10
$\begingroup$

Let $\mathfrak{g}$ be a complex semisimple Lie algebra of rank $r$. Let $\mathfrak{g}^{\mathrm{reg}}$ be the set of $X\in\mathfrak{g}$ whose centralizer $Z_{\mathfrak{g}}(X):=\{Y\in\mathfrak{g}:[X,Y]=0\}$ has dimension $r$ (called the set of regular elements here).

Question. Can we find polynomial maps $$f_1,\ldots,f_r:\mathfrak{g}\to\mathfrak{g}$$ such that for all $X\in\mathfrak{g}^{\mathrm{reg}}$, $\{f_1(X),\ldots,f_r(X)\}$ is a basis for $Z_{\mathfrak{g}}(X)$?

The answer is trivially yes for $\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{sl}(2,\mathbb{C})$. Simply take $f_1:\mathfrak{sl}(2,\mathbb{C})\to\mathfrak{sl}(2,\mathbb{C})$ to be the identity map.

Using Mathematica, I also found two such polynomials $f_1,f_2$ for $\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{sl}(3,\mathbb{C})$, but they are a bit too messy to write down here.


Edit. In other words, if we let $$E=\{(X,Y)\in\mathfrak{g}^{\mathrm{reg}}\times\mathfrak{g}:[X,Y]=0\}$$ then $E$ is a vector bundle of rank $r$ over $\mathfrak{g}^{\mathrm{reg}}$ and the question is if it is trivial in the algebraic category.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ In $\mathfrak{sl}_{r+1}$, I'd be tempted by $f_i(g)=g^i-\frac1{r+1}\mathrm{Tr}(g^i)I_r$. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Jan 4, 2017 at 20:14
  • $\begingroup$ (I mean $I_{r+1}$, not $I_r$) $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Jan 4, 2017 at 23:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, @YCor's polynomials $f_i$ for $i=1,\dots,r$ answer the question in positive for $\mathfrak{sl}_{r+1}$. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 5, 2017 at 19:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In $\mathfrak{so}_n$ I'd try $f_i(g)=g^{2i+1}$ for $1\le i\le r=\lfloor n/2\rfloor$. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Jan 5, 2017 at 21:33
  • $\begingroup$ If you choose an sl_2 triple (x,y,h), there is a simple trivialization of the restriction of that bundle to the Kostant section: you have an isomorphism of the tot space of that bundle with the product of the centralizer of x and the centralizer of y, given by $(h,u)\mapsto (h,(1+P\pi ad_h)u)$, where $P$ is a splitting of $ad_y$ and $\pi: \mathfrak{g}\to Im ad_y$ is the projection, cf. Thm 5.1 in arxiv 1111.6457 (I also used it in my thesis) $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 30, 2017 at 18:20

1 Answer 1

7
$\begingroup$

The answer is 'yes', and it follows from Theorem 0.1 in B. Kostant, "Lie group representations on polynomial rings" (American Journal of Mathematics, 85 (1963), 327–404). Here is the argument/construction:

Let $\phi_1,\ldots,\phi_r$ be generators of the ring of ad-invariant polynomial functions on $\frak{g}$. (We can assume that $\phi_1(X)=\tfrac12\langle X,X \rangle$, where $\langle, \rangle$ is the Killing form on $\frak{g}$, and we can assume that $\phi_i$ is homogeneous of degree $m_i+1$ where $1=m_1\le m_2\cdots\le m_r$ are the exponents of $\frak{g}$. By Kostant's Theorem 0.1 quoted above, the differentials $$ \mathrm{d}\phi_1,\ldots, \mathrm{d}\phi_r $$ are linearly independent at each point $X\in\frak{g}^{\mathrm{reg}}$.

Define a polynomial map $f_i:\frak{g}\to\frak{g}$ homogeneous of degree $m_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,r$ as the 'gradient' of $\phi_i$ with respect to the Killing metric, i.e., $$ (\mathrm{d}\phi_i)_X(Y) = \langle f_i(X),Y\rangle. $$ Because $\phi_i$ is ad-invariant, it satisfies $(\mathrm{d}\phi_i)_X\bigl([X,Y]\bigr)=0$ for all $Y\in\frak{g}$. Consequently, $$ \bigl\langle [X,f_i(X)],Y\bigr\rangle = -\bigl\langle f_i(X),[X,Y]\bigr\rangle = 0 $$ for all $Y$, and, since the Killing form is nondegenerate, this implies that $[X,f_i(X)]$ vanishes identically on $\frak{g}$. (Note that $f_1(X) = X$.)

By Kostant's result, the vectors $f_1(X), f_2(X),\ldots, f_r(X)$ are linearly independent and hence are a basis of $Z_{\frak{g}}(X)$ for all $X\in\frak{g}^{\mathrm{reg}}$.

Thus, these polynomial vector fields furnish a solution to the OP's problem.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Small note: Though Bert Kostant himself is beyond caring about such things, your second spelling "Konstant" always annoyed him. (The family name is indeed unusual, but is most likely a shortening of the original one by earlier immigrants in the family tree.) $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 30, 2017 at 16:58
  • $\begingroup$ @JimHumphreys: Oops! Sorry about that typo. I'll fix it now. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 30, 2017 at 17:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .