Codex @codex  0

In the semisimple Lie algebra convention, an abstract root system is a finite subset $\Phi$ of a finite-dimensional real Euclidean space $E$ with the following properties: it spans $E$, does not contain zero, is reduced, is invariant under each of its root reflections, and satisfies crystallographic integrality. More explicitly, for every $\alpha ,\beta \in \Phi$,Here $(,)$ is a positive-definite inner product. The first condition is reducedness, the second gives closure under root reflections, and the last number is a Cartan integer. The rank is $\dim E$. A simple root basis is a basis of $E$ consisting of roots such that each root has integral coordinates that are either all nonnegative or all nonpositive. The two signs distinguish positive and negative roots. The diagrams in this problem concern these reduced crystallographic root systems; broader definitions sometimes omit one of these conditions.

Put $\bar{i}=2n+1-i$ and let $E_{ij}$ denote a matrix unit. The antidiagonal matrix satisfies $J^{-1}=J$, so the orthogonal condition is $A=-J{A}^{T}J$, or entrywise $A_{ij}=-A_{\bar{j}\bar{i}}$. Consequently the diagonal Cartan subalgebra isWe first take $n\ge 2$. Since $[H,E_{ab}]=(H_{aa}-H_{bb})E_{ab}$, the matrix root basis of the even orthogonal Lie algebra givesThe zero weight space is $\mathfrak{t}$; its basis is $H_i=E_{ii}-E_{\bar{i}\bar{i}}$. No vector of weight $2{\epsilon }_i$ occurs, because the corresponding matrix unit is forced to be its own negative. These spaces account for $n+2n(n-1)=n(2n-1)$ dimensions, exhausting the Special orthogonal Lie algebra. Thus its decomposition as a $\mathfrak{t}$-module and its Dn root system areEach nonzero root space has dimension one; the zero weight has multiplicity $n$.

The upper triangular root spaces are precisely those of weights ${\epsilon }_i-{\epsilon }_j$ and ${\epsilon }_i+{\epsilon }_j$ with $i<j$. ThereforeThese $n$ roots form the simple roots. To check that they generate the chosen positive system with nonnegative coefficients, write ${\epsilon }_i-{\epsilon }_j={\sum }_{k=i}^{j-1}{\alpha }_k$. For $j<n$,and for $j=n$ use ${\epsilon }_i+{\epsilon }_n={\sum }_{k=i}^{n-2}{\alpha }_k+{\alpha }_n$. Empty sums are zero. Their linear independence and these expansions identify the base of the root system.

Equip the real span of the roots in ${\mathfrak{t}}^{\ast }$ with the inner product making the ${\epsilon }_i$ orthonormal. All roots then have squared length two. The coroots of ${\epsilon }_i\pm {\epsilon }_j$ are $H_i\pm H_j$, so the fundamental weights of Dn, characterized by ${\omega }_i({\alpha }_j^{\vee })={\delta }_{ij}$, areTaking their pairings with $H_j-H_{j+1}$ and $H_{n-1}+H_n$ verifies the defining identities directly. For each pair $i<j$, the sum of its two positive roots is $2{\epsilon }_i$. Hence the half-sum of positive roots is

The Dynkin diagram has a chain ending at ${\alpha }_{n-2}$, which is joined to both ${\alpha }_{n-1}$ and ${\alpha }_n$. Every edge is a single bond because the root lengths agree; the nonzero off-diagonal simple-root pairings are minus one. The labelled Dn Dynkin diagram and its low-rank versions are shown below.

For $n=2$, ${\alpha }_1={\epsilon }_1-{\epsilon }_2$ and ${\alpha }_2={\epsilon }_1+{\epsilon }_2$ are orthogonal, giving two disconnected A1 root systems. For $n=3$, the diagram is the chain ${\alpha }_2-{\alpha }_1-{\alpha }_3$, of type A3 root system; the displayed weight formulas still apply. If $n=1$ is allowed, ${\mathfrak{so}}_2=\mathfrak{t}$ is one-dimensional and abelian: there are no roots or fundamental weights, and $\rho =0$.

The Weyl group acts on the weight lattice by its root reflections and extends to ring automorphisms of the group ring of a weight lattice:Weights and their multiplicities in a finite-dimensional Lie algebra representation of a semisimple Lie algebra are permuted by this action, so its formal character is Weyl-invariant.

