6
$\begingroup$

The closure of a 1-parameter subgroup in a compact Lie group is a torus. To what extent does this result generalize to compact Riemannian symmetric spaces? In other words, is the closure of a geodesic in a compact Riemannian symmetric space necessarily a flat totally geodesic submanifold?

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ According to Berger in a compact symmetric space any geodesic lies in a totally geodesic flat torus, see ["A Panoramic View of Riemannian Geometry", section 4.3.5.2, page 193]. I am not sure how to prove this. I suspect an answer is somewhere is Besse's book on closed geodesics. $\endgroup$ Sep 21, 2014 at 16:59
  • $\begingroup$ @IgorBelegradek: Thanks for the reference. $\endgroup$ Sep 23, 2014 at 7:27

1 Answer 1

6
$\begingroup$

I think that this is treated in Helgason's Differential Geometry, Lie Groups and Symmetric Spaces. The point is that, for any Riemannian symmetric space $G/K$, one has the notion of the rank $r$ of the symmetric space, which is the dimension $r$ of a maximal abelian subspace $\frak{a}$ in $\frak{k}^\perp\subset \frak{g}$, where $\frak{k}\subset\frak{g}$ are the respective Lie algebras of $K\subset G$. The exponential of $\frak{a}$ gives a torus that then maps down to a totally geodesic torus in $G/K$. (The images of this torus under the action of $G$ are the so-called 'flats' in $G/K$.) Then, because the $K$-orbit of $\frak{a}$ in $\frak{k}^\perp$ contains everything in $\frak{k}^\perp$, it follows that every geodesic in $G/K$ is a geodesic in such a 'flat', and hence its closure is itself a closed geodesic sub-torus in a flat.

The case of a compact Lie group $K$ is the special case in which $G = K\times K$ and we regard $K$ as embedded diagonally in $G$.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the answer Robert but there's something puzzling me. The flats you describe above need not be tori, right? For example, if we have a symmetric space of noncompact type then the exponential map is a diffeomorphism and so the space can't contain a torus. Have I misunderstood something? $\endgroup$ Sep 22, 2014 at 0:35
  • $\begingroup$ @OliverJones: Yes, you are right. I was assuming that you wanted only to consider symmetric spaces of compact type; I should have made that clear. $\endgroup$ Sep 22, 2014 at 1:14
  • $\begingroup$ I guessed that's what you meant but just wanted to make sure. Thanks again for the nice answer. $\endgroup$ Sep 22, 2014 at 1:26

Your Answer

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.