During my researches I've come across the following question.

Let $A$ and $B$ be a couple of square $k\times k$ skew symmetric matrices on $\mathbb R$. Let us consider the (real) pencil generated by $A$ and $B$ that is $$P(A,B)\doteq \lambda A+\eta B,\; \lambda,\eta\in\mathbb R.$$

What I am studying is the stabilization of $P(A,B)$ under the action of the orthogonal group $O(k)$, that is I would like to know what can be deduced about $A$ and $B$ under the following request that is

$$(*)\quad M P(A,B) M^{T}\subset P(A,B),\quad \forall M\in O(k).$$

Another interesting question for me would be to characterize all the $M\in O(k)$ such that $(*)$ holds.

What I would like to know is if there are already similar results in literature and what is known on the subject, references are warmly welcomed and I thank you all in advance for your kind help.

Best Wishes.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Similarly as Raziel reinterpreted your first question into an exercise in representation theory, your second question is equivalent to this: What is the stabilizer of a point in $\mathrm{Gr}_2(\mathfrak{so}(k))$ (the Grassmanian of two-planes in $\mathfrak{so}(k)$) under the adjoint action of $\mathrm{O}(k)$? Or maybe rather: What are possible orbits of $\mathrm{O}(k)$ on $\mathrm{Gr}_2(\mathfrak{so}(k))$? I think this question is much harder. $\endgroup$ – Vít Tuček Apr 24 '14 at 16:00

Your first question

"what can be deduced about $A$ and $B$ under the request $(*)$"

can be reformulated as follows.

In fact, you are asking if there exists a $2$-dimensional vector subspace $V \subset \mathfrak{so}(k)$ stable under the adjoint action of $O(k)$

$$\mathrm{Ad} : O(K) \to \mathrm{Aut}(\mathfrak{so}(k))$$

defined by $\mathrm{Ad}(M)N := MNM^*$ for all $M \in O(k)$ and $N \in \mathfrak{so}(k)$

Thus you are asking if the adjoint representation of $O(k)$ is reducible (and admits a reduction of dimension $2$).

Your second question, i.e.

"characterize all the $M \in O(k)$ such that $(*)$ holds"

is indeed harder, but it has an explicit solution for $k=3$. In this case $\mathfrak{so}(3) \simeq \mathbb{R}^3$ and the adjoint representation of $O(3)$ is just the tautological representation.

Under the above identification, the stabilizer of a two dimensional subspace in $\mathfrak{so}(3)$ under the adjoint action is just the stabilizer of a two dimensional subspace in $\mathbb{R}^3$ under the tautological representations, namely the subgroup $SO(2)$.

  • $\begingroup$ Useful rephrasing. $\endgroup$ – J. Martel Apr 24 '14 at 15:28
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Indeed, the adjoint representation of the orthogonal group is irreducible which means that the only invariant subspaces are trivial representation $0$ and the whole space $\mathfrak{so}(k)$. $\endgroup$ – Vít Tuček Apr 24 '14 at 15:39
  • $\begingroup$ This settles the first question. The second one sounds harder to me. $\endgroup$ – Raziel Apr 24 '14 at 15:41
  • $\begingroup$ I should probably add that the adjoin representation is not irreducible for $k=4$ where $\mathfrak{so}(4) = \mathfrak{sl}(2)\oplus\mathfrak{sl}(2)$. $\endgroup$ – Vít Tuček Apr 24 '14 at 15:45
  • $\begingroup$ The isomorphism on the group level is given here mathoverflow.net/a/81359/6818 in the real version and here terrytao.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/… in the complex version. $\endgroup$ – Vít Tuček Apr 24 '14 at 15:54

It just occurred to me that the answer to your second question might be contained in the existing literature. I will give a separate answer to give it more visibility and also because is different, in spirit, from the previous one.

Normal forms for pairs of skew-symmetric matrices are known: Pencils of complex and real symmetric and skew matrices or also Canonical forms for symmetric/skew-symmetric real matrix pairs under strict equivalence and congruence

So, once the normal forms are given, it remains to compute the subgroup of $M \in O(k)$ that preserves these normal forms. This will give (possibly after some heavy and/or non-trivial linear algebra) a complete answer to your problem, which will depend indeed on the invariants of the pair.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy