3
$\begingroup$

Fix a field $k$ of characteristic zero, and let $G$ be a connected reductive algebraic $k$-group of isotropic rank $\ge 1$. Fix a maximal $k$-split torus $S$, and let $\Phi_k$ be the relative root system of $G$ with respect to $S$. Assume that $\Phi_k$ is reduced and irreducible.

By Theorem 2 of Petrov and Stavrova, for every root $\alpha \in \Phi_k$ there is an embedding $X_\alpha:V_\alpha \to G$ where $V_\alpha$ is a vector group (EDIT: vector group scheme), and the image of $X_\alpha$ is the root subgroup $U_\alpha$. Given $v \in V_\alpha(k)$, $v \neq 0$, associated to $X_\alpha(v) \in U_\alpha(k)$ is a "Weyl group element" $w_\alpha(v)$, using Lemma 1.3 of Deodhar. If $G$ is a Chevalley group, these are the elements denoted $w_\alpha(t)$ in Steinberg, and $w_\alpha(1)$ is literally a representative of a Weyl group element. Steinberg lists some relations, of interest here is (R7), which says that for any two roots $\alpha,\beta \in \Phi_k$ and $v \in k$, $$ w_\alpha(1) \cdot X_\beta(v) \cdot w_\alpha(1)^{-1} = X_{w_\alpha \beta} \Big( c_{\alpha,\beta} v\Big) $$ This says that the action of the (lifts of) Weyl group elements on $G(k)$ by conjugation corresponds to the action of the Weyl group on $\Phi_k$; conjugating the root subgroup $U_\beta$ by a Weyl group representative $w_\alpha(1)$ takes it to the root subgroup $U_{w_\alpha \beta}$. The coefficient $c_{\alpha,\beta}$ is just a sign $\pm 1$ depending on $\alpha$ and $\beta$.

I have done a variety of explicit computations in quasi-split groups, and found in every case that $$ w_\alpha(u) \cdot X_\beta(v) \cdot w_\alpha(u)^{-1} = X_{w_\alpha \beta} \Big( c_{\alpha,\beta}(u,v) \Big) $$ for some function $c_{\alpha,\beta}:V_\alpha(k) \times V_\beta(k) \to V_{w_\alpha \beta}(k)$. Steinberg's (R7) says that in the split case $c_{\alpha,\beta}(1,v) = \pm v$. In the preprint (reference 3, equation 3) we give a version of this for a class of quasi-split special unitary groups, where $c_{\alpha,\beta}(1,v) = \pm v$ or $\pm \overline{v}$, with the bar denoting a Galois automorphism of order 2. I have also done computations in a quasi-split special orthogonal group, where some more complicated functions $c_{\alpha,\beta}$ arise.

Question 1: Why does the conjugation on the LHS above always end up in $U_{w_\alpha \beta}$, even in non-split cases? I suspect this is an obvious consequence of a Bruhat decomposition, but I don't understand that as well as I should.

Question 2: Is there a known generalization of this relation to reductive isotropic groups, or perhaps just for quasi-split groups?

  1. Deodhar, Vinay V., On central extensions of rational points of algebraic groups, Am. J. Math. 100, 303-386 (1978). ZBL0392.20027.2.
  2. Petrov, V.; Stavrova, A., Elementary subgroups of isotropic reductive groups., St. Petersbg. Math. J. 20, No. 4, 625-644 (2009); translation from Algebra Anal. 20, No. 4, 160-188 (2008). ZBL1206.20053.
  3. Rapinchuk, I.; Ruiter, J., On abstract homomorphisms of some special unitary groups, arXiv:2107.07351, preprint.
  4. Steinberg, Robert, Lectures on Chevalley groups, University Lecture Series 66. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS) (ISBN 978-1-4704-3105-1/pbk; 978-1-4704-3631-5/ebook). xi, 160 p. (2016). ZBL1361.20003.
$\endgroup$
12
  • $\begingroup$ The relative root groups are generated by the absolute root groups with the right restriction, with a predictable modification for multipliable relative roots. The relative Weyl group acts on absolute roots and preserves the restriction. Are you asking for something more subtle than that? EDIT: Oh, I see that your $V_\alpha$ is not the root group. So your worry is precisely about multipliable relative roots, right? $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 7, 2021 at 0:47
  • $\begingroup$ Notice, by the way, that (as far as I can tell—the generality is more than that in which I am used to working) the embedding $V_\alpha \to G$ is an embedding just of schemes, not of groups. (You didn't say otherwise, but I misread at first.) $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 7, 2021 at 0:51
  • $\begingroup$ Wait, one more comment: I see now you assume the relative root system is reduced, so multipliable roots are not a problem. So once again I'm not sure where the subtlety is …. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 7, 2021 at 0:56
  • $\begingroup$ I am aware that $V_\alpha \to G$ is an embedding of group schemes, though I did not mention it. I have not seen other people phrase it as such, but in all the cases I have studied, $V_\alpha$ is essentially the root space $\mathfrak{g}_\alpha$, and $X_\alpha:V_\alpha \to G$ is just the restriction of the exponential map $\operatorname{exp}:\mathfrak{g} \to G$. $\endgroup$ Sep 7, 2021 at 2:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The Deodhar reference was incorrect, but I have fixed it. One of his papers has the exact same title as one of his thesis; I meant to refer to the thesis. $\endgroup$ Sep 8, 2021 at 21:22

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

Let me use $a$ and $b$ for relative roots, so that I can later switch to $\alpha$ and $\beta$ for absolute roots.

