8
$\begingroup$

Let $K$ be a field and consider the surjective determinant homomorphism $\mathrm{GL}_n(K)\to K^\times$. Since the kernel is the special linear group $\mathrm{SL}_n(K)$ we obtain a short exact sequence

$$\require{AMScd}\begin{CD} 1 @>>> \mathrm{SL}_n(K) @>i>> \mathrm{GL}_n(K) @>\det>> K^\times @>>> 1\\ \end{CD}$$

Since the determinant map has a section $s:K^\times\to\mathrm{GL}_n(K)$ defined by $$s(\alpha):=\begin{pmatrix} \alpha&&&\\ &1&& \\ &&\ddots& \\ &&&1\end{pmatrix},$$ we conclude from the splitting lemma that $\mathrm{GL}_n(K)\approx\mathrm{SL}_n(K)\rtimes K^\times$. Here's a question:

Under what conditions on $K$ and $n$ does the inclusion homomorphism $i:\mathrm{SL}_n(K)\to\mathrm{GL}_n(K)$ have a retraction?

Example: If $K=\mathbb{R}$ and $n$ is odd, then every $\alpha\in\mathbb{R}^\times$ has a unique real $n$-th root, so we obtain a group homomorphism $\sqrt[n]{\cdot}:\mathbb{R}^\times\to\mathbb{R}^\times$, and we can use this to define a retraction $r:\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R})\to\mathrm{SL}_n(\mathbb{R})$ by $$r(A):=\frac{1}{\sqrt[n]{\det(A)}}\cdot A.$$ Now it follows from the splitting lemma that $\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{R})\approx \mathrm{SL}_n(\mathbb{R})\times\mathbb{R}^\times$. Here's another question:

Is there a topological/geometric explanation for this example? Is there a topological/geometric obstruction when $n$ is even?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ It's if and only if the set of $n$-th roots of unity in $K^*$ has a direct summand in $K^*$. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Oct 30, 2015 at 17:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Just an observation that if $K$ has characteristic $p> 0$ and $n$ is a power of $p$ then $GL_n(K) = SL_n(K) \times Z(GL_n(K))$. $\endgroup$
    – Jay Taylor
    Oct 30, 2015 at 17:58
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @YCor The square roots of unity are a direct summand of $\mathbb{R}^\times$: $\mathbb{R}^\times = \{\pm 1\}\oplus \mathbb{R}^\times_{>0}$, but there can be no retraction $\varphi:GL_2(\mathbb{R})\to SL_2(\mathbb{R})$ because $A:=[-1,0;0,1]$ and $B:=[0,1;1,0]$ both square to $1$, every element of $SL_2(\mathbb{R})$ which squares to $1$ is central, so we would need $1=[\varphi(A),\varphi(B)]=\varphi([A,B])=\varphi([-1,0;0,-1])=[-1,0;0,-1]$. This same argument seems to work for any $K$ of characteristic not $2$. $\endgroup$ Oct 30, 2015 at 22:54
  • $\begingroup$ @JulianRosen thanks, you're right. My claim in the comment is not correct (only one implication holds); this is fixed in the answer below. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Oct 30, 2015 at 23:55

1 Answer 1

10
$\begingroup$

$\mathrm{GL}_n(K)\to\mathrm{SL}_n(K)$ has a retraction iff the following two conditions hold

  1. The subgroup of $n$-root of unity in $K^*$ has a direct summand in $K^*$.
  2. $x\mapsto x^n$ is surjective on $K$

Let us first check that (1.) is equivalent to the existence of a retraction in restriction to $K^*\mathrm{SL}_n(K)$ (the subgroup generated by homotheties and unimodular matrices). Clearly it implies it (consider the set of scalar matrices whose diagonal entry belongs to this direct summand). Conversely, if there is a retraction, its kernel has trivial intersection with $\mathrm{SL}_n(K)$, hence contained in its centralizer, which is reduced to scalar matrices, so it should form the set of scalar matrices with diagonal entry in some direct summand of the set $n$-roots of unity in $K^*$.

Now it is clear that $K^*\mathrm{SL}_n(K)$ equals $\mathrm{GL}_n(K)$ if and only if (2.) holds; so if both (1.) and (2.) hold it follows that we have a retraction; conversely if we have a retraction, its kernel is a normal subgroup with trivial intersection with $\mathrm{SL}_n(K)$, hence contained in its centralizer, which is reduced to scalar matrices, so $\mathrm{GL}_n(K)$ should be generated by unimodular and scalar matrices, i.e. (2.) holds, and then the first verification shows that (1.) holds.

Edit: as noticed by Julian Rosen, (2.) together with (1.) implies something much stronger than (1.), namely that the subgroup of $n$-roots of unity is actually trivial, which means that $x\mapsto x^n$ is injective on $K$. To conclude:

$\mathrm{GL}_n(K)\to\mathrm{SL}_n(K)$ has a retraction (in the category of groups) iff $x\mapsto x^n$ is a permutation of $K$

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ By the way Condition (1.) should be characterized in a more convenient way. Call $n^*$-root of unity, any $m$-root of unity where all prime divisors of $m$ divide $n$. Then (1.) implies that (X) any $n^*$-root of 1 in $K$ is also a $n$-root of 1. I'm wondering whether conversely (X) implies (1.). (X) is equivalent to the following even simpler one from a model-theoretic point of view: every $n^2$-root of unity is a $n$-root of unity. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Oct 31, 2015 at 0:02
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ The map $x\mapsto x^n$ kills the $n$-th roots of unity, so if this map is surjective and the $n$-th roots of unity are a summand, then the $n$-th roots of unity should be trivial. Actually is looks like conditions (1) and (2) together are equivalent to "the map $x\mapsto x^n$ is bijective on $K$". $\endgroup$ Oct 31, 2015 at 0:39

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.