Codex @codex  0

The printed identity has a sign error. With the defined Kostant partition function and the exponent $e^{-\nu }$, the cancelling factors must be $1-e^{-\alpha }$. This is already visible for $SU(2)$ with positive root $\alpha$: the formal series ${\sum }_{k\ge 0}{e}^{-k\alpha }$ multiplied by $1-e^{\alpha }$ is $-e^{\alpha }$, not $1$.

For the corrected formula, a partition of $\nu$ is a tuple of nonnegative integers $(k_{\alpha }{)}_{\alpha >0}$ satisfying $\nu ={\sum }_{\alpha >0}{k}_{\alpha }\alpha$. The order of summands is not counted. Multiplying the formal geometric series yieldsThis product is coefficientwise meaningful. Choose a linear functional strictly positive on every positive root. For a fixed $\nu$ it bounds each $k_{\alpha }$, so only finitely many tuples contribute. We are working in the completion supported on the negative positive-root cone, not claiming convergence of an ordinary Fourier series on the torus.

Each geometric series cancels its factor $1-e^{-\alpha }$, provingEquivalently, reversing all the exponential signs gives $({\sum }_{\nu }p(\nu )e^{\nu }){\prod }_{\alpha >0}(1-e^{\alpha })=1$ in the opposite completion. More generally, if $N$ is the number of positive roots, the expression literally printed in the paper equalssince ${\prod }_{\alpha >0}(1-e^{\alpha })=(-1{)}^N{e}^{2\rho }{\prod }_{\alpha >0}(1-e^{-\alpha })$. Thus the correction is substantive, not merely a choice of Fourier convention.

Use the corrected generating series of the Kostant partition function and the permitted Weyl character formula:For a fixed $w$, the coefficient of $e^{\mu }$ arises exactly whenThere are only finitely many Weyl-group terms, and the partition function vanishes outside the cone of nonnegative root combinations. Coefficient extraction is therefore legitimate in the formal completion used in the preceding part. Summing the signed contributions provesThis proves the Kostant multiplicity formula for every compact connected Lie group, not just the unitary groups. In the presence of a central torus, roots have zero central component, so the partition function automatically gives zero for any incompatible central weight. Also $\rho$ need not itself be an integral weight for the given global group: $w\rho -\rho$ always belongs to the root lattice, so every argument in the formula is nevertheless integral whenever $\lambda$ and $\mu$ are integral group weights.

As a normalization check, for $SU(2)$ write a highest weight as the nonnegative integer $\ell$, with positive root $2$ and $\rho =1$. The two Weyl-group terms giveSince $p(a)=1$ precisely when $a$ is even and nonnegative, this is one for $\mu =\ell ,\ell -2,\dots ,-\ell$ and zero otherwise, including the cancellation below the lowest weight. This recovers the full familiar weight string.

The origin has Jacobian $\left(\begin{array}{cc}r& 0\\ 1-b& 0\end{array}\right)$ and is unstable because $r>1$. At a positive equilibrium, $r{e}^{-p_c}=1$, givingThe linearization isIts trace is $\tau =1+b{n}_c/r$ and determinant $n_c$. Elimination gives $n_{t+2}^{\prime }-\tau n_{t+1}^{\prime }+n_c{n}_t^{\prime }=0$. For distinct roots,At a repeated root replace the first expression by $(A+Bt){\lambda }^t$ and use $p_t^{\prime }=(n_t^{\prime }-n_{t+1}^{\prime })/n_c$.

As $r\downarrow 1$, $n_c\to 0$, so the roots approach one and zero. The characteristic polynomial at one is $n_c(1-b/r)>0$, putting the larger real root just below one and the other positive root below it. No real root can ever equal one. Moreoversince its numerator exceeds $r-1-\log r>0$. At $n_c=1$, $\tau =1+b/r<2$, so the roots are conjugate and nonreal. Just above this point their modulus is $\sqrt{n_c}>1$.

