Can someone point out the gap in this argument. Consider a simply-connected Lie group with the (-)-connection. This connection is flat and so the sectional curvatures are zero. Then, by the Cartan-Hadamard theorem and simple-connectedness, the Lie group must be diffeomorphic to ${\Bbb R}^n$. However, I don't think that this is correct without an addition assumption of solvability or nilpotency. What's wrong here?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Which flat connection do you have in mind? E.g. if $G = SU(2)$, which is $S^3$ topologically, then the $G$-invariant metric is just the standard spherical metric, which is not flat. More generally, if $G$ is not abelian, then non-trivial commutators in $G$ will correspond to non-trivial curvature for the Levi--Civita connection on $G$. $\endgroup$
    – Emerton
    Jan 4, 2012 at 21:23
  • $\begingroup$ Emerton, the connection I had in mind was the (-)-connection (the minus connection). However, as you've all pointed out, the theorem applies to a Levi-Civita connection. Thanks. $\endgroup$ Jan 4, 2012 at 22:59

2 Answers 2


As Emerton pointed out, you need to be careful about the connection. Cartan-Hadamard theorem is a statement involving the curvature of the Levi-Civita connection determined by some metric.

If $G$ is a Lie group equipped with a bi-invariant metric $h$, then this metric induces a metric $\langle-,-\rangle$ on the Lie algebra $T_1G$. Given two unit orthogonal vectors $X,Y\in T_1G$ that span a plane $\pi\subset T_1G$, then the sectional curvature of $h$ at $1$ along the plane $\pi$ is given by

$$ K_1(\pi)=\frac{1}{4}\langle\;[x,y],[x,y]\;\rangle$$.

We see from the above equality that the sectional curvature everywhere $\leq 0$ iff the Lie algebra is Abelian.

For metrics on $G$ which are only left invariant the computations of curvatures are a bit more complicated and you can find more details in John Milnor's paper, Curvatures of left invariant metrics on Lie groups, Adv. in Math., vol. 121(1976), p. 293-329.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Liviu for your helpful response. I suspected that it wasn't enough to just have a connection but didn't know what was missing. $\endgroup$ Jan 4, 2012 at 23:10

Your connection is not Riemannian; it has torsion, so cannot be the Levi-Civita connection of any Riemannian metric. The Cartan-Hadamard theorem isn't even true in Lorentzian geometry, and so you wouldn't expect it for a flat connection which isn't torsion free.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Ben. I didn't look at the Cartan-Hadamard theorem close enough to see that it refers to a Levi-Civita connection. $\endgroup$ Jan 4, 2012 at 22:55

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.