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

I'm rather ignorant in both fields, but I would still like to endeavor asking this question. I've just learned that any Lie group is diffeomorphic to a compact Lie group cross $\mathbb{R}^n$. While there is no (to my knowledge) equivalent to diffeomorphic in the group-schemes language, this does have obvious implications about the cohomology of Lie groups (which has an analog in the group-scheme language.)

So: Is there an analog of this theorem for group-schemes? What is it? What can we say?

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

For algebraic groups over a perfect field $k$, one has Chevalley's Theorem. It says that every algebraic group $G$ over $k$ contains a unique closed normal linear subgroup $H$ such that $G/H$ is an abelian variety. The abelian variety is the analogue of the compact Lie group, and the linear group $H$ is the analogue of affine space.

share|improve this answer
1  
You mean to say that every (connected) linear group over $\mathbb{R}$ is diffeomorphic to $\mathbb{R}^n$? This seems like a stronger version of the theorem that every linear group is rational, but I've never heard of it before. Also, in the theorem you state, is it implied that $H$ is connected? –  James D. Taylor Oct 2 '10 at 16:21
1  
@James D. Taylor---what is a "(connected) linear group over $\mathbf{R}$" and what does it mean for such a thing to be diffeomorphic to $\mathbf{R}^n$? For me, GL_1 is a connected linear algebraic group over the reals. It's not diffeomorphic to anything though, because it's not a sensible topological space. Its real points can be given the structure of a sensible topological space---but this space is not connected. So there are issues here. Another example is the restriction of scalars from $\mathbf{C}$ to $\mathbf{R}$ of $GL(1)$; this has real points isomorphic to $\mathbf{C}^\times$. –  Kevin Buzzard Oct 2 '10 at 20:54
1  
...[ran out of space]...and $\mathbf{C}^\times$ isn't diffeo to $\mathbf{R}^n$ because it isn't simply connected. Perhaps these examples above may help to clarify what your question is. –  Kevin Buzzard Oct 2 '10 at 20:57
    
Yes, thanks Kevin. My question is: in what way does Chevalley's theorem answer the question? It's portrayed as a more general theorem than the one I stated in the question. I'm trying to understand why. In order to relate the two, I assumed that cfranc had it in his mind that $H$ is diff. to $\mathbb{R}^n$. Indeed you're right that there are problems with the definition of "diff." here, and even with "connected". Still -- for his answer to make sense he must have had an idea of how these two things are related in the classical case. –  James D. Taylor Oct 2 '10 at 23:02
1  
Dear James D. Taylor: It doesn't really answer your question. If $G$ is a conn'd lin. alg. group over field $k$ of char. 0 then qt map $G \rightarrow G/U$ for unipotent radical $U$ admits splitting: $G = L \rtimes U$ over $k$ with conn'd reductive $L$ ("Levi factor"). Now $U$ is $k$-isomorphic to affine space as a variety, and if $G$ does not contain ${\rm{GL}}_1$ as $k$-subgroup and $k = \mathbf{R}$ then $L(\mathbf{R})$ is maximal compact subgp of $G(\mathbf{R})$. A pseudo-answer to your question, perhaps. For conn'd reductive $G$ it says nothing. But what would we want for $G = {\rm{SL}}_2$? –  BCnrd Oct 2 '10 at 23:23

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.