The unit-disc conditions are $1-n_c>0$, $1-\tau +n_c>0$, and $1+\tau +n_c>0$. The last two hold automatically here, so stability is equivalent to $n_c<1$. The unique crossing and its eigenvalue argument satisfyIndeed $\log r_{\ast }=1-b/r_{\ast }<1$. This is the stability threshold of a discrete exponential predator-prey model. The sketch uses $b=1/2$: the real moduli merge and then coincide, increasing through one at the threshold. Linearization decides stability below and instability above; it does not determine nonlinear stability exactly at the crossing.

Put $\bar{i}=2n+2-i$ and $o=n+1$. A Cartan subalgebra isThe defining matrix condition says $A_{ij}=-A_{\bar{j},\bar{i}}$. Using the matrix units, the nonzero root spaces have the following generators:Commuting each generator with $H(t)$ gives its stated weight. Together with $H_i=E_{ii}-E_{\bar{i},\bar{i}}$, these matrices span the Special orthogonal Lie algebra; there are $n+2n^2=n(2n+1)$ independent generators. Thus its decomposition as a Cartan subalgebra module isThis is the Bn root system. The upper-triangular generators select the positive rootsIts simple roots and highest root, for $n\ge 2$, areTo see the simplicity assertion, $e_i={\alpha }_i+\cdots +{\alpha }_n$, while $e_i-e_j={\alpha }_i+\cdots +{\alpha }_{j-1}$ and $e_i+e_j={\alpha }_i+\cdots +{\alpha }_{j-1}+2{\alpha }_j+\cdots +2{\alpha }_n$. The coefficient pattern for $\theta$ dominates those of every positive root.

Normalize the inner product so the $e_i$ are orthonormal. The simple coroots are ${\alpha }_i^{\vee }={\alpha }_i$ for $i<n$ and ${\alpha }_n^{\vee }=2e_n$. Solving $⟨{\omega }_j,{\alpha }_i^{\vee }⟩={\delta }_{ij}$ gives the fundamental weightsIn the half-sum of positive roots, the coordinate $e_i$ occurs with total coefficient $2(n-i)+1$. Hence the Weyl vector is

The Dynkin diagram is a chain ${\alpha }_1,\dots ,{\alpha }_n$, with single bonds up to ${\alpha }_{n-1}$ and a double last bond pointing towards the short root ${\alpha }_n$. In the Extended Dynkin diagram, add ${\alpha }_0=-\theta$. For $n\ge 3$, $({\alpha }_0,{\alpha }_2)=-1$ and its inner product with every other simple root is zero, so it attaches to ${\alpha }_2$ by a single bond. For $n=2$, both long nodes $0,1$ attach by double bonds to short node $2$. These rules give the Bn Dynkin diagram and affine extension drawn below.

For rank one, $R=\{\pm e_1\}$, ${\alpha }_1=\theta =e_1$, ${\omega }_1=e_1/2$, and $\rho =e_1/2$. The finite diagram is one node; its affine extension has two equal-length nodes joined by a double bond, without a short-root arrow.

Number the simple roots of the G2 root system so that ${\alpha }_1$ is short and ${\alpha }_2$ is long. In the Euclidean plane chooseTheir squared lengths are one and three, and their angle is $150$ degrees. The six positive roots areTogether with their negatives these form the twelve-root diagram: two regular hexagons of radii one and $\sqrt{3}$, rotated by $30$ degrees relative to one another. Solving the fundamental weight equations givesIn particular ${\omega }_1$ is the highest short root and ${\omega }_2$ the highest long root. The root diagram below marks both weights.

To evaluate the Weyl dimension formula, put $a=n_1$, $b=n_2$ and $\lambda =a{\omega }_1+b{\omega }_2$. The Weyl vector is $\rho ={\omega }_1+{\omega }_2$. In the order of positive roots listed above, their coroots have simple-coroot coefficient pairsFor example the short root ${\alpha }_1+{\alpha }_2$ has coroot ${\alpha }_1^{\vee }+3{\alpha }_2^{\vee }$, while the long root $3{\alpha }_1+2{\alpha }_2$ has coroot ${\alpha }_1^{\vee }+2{\alpha }_2^{\vee }$. Pairing with $\lambda +\rho$ and dividing by the same factors at $a=b=0$ gives the G2 dimension polynomialThe denominator is $1\cdot 1\cdot 2\cdot 3\cdot 4\cdot 5$. As checks, the fundamental representations have dimensions seven and fourteen, and $a=b=0$ gives the trivial representation of dimension one.