Choose a set ${\Phi }^{+}$ of positive roots and putHere ${\omega }_i$ are the fundamental weights, and $\det (w)=(-1{)}^{\ell (w)}$, where the Coxeter length $\ell (w)$ counts positive roots carried to negative ones. For a dominant integral weight $\lambda$, let $L(\lambda )$ denote the finite-dimensional Irreducible Lie algebra representation of highest weight $\lambda$. The Weyl character formula isThe second denominator expression is the Weyl denominator formula. Both alternants change sign under each root reflection; their quotient is invariant. Although written as a fraction, the theorem asserts that it is a finite element of $\mathbb{Z}[{\Lambda }_W]$ with the nonnegative coefficients given by weight multiplicities. The highest-weight classification specifies which $\lambda$ label the irreducibles, while the root system and choice of positive roots determine every other term.

Work with a finite-dimensional complex semisimple Lie algebra. The Dynkin diagram is obtained from its intrinsic root system, with several structure theorems entering the construction.

First choose a Cartan subalgebra $\mathfrak{h}$. The semisimple structure theory gives the root-space decompositionThe nonzero roots span ${\mathfrak{h}}^{\ast }$, root spaces have dimension one, and every root has its negative. The rank is $r=\dim \mathfrak{h}$.

Next use the Killing form. Its nondegeneracy on $\mathfrak{h}$ and its positive-definite restriction to the real coroot span identify the real root span $E=\mathbb{R}\Phi$ with a Euclidean space. Explicitly, if $t_{\lambda }={\mathcal{B}}^{-1}(\lambda )$, put $(\lambda ,\mu )=B(t_{\lambda },t_{\mu })$. The sl2 subalgebra associated with a root supplies its normalized coroot $H_{\alpha }$ and the integral pairingThe root-string theorem makes the reflection $s_{\alpha }(\beta )=\beta -\beta (H_{\alpha })\alpha$ permute $\Phi$. Together with the absence of multiples other than $\pm \alpha$, this shows that $\Phi$ is a finite reduced root system and a crystallographic root system. These properties come from semisimple Lie algebra theory, not from the diagram's definition.

Choose a vector in $E$ that is not perpendicular to any root. Define the positive roots by positive inner product with this vector. The simple roots are those positive roots that cannot be expressed as sums of two positive roots. Root-system theory shows that they form a basis $\Delta =\{{\alpha }_1,\dots ,{\alpha }_r\}$, and each root is an integer combination of them with coefficients all of one sign. Distinct simple roots have nonpositive inner product.

Use the standard Cartan matrix conventionThere is one diagram vertex for each simple root. For $i\ne j$, the integral off-diagonal entries are nonpositive andConnect the two vertices with respectively zero, one, two or three edges. The corresponding angles are $90^{\circ },120^{\circ },135^{\circ },150^{\circ }$. A multiple edge carries an arrow toward the shorter root. For joined vertices, the length ratio is determined by $A_{ij}/A_{ji}=({\alpha }_i,{\alpha }_i)/({\alpha }_j,{\alpha }_j)$; hence the diagram records both angle and relative length.

For example, ${\mathfrak{sl}}_3$ has simple roots $L_1-L_2$ and $L_2-L_3$, giving two equal-length vertices joined by one edge: type $A_2$. For ${\mathfrak{sp}}_4$, take ${\alpha }_1=L_1-L_2$ and ${\alpha }_2=2L_2$. Thenso the two vertices have a double edge directed toward ${\alpha }_1$, the shorter root: type $C_2$.

Finally, orthogonal irreducible components of the root system correspond to the simple ideals of a Lie algebra in the semisimple Lie algebra, so its diagram is the disjoint union of their connected diagrams. Conjugacy of Cartan subalgebras and the Weyl group action on choices of positive roots make the resulting diagram independent of these choices up to isomorphism. Thus the vertices, edge multiplicities, arrows and connected components encode the simple-root geometry and the simple-ideal decomposition.

Choose a fundamental system of a root system $\{\alpha ,\beta \}$. Distinct simple roots have nonpositive inner product. Their Cartan matrix has diagonal entries two and off-diagonal entries $-p,-q$, where either $p=q=0$, or $p,q$ are positive integers. The root-system finiteness lemma gives $pq<4$. After exchanging the simple roots, the possibilities areTheir angles and relative lengths determine the two simple roots up to an orthogonal transformation and common scaling, except that the two orthogonal components can be scaled separately.

To see that no extra roots remain unspecified, write a positive root $\gamma =m\alpha +n\beta$ with nonnegative integer coefficients. If it is not simple, some simple root $\delta$ has $(\gamma ,\delta )>0$: otherwise $\Vert \gamma {\Vert }^2=m(\gamma ,\alpha )+n(\gamma ,\beta )\le 0$. The root reflection in $\delta$ subtracts a positive integer multiple of $\delta$. The other coordinate stays nonnegative; since $\gamma$ is not proportional to $\delta$, it is positive, so the reflected root must still be positive by the defining sign property of a fundamental system of a root system. Its height decreases. Repeating reduces $\gamma$ to a simple root. Thus every root is in a Weyl group orbit of a simple root.