If $b$ is a non-multipliable root, then, as you have said, $V_b$ is the $b$-root space, and $X_b$ is an exponential-type map. Specifically, it is the unique group homomorphism $V_b \to G$ whose derivative at the identity is the inclusion of the $b$-root subspace of $\operatorname{Lie}(G)$. It can be described ‘explicitly’, for small values of explicitly, as $v \mapsto \prod X_\beta(v_\beta)$, where $\beta$ runs over the absolute roots whose restriction to $S$ is $b$, and $v = \sum v_\beta$.

If $a$ is also non-multipliable, then we have that $w_a(u)$ is the commuting product $\prod w_\alpha(u_\alpha)$, where $\alpha$ runs over the absolute roots whose restriction to $S$ is $a$, and $u = \sum u_\alpha$. (Actually, now that I think about it, I might already be assuming $G$ quasi-split here.) In particular, $w_a(u)w_a(1)^{-1}$ equals $\prod \alpha^\vee(u_\alpha)$ (or maybe the inverse of this, depending how things are normalised; I didn't check).

You have already observed that $\operatorname{Int}(w_a(1))\bigl(X_b(v)\bigr)$ equals $\prod X_{w_a\beta}\bigl(c_{a\beta}\operatorname{Ad}(w_a(1))v_\beta\bigr)$, where $c_{a\beta} = \prod c_{\alpha\beta}$. Now suppose that $G$ is quasi-split. Then the set of absolute roots $\beta$ restricting to $b$ is a Galois orbit, and it is clear that $\beta \mapsto c_{a\beta}$ is constant on Galois orbits, so $\operatorname{Int}(w_a(1))\bigl(X_b(v)\bigr)$ equals $X_{w_a b}\bigl(c_{a b}\operatorname{Ad}(w_a(1)v)\bigr)$, where $c_{a b}$ is the common value of $c_{a\beta}$. Now just conjugate by $\prod \alpha^\vee(u_\alpha)$ to finish.

$\endgroup$
13
  • $\begingroup$ The usual definition of the $w_\alpha(t)$ requires that $t \ne 0$, so in our setting we must restrict to an open subset of $V_a$. I tried to check whether this is consistent with your pointer to the definition of $w_a$, but I cannot find it in Deodhar. However, this is how it "should" be defined, so I will proceed that way and correct if necessary once I know where to look. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 8, 2021 at 0:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I am confused by your placement of parentheses in the expression $w_a(1) X_b(w_a(1)^{-1} v)$ both times. Why have you not written this as $w_a(1) X_b(v) w_a(1)^{-1}$? $\endgroup$ Sep 9, 2021 at 0:28
  • $\begingroup$ Can you provide any reference on the fact that $X_b(v) = \prod_\beta X_\beta(v_\beta)$, or that $w_\alpha(u) = \prod w_\alpha(u_\alpha)$? I believe the first equation, but I am skeptical of the second. In particular, in concrete calculations in special orthogonal groups, I have found that the elements $w_\alpha(u)$ associated with multidimensional root groups are not monomial matrices. But if what you say is true, it is a product of the absolute versions $w_\alpha(u_\alpha)$ which are monomial matrices (at least for absolute type $A_n$, which I think these special orthogonal groups are). $\endgroup$ Sep 9, 2021 at 0:32
  • $\begingroup$ Re, in both cases, because root groups commute (since we're in the non-multipliable case). $X_b$ is the unique homomorphism whose derivative is the inclusion, and $v \mapsto \prod X_\beta(v_\beta)$ has that derivative. $w_a(u)$ is the unique element of $U_{-a}u U_{-a} \cap N$. Since $U_{-a}u U_{-a}$ equals $\prod U_{-\alpha}u_\alpha U_{-\alpha}$ (now also using quasisplit), it contains $\prod w_\alpha(u_\alpha)$. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 9, 2021 at 0:55
  • $\begingroup$ Re again, special orthogonal groups are of type $B_n$ (if ($2n + 1$)-dimensional orthogonal space) or $D_n$ (if $2n$-dimensional). Unitary groups are of type $A_n$. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 9, 2021 at 0:56

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.