Let $\mathfrak{g}$ be a complex semisimple Lie algebra, choose a Cartan subalgebra and a positive root system $R^{+}$, and let $\lambda$ be a dominant integral highest weight. Write $L(\lambda )$ for the corresponding finite-dimensional irreducible representation, ${\alpha }^{\vee }=2\alpha /(\alpha ,\alpha )$ for a coroot, and $\rho =\frac{1}{2}{\sum }_{\alpha \in R^{+}}\alpha$ for the Weyl vector. The Weyl dimension formula isThe bracket denotes the natural pairing of weights with coroots. The normalization of an invariant inner product cancels from each ratio, so the formula can equivalently use roots instead of coroots in both numerator and denominator.

A highest-weight vector is a nonzero weight vector $v$ such that ${\mathfrak{g}}_{\alpha }v=0$ for every positive root $\alpha$. Its weight of a representation is a highest weight. For an irreducible finite-dimensional Lie algebra representation, this is the unique highest weight of a representation, and $v$ generates the module; a reducible module can have several highest weights of different summands.

Here is an existence argument for every nonzero finite-dimensional module $V$. For each simple root, its root operators and coroot form an sl2 subalgebra associated with a root. The classification of finite-dimensional sl2 representations shows that this coroot acts diagonalizably with integral eigenvalues. These commuting coroots span the Cartan subalgebra, so simultaneous diagonalization gives a finite weight-space decompositionChoose a real linear functional $\ell$ on the weight lattice span that is positive on every simple root, hence on every positive root, and choose a weight $\lambda$ maximizing $\ell$ among the finitely many weights of $V$. If $v\in V_{\lambda }$ and $X_{\alpha }\in {\mathfrak{g}}_{\alpha }$, thenso $X_{\alpha }v$ belongs to $V_{\lambda +\alpha }$ if nonzero. For positive $\alpha$, that would contradict maximality because $\ell (\lambda +\alpha )>\ell (\lambda )$. Thus every nonzero $v\in V_{\lambda }$ is a highest-weight vector. Every nonzero finite-dimensional module therefore has a highest weight. The zero module has no nonzero vector or weight, so it is the vacuous exception to the literal unrestricted wording.

Choose a positive system $R^{+}$ and its simple roots $\Delta =\{{\alpha }_1,\dots ,{\alpha }_{\ell }\}$. The corresponding fundamental Weyl chamber is the open coneIts Closed dominant Weyl chamber replaces all strict inequalities by weak inequalities. The facts used here are that every positive root is a nonnegative integral combination of the simple roots, and that the Weyl chambers are the connected components left after removing the root-orthogonal hyperplanes. Hence the displayed inequalities describe one such component. The Weyl group permutes these components simply transitively, and every orbit in $E$ meets the Closed dominant Weyl chamber in exactly one point. A point on a wall may have a nontrivial stabilizer, which is why uniqueness of the chamber point does not always mean uniqueness of the group element carrying it there.

In the finite-dimensional complex semisimple Lie algebra setting implicit in this root-system construction, the given Cartan subalgebra and root spaces determine a reduced crystallographic root system $R$. The ordering divides $R$ into positive roots and their negatives. The simple roots are the positive roots that cannot be written as a sum of two positive roots; a standard root-system fact is that they form a basis and that every positive root is a nonnegative integral combination of them.

Index the simple roots as ${\alpha }_1,\dots ,{\alpha }_{\ell }$ and form the Cartan matrixFor $i\ne j$, these entries are nonpositive integers and $A_{ij}{A}_{ji}\in \{0,1,2,3\}$. Construct one vertex per simple root and join distinct vertices by $A_{ij}{A}_{ji}$ lines. If root lengths differ, direct the arrow toward the shorter simple root. This labelled and oriented graph is the Dynkin diagram. Its unoriented Coxeter graph is admissible: normalizing the simple roots to unit length gives $4(v_i,v_j{)}^2=A_{ij}{A}_{ji}$. A general Lie algebra without the semisimple root-system hypotheses need not produce such a diagram.

