4
$\begingroup$

Let $k$ be an arbitrary field with $\operatorname{char}(k) \neq 2$. Let $G$ be a linear algebraic group over $k$. Let $X$ be the conjugacy class of a semisimple element $s \in G(k)$ of order 2 (or a union of such sets).

Can we say something about the subgroup of $G(k)$ generated by $X$? Is it closed under the Zariski topology? Does it make sense to speak of the algebraic subgroup generated by X?

A few facts that might be relevant:

Theorem 1.45 of Milne, Algebraic Groups, tells us that if $\langle X \rangle$ is a closed subgroup of $G(k)$, there exists a unique reduced algebraic subgroup $H$ of $G$ such that $\langle X \rangle = H(k)$ and $H$ is geometrically reduced.

If $k$ is algebraically closed, $X$ itself is closed. See 18.2 in Humphreys, Linear Algebraic Groups.

In the case where I am particular interested in, $G$ is the automorphism group of a (not necessarily associative) algebra and $X$ corresponds to idempotents of the algebra.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ You can certainly speak of the algebraic subgroup generated by $X$. It is the intersection of all closed subgroups containing $X$. $\endgroup$ – S. Carnahan Jan 31 '18 at 14:05
  • $\begingroup$ If $s$ belongs to the subgroup of $G(k)$ generated by unipotents and the latter is not equal to $G(k)$ then the answer is no. For instance, $PGL_2$ over any field in which some element is not a square yields counterexamples. $\endgroup$ – YCor Jan 31 '18 at 17:28
  • $\begingroup$ @S.Carnahan Is there nothing more to it? Is an algebraic subgroup really the same as a closed subgroup? Or do you use something like the Theorem 1.45 that I mentioned in my question? $\endgroup$ – Michiel Van Couwenberghe Feb 1 '18 at 9:45
  • $\begingroup$ @YCor Do you mean that in that case it will never be true of that there exist counterexamples? Can you be more precise with your counterexample in $PGL_2$? I find it hard to see whether a subgroup is closed but that is probably because I am not aware of some relevant Theorems... Probably you want $X$ to generate $PSL_2$ or so which is not closed? $\endgroup$ – Michiel Van Couwenberghe Feb 1 '18 at 9:49
  • $\begingroup$ Per @YCor's answer, you should probably specify that you're speaking of the $G(k)$- (i.e., rational) conjugacy class of $s$, not its algebraic conjugacy class. $\endgroup$ – LSpice Aug 3 '18 at 12:45
4
$\begingroup$

We can assume that the $G(k)$-conjugacy class of $s$ generates a Zariski-dense subgroup $Q$ of $G$.

Let me assume that $k$ has characteristic zero and provide consequences. So $G=U\rtimes S$ for the unipotent radical $U$, which is defined over $k$, and some $k$-defined reductive subgroup $S$, and $G(k)=U(k)\rtimes S(k)$.

I claim that $Q$ contains $U(k)$.

If $U$ is abelian, $Q\cap U(k)$ contains all commutators $quq^{-1}u^{-1}$ ($q\in Q$, $u\in U(k)$), which can be rewritten as additively $q\cdot u-u$ and such element form a $k$-linear subspace, which is the whole of $U$, because $G$ is generated by unipotent elements. In general, this applies to $G/[U,U]$ and one deduces that $Q\cap U(k)$ has a surjective image in $[U(k),U(k)]=[U,U](k)$ and hence a standard lemma about nilpotent groups implies $Q\cap U(k)=U(k)$.

This completely reduces the question (in char 0) to reductive groups.

In the abelian case there is not much to say: a conjugacy class is a singleton. So mostly things amount to understand the semisimple case.

Then in the isotropic case we can get somewhat fine results. Let $Z$ be the largest finite normal subgroup of $G$, that is, the centralizer of the unit component $G^0$. Let $G(k)^+$ be the subgroup of $G(k)$ generated by unipotent elements.

Suppose that $G$ is connected, $k$-isotropic and $k$-simple. It is known (I think it's in Margulis' book) that every normal subgroup of $G(k)$ not contained in $Z$ contains $G(k)^+$. [This extends immediately to the case when $G$ is semisimple, $k$-isotropic, $G(k)$ is Zariski-dense (i.e., meets all connected components), and $G/G^0$ acts transitively on minimal nontrivial $k$-defined semisimple subgroups (these latter assumptions implies that they are all $k$-isotropic). Typical example: the wreath product $S\wr\mathrm{Sym}_n=S^n\rtimes\mathrm{Sym}_n$, with $S$ $k$-simple $k$-isotropic.]

Example: $G=\mathrm{PGL}_2(k)$ (here $\mathrm{PGL}_2$ is connected, simple, trivial center). Then the subgroup generated by the $G(k)$-conjugacy class of $s\in G(k)\smallsetminus\{1\}$ is equal to the subgroup of those $t\in\mathrm{PGL}_2(k)$ such that $\overline{\det}(t)\in\{1,\overline{\det}(s)\}$, where $\overline{\det}$ is the determinant viewed as function into $k^\ast/(k^\ast)^2$, which is well-defined as homomorphism $\mathrm{PGL}_2(k):k^\ast/(k^\ast)^2$.

The anisotropic case is far worse-understood. Still in the real case it behaves well and even better (in the above setting with "isotropic" replaced by "anisotropic", we automatically have $Q$ Zariski-closed.). In the $p$-adic case, for $G$ semisimple anisotropic, $G(k)$ is profinite and thus has no "minimal" normal subgroup; anyway some easy $p$-adic analysis probably ensures that $Q$ is an open subgroup, which is a reasonable conclusion.

$\endgroup$

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.