3
$\begingroup$

Let $G$ be the algebraic group $\operatorname{Sp}(2n, K)$ where $K$ is an algebraically closed field of characteristic not $2$. There is a quaternion subgroup $Q$ such that $Q/Z(G)$ is elementary abelian. Is the conjugacy class to which $Q$ belong unique? I have a feeling that it is unique but I'm not sure how to clearly argue. Maybe from the viewpoint of Class 5 maximal subgroup of symplectic groups $\operatorname{Sp}(2, K)$ and then embed $\operatorname{Sp}(2, K)$ in $\operatorname{Sp}(2n, K)$? Could I get a hint or some reference? Thank you.

Reference:

Martin Liebeck, Gary Seitz. On the subgroup structure of classical groups. Invent. math. 134, 427-453 (1998).

Edit:

I only mean the quaternion subgroup of order 8.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ As soon as $n$ is large, surely there are many conjugacy classes of quaternion subgroups containing the centre. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 14, 2023 at 11:56
  • $\begingroup$ By quaternion subgroup do you mean $Q_{4n}$ for some $n$? $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 14, 2023 at 12:27
  • $\begingroup$ @KentaSuzuki I mean the the group of order 8 only. $\endgroup$
    – user488802
    Commented Sep 14, 2023 at 19:19
  • $\begingroup$ @DaveBenson Thank you for the input. So you mean when $n=1$, it is true but when $n>1$, it is not. How to see this? Thanks. $\endgroup$
    – user488802
    Commented Sep 14, 2023 at 19:58
  • $\begingroup$ Let me think. Thank you. By "embed in large $n$", do you mean how? By tensor product? $\endgroup$
    – user488802
    Commented Sep 14, 2023 at 20:12

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

Here is an argument for $\operatorname{char} K=0$ (and probably also for $\operatorname{char} K>2$). Let $\pi\colon Q_8\to\operatorname{Sp}_{2n}(K)$ be an injective homomorphism, i.e., a vector space $V$ of dimension $2n$ with a faithful action of $Q_8$ and an invariant symplectic form.

The irreducible representations of $Q_8$ are $\{1,\chi_1,\chi_2,\chi_3,\rho\}$ where $\chi_i$ are order $2$ characters, and $\rho$ is the $2$-dimensional representation. Thus by complete reducibility $V$ decomposes as a direct sum of the five representations. However, the requirement that $Q/Z(G)$ is abelian says $-1\in Q$ acts as $-1$ on $V$, so in fact, only $\rho$ can appear in the decomposition of $Q_8$ (indeed, $-1$ acts trivially on all other representations). In other words, $V\simeq\rho^{\oplus n}$ as $Q_8$-representations.

Thus it remains to show that (up to conjugation) there is a unique symplectic form on $V$ compatible with the $Q_8$-action. Let $\omega\colon V\otimes V\to K$ be a symplectic form. Since $\rho$ also carries a $Q_8$-invariant symplectic form, we conclude there is a non-degenerate symmetric bilinear form on $\hom_{Q_8}(\rho,V)\simeq K^n$. Since we are working over an algebraically closed field, all non-degenerate symmetric bilinear forms must be conjugate to each other. Since there is an isomorphism $V\simeq \rho\otimes\hom_{Q_8}(\rho,V)$ of vector spaces carrying bilinear forms, we conclude that $V$ must have a unique non-degenerate symplectic form up to conjugation.

P.S. To answer LSpice's question: Since $Q_8$ is non-abelian, for $Q_8/Z(G)$ to be abelian, we need $Z(G)\cap Q_8$ to be non-trivial. Since $Z(G)=\{\pm I_{2n}\}$, this means $Z(G)\subset Q_8$. But since $Z(G)$ is central, it must be $\{\pm1\}\subset Q_8$.

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand—why couldn't an Abelian group like $Q/Z(G)$ have an element $-1$ acting trivially on some components? (Clearly not on all, since the homomorphism is injective.) $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Sep 14, 2023 at 21:54
  • $\begingroup$ @LSpice $Z(G) = \{\pm 1\}$ so an injective homorphism sending $Z(Q)$ into $Z(G)$ must send $-1$ to $-1$. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 14, 2023 at 23:49
  • $\begingroup$ @user488802 the tensor product of two vector spaces $V^* \otimes \rho$ with alternating bilinear forms carries a symmetric bilinear form: the tensor product of the forms. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 14, 2023 at 23:53
  • $\begingroup$ @JoshuaMundinger, re, that was my question: why must $Z(Q)$ map to $Z(G)$? Certainly it must for an irreducible representation, but I don't see it in general. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Sep 15, 2023 at 0:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LSpice The question is a little ambiguous. If we take $Q/Z(G)$ in the statement to mean $Q/Q \cap Z(G)$, then $Q/Q \cap Z(G)$ being abelian means $-1 \in Q$ maps into $Z(G)$. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 15, 2023 at 2:02

You must log in to answer this question.

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