Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let V and W be subalgebras of a Lie algebra $\mathcal{L}$. I want to show that $[V,W]$ is not always a subalgebra of $\mathcal{L}$.

share|improve this question
1  
I cannot understand what you are asking. –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Nov 27 '12 at 18:47
    
Let V and W be subalgebras of $\mathcal{L}$ a Lie algebra. I want to show that $[V,W]$ is not always a subalgebra of $\mathcal{L}$. Is it clearer? Thank you very much –  Nre Nov 27 '12 at 18:50
    
Edit the question and add the explanation there. –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Nov 27 '12 at 18:52
    
I made a few changes in your question :D –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Nov 27 '12 at 18:54
    
Yes I saw that thanks! –  Nre Nov 27 '12 at 18:55
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 2 down vote accepted
  • Consider the Lie algebra $\mathcal L=\{X\in M_4(\mathbb R)\,|\,X^T=-X\}$ with the product $[X,Y]=XY-YX$. A basis of this algebra is given by the matrices $u_{i,j}=e_{i,j}-e_{j,i}$ for $i<j$, where the matrix $e_{i,j}$ has all its coefficients equal to zero but the $(i,j)$-th coefficient which is one. As an example $$u_{1,2}=\left( \begin{array}{cccc} 0 & 1 & 0 & 0\\ -1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\end{array}\right)\,.$$ Note the formulae, for $i,j,k$ all different, $$[u_{i,j},u_{j,k}]=-u_{i,k}$$ and for $i,j,k,l$ all different $$[u_{i,j},u_{k,l}]=0$$ allow us to compute easily with those matrices.

  • Define the subalgebras $$V=Span(u_{1,2},u_{1,3},u_{2,3})\quad\text{and}\quad W=Span(u_{2,3},u_{2,4},u_{3,4})\,.$$ Then $$[V,W]=Span(u_{1,2},u_{1,3},u_{1,4,},u_{2,4},u_{3,4})$$ Note that $[u_{1,3},u_{1,2}]=u_{2,3}$ and thus $[V,W]$ is not a Lie algebra, since $u_{2,3}\notin[V,W]$.

Well I am not a big fan of my own example so if anyone had anything more simple or more elegant, I would be interested too.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks a lot, I don't think there is any elegant way to prove it... :) –  Nre Nov 27 '12 at 21:22
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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