Skip to main content
8 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 1 at 17:28 comment added JRojo Thank you very much again, this self-contained argument saves the day for me (I know very little of the general theory of Lie algebras). It was very helpful your answer.
Jun 28 at 15:04 comment added YCor @JRojo yes, as I said, it's a theorem in Bourbaki. However, in the present case, one can argue more directly. In the complexification $\mathfrak{g}\subset\mathfrak{g}_\mathbf{C}$, if one takes an element outside the union of two hyperplanes, its centralizer is a Cartan subalgebra (here, 2-dimensional abelian complement to the derived subgroup). These two hyperplanes intersect $\mathfrak{g}$ at most in hyperplanes. So there exists some element in $\mathfrak{g}$ not in these hyperplanes, and hence its centralizer in $\mathfrak{g}$ is an abelian complement to the derived subalgebra.
Jun 28 at 14:44 vote accept JRojo
Jun 28 at 14:43 comment added JRojo Everything makes sense, the only I would ask is a little explanation as to the fact that $\mathfrak{a}+\mathfrak{h}=\mathfrak{g}$, is it always true that a cartan subalgebra plus the derived subalgebra fill the total algebra?
Jun 28 at 13:39 comment added JRojo okey that was silly, any 2-dimensional nilpotent algebra is abelian
Jun 28 at 11:04 comment added JRojo Thank you very much for the answer. A couple of questions: the fact that $\mathfrak{h}$ is 2-dimensional follows since in $\mathfrak{g}$ there are not nilpotent subalgebras of dimension $\ge 3$ (at the complex level), right? Another: why do you get an abelian subalgebra of $\mathfrak{gl}_2(K)$? The algebra $\mathfrak{h}$ is nilpotent, in principle it is not abelian, right?
Jun 26 at 13:17 history edited LSpice CC BY-SA 4.0
Typo
Jun 26 at 11:55 history answered YCor CC BY-SA 4.0