$\mathfrak {sl}_{3}\mathbb{C}$ is the Lie algebra of $3\times3$ matrices with complex entries and trace $0$ and Lie bracket $[X,Y] = XY-YX \hspace{3mm} \forall \hspace{3mm} X,Y\in \mathfrak {sl}_{3}\mathbb{C}$. The centre of $\mathfrak {sl}_{3}\mathbb{C}$ is the set of all $Z\in \mathfrak {sl}_{3}\mathbb{C}$ s.t. $[Z,X]=0 \hspace{2mm} \forall \hspace{2mm} X \in \mathfrak {sl}_{3}\mathbb{C}$.

I want to show that this centre is $\left\{\mathbf{0}\right\}$. Is there a way to show this without ending up with many equations to solve? I was thinking of representing $X$ in terms of the basis for $ \mathfrak{sl}_{3}\mathbb{C}$ and then it would be enough to show that $[Z,K]=0$ implies $Z=\mathbf{0}$ for every basis element $K$ of $ \mathfrak{sl}_{3}\mathbb{C}.$ But I'm not sure if this is true and it also means solving many equations.


  • $\begingroup$ ok thanks. I got my ordering a bit confused in that sentence thanks for pointing that out. $\endgroup$ – Sam Forbes Feb 10 '13 at 12:07
  • $\begingroup$ You're welcome! The order is important, if only because you loose points with the wrong one ;-) $\endgroup$ – Andreas Caranti Feb 10 '13 at 12:12
  • $\begingroup$ Oh, no, I am very sorry, I stated it wrong myself. The correct statement is "$Z$ is in the centre if and only if $[Z, K] = 0$ for all $K$ in a basis." Sorry. $\endgroup$ – Andreas Caranti Feb 10 '13 at 12:26
  • $\begingroup$ Checking $Z$ against the natural basis of $E_{ij},1\le i,j\le 3, i\neq j$ and $E_{11}-E_{22}, E_{22}-E_{33}$ is good enough here. Courage! Here $E_{ij}$ is the matrix with $1$ at position $(i,j)$ and zeros elsewhere. $\endgroup$ – Jyrki Lahtonen Feb 10 '13 at 13:08
  • $\begingroup$ @Andreas Sorry for late reply. How do you show that if $Z$ is in the centre then $[Z,K]=0$ for all $K$ in the basis. I know by linearisation that $[Z,X]=\sum_{i=1}^{n} a_{i}[Z,K_{i}]$ where $K_{1},K_{2},\dots, K_{n}$ are basis elements for an arbitrary element $X$ in the Lie algebra.But how do you know that if $\sum_{i=1}^{n} a_{i}[Z,K_{i}]=0$ implies $[Z,K_{i}]=0$ for all $i=1,2, \dots, n$ ? Thanks $\endgroup$ – Sam Forbes Feb 10 '13 at 17:52

As some people already said in the comments, it is necessary for intuition that you work on the basis $(E_{ij})$ (the matrices with $1$ in one entry and $0$ in all the others). But there are other means of proving that the center $\mathfrak z(\mathfrak{sl}_n\mathbb C)$ of $\mathfrak{sl}_n\mathbb C$ is null as, for example, using the Schur's Lemma.

For a better understanding of which hypothesis are needed, let us generalize the discussion to a finite dimensional vector space $V$ under a algebraically closed field $\mathbb K$ of characteristic $0$ instead of $\mathbb C^n$.

We say that a subset $\Gamma\subset\mathfrak{gl}(V)$ is irreducible if for all proper subspace W (i.e. $\neq 0$ or $V$) of $V$ there are $v\in W$ and $X\in\Gamma$ such that $Xv\notin W$.

One can state a version of the Schur's Lemma as:

Let $V$ (under the hypothesis above) and $\Gamma$ a irreducible subset of $\mathfrak{gl}(V)$. If $Z$ commutes with every element of $\Gamma$ then $Z=\lambda I$ (where $I$ is the identity function) for some $\lambda\in\mathbb K$.

So, one can check that $\mathfrak{sl}(V)$ is a irreducible set of $\mathfrak{gl}(V)$ (you can do it chosing a basis for $V$). Hence, if $Z\in\mathfrak z(\mathfrak{sl}(V))$ then $$ZX-XZ=[Z,X]=0,$$ for all $X\in\mathfrak{sl}(V)$, and, by the Schur's Lemma, $Z=\lambda I$, for some $\lambda\in\mathbb K$. Thus, since $\operatorname{tr}Z=0$ for all $Z\in\mathfrak z(\mathfrak{sl}(V))$, we must have that $\mathfrak z(\mathfrak{sl}(V))=0$.

Let us prove the above version of Schur Lemma.

Suppose $\lambda\in\mathbb K$ is an eigenvalue (possibly $0$) of $Z$. Define $$T:=Z-\lambda I.$$ Since $Z$ and $I$ commute with every element of $\Gamma$ then so does $T$.

The image $\operatorname{Im}(T)$ of $T$ is invariant by $\Gamma$ (i.e. there are no $v\in\operatorname{Im}(T)$ and $X\in\Gamma$ such that $Xv\notin\operatorname{Im}(T)$). In fact, for every $v\in V$, $$X(Tv)=T(Xv)\in\operatorname{Im}(T).$$ So, since $\Gamma\subset\mathfrak{gl}(V)$ is irreducible, we must have that $\operatorname{Im}(T)=V$ or $0$. Also, $\operatorname{Im}(T)$ can not be $V$ because $T=Z-\lambda I$ has non-null kernel and $\dim V<\infty$. Therefore, $$Z-\lambda I = T = 0.$$


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.