For the four matrices, applying their simple reflections gives, respectively, the following positive roots:where in the last two rows $\alpha$ is long, $\beta$ short. For example, $s_{\beta }(\alpha )=\alpha +q\beta$ and $s_{\alpha }(\beta )=\beta +\alpha$ for the displayed matrices when the convention is $a_{ij}=2({\alpha }_i,{\alpha }_j)/({\alpha }_i,{\alpha }_i)$. The sets comprising these positive roots and their negatives are invariant under both reflections, as direct substitution verifies. The height argument therefore shows they are the whole root system. This proves the classification of rank-two root systems:

Use the course convention that a root system is finite and is a reduced root system satisfying the crystallographic root system condition. These hypotheses are essential for the angle restriction. For roots $r,s$, the two Cartan integerssatisfy $ab=4{\cos }^2\theta$. If $r,s$ are not parallel, the strict Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and integrality give $ab\in \{0,1,2,3\}$. These values give angles $\pi /2$, $\pi /3$ or $2\pi /3$, $\pi /4$ or $3\pi /4$, and $\pi /6$ or $5\pi /6$, respectively. If the roots are parallel, reducedness implies $s=\pm r$, giving $0$ or $\pi$. ThereforeHere are examples accounting for every angle. In the A1 root system, the pairs $(r,r)$ and $(r,-r)$ give $0,\pi$. Two roots from different summands of $A_1\oplus A_1$ give $\pi /2$. The six unit vectors at angles $k\pi /3$ form an A2 root system: taking one root at angle zero and another at $\pi /3$ or $2\pi /3$ gives those two angles. In the B2 root system $\{\pm e_1,\pm e_2,\pm e_1\pm e_2\}$, pair $e_1$ with $e_1+e_2$ or $-e_1+e_2$ to obtain $\pi /4,3\pi /4$. In a G2 root system, take short unit roots at angles $k\pi /3$ and long roots of length $\sqrt{3}$ at angles $\pi /6+k\pi /3$. A short root at zero paired with long roots at $\pi /6,5\pi /6$ gives the remaining angles.

A Dynkin diagram has one vertex for each simple root. Vertices $i,j$ are joined by $a_{ij}{a}_{ji}$ bonds, where $a_{ij}$ are the off-diagonal Cartan integers. No bond means orthogonality; one, two and three bonds mean angles $2\pi /3,3\pi /4,5\pi /6$. A multiple-bond arrow points to the shorter root. Thus the Dynkin diagram determines the Cartan matrix, including the relative lengths inside each connected component.

An irreducible root system corresponds to a connected Dynkin diagram. The classification of finite crystallographic Dynkin diagrams givesHere $C_2$ is already represented by $B_2$, and $B_1,C_1$ by $A_1$. General systems are orthogonal direct sums of these, with separate component scales. The following diagrams specify all the types; dots denote a continued chain, not additional vertices.

For orientation, the An Dynkin diagram is a single chain, the Bn Dynkin diagram has a terminal double bond pointing to its terminal short root, and the Cn Dynkin diagram reverses that arrow. The Dn Dynkin diagram has arm lengths $1,1,l-3$. The En Dynkin diagram has arm lengths $1,2,2$; $1,2,3$; or $1,2,4$. The F4 Dynkin diagram has a central double bond and the G2 Dynkin diagram a triple bond.

The positivity behind this finite list is the positive-definite Gram matrix of the simple roots. In particular the underlying graph is a tree: if it contained a cycle, the sum of its normalized roots would have squared norm at most zero, since each bonded inner product is at most $-1/2$. This contradicts linear independence. Restricting the possible bonds and branches by positive definiteness gives precisely the listed chains and trees. Conversely their Cartan matrices are positive definite after symmetrization and their reflection-generated root sets give the indicated finite root systems.

Work in finite dimension over $\mathbb{C}$; the characteristic-zero real version follows by complexification. The Cartan solvability criterion isIts semisimplicity consequence, also often called Cartan's criterion, is $\mathfrak{g}$ is semisimple if and only if its Killing form is nondegenerate. We prove both forms.

