3
$\begingroup$

Let $\mathfrak{sp}(n)$ be the lie algebra of compact symplectic group $\mathrm{SP}(n)$, regarded as a compact form of $\mathfrak{sp}(2n,\mathbb{C})$, so we can talk about its (complex) determinant.

Let $M\in \mathfrak{sp}(n)$, then $M$ has purely imaginary eigenvalues $(ix_1,ix_2,\dots,ix_n,-ix_1,-ix_2,\dots,-ix_n)$, so $$\det(M)=(x_1x_2\cdots x_n)^2\geq 0.$$

My question is

Is there a coordinate independent way to show that every element of $\mathfrak{sp}(n)$ has nonnegative determinant?

I would want an argument without using eigenvalues, nor anything that cannot be expressed as a function of the matrix entries.



  1. I will like to know if there is some geometric arguments.

I also want to understand the algebra behind. For $n=2$, I have tried expanding $\det(M)$, but I cannot find a way to express it as a sum of non-negative terms.

A useful way to show the positivity of an algebraic expression is to write it as a sum of terms, and each term is either a norm square, or can be shown to be non-negative by a direct application of the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality. For example, we know $\mathrm{tr}(A^4)\geq 0$ because $\mathrm{tr}(A^4)=||A^2||^2$.

Of course we have $\det(M)=(x_1x_2\cdots x_n)^2$, but the problem $(x_1x_2\cdots x_n)$ is not expressible by $M$.

  1. Can $\det(M)$ be expressed a sum of such non-negative terms? If yes, what are they? If not, what are the extra ingredients we need to show the positivity apart from Cauchy Schwartz or completing squares?

Thanks in advanced!

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Because some now-deleted answers were confused about this, might be worth recording that the matrices $M \in \mathfrak{sp}(n)$ are those which satisfy $\Omega M = -M^T\Omega$ where $\Omega$ is some fixed non-singular skew-symmetric matrix, e.g. $\Omega = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & I \\ -I & 0 \end{pmatrix}$. $\endgroup$ Feb 25 at 17:05
2
$\begingroup$

Here is a proof of $\det M\geq 0$ for $M\in \mathfrak{sp}(n)$ based on the lemma that every complex matrix is consimilar to a real matrix.

Acknowledgment: In what follows I was helped by feedback I received at MSE.

By construction, the $2n\times 2n$ complex matrix $M\in \mathfrak{sp}(n)$ is skew-Hermitian and Hamiltonian, which means that it has the $n\times n$ block decomposition $$M=\begin{pmatrix} A&B\\ C&-A^T\end{pmatrix},\;\;\text{with}\;\;A=-A^\ast,\;\;B=B^T=-C^\ast=-\bar{C}.$$ Here $M^T$ denotes the transpose, $\bar{M}$ the complex conjugate, and $M^\ast$ the conjugate transpose.

By continuity of the determinant it is sufficient to consider $\det A\neq 0$. Then Schur's determinant identity gives

$$\det M=\det(-AA^T-ACA^{-1}B)=\det(A\bar{A}+A\bar{B}A^{-1}B)$$ $$\qquad=\det(A\bar{A})\det(1+\bar{A}^{-1}\bar{B}A^{-1}B)$$ $$\qquad=|\det A|^2\det(1+\bar{X}X),\;\;\text{with}\;\;X=A^{-1}B.$$

Now I apply the consimilarity lemma, to write $X=SR\bar{S}^{-1}$ with $R$ a real matrix. This gives $$\det M=|\det A|^2\det(1+\bar{S}R^2\bar{S}^{-1})=|\det A|^2\det(1+R^2)$$ $$\qquad=|\det A|^2\det(1+iR)\det(1-iR)$$ $$\quad=|\det A|^2|\det(1+iR)|^2\geq 0.$$

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Ultimately this seems to use eigenvalues in a way that's pretty similar to what the OP did. $\endgroup$ Feb 26 at 1:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ For $X=\begin{pmatrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{pmatrix}$, $|b|^4\det(1+X\overline{X})=||b|^2-\overline{b}^2 \det(X)|^2+|b|^2|a\overline{b}+b\overline{d}|^2$. So it is possible to write the determinant as a sum of norm square in the case $n=2$. $\endgroup$ Feb 26 at 3:47
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @SamHopkins --- I worked a bit more on the proof, I think I have now removed any reliance on eigenvalues. $\endgroup$ Feb 26 at 12:43
  • $\begingroup$ @CarloBeenakker Can $R$ be expressed using $X$? I think you proof is using the fact that $X\overline{X}$ is conjugate to the square of a real matrix, which is not so much different from a proof using eigenvalues $\endgroup$ Feb 27 at 1:05
  • $\begingroup$ a proof along these lines using eigenvalues would rely on the fact that the negative eigenvalues of $X\bar{X}$ have multiplicity two, which is not what I am using here (although indeed this property can be derived from the consimilarity of $X$ with a real matrix). $\endgroup$ Feb 27 at 7:42

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.