Welcome to MathOverflow

Question

7

1

Let $V$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible representation of the Lie group $\text{SL}_n(\mathbb{R})$. Must $V$ remain irreducible when you restrict the action to $\text{SL}_n(\mathbb{Z})$? More generally, when you restrict it to other lattices in $\text{SL}_n(\mathbb{R})$?

flag	asked Sep 10 at 1:41 Sue 149●1●7

Yes, I agree. I was actually answering a different question. – Igor Rivin Sep 10 at 2:42

Plus the fact that all finite-dimensional representations of semisimple groups are algebraic. – Misha Sep 10 at 2:45

@Misha: @Harpo had abbreviated his comment, which initially remarked on the fact you are alluding to. The OP (and I) would probably appreciate a reference to where the fact should be found. – Igor Rivin Sep 10 at 2:56

1

@Misha: Over $\mathbf{C}$ what you write is correct, but over $\mathbf{R}$ you need to impose simply connectedness in additional to semi-simplicity. The usual counterexample is the inverse of the analytic isomorphism ${\rm{SL}}_n(\mathbf{R}) \rightarrow {\rm{PGL}}_n(\mathbf{R})$ for odd $n > 1$. The "problem" is that an $\mathbf{R}$-isogeny between connected linear algebraic $\mathbf{R}$-groups can have finite kernel with no nontrivial $\mathbf{R}$-points; over $\mathbf{C}$ this isogeny issue (invisible to Lie algebras) cannot be missed at the level of $\mathbf{C}$-points. – grp Sep 10 at 5:05

2

@Misha: A more basic kind of counterexample is that if the connected semisimple $G$ isn't simply connected then $G(\mathbf{R})$ may be disconnected (e.g., ${\rm{PGL}}_{2n}$ and various other $G$ with "fundamental group" of even order). In such cases the projection from $G(\mathbf{R})$ onto its nontrivial finite component group leads to rather non-algebraic representations. This highlights the significance of the connectedness of $G(\mathbf{R})$ when $G$ is simply connected (see my comments on the answer below). – grp Sep 10 at 6:04

show 3 more comments

Lavender Honey · Accepted Answer · 2012-09-10 03:08:06Z UTC

8

The result is essentially the statement of Borel's stability theorem for $\mathrm{SL}_n(\mathbf{R})$, see for example Theorem 4.39 of the following:

http://people.uleth.ca/~dave.morris/books/IntroArithGroups.pdf

Sometimes Borel's stability theorem is phrased in terms of one of the corollaries, which in this case would be that any lattice in $\mathrm{SL}_n(\mathbf{R})$ is Zariski dense. Then to deduce the result one would also have to note that all finite dimensional representations of $\mathrm{SL}_n(\mathbf{R})$ are algebraic.

answered Sep 10 at 3:08

Lavender Honey
6,024●30●69

	Thanks! I was previously vaguely aware of the Borel density theorem, but I hadn't connected it to this question and was not aware that it was deduced from something that is almost exactly what I wanted. – Sue Sep 10 at 3:14
	This still lacks a pointer to the algebricity fact, though the Witte-Morris book is most excellent. – Igor Rivin Sep 10 at 3:57
	@Igor: Let's show for linear algebraic $\mathbf{R}$-groups $G'$ and $G$ with $G'$ connected semisimple and simply connected, analytic $f:G'(\mathbf{R}) \rightarrow G(\mathbf{R})$ are algebraic. The Lie algebra of $\Gamma_f$ is a perfect subalgebra of $\mathbf{g}' \times \mathfrak{g}$, so by 7.9 in Borel's LAG it arises from a connected closed $\mathbf{R}$-subgroup $H$ of $G' \times G$. Clearly $H$ is semisimple, and $H \rightarrow G'$ is an isogeny, so an isomorphism as $G'$ is simply connected. This gives $G' \rightarrow G$ recovering $f$ on $G'(\mathbf{R})^0 = G'(\mathbf{R})$ (Steinberg!) – grp Sep 10 at 5:22
	@Igor (cont'd): At the final step above I am hauling out the big guns: if $G'$ is a connected semisimple $\mathbf{R}$-group that is simply connected then $G'(\mathbf{R})$ is connected. The only proof I know is to deduce it from considerations with maximal compact subgroups, Cartan involutions, and a theorem of Steinberg (or topological precursor by Cartan) on Zariski-connectedness of centralizers of semisimple automorphisms of simply connected semisimple groups, way too much to explain here. I would love to know a literature reference (beyond the "classical" anisotropic case). – grp Sep 10 at 5:31
	The Zariski-density of $G(\mathbf{Z})$ in $G(\mathbf{R})$ for any "split semisimple" group $G$ over $\mathbf{Z}$ (e.g., ${\rm{SL}}_n$) admits a direct proof more elementary than the proof of Borel's theorem. Indeed, by considering pairs of opposite root groups and the open cell structure relative to a positive system of roots for a split maximal $\mathbf{Z}$-torus, we get $\mathbf{Z}$-subgroups $U \simeq \mathbf{G}_a$ such that the subgroups $U_{\mathbf{Q}}$ generate $G$ over $\mathbf{Q}$. Thus, we just need to note that $\mathbf{Z}$ is Zariski-dense in $\mathbf{G}_a$ over $\mathbf{Q}$! – grp Sep 10 at 7:15

show 1 more comment

Restricting representations to lattices

Remember to vote up questions/answers you find interesting or helpful (requires 15 reputation points)

1 Answer

You can accept an answer to one of your own questions by clicking the check mark next to it. This awards 15 reputation points to the person who answered and 2 reputation points to you.