Write an element of the symplectic Lie algebra in $n\times n$ blocks. Direct multiplication in $AJ+J{A}^T=0$ givesThe diagonal Cartan subalgebra consists of $H=\mathrm{diag}(h_1,\dots ,h_n,-h_1,\dots ,-h_n)$. Define ${\epsilon }_i(H)=h_i$. Under the Adjoint representation, the off-diagonal matrix units in $P$ have weights ${\epsilon }_i-{\epsilon }_j$; the symmetric entries in $Q$ have weights ${\epsilon }_i+{\epsilon }_j$, including $2{\epsilon }_i$ on the diagonal; those in $R$ have the negatives of these weights. All nonzero root spaces are one-dimensional, while the zero weight space is the diagonal Cartan subalgebra. Thus the Cn root system isChoose the positive roots and simple roots asTheir highest root and Weyl vector areFor the last identity, each pair $i<j$ contributes $2{\epsilon }_i$ before division by two, and the long positive root contributes another ${\epsilon }_i$ afterward. Successive simple roots have equal length except for ${\alpha }_n$, whose squared length is twice that of ${\alpha }_{n-1}$. The Cn Dynkin diagram is a chain with a double last bond, whose arrow points toward ${\alpha }_{n-1}$, the short root:

The displayed schematic is for $n\ge 4$; omit intermediate nodes for $n=2,3$. For $n=1$ the diagram has just the single node ${\alpha }_1=2{\epsilon }_1$.

Choose a base of a root system and its positive roots, so that the triangular decomposition of a Lie algebra is $L={\mathfrak{n}}^{-}\oplus H\oplus {\mathfrak{n}}^{+}$. A primitive element of a Lie algebra representation of weight $\omega \in H^{\ast }$ is a nonzero vector $v$ such thatEquivalently it is a highest-weight vector. Being primitive depends on the chosen positive system; no integrality condition is part of this definition.

Construct the Verma module for an arbitrary $\omega$. The subalgebra $\mathfrak{b}=H\oplus {\mathfrak{n}}^{+}$ has a one-dimensional module ${\mathbb{C}}_{\omega }$ on which $H$ acts by $\omega$ and ${\mathfrak{n}}^{+}$ acts by zero. This is a representation because $[\mathfrak{b},\mathfrak{b}]\subseteq {\mathfrak{n}}^{+}$. Setwhere $U$ denotes the universal enveloping algebra. The Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt theorem, applied with negative-root vectors first, then Cartan vectors and positive-root vectors, givesas vector spaces. In particular $v_{\omega }=1\otimes 1$ is nonzero, generates $M(\omega )$, and is primitive of weight $\omega$.

The same ordered monomials show that $M(\omega )$ is a direct sum of weight spaces, with weights of the formand that its weight-$\omega$ space is exactly $\mathbb{C}{v}_{\omega }$. Each vector has only finitely many weight components. If a submodule contains a vector with nonzero weight-$\omega$ component, choose $h\in H$ that separates $\omega$ from the finitely many other weights of that vector. Polynomial interpolation in the action of $h$ extracts a nonzero multiple of $v_{\omega }$. Such a submodule is all of $M(\omega )$, because $v_{\omega }$ generates it. Consequently every proper submodule has zero component in weight $\omega$.

Let $N$ be the sum of all proper submodules. Every finite sum still has zero weight-$\omega$ component, so $N$ is proper; it contains every proper submodule and is therefore the unique maximal proper submodule. Its quotientis irreducible, and the nonzero image of $v_{\omega }$ is primitive of weight $\omega$. This proves existence for every $\omega \in H^{\ast }$ and gives the irreducible quotient of a Verma module. It also proves uniqueness up to isomorphism among irreducible modules generated by a primitive vector of that weight: the defining relations induce a surjection from $M(\omega )$, whose proper kernel must be $N$.

