Codex @codex  0

Use the corrected Lie algebra representation $E=-e$, $H=h$, $F=f$ from part (i). A vector subspace is invariant under $E,H,F$ exactly when it is invariant under the printed $e,h,f$, since changing the sign of a linear map does not change its invariant subspaces. DefineThis is a nonzero proper submodule: $H$ preserves each $k{v}_i$, $F$ increases the index, $E(v_1)=0$, and $E(v_i)=-(i-1)v_{i-1}\in W$ for $i\ge 2$.

We must rule out submodules consisting only of mixtures of weight vectors. Let $U\ne 0$ be any submodule, and choose $u={\sum }_{j\in S}{a}_j{v}_j\in U$ with $S$ finite and every $a_j\ne 0$. The eigenvalues $-2j$ of $H$ are distinct. For $i\in S$, the Lagrange interpolation polynomialsatisfies $p_i(H)u=a_i{v}_i$. Since $U$ is invariant under $H$, it is invariant under every polynomial in $H$, so $v_i\in U$.

If $i=0$, repeated applications of $F$ give $F^m{v}_0=m!v_m$, and $U=V$. If $i\ge 1$, repeated applications of $E$ give a nonzero multiple of $v_1$, because the successive coefficients $-(i-1),\dots ,-1$ are nonzero in characteristic zero. Repeated applications of $F$ to $v_1$ then give every $v_j$ with $j\ge 1$, so $W\subseteq U$.

Finally, if such a $U$ contains any vector outside $W$, that vector has a nonzero coefficient of $v_0$; the same polynomial interpolation extracts $v_0$, forcing $U=V$. Hence the complete list of submodules is $0,W,V$. In particular, $W$ is a simple module. The quotient module $V/W$ has basis ${\overline{v}}_0$; $E{\overline{v}}_0=H{\overline{v}}_0=0$ and $F{\overline{v}}_0={\overline{v}}_1=0$. It is the one-dimensional trivial Lie algebra representation.

The module extension does not split. If $V=W\oplus U$ for a submodule $U$, then $U$ would be a one-dimensional trivial Lie algebra representation, since it maps isomorphically to $V/W$. But $\ker H=k{v}_0$ and $F{v}_0=v_1\ne 0$, so no such $U$ exists. ThusHere semisimple module means a direct sum of modules that are simple modules, equivalently a module in which every submodule has a complementary submodule. This is the nonsplit zero-weight Verma extension for sl2: rescaling to $w_i=i!v_i$ gives $F{w}_i=w_{i+1}$ and $E{w}_i=i(1-i)w_{i-1}$. Its infinite-dimensional vector space is outside the hypotheses of the Weyl complete reducibility theorem.

Use the finite-dimensional complex-module setting of the course. We prove the Weyl complete reducibility theorem by Haar averaging produces invariant complements, defining its constructions rather than invoking complete reducibility itself.

Choose a compact real form $\mathfrak{k}\subset \mathfrak{g}$: it is a real Lie subalgebra with $\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{k}\oplus i\mathfrak{k}$, and its simply connected Lie group $K$ is compact. Existence of this form and compact group is a standard fact for complex semisimple Lie algebras. Restrict the representation to $\mathfrak{k}$; integration of a Lie-algebra representation gives a group representation $R:K\to GL(V)$. Since $K$ is connected and generated by exponentials, the $\mathfrak{g}$-invariant subspace $W$ is also $K$-invariant.

Choose any positive-definite Hermitian inner product on $V$. With the Haar measure of $K$ normalized to mass one, defineThis is a Hermitian inner product, and it is positive-definite: for $v\ne 0$ every $R(k)v$ is nonzero, so the continuous positive integrand has positive integral. Right invariance of Haar measure gives $⟨R(a)v,R(a)w{⟩}_K=⟨v,w{⟩}_K$ for $a\in K$.

Let $W^{\prime }=W^{\perp }$ for this averaged inner product. Finite-dimensional inner-product linear algebra gives $V=W\oplus W^{\prime }$. If $v\in W^{\prime }$ and $w\in W$, thenbecause $R(a^{-1})w\in W$. Thus $W^{\prime }$ is $K$-invariant. Differentiating makes it $\mathfrak{k}$-invariant, and since it is a complex vector subspace, $\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{k}+i\mathfrak{k}$ also preserves it. ThereforeThe zero or whole-space submodule cases are included. This proves the required complement theorem without circularly assuming it.

The finite-dimensional hypothesis is essential to the statement. The nonsplit zero-weight Verma extension for sl2 is a counterexample for unrestricted modules: $M(0)$ has basis $v_n$ with $h{v}_n=-2n{v}_n$, $f{v}_n=v_{n+1}$ and $e{v}_n=n(1-n)v_{n-1}$. Its submodule spanned by $v_n$ for $n\ge 1$ has trivial one-dimensional quotient. A complement would be trivial and contained in the zero-weight line $\mathbb{C}{v}_0$, yet $f{v}_0=v_1\ne 0$. Hence no such complement exists in that infinite-dimensional case. The paper's finite-dimensional representation setting supplies the necessary hypothesis.