Theorem 1 in the connected case.
Now we turn to the disconnected case. From the local connectedness of we see that
is locally connected, so that
is discrete. So it will suffice to show that the group operations are continuous on each connected component of
(i.e. the cosets of the normal subgroup
) separately. But observe that any element
of
induces an outer automorphism
on
, the graph of which can be viewed as a closed connected subgroup of
. By the connected case of Theorem 1, this subgroup must also be a Lie group, and so the outer automorphism is smooth. From this one easily verifies that the group operations are now smooth on all connected components of
, as required.
Remark 3 A similar argument shows that any continuous homomorphism between two Lie groups is automatically smooth (and analytic). Thus we see a rigidity phenomenon in Lie groups: the smooth structure is completely determined by the topological structure. This is ultimately due to the fact that the Lie algebra (which controls the smooth and analytic structure) can be constructed in a purely topological fashion, via one-parameter subgroups.
Remark 4 The above arguments were sufficiently “local” in nature that they can be extended without much difficulty to local groups, with the conclusion being that any local group that has a locally faithful continuous linear representation, is a local Lie group.
No comments:
Post a Comment