The auxiliary results used are as follows. The Lie theorem simultaneously triangularizes every finite-dimensional representation of a complex solvable Lie algebra. The Engel theorem says that a matrix Lie algebra consisting entirely of nilpotent endomorphisms has a common annihilated nonzero vector and a basis making all its matrices strictly upper triangular; in particular it is a nilpotent Lie algebra. Nilpotent means that the lower central series terminates, which implies that the derived series terminates as well. Finally, the Additive Jordan decomposition writes any complex endomorphism uniquely as $x=x_s+x_n$, where $x_s$ is diagonalizable, $x_n$ is nilpotent and they commute. On a generalized eigenspace $V_{\lambda }$, the two parts are $\lambda I$ and $x-\lambda I$, and both are polynomials in $x$. On endomorphisms, $\mathrm{ad}{x}_s$ is diagonalizable, $\mathrm{ad}{x}_n$ is nilpotent, and these are the Jordan parts of $\mathrm{ad}x$: the first assertion follows by splitting into maps between eigenspaces, and the second by expanding repeated commutators with the nilpotent $x_n$.

First prove the linear trace version: if $L\subseteq \mathfrak{gl}(V)$ andthen $L$ is solvable. Fix $x\in [L,L]$ and let $V=⨁V_{\lambda }$ be its generalized eigenspace decomposition. Define $y$ to act on $V_{\lambda }$ by the scalar $\overline{\lambda }$. We do not assume that $y$, $x_s$ or $x_n$ belongs to $L$.

On $\mathrm{Hom}(V_{\mu },V_{\lambda })$, $\mathrm{ad}x$ has the form $(\lambda -\mu )I+N$ with $N$ nilpotent, whereas $\mathrm{ad}y$ is multiplication by $\overline{\lambda -\mu }$. Choose a polynomial $q$ with $q(d)=\bar{d}$ for every occurring eigenvalue difference $d$, and with all its derivatives of positive order up to the relevant nilpotency index zero at $d$. Such a polynomial exists by Hermite interpolation, or the Chinese remainder theorem for the pairwise coprime powers of $(t-d)$. At $d=0$ its value is zero, so $q(0)=0$. Expanding $q(dI+N)$ now givesBecause $x\in L$ and $[L,L]$ is an ideal, every positive power of $\mathrm{ad}x$ sends $L$ into $[L,L]$. The zero constant term therefore gives $[y,L]\subseteq [L,L]$.

Express $x$ as a sum of commutators ${\sum }_j[a_j,b_j]$ with $a_j,b_j\in L$. Cyclicity of trace and the hypothesis implyBut on $V_{\lambda }$, $xy$ has trace $\dim (V_{\lambda })|\lambda {|}^2$, since the nilpotent part has trace zero. Henceforcing every eigenvalue of $x$ to vanish. Thus every member of the derived algebra $[L,L]$ is a nilpotent endomorphism. By the Engel theorem, $[L,L]$ is nilpotent and therefore solvable; its derived series terminates, and adjoining the initial term $L$ shows that $L$ is solvable.

Conversely, if $L$ is solvable, the Lie theorem makes it upper triangular. Commutators of upper-triangular matrices have zero diagonal, and multiplying such a commutator by an upper-triangular matrix still has zero diagonal. Therefore the trace condition holds. Apply this equivalence to $L=\mathrm{ad}\mathfrak{g}$. Its trace pairing is the Killing form, and solvability of its image is equivalent to solvability of $\mathfrak{g}$: the kernel is its abelian centre, so a terminating derived series in the quotient terminates after at most one more step in $\mathfrak{g}$. This proves the solvability criterion.

For the semisimplicity criterion, let $R$ be the radical of the Killing form. Invariance makes $R$ a Lie algebra ideal. For $x,y\in R$, their adjoint actions on $\mathfrak{g}/R$ vanish, so computing trace in a basis adapted to $R$ gives $B_R(x,y)=B_{\mathfrak{g}}(x,y)=0$. The solvability criterion applied to $R$ shows it is a solvable ideal. Thus a semisimple Lie algebra has $R=0$ and a nondegenerate Killing form.

Conversely, any nonzero solvable ideal has a last nonzero term $A$ in its derived series; this is an abelian ideal of $\mathfrak{g}$. For $x\in A$, $y\in \mathfrak{g}$, the map $\mathrm{ad}x\mathrm{ad}y$ sends $\mathfrak{g}$ into $A$ and vanishes on $A$, so has trace zero. Hence $A\subseteq R$. A nondegenerate Killing form therefore rules out nonzero solvable ideals, exactly the definition of semisimplicity.

For classification, nondegeneracy of the Killing form provides the duality and root-space pairings used to extract a reduced crystallographic root system from a semisimple Lie algebra. Classification then reduces to the finite Dynkin diagrams and reconstruction of the Lie algebra from its root data.