These modules are not generally finite-dimensional. For example, in an ${\mathfrak{sl}}_2$ root subalgebra, a primitive vector with $hv=\lambda v$ satisfiesIf its irreducible highest-weight module is finite-dimensional, the weight-lowering sequence eventually stops. For the first $m$ with $f^{m+1}v=0$ and $f^{m}v\ne 0$, the identity forces $\lambda =m\in {\mathbb{Z}}_{\ge 0}$. In general a finite-dimensional highest-weight module therefore requires nonnegative integral values on all simple coroots; arbitrary $\omega$ in the request must allow infinite-dimensional representations. This is consistent with the finite-dimensional qualification made in Question 2.

For simple coroots $h_1,\dots ,h_r$ forming a basis of $H$, the fundamental weights are the dual basis ${\omega }_1,\dots ,{\omega }_r\in H^{\ast }$:For the special linear Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{sl}}_3(\mathbb{C})$, take the diagonal trace-zero Cartan subalgebra and positive roots corresponding to upper triangular matrix units. Write ${\epsilon }_i(\mathrm{diag}(t_1,t_2,t_3))=t_i$. The simple roots are ${\alpha }_1={\epsilon }_1-{\epsilon }_2$, ${\alpha }_2={\epsilon }_2-{\epsilon }_3$, and the simple coroots areThe fundamental weights of sl3 are thereforeChecking these on $h_1,h_2$ gives the two coordinate vectors $(1,0)$ and $(0,1)$. In the Euclidean trace-zero plane they can also be writtenThe Fundamental representations of sl3 make these weights concrete: ${\mathbb{C}}^3$ has primitive vector $e_1$ of weight ${\omega }_1$, and ${\Lambda }^2{\mathbb{C}}^3$ has primitive vector $e_1\wedge e_2$ of weight ${\omega }_2$. Every finite-dimensional irreducible highest weight is $a{\omega }_1+b{\omega }_2$ with nonnegative integers $a,b$.

The form attached to $V$ is $B_V(x,y)={\mathrm{tr}}_V(xy)$. More generally, for a Lie algebra representation $\rho$, the Trace form of a Lie algebra representation isThe unqualified Killing form is the special case of the Adjoint representation,The distinction matters: a Trace form of a Lie algebra representation can be degenerate even when $\mathfrak{g}$ is semisimple, for example on the trivial Lie algebra representation.

The Trace form of a Lie algebra representation is bilinear and symmetric, because $\mathrm{tr}(AB)=\mathrm{tr}(BA)$. It is an invariant bilinear form on a Lie algebra:This follows by expanding both commutators and cyclically permuting factors under the matrix trace. Equivalently,Its radical of a bilinear form is an ideal of a Lie algebra, since if $B_V(y,-)=0$, then $B_V([x,y],z)=-B_V(y,[x,z])=0$. The Killing form is also preserved by every automorphism of a Lie algebra, because the corresponding adjoint operators are conjugate. On a complex finite-dimensional Lie algebra, the Cartan criterion for semisimplicity says that the Killing form is nondegenerate exactly when the Lie algebra is semisimple. The Cartan solvability criterion says that $\mathfrak{g}$ is solvable exactly when $B(\mathfrak{g},[\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g}])=0$.

We next construct the sl2 subalgebra associated with a root. Use the root-space decompositionFor $u\in {\mathfrak{g}}_{\beta }$, $v\in {\mathfrak{g}}_{\gamma }$, invariance of the Killing form givesThus $B({\mathfrak{g}}_{\beta },{\mathfrak{g}}_{\gamma })=0$ unless $\beta +\gamma =0$, and $B({\mathfrak{g}}_{\beta },\mathfrak{h})=0$ for nonzero $\beta$. Nondegeneracy of $B$ on $\mathfrak{g}$ now implies that $-\alpha$ is a root and that $B$ pairs ${\mathfrak{g}}_{\alpha }$ and ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-\alpha }$ nondegenerately.

Nondegeneracy of $B{|}_{\mathfrak{h}}$ defines a unique $t_{\alpha }\in \mathfrak{h}$ byChoose $x\in {\mathfrak{g}}_{\alpha }$ and $y\in {\mathfrak{g}}_{-\alpha }$ with $B(x,y)=1$. Their Lie bracket lies in the zero root space, namely $\mathfrak{h}$, andTherefore $[x,y]=t_{\alpha }$.

