Lie group structure on the complex projective space
There is a famous theorem about when $S^n$ has the structure of a Lie group. What about the complex projective space $mathbb CP^n$? For example, why $mathbb CP^2$ is not a Lie group (without using classification for low dimension compact Lie groups)?
algebraic-topology lie-groups projective-space
add a comment |
There is a famous theorem about when $S^n$ has the structure of a Lie group. What about the complex projective space $mathbb CP^n$? For example, why $mathbb CP^2$ is not a Lie group (without using classification for low dimension compact Lie groups)?
algebraic-topology lie-groups projective-space
7
It is an amusing observation that a polynomial $f$ over $Bbb C$ that does not split into linear factors gives a non-trivial finite field extension $F/Bbb C$, and $Bbb P(F) = Bbb CP^{dim F - 1}$ is then a commutative positive-dimensional Lie group, and so the proofs below give as a corollary the fundamental theorem of algebra.
– Mike Miller
Dec 17 at 3:21
@MikeMiller: Could I ask what makes it amusing?! (I'm not a mathematician...)
– Mehrdad
Dec 17 at 9:02
2
@Mehrdad I'll let Mike answer for himself, but personally, I think that such a sophisticated and conceptual proof (it involves field extensions, Lie groups, algebraic topology) for such a simple-looking result (any non-constant complex polynomial has a root) is amusing. And it doesn't really use any analysis!
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
1
@Mehrdad There are many proofs of FTA, most of which are much faster routes to the actual theorem. This is one that requires the technical input of algebraic topology (or by a different proof, the Lie-theoretic notion of exponential map and some easier algebraic topology) for a concise and fully topological argument.
– Mike Miller
yesterday
add a comment |
There is a famous theorem about when $S^n$ has the structure of a Lie group. What about the complex projective space $mathbb CP^n$? For example, why $mathbb CP^2$ is not a Lie group (without using classification for low dimension compact Lie groups)?
algebraic-topology lie-groups projective-space
There is a famous theorem about when $S^n$ has the structure of a Lie group. What about the complex projective space $mathbb CP^n$? For example, why $mathbb CP^2$ is not a Lie group (without using classification for low dimension compact Lie groups)?
algebraic-topology lie-groups projective-space
algebraic-topology lie-groups projective-space
edited Dec 17 at 3:22
Eric Wofsey
178k12202330
178k12202330
asked Dec 17 at 2:55
zzy
2,3321419
2,3321419
7
It is an amusing observation that a polynomial $f$ over $Bbb C$ that does not split into linear factors gives a non-trivial finite field extension $F/Bbb C$, and $Bbb P(F) = Bbb CP^{dim F - 1}$ is then a commutative positive-dimensional Lie group, and so the proofs below give as a corollary the fundamental theorem of algebra.
– Mike Miller
Dec 17 at 3:21
@MikeMiller: Could I ask what makes it amusing?! (I'm not a mathematician...)
– Mehrdad
Dec 17 at 9:02
2
@Mehrdad I'll let Mike answer for himself, but personally, I think that such a sophisticated and conceptual proof (it involves field extensions, Lie groups, algebraic topology) for such a simple-looking result (any non-constant complex polynomial has a root) is amusing. And it doesn't really use any analysis!
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
1
@Mehrdad There are many proofs of FTA, most of which are much faster routes to the actual theorem. This is one that requires the technical input of algebraic topology (or by a different proof, the Lie-theoretic notion of exponential map and some easier algebraic topology) for a concise and fully topological argument.
– Mike Miller
yesterday
add a comment |
7
It is an amusing observation that a polynomial $f$ over $Bbb C$ that does not split into linear factors gives a non-trivial finite field extension $F/Bbb C$, and $Bbb P(F) = Bbb CP^{dim F - 1}$ is then a commutative positive-dimensional Lie group, and so the proofs below give as a corollary the fundamental theorem of algebra.
– Mike Miller
Dec 17 at 3:21
@MikeMiller: Could I ask what makes it amusing?! (I'm not a mathematician...)
– Mehrdad
Dec 17 at 9:02
2
@Mehrdad I'll let Mike answer for himself, but personally, I think that such a sophisticated and conceptual proof (it involves field extensions, Lie groups, algebraic topology) for such a simple-looking result (any non-constant complex polynomial has a root) is amusing. And it doesn't really use any analysis!
