Skip to main content
22 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 27 at 14:30 answer added Joshua Mundinger timeline score: 1
Mar 9, 2022 at 22:58 comment added Luis @YCor. Thanks. Since you suggested before to fix the question, I added these examples too.
Mar 9, 2022 at 22:57 history edited Luis CC BY-SA 4.0
added 174 characters in body
Mar 9, 2022 at 22:21 comment added YCor @Luis no: consider $\mathrm{SL}_3(\mathbf{R})$.
Mar 9, 2022 at 19:32 history edited Luis CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 7 characters in body
Mar 9, 2022 at 19:04 comment added Luis @YCor About the simple case: is it a dichotomy compact/non-compact?
Mar 9, 2022 at 13:50 comment added YCor You should fix the question to take the counterexamples into account: to cover the semisimple groups, you need to relax the algebraicity definition (e.g., being the unit component in the Lie group of real points). Also for the nilpotent case, the point is that the quotient of every connected nilpotent Lie group (which may be non-linear) by its center is always simply connected.
Mar 9, 2022 at 11:57 comment added Luis Thanks for all the examples
Mar 9, 2022 at 11:56 history edited Luis CC BY-SA 4.0
added 151 characters in body
Mar 9, 2022 at 11:26 comment added Venkataramana @YCor: of course you are well aware of all this. Mine was a "tongue in cheek" comment.
Mar 9, 2022 at 11:24 comment added YCor @Venkataramana yes of course it's the connected component of $\mathrm{PGL}_2(\mathbf{R})$ (which is the group of real points of $\mathrm{PGL}_2$). In any case as you pointed out, the assertion "If $G$ is semisimple, this is always the case" of the OP is wrong.
Mar 9, 2022 at 11:23 comment added Venkataramana @YCor: you are right. But is it not the case that $PSL_2(\mathbb R)$ the connected component of identity of $SO(1,2)$?
Mar 9, 2022 at 11:19 comment added YCor The answer is negative for $\mathrm{SL}_2(\mathbf{R})$ itself: $\mathrm{PSL}_2(\mathbf{R})$ is not isomorphic to the group of $\mathbf{R}$-points of any algebraic $\mathbf{R}$-group.
Mar 9, 2022 at 5:21 comment added Venkataramana Actually, even for semi-simple Lie groups this is false: the connected component of identity of SO(1,n) is not an algebraic group.
Mar 9, 2022 at 3:48 comment added David E Speyer How about Allen Knutson's example mathoverflow.net/a/23594/297 : $\mathbb{R}^4 \rtimes \mathbb{R}$ with $\theta$ acting by $\left[ \begin{smallmatrix} \cos \theta & -\sin \theta && \\ \sin \theta & \cos \theta && \\ && \cos (a \theta) & - \sin(a \theta) \\ && \sin(a \theta) & \cos (a \theta) \\ \end{smallmatrix} \right]$ for irrational $a$? This is simply connected and, if I am not mistaken, centerless.
Mar 9, 2022 at 3:35 comment added Will Sawin The image of $G/Z(G)$ in the automorphisms of the Lie algebra of $G$ is not always algebraic, so that proof strategy won't work, but the counterexample I have for that has $G / Z(G)$ itself algebraic: It's $ \mathbb R^3 \rtimes \mathbb R^2$, with the action of $\mathbb R^2$ on $\mathbb R^3$ by a rank two subtorus of the diagonal matrices defined by a non-algebraic equation.
Mar 9, 2022 at 3:34 comment added Will Sawin What about the group of $3 \times 3$ upper-triangular matrices with diagonal entries positive? This is a connected component of an algebraic group but I don't think is an algebraic group itself, and the same thing is true mod center.
Mar 9, 2022 at 3:27 history edited Luis CC BY-SA 4.0
added 94 characters in body
Mar 9, 2022 at 2:29 history edited Luis CC BY-SA 4.0
edited body
Mar 9, 2022 at 2:11 history edited Luis CC BY-SA 4.0
edited body
S Mar 9, 2022 at 2:00 review First questions
Mar 9, 2022 at 2:13
S Mar 9, 2022 at 2:00 history asked Luis CC BY-SA 4.0