A reduced crystallographic abstract root system in a finite-dimensional real inner product space $E$ is a finite set $R$ such that: it spans $E$ and does not contain zero; the only scalar multiples of $\alpha \in R$ belonging to $R$ are $\pm \alpha$; every root reflectionpermutes $R$; and each Cartan integer $2(\beta ,\alpha )/(\alpha ,\alpha )$ is integral. These are the crystallographic and reduced conventions appropriate to roots of a complex semisimple Lie algebra. Without crystallographic integrality, the numerical restrictions in the following subparts would not hold.

There is an exception to the printed assertion: for $\beta =-\alpha$, the inner product is negative but $\alpha +\beta =0$ is not a root. This already occurs in the rank-one root system $R=\{\alpha ,-\alpha \}$.

For the intended assertion, assume $\beta \ne -\alpha$. By the preceding list, at least one of $n_{\alpha ,\beta },n_{\beta ,\alpha }$ equals $-1$. If the first does, the reflection axiom givesIf the second does, use $s_{\beta }(\alpha )=\alpha +\beta$ instead. Thus the precise reusable conclusion isThis proves that obtuse nonopposite roots have a root sum directly from the reflection and integrality axioms, without appealing to the classification of root systems.

Work with a complex semisimple Lie algebra and its root system $R$ in the real span $E$ of the roots of a root system. The Killing form induces a positive definite inner product on this real root space, after the usual identification with the dual of the real span of the coroots. For each root $\alpha$, its Weyl reflection isThe Weyl group is $\boxed{W=⟨s_{\alpha }:\alpha \in R⟩}$. The structural facts being used are that these reflections preserve the finite root system, that the roots span $E$, and that the reflections in the simple roots already generate $W$. Thus $W$ is finite: it acts faithfully as permutations of $R$. Equivalently, it is the normalizer of the Cartan subalgebra modulo its centralizer in the associated adjoint group.

Use the ${\mathfrak{sl}}_3$ weight of a representation convention from Question 1: $L_1+L_2+L_3=0$, with simple roots $L_1-L_2$ and $L_2-L_3$. This identification is necessary: the general preceding setup does not by itself specify which root system the symbols $L_i$ refer to.

The Weyl group is $S_3$, acting by permutations of the $L_i$. Let $s_1=(12)$ and $s_2=(23)$, with composition read from right to left. ThenHenceFor direct verification, the diagonal coefficients of $\mu$ are $(1,0,-2)$, so its two Dynkin labels are $1-0=1$ and $0-(-2)=2$, both strictly positive. Thus $\mu$ is in the open Weyl chamber. The original three coefficients $(-2,1,0)$ are distinct, so its stabilizer is trivial and this permutation is unique.

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.

Let $\mathfrak{g}$ be a complex semisimple Lie algebra, choose a Cartan subalgebra and positive root system $R^{+}$, and put $\rho =\frac{1}{2}{\sum }_{\alpha \in R^{+}}\alpha$. For a dominant integral weight $\lambda$, let $L(\lambda )$ be the finite-dimensional highest-weight representation with highest weight $\lambda$. The Weyl dimension formula isHere ${\alpha }^{\vee }=2\alpha /(\alpha ,\alpha )$ is the coroot, the pairing is between a weight and a coroot, and $\rho$ is the Weyl vector. The inner product can be any Weyl group invariant normalization on each simple factor: its scaling cancels from the ratios. The dominance condition means that $⟨\lambda ,{\alpha }_i^{\vee }⟩$ is a nonnegative integer for each simple root.

Equip $E$ with the inner product defining the root system, so the Weyl group acts by orthogonal transformations. As usual, the root system spans its ambient space $E$. Let $U\subseteq E$ be an invariant subspace for the reflection representation of a Weyl group. Its orthogonal complement is also invariant.

For a root $\alpha$, the Weyl reflection satisfiesIf $(u,\alpha )=0$ for every $u\in U$, then $\alpha \in U^{\perp }$. Otherwise choose $u\in U$ with $(u,\alpha )\ne 0$. Both $u$ and $s_{\alpha }(u)$ belong to $U$, and their difference is a nonzero multiple of $\alpha$, so $\alpha \in U$. HenceThe two sets are mutually orthogonal and individually closed under their root reflections. If both were nonempty, this would decompose $R$ into two orthogonal root systems, contradicting that it is an irreducible root system. All roots therefore lie in one of the two subspaces. Because they span $E$, either $U=E$ or $U^{\perp }=E$, the latter giving $U=0$. Thus the reflection representation is an irreducible representation.