# Lie algebras and roots systems

Let $\Phi$ an irreducible system of roots, $\Phi^{+} \subset \Phi$ a choose of positive roots. I have to prove that if $(\alpha, \beta) \ge 0$ for al $\beta \in \Phi^{+}$ then $\alpha$ is the highest among roots of the same lenght. I have a long way... is there a way that uses only some theorem? My way: Let be $\alpha '\neq \alpha$ the root of maximal lenght $||\alpha||$. Obviusly $\alpha '\in \Phi_+$, so $(\alpha,\alpha')\ge 0$. \ I want to prove that $(\alpha,\alpha')>0$. \ I show now that $$\alpha'=\sum_{\alpha_i\in\Delta}m_i\alpha_i\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,(m_j>0)$$ We can suppose that $\alpha'$ is short. Now we suppose that $\alpha'$ is short. $\Phi$ is irreducible than it exists a simple root $\beta_i$ such that $$(\alpha',\beta_i)<0$$ so $\alpha'+\beta_i$ is a positive root longer than $\alpha'$.\ Morever $||\alpha'+\beta_i||=||\alpha'||$, because $$(\alpha'+\beta_i,\alpha'+\beta_i)=(\alpha',\alpha')+(\beta_i,\beta_i)+2(\alpha'+\beta_i)=$$ $$=(\alpha',\alpha')+(\beta_i,\beta_i)\left[1+\frac{2(\alpha',\beta_i)}{(\beta_i,\beta_i)} \right]$$ $$\leq (\alpha',\alpha')$$ Because we have $<\alpha',\beta_i>\leq -1$, for the irreducibility of $\Phi$ we have finish.\ Now if $(\alpha,\alpha')=0$, we have $$\sum m_j(\alpha,\alpha_j)=0 \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, (\alpha_j\in\Delta)$$ and so $$(\alpha,\alpha_j)=0 \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, (\forall\,\alpha_j\in\Delta)$$ and it is no possible.\ We have finally that $(\alpha',\alpha)>0$, so $\alpha'-\alpha \in \Phi_+$,because $\alpha maximality$. However we had seen $(\alpha',\alpha)>0$ and $(\alpha',\alpha')/(\alpha,\alpha)=1$ we must have $<\alpha',\alpha>=1$. So we can say that $$(\alpha',\alpha)=\frac{1}{2}(\alpha,\alpha)$$ but for hipotesys we have to have $$(\alpha,\alpha'-\alpha)\ge 0$$ and so $$(\alpha,\alpha')-(\alpha,\alpha)=-\frac{1}{2}(\alpha,\alpha)\ge 0$$ and it si no possible. Could you give me a more easy and fast method... maybe using theorems? Is there a method that involves Weyl group?

-
Why do you think this is long?! – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Feb 23 '13 at 2:30
By the way, there was no need of opening a new question, when you had math.stackexchange.com/questions/311363/system-of-roots already. – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Feb 23 '13 at 2:31
I open a new post because I completed it with a proof. I think that the proofs must be true and elegant. So if someone knows a way to prove the clain in a row I'd like to know it. – ArthurStuart Feb 23 '13 at 2:33
By the way number two. Neither in LaTeX nor here you start a new paragraph using \\: the correct way to do this is to leave an empty line. If you do not like the indentation (a common cause for your mistake) then ask someone who knows LaTeX how to suppress the indentation is a more civil way :-) – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Feb 23 '13 at 2:33
You could have edited the proof in the old question. – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Feb 23 '13 at 2:38

Let $\alpha_0$ be the highest root of the same length as $\alpha$. Then $\alpha$ and $\alpha_0$ are in the same orbit of the Weyl group. Therefore (are you familiar with the length function on the Weyl group?) there is a sequence of simple reflections $s_{i_1}$, $s_{i_2}$, $\ldots$,$s_{i_\ell}$ such that $$\alpha=s_{i_\ell}s_{i_{\ell-1}}\cdots s_{i_1}(\alpha_0).$$ Furthermore, by selecting the minimal number (= minimal $\ell$) of such simple reflections we have the result that the recursively defined sequence of roots $\alpha_1=s_{i_1}(\alpha_0)$, $\alpha_2=s_{i_2}(\alpha_1)$, $\ldots$, $\alpha=\alpha_\ell=s_{i_\ell}(\alpha_{\ell-1})$ is linearly ordered: $$\alpha<\alpha_{\ell-1}<\alpha_{\ell-2}<\cdots <\alpha_0.$$ So if here $\alpha\neq\alpha_0$, or equivalently $\ell>0$, then the simple root $\beta_{i_\ell}$ corresponding to the simple reflection $s_{i_\ell}$ satisfies $(\alpha,\beta_{i_\ell})<0$. This contradicts your hypothesis.
But where we used the hypotesis that $\alpha_{0}$ is the root of maximal hight. I don't undertand the step that in your text go from "then the simple root..." to "this contradicts your hypotesis". – ArthurStuart Feb 23 '13 at 17:36
The element $w$ of the Weyl group mapping $\alpha_0$ to $\alpha$ is of length $\ell=0$ iff and $\alpha=\alpha_0$. So that assumption was used to get the existence of $\beta_{i_\ell}$. If $\ell=0$ there is no such simple root! But then we also have $\alpha=\alpha_0$. – Jyrki Lahtonen Feb 23 '13 at 18:51