The essential nonisotropic root lemma is that $\alpha (t_{\alpha })\ne 0$. Suppose instead that it vanished. Then $[t_{\alpha },x]=[t_{\alpha },y]=0$, so $⟨x,y,t_{\alpha }⟩$ would be a solvable Lie algebra with derived algebra $\mathbb{C}{t}_{\alpha }$. Apply the Lie theorem to its action on $\mathfrak{g}$ by the Adjoint representation. The commutator $\mathrm{ad}{t}_{\alpha }=[\mathrm{ad}x,\mathrm{ad}y]$ is strictly upper triangular in a suitable basis, hence nilpotent. But $t_{\alpha }\in \mathfrak{h}$, so the root-space decomposition makes $\mathrm{ad}{t}_{\alpha }$ diagonalizable. A diagonalizable nilpotent linear map is zero. Thus $t_{\alpha }$ is central in $\mathfrak{g}$. The center of a Lie algebra of a semisimple Lie algebra is zero; equivalently a central element lies in the radical of the Killing form. This forces $t_{\alpha }=0$, contradicting $\alpha \ne 0$.

Writing $c=\alpha (t_{\alpha })$, defineThe root-space decomposition and $[x,y]=t_{\alpha }$ giveThe three vectors are linearly independent because they lie in the distinct summands ${\mathfrak{g}}_{\alpha }$, $\mathfrak{h}$, and ${\mathfrak{g}}_{-\alpha }$. Their span is therefore a copy of the sl2 Lie algebra.

The weight lattice consists of the functionals integral on all coroots. With $H_{\alpha }$ the coroot above, the weight lattice iswhere the fundamental weights satisfy ${\omega }_i(H_{{\alpha }_j})={\delta }_{ij}$ for the simple roots ${\alpha }_j$. Here $P$ lies in the real span of the roots, viewed inside ${\mathfrak{h}}^{\ast }$.

The classification of finite-dimensional sl2 representations says that every finite-dimensional complex sl2 Lie algebra representation is a direct sum of irreducibles $L_m$, $m\in {\mathbb{Z}}_{\ge 0}$, on which the standard $H$ has eigenvalues $m,m-2,\dots ,-m$. Restrict any finite-dimensional Lie algebra representation of $\mathfrak{g}$ to each sl2 subalgebra associated with a root. If $v$ has weight $\lambda$, then $H_{\alpha }v=\lambda (H_{\alpha })v$, so $\lambda (H_{\alpha })$ is an integer. Thus every weight lies in $P$. The same restrictions show that the commuting simple coroots act diagonalizably, justifying the simultaneous weight-space decomposition.

For $\mathfrak{sp}(4)$, the roots are $\pm 2{\epsilon }_1$, $\pm 2{\epsilon }_2$, and $\pm {\epsilon }_1\pm {\epsilon }_2$. Work on ${\mathbb{C}}^4$ with the alternating bilinear form having matrixThe symplectic Lie algebra isUsing the matrix units $E_{ij}$, take the Cartan subalgebraDefine ${\epsilon }_i(a_1{h}_1+a_2{h}_2)=a_i$. A regular diagonal element of $\mathfrak{h}$ has centralizer precisely $\mathfrak{h}$, and every element of $\mathfrak{h}$ acts diagonalizably. Thus it is a Cartan subalgebra. The requested Cartan decomposition is the root-space decompositionChoose positive roots ${\epsilon }_1-{\epsilon }_2$, $2{\epsilon }_2$, ${\epsilon }_1+{\epsilon }_2$, $2{\epsilon }_1$. The symplectic root sl2 triple are given explicitly byFor the negative root spaces, use the corresponding $Y_{\alpha }$. These eight root vectors, together with $h_1,h_2$, form a basis: the block description above has dimension $4+3+3=10$, and the ten listed vectors are independent. Finally, the matrix unit identityverifies $[X_{\alpha },Y_{\alpha }]=H_{\alpha }$ for every row. The diagonal differences verify $[H_{\alpha },X_{\alpha }]=2X_{\alpha }$ and $[H_{\alpha },Y_{\alpha }]=-2Y_{\alpha }$. Thus each row supplies a basis of the required sl2 subalgebra associated with a root.