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
1
@Mehrdad There are many proofs of FTA, most of which are much faster routes to the actual theorem. This is one that requires the technical input of algebraic topology (or by a different proof, the Lie-theoretic notion of exponential map and some easier algebraic topology) for a concise and fully topological argument.
– Mike Miller
yesterday
7
7
It is an amusing observation that a polynomial $f$ over $Bbb C$ that does not split into linear factors gives a non-trivial finite field extension $F/Bbb C$, and $Bbb P(F) = Bbb CP^{dim F - 1}$ is then a commutative positive-dimensional Lie group, and so the proofs below give as a corollary the fundamental theorem of algebra.
– Mike Miller
Dec 17 at 3:21
It is an amusing observation that a polynomial $f$ over $Bbb C$ that does not split into linear factors gives a non-trivial finite field extension $F/Bbb C$, and $Bbb P(F) = Bbb CP^{dim F - 1}$ is then a commutative positive-dimensional Lie group, and so the proofs below give as a corollary the fundamental theorem of algebra.
– Mike Miller
Dec 17 at 3:21
@MikeMiller: Could I ask what makes it amusing?! (I'm not a mathematician...)
– Mehrdad
Dec 17 at 9:02
@MikeMiller: Could I ask what makes it amusing?! (I'm not a mathematician...)
– Mehrdad
Dec 17 at 9:02
2
2
@Mehrdad I'll let Mike answer for himself, but personally, I think that such a sophisticated and conceptual proof (it involves field extensions, Lie groups, algebraic topology) for such a simple-looking result (any non-constant complex polynomial has a root) is amusing. And it doesn't really use any analysis!
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
@Mehrdad I'll let Mike answer for himself, but personally, I think that such a sophisticated and conceptual proof (it involves field extensions, Lie groups, algebraic topology) for such a simple-looking result (any non-constant complex polynomial has a root) is amusing. And it doesn't really use any analysis!
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
1
1
@Mehrdad There are many proofs of FTA, most of which are much faster routes to the actual theorem. This is one that requires the technical input of algebraic topology (or by a different proof, the Lie-theoretic notion of exponential map and some easier algebraic topology) for a concise and fully topological argument.
– Mike Miller
yesterday
@Mehrdad There are many proofs of FTA, most of which are much faster routes to the actual theorem. This is one that requires the technical input of algebraic topology (or by a different proof, the Lie-theoretic notion of exponential map and some easier algebraic topology) for a concise and fully topological argument.
– Mike Miller
yesterday
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$mathbb{CP}^n$ has Euler characteristic $n+1$, but a compact (positive-dimensional) Lie group has Euler characteristic $0$, for example by the Lefschetz fixed point theorem.
Alternatively, you can show in various ways that the rational cohomology ring of a compact Lie group must be an exterior algebra on a finite number of odd generators. But $H^{bullet}(mathbb{CP}^n, mathbb{Q})$ is concentrated in even degrees, so doesn't admit odd generators.
add a comment |
A complex projective space (of positive dimension) never admits a Lie group structure. There are lots of ways to prove this. For instance, the rational cohomology ring of any Lie group is a graded Hopf algebra (the comultiplication coming from the group operation) but the cohomology ring $mathbb{Q}[x]/(x^{n+1})$ of $mathbb{CP}^n$ does not admit a Hopf algebra structure. Indeed, for reasons of degree, $Delta(x)$ would have to be $xotimes 1+1otimes x$ but then $Delta(x^n)=Delta(x)^n=sum_{k=0}^n binom{n}{k} x^kotimes x^{n-k}$ would be nonzero (all the terms except $k=0$ and $k=n$ are nonzero), which is a contradiction.
Can you talk a bit about the Hopf structure on the cohomology ring? The "standard" way I've seen to get a Hopf algebra out of a Lie group is to consider the universal enveloping algebra of its Lie algebra, but this is obviously coarser. Are the two related in any way?
