1
$\begingroup$

Let $G$ be a compact connected Lie group. We denote by $\mathfrak{g}$ the Lie algebra of $G$ and by $\mathfrak{g}^*$ the dual space of $\mathfrak{g}$. Let $\mathcal{O}_r: = G\cdot r$ be a generic coadjoint orbit of $G$.

The coadjoint orbit $\mathcal{O}_r$ endowed with the Kirillov–Kostant–Souriau $\omega$ is a symplectic manifold. I've read that it is also a Kähler manifold; meaning that there exists a unique almost complex structure $J$ on $\mathcal{O}_r$ which is compatible with $\omega$ and such that the form $g(\cdot,\cdot):= \omega(\cdot,J\cdot )$ is a Riemannian metric on $\mathcal{O}_r$.

Given an element $\beta \in \mathcal{O}_r $, then the tangent space of $\mathcal{O}_r$ at $\beta$ is $T_\beta \mathcal{O}_r = \lbrace \xi_{\mathcal{O}_r}(\beta), \xi \in \mathfrak{g}\rbrace$ , where $\xi_{\mathcal{O}_r}(\beta) = \frac{d}{dt}\rvert_ {t=0} e^{-t \xi}\cdot\beta$. What is $J(\xi_{\mathcal{O}_r}(\beta) )$, $\xi \in \mathfrak{g} $ ?

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ Does 'generic' in "generic coadjoint orbit" have a technical meaning here? $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 21 at 14:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Ah, OK. I am used to "strongly regular semisimple" in that context. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 21 at 14:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm also a little confused by your description of $T_\beta\mathcal O_r$, which seems to make no reference to $r$. Are you sure it's correct? (At least $\beta$ should be an element of $G\cdot r$, not just of $\mathfrak g^*$.) $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 21 at 15:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LSpice, you are right $\beta$ should be an element of $G.r$, I'll fix that! However the description of $T_\beta \mathcal{O}_r$ is correct. $\endgroup$
    – asma
    Sep 21 at 15:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It seems to be on Google Books. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 26 at 14:27

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

Put $T = G_r$. We may, and do, assume that $\beta = r$, and simply describe a $T$-invariant complex structure on $\operatorname T_{\mathcal O_r}(r)$.

Instead of having one 1-dimensional subspace of $\mathfrak g$ for every root $\alpha$, we get a $2$-dimensional subspace $\{X_\alpha + \overline{X_\alpha} \mathrel: X_\alpha \in (\mathfrak g_{\mathbb C})_\alpha\}$ for every pair of roots $\{\alpha, \overline\alpha = -\alpha\}$.

Our Kähler structure treats this $2$-dimensional space, which I will provocatively call $\mathfrak g_{\pm\alpha}$ since its complexification is $(\mathfrak g_{\mathbb C})_\alpha \oplus (\mathfrak g_{\mathbb C})_{-\alpha}$, as a $\mathbb C$-vector space via the (isomorphic) projection to $(\mathfrak g_{\mathbb C})_\alpha$, and then rotates by $i$—but we must choose $i$ appropriately to get a negative definite metric. After our discussion in the comments, I think I have finally cleaned up the relevant signs.

Fix a root $\alpha$ of $T$ in $\mathfrak g_{\mathbb C}$. Put $i_\alpha = -\lambda\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}$, where $\lambda = r(\mathrm d\alpha^\vee(1))$ ($H_\alpha \mathrel{:=} \mathrm d\alpha^\vee(1)$ is sometimes called the coroot, but I prefer to reserve that terminology for $\alpha^\vee$ itself), so that $i_\alpha$ is a square root of $-1$. Then $J$ carries $\xi_{\mathcal O_r}(r)$, where $\xi = X_\alpha + \overline{X_\alpha}$, to $\xi'_{\mathcal O_r}(r)$, where $\xi' = i_\alpha(X_\alpha - \overline{X_\alpha})$, for every $X_\alpha \in (\mathfrak g_{\mathbb C})_\alpha$.

$\endgroup$
11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I realize now that I don't know why is the metric $g$ definite positive. Here is my attempt: suppose that we are in the simplest situation where $\mathfrak{g}_\mathbb{C}= \mathfrak{t}_\mathbb{C} \oplus {(\mathfrak{g}_\mathbb{C})}_\alpha \oplus {(\mathfrak{g}_\mathbb{C})}_{-\alpha} $. Let $\xi= X_\alpha + \overline{X_\alpha} $. Let $<.,.>$ an Ad-invariant inner product on $\mathfrak{g}$. $\endgroup$
    – asma
    Sep 22 at 19:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Then, $g_r(\xi_{\mathcal{O}_r}, \xi_{\mathcal{O}_r})= \omega(\xi_{\mathcal{O}_r}, J(\xi_{\mathcal{O}_r}))=<H_r, [\xi,J(\xi)]> = -2i<[H_r, X_\alpha],\overline{X_\alpha}>= -2i\alpha(H_r)<X_\alpha,\overline{X_\alpha}>.$ From here I don't know how to continue , any help please! $\endgroup$
    – asma
    Sep 22 at 19:30
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Re$\newcommand\l{\overline}\newcommand\p[2]{\langle#1,#2\rangle}$, $\alpha(H_r)$ is non-$0$ pure imaginary, and $\p{X_\alpha}{\l{X_\alpha}}=\p{s X_\alpha}{s\overline{X_\alpha}}=\lvert c\rvert^2\p{\l{X_\alpha}}{X_\alpha}=\lvert c\rvert^2\l{\p{X_\alpha}{\l{X_\alpha}}}$, where $s$ is a representative in $G$ of the reflexion in $\alpha$ and $c$ is the non-$0$ complex number such that $s X_\alpha$ equals $c\overline{X_\alpha}$. So the pairing is either positive definite or negative definite. If it's negative definite, then take $-J$ instead. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 22 at 19:59
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This issue (of maybe having to change the complex structure after the fact) can be fixed by choosing the square root $i$ of $-1$ carefully. I have updated my answer accordingly. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 22 at 20:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You are right. My argument shows that $\langle X_\alpha, \overline{X_\alpha}\rangle$ is real, but not that it is positive. I will think about it. (TeX note: please use $\langle\rangle$ \langle\rangle instead of $<>$ <>; compare the spacing in $\langle X, Y\rangle = 0$ \langle X, Y\rangle = 0 to the spacing in $<X, Y> = 0$ <X, Y> = 0.) $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Sep 23 at 0:58
0
$\begingroup$

For the affine case for coadjoint orbits of Souriau, see Jean-Louis Koszul book "Introduction to symplectic geometry" in chapter 4 and 5 where it is explained the Souriau cocycle in cas of non null cohomology: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-13-3987-5

$\endgroup$

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.