3
$\begingroup$

Is it true that there is no homomorphism from a semisimple Lie group without compact factor to a compact Lie group?

$\endgroup$
5
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Wouldn't such a map be a compact factor of the original Lie group? $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Oct 8, 2020 at 3:18
  • $\begingroup$ @LSpice I don't see why the image would be normal. However, the non-existence of a nontrivial/injective homomorphism (there's always the trivial homomorphism) follows, for instance, from the fact that the affine group $\mathbf{R}\ltimes\mathbf{R}$ has no faithful finite-dimensional unitary representation. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Oct 8, 2020 at 5:56
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This question is strictly covered in this one which was answered in comments. I have now provided the detailed answer there. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Oct 8, 2020 at 9:39
  • $\begingroup$ @YCor, maybe I don't know the terminology. I thought a compact factor just meant a quotient with compact image. I believe that there are obstructions (which is why I just asked in a comment); I just don't see why it matters whether the image of that quotient is normal in some larger compact group. Is the issue whether the kernel is an almost direct factor? $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Oct 8, 2020 at 11:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ But the problem is that it's not a priori obvious that the image is closed. So the quotient by the kernel might be noncompact. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Oct 8, 2020 at 12:27

2 Answers 2

4
$\begingroup$

See below a detailed version of the comment of @LSpice. (Edited taking into account a comment of @YCor.) This is an answer to the question on homomorpisms of real algebraic groups.

Proposition. Let $\varphi\colon G\to K$ be a homomorphism of real algebraic groups, where $G$ is a connected semisimple real algebraic group without compact factors and $K$ is a compact real algebraic group. Then $\varphi$ is trivial (identically 1).

Proof. Such a homomorphism $\varphi$ induces an isomorphism $$ G/{\rm ker}\,\varphi\,\overset\sim\longrightarrow\, {\rm im\,}\varphi.$$ The image ${\rm im\,}\varphi$ is closed in $K$. Therefore, ${\rm im\,}\varphi$ is compact. On the other hand, from the theory of real semisimple algebraic groups we know that since $G$ is a connected semisimple real algebraic group without compact factors, it has no nontrivial compact quotients. It follows that $G/{\rm ker}\,\varphi=\{1\}$, and hence $\varphi$ is trivial.

Note that any compact real Lie group is algebraic. However, a noncompact real semisimple Lie group might be non-algebraic. For example, any nontrivial cover of ${\rm SL}(2, {\Bbb R})$ is non-algebraic.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't think this is a proof. It's a trivial reduction to showing that there's no injective homomorphism from a [nontrivial!] semisimple group with no compact factor into a compact Lie group. The remainder of the proof (which I mentioned in a comment, or alternatively doing the case when $G$ is locally isomorphic to $\mathrm{SL}_2(\mathbf{R})$) is fairly standard (and probably quite a duplicate here), but contains all the substance of the proof, which is not apparent here. Just to keep in mind, there's an injective hom from the noncompact Lie group $\mathbf{R}$ into some compact Lie group. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Oct 8, 2020 at 9:02
  • $\begingroup$ @YCor: I agree. I had in mind real semisimple algebraic groups. $\endgroup$ Oct 8, 2020 at 10:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ... with algebraic homomorphisms. (Which is automatic among Lie group homomorphisms between semisimple algebraic groups, which is not hard but strictly harder this whole argument). $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Oct 9, 2020 at 12:58
2
$\begingroup$

I think an elementary argument is that if such a homomorphism exists, one can pull back the Cartan-Killing form (or an extension of that, in case the compact group has positive dimensional center) to an Ad-invariant definite inner product on the Lie algebra of a quotient of the original group. This quotient is then compact.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Indeed. This argument works in the broader setting of this older question. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Oct 9, 2020 at 13:04

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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