Assume a finite optimum with $X>0$ and continuous price near its completion time. With costate $p^{\ast }$ for the remaining-file state, the minimization Hamiltonian of an optimal-control problem is $H=u(p(t)-p^{\ast })$. It is independent of $x$, so $p^{\ast }$ is constant. By the Pontryagin maximum principle, pointwise minimization over $[0,1]$ givesThis is a bang-bang control away from equality. At equality partial transmission or either endpoint rate is allowed. This also follows by exchanging a small amount of transmission from a more expensive time to a cheaper unused time. The free-terminal-time transversality condition is ${\min }_{u}H(T,u)+2\gamma T=0$. Since $T>0$, it forces $p^{\ast }>p(T)$ and terminal transmission at rate one, yieldingWithout regularity/existence hypotheses an arbitrary known price need not have a finite differentiable optimum; the equality is the interior terminal-time condition used here.

For $p(t)=t+1/t$, $X=1$, feasible completion requires $T>1$ for finite cost. The price decreases to its minimum at one and then increases. Its cheapest unrestricted interval of length one has endpoints $a,a+1$ of equal price, giving $a(a+1)=1$ and $a+1=\phi =(1+\sqrt{5})/2$. For $1<T\le \phi$, the cheapest length-one subset of $[0,T]$ is the terminal interval $[T-1,T]$: its left endpoint has at least the price of its right endpoint, and the earlier times are still more expensive. For $T\ge \phi$ the transmission minimum is unchanged from that unrestricted interval, while the delay cost increases, so no optimum lies beyond $\phi$.

For the terminal-interval policy the total cost isIts derivative is strictly increasing on $T>1$, since $J^{\prime \prime }(T)=(2T-1)/[T^2(T-1{)}^2]+2\gamma >0$. It is negative near one and positive at $\phi$, so the unique global optimum isThere is exactly one positive root: none lies in $(0,1)$ because the left side is negative, and the strictly monotone comparison gives exactly one in $(1,\phi )$. Its threshold is $p(T-1)=p(T)+2\gamma T$.

Choose the given short root $\alpha$ as a simple root, and let $\beta$ be the long simple root. This entails no loss of generality: the Weyl group is transitive on the short roots of the G2 root system. The relevant Cartan integers are $⟨\beta ,{\alpha }^{\vee }⟩=-3$ and $⟨\alpha ,{\beta }^{\vee }⟩=-1$. The positive roots areUnder ${\mathfrak{m}}_{\alpha }\cong {\mathfrak{sl}}_2$, the root space for $m\alpha +n\beta$ has $h_{\alpha }$ eigenvalue $2m-3n$. The subalgebra ${\mathfrak{m}}_{\alpha }$ itself is the three-dimensional irreducible $V(2)$ in the Adjoint representation.

The four root spaces along the root string $\beta ,\alpha +\beta ,2\alpha +\beta ,3\alpha +\beta$ have eigenvalues $-3,-1,1,3$. Consecutive spaces are connected by nonzero raising operators and lowering operators, so their sum is $V(3)$. The negative root string supplies another $V(3)$. The root spaces for $\pm (3\alpha +2\beta )$ have eigenvalue zero, and neither adding nor subtracting $\alpha$ gives a root; they are two copies of $V(0)$. Finally, the one-dimensional space $\ker \alpha \subset \mathfrak{t}$ commutes with ${\mathfrak{m}}_{\alpha }$, giving one more $V(0)$. We have accounted for all $14$ dimensions, and therefore the G2 adjoint branching to a short-root sl2 subalgebra isFor a nonzero root vector $x\in {\mathfrak{g}}_{\alpha }$, its Adjoint representation action is a nonzero scalar multiple of the raising operator on each summand. On each irreducible $V(n)$ this operator has a one-dimensional kernel, including $V(0)$. Since the Lie algebra centralizer is that kernel,