Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

To study the topology of Lie groups, you can decompose them into the simple compact ones, plus some additional steps, such as taking the cover if necessary. After that, the structure of $SO(n)$'s is rather straightforward, but the exceptional groups are more interesting.

Any simple compact Lie group, by means of Hopf algebra theory, has the rational homology of a product $$S^a \times S^b \times \dots \times S^z$$ where the numbers are called exponents. Other than that, their cohomology could also have torsion. Now the torsion for all groups is known:

  • Among classical groups, only 2-torsion is possible and only for $Spin(n)$
  • Exceptional groups can only have 2 and 3-torsion (most do), with the exception of:
  • $E_8$ which has 2-, 3-, and 5- torsion.

Well, this is bound to be related to $E_8$'s Coxeter number, which is 30, but are there any hints as to why? My reference would be math-ph/0212067 but it can't relate this to Coxeter number either.

For the reference, exponents are known to be related to Coxeter number, see Kostant, The Principal Three-Dimensional Subgroup and the Betti Numbers of a Complex Simple Lie Group (google search).

Is this an open problem? Maybe yes, but maybe it's been explained, so I'm posting it as it is for now.

share|improve this question
    
On the related problem of torsion in the cohomology of BG, there has been recent results by Totaro for spin groups and E_8, see dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~bt219/spin.pdf dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~bt219/torsion.pdf –  Simon Pepin Lehalleur Aug 7 '10 at 22:18

6 Answers 6

This doesn't directly address your question, but it does give you a way of thinking about torsion in the cohomology of Lie groups in general.

(This is all coming from Borel and Serre's Sur certains sous-groupes des groupes de Lie, which can be found in Commentarii mathematici Helvetici Volume 27, 1953)

As you mentioned above, every compact lie group is rationally a product of odd spheres. But how many odd spheres? Turns out, if G is compact and rank k, then it is rationally a product of k spheres (of various dimensions).

There is an analogous result for torsion. That is, one can define the 2-group of G to be any subgroup which is isomorphic to $(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z})^n$ or some n. One defines the 2-rank of a group as the maximal $n$ of any 2-group in G. (On can show that for connected $G$, the 2-rank is bounded by twice the rank, and is thus finite).

Just to point out something that really threw me when I first learned of these - while the rank is an invariant of the algebra (i.e., all Lie groups with the same algebra have the same rank), the 2-rank of a Group is NOT an invariant of the algebra. For example, the 2-rank of SU(2) is 1 (in fact, -Id is the UNIQUE element of SU(2) of order 2), while the 2-rank of SO(3) is 2 (generated by diag(-1,-1,1) and diag(-1,1,-1) ). The 2-rank of O(3) is 3 (generated by diag(-1,1,1), diag(1,-1,1), and diag(1,1,-1) ).

Now, given $T\subseteq G$, the maximal torus, it's clear that simply by taking the maximal 2-group in T, that the 2-rank of G is AT LEAST the rank of G. When is it strictly bigger? Precisely when the group G contains 2-torsion.

The analogous result for p-groups and p-torsion (p any prime) also holds.

In short, to understand the existence of the 5-torsion in $E_{8}$, one need only understand why there is a subgroup isomorphic to $(\mathbb{Z}/5\mathbb{Z})^n\subseteq E_8$ for some $n\geq 9$.

share|improve this answer

JP Serre, in his june 1999 Bourbaki talk "Sous-groupes finis des groupes de Lie", gives the following two references for torsion in Lie groups

R. STEINBERG - Torsion in reductive groups, Adv. in Math. 15 (1975), 63-92

and

A. BOREL - Sous-groupes commutatifs et torsion des groupes de Lie compacts connexes, T^ohoku Math. J. 13 (1961), 216-240.

Btw, the Bourbaki talk is on Serre's College de France page

http://www.college-de-france.fr/media/ins_pro/UPL61366_Serre_Bourbaki_864.pdf

Hope this helps.

share|improve this answer
    
The last one, at least, seems to be about G(F_q) where G is a simple algebraic group and F_q a field of q elements, which is a very different story, as long as I know! I haven't seen the first two though. –  Ilya Nikokoshev Nov 2 '09 at 19:34

I don't know the answer to your question, so the following may simply be a repackaging of the mystery, or may be wholly related, and at any rate, is probably already well-known to you. The numbers 2, 3, 5 remind one of the symmetries of the icosahedron, which is related to E8 by the McKay correspondence (see http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez//ADE.html). The ADE Dynkin diagrams are related to finite subgroups of SU(2) which include cyclic groups, dihedral groups, and the three exceptional symmetries: tetrahedral, octahedral, and icosahedral.

share|improve this answer
    
I've heard about McKay, but indeed how to apply it here would be a mystery! –  Ilya Nikokoshev Nov 2 '09 at 18:48

Take a look at "Finite H-spaces and Lie Groups" by Frank Adams, particularly the letter from E8 and the appendix which follows it.

share|improve this answer

To throw in a bit more numerology from another Serre's Bourbaki seminar: Cohomologie galoisienne : progrès et problèmes. Séminaire Bourbaki, 36 (1993-1994), Exposé No. 783, 29 p. [available at numdam]. In \S 2.2 he refers to torsions related to Lie groups in two senses, as far as I understand, the second one is related to group of automorphisms of the completed Dynkin diagram.

share|improve this answer

Sorry, I forgot to mention in my answer that only \S 1.3 in Serre 99 is about torsion in Lie or algebraic groups in zero characteristic (which doesn't prevent him to try embed some finite groups of Lie Type into them !).

PS: didn't found how to append this to your answer to my answer.

share|improve this answer
    
You'll be able to comment once you get more reputation (50, I think) –  Ilya Nikokoshev Nov 3 '09 at 15:13
    
Also, I think there's some strange bug or perhaps you created two logins by mistake. This one has 1 rep and the other one has 21 rep. –  Ilya Nikokoshev Nov 3 '09 at 15:14

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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