– Ashwin Trisal
Dec 17 at 3:48
1
It's very simple: if $G$ is a topological group, the multiplication $mu:Gtimes Gto G$ gives a map $mu^*: H^*(G)to H^*(Gtimes G)cong H^*(G)otimes H^*(G)$ (here cohomology is with coefficients in a field to get the latter isomorphism), and the group axioms for $mu$ say exactly that $mu^*$ is the comultiplication of a Hopf algebra structure on $H^*(G)$. I don't know of any connection to the universal enveloping algebra (there may be one but it would have to be fairly indirect).
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 17 at 3:54
$H^*(G;mathbb{Q})$ is the universal enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra given by $pi_*(Omega G) otimes_mathbb{Z} mathbb{Q}$ (with Whitehead product, which is trivial here). But of course the Lie algebra involved isn't $mathfrak{g} = T_e G$...
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
@Najib: I think you want $H_{bullet}(Omega G, mathbb{Q})$ there.
– Qiaochu Yuan
2 days ago
add a comment |
$pi_2(mathbb{C}P^n)$ is $mathbb{Z}$ and $pi_2(G)$ is trivial where $G$ is a connected Lie group.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_projective_space#Homotopy_groups
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/8957/homotopy-groups-of-lie-groups
add a comment |
You can actually generalise everything in the question to show that $mathbb{C}P^n$ ($1leq n<infty$) cannot even admit a Hopf structure (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-space). And one way to see this is to demonstrate the existence of a non-trivial Whitehead product in $pi_*mathbb{C}P^n$. I'll point out that you already have fantastic answers, and most of them can be generalised directly to cover this case. This answer is only supposed to add another perspective.
Recall the quotient map $gamma_n:S^{2n+1}rightarrow mathbb{C}P^n$ and the fact that it induces isomorphisms on $pi_*$ for $*>2$. In particular $gamma_{n*}:pi_{4n+1}S^{2n+1}xrightarrow{cong}pi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n$ is an isomorphism that takes the Whitehead square $omega_{2n+1}=[iota_{2n+1},iota_{2n+1}]inpi_{4n+1}S^{2n+1}$ to the Whitehead product
$$gamma_{n*}omega_{2n+1}=[gamma_n,gamma_n]inpi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n.$$
It is classical fact related to the Hopf invariant one problem that for odd $k$, $omega_k$ vanishes exactly when $k=1,3$ or $7$. Therefore, since $gamma_{n*}$ is an isomorphism, $[gamma_n,gamma_n]$ is non-zero in $pi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n$ as long as $nneq 1,3$. Now $mathbb{C}P^1cong S^2$ is not an $H$-space exactly because of Adam's solution to the Hopf invariant one problem (and more in line with the current trail of thought, $[iota_2,iota_2]=-2etainpi_3S^2$).
Therefore we single out $mathbb{C}P^3$ as the interesting case for which this line of reasoning does not apply. In fact all Whitehead products vanish in $mathbb{C}P^3$ (Stasheff: "On homotopy Abelian H-spaces") and $Omega mathbb{C}P^3$ is homotopy commutative. I assure you still that $mathbb{C}P^3$ is not an $H$-space, since either Qiaochu's or Eric's answers for compact Lie groups apply more or less verbatim to finite H-spaces.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3043483%2flie-group-structure-on-the-complex-projective-space%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$mathbb{CP}^n$ has Euler characteristic $n+1$, but a compact (positive-dimensional) Lie group has Euler characteristic $0$, for example by the Lefschetz fixed point theorem.
Alternatively, you can show in various ways that the rational cohomology ring of a compact Lie group must be an exterior algebra on a finite number of odd generators. But $H^{bullet}(mathbb{CP}^n, mathbb{Q})$ is concentrated in even degrees, so doesn't admit odd generators.
add a comment |
$mathbb{CP}^n$ has Euler characteristic $n+1$, but a compact (positive-dimensional) Lie group has Euler characteristic $0$, for example by the Lefschetz fixed point theorem.
Alternatively, you can show in various ways that the rational cohomology ring of a compact Lie group must be an exterior algebra on a finite number of odd generators. But $H^{bullet}(mathbb{CP}^n, mathbb{Q})$ is concentrated in even degrees, so doesn't admit odd generators.
add a comment |
$mathbb{CP}^n$ has Euler characteristic $n+1$, but a compact (positive-dimensional) Lie group has Euler characteristic $0$, for example