1
$\begingroup$

Let $G$ be a connected, reductive group over a $p$-adic field $k$, let $P$ be a parabolic subgroup with Levi $M$ and radical $N$. Let $K$ be a maximal open compact subgroup of $G$ in good position relative to $P$, so that $G = PK$. Under what circumstances do we have $P \cap K = (M \cap K)(N \cap K)$?

My motivation is the following: it is a common convention, e.g. in Harish-Chandra's notes, to normalize a left or right Haar measure on each closed subgroup $H$ of $G$ so that $H \cap K$ has measure one. Supposing we do this for $M$ and $N$, then we get a left Haar measure $d_lp$ on $P$ satisfying:

$$\int\limits_P f(p)d_lp = \int\limits_M \int\limits_N f(mn) dndm$$ My question is then equivalent to the assertion that the Haar measure on $P$ in this way follows the convention that $P \cap K$ has measure one (taking $f = \operatorname{Char} P \cap K$).

I'm not even sure about the unramified case. Here $G$ comes from a smooth affine group scheme $\mathcal G$ over $\mathcal O_K$, and $K = \mathcal G(\mathcal O_K) = G(\mathcal O_K)$. So should $P, M, N$ as $\mathcal P, \mathcal M, \mathcal N$. We would have $P \cap K = (M \cap K)(N \cap K)$ if the product map $M \times_k N \rightarrow P$ comes from an isomorphism of $\mathcal O_K$-schemes $\mathcal M \times_{\mathcal O_K} \mathcal N \rightarrow \mathcal P$.

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ This is a weakened form (i.e., it holds for more subgroups) of the notion of $K$ having an Iwahori decomposition with respect to $P$, which demands that $K = (\overline N \cap K)(M \cap K)(N \cap K)$ (from which your desired equality follows since $P \cap \overline N = \{1\}$). In particular, it holds for all Moy–Prasad filtration subgroups with respect to points $x$ in the building of $M$. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 2:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LSpice This is true but unfortunately insufficient since D_S wants K maximal. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 19:09
  • $\begingroup$ @PaulBroussous, thanks; I missed that. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 19:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LSpice In their article "Structure Theory Via Types", Bushnell and Kutzko claim that this is true if $K$ is special and refer to Tits, Corvalis. I do not have Tits's article with me. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 19:19
  • $\begingroup$ @PaulBroussous, I'm sure it follows from the material there (what doesn't?), but I don't find an exact statement. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 19:27

0

You must log in to answer this question.