Timeline for centralisers of maximal split tori
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dec 4, 2013 at 8:42 | vote | accept | Rupert | ||
Dec 3, 2013 at 16:38 | answer | added | Jim Humphreys | timeline score: 1 | |
Dec 3, 2013 at 16:16 | comment | added | Jim Humphreys | @Rupert: I added a more relevant tag. | |
Dec 3, 2013 at 16:15 | history | edited | Jim Humphreys |
edited tags
|
|
Dec 3, 2013 at 14:53 | comment | added | user76758 | I think there are also some E$_6$ counterexamples as well (over suitable fields). For "most" types it is OK by inspection of classification theorems. | |
Dec 3, 2013 at 14:50 | comment | added | user76758 | No. Assume $G$ is semisimple (else silly counterexamples via non-split central tori). For a maximal $k$-torus $T\supset S$ and basis $\Delta$ of the set $\Phi$ of absolute roots, a basis of absolute roots of $Z_G(S)$ is $\Delta_0=\ker(\Delta\rightarrow{\rm{X}}(S))$. You want $\Delta_0$ of size $\dim(T)-\dim(S)$; i.e., $D:=\Delta -\Delta_0$ of size $\dim(S)$ $(\dim(T)=\#\Delta$ since $G$ is semisimple). Restriction $D\rightarrow{\rm{X}}(S)$ maps onto a basis of relative roots, so you want it injective; i.e., $\#D$ is the $k$-rank. False for many non-quasi-split unitary groups over fields. | |
Dec 3, 2013 at 12:45 | history | asked | Rupert | CC BY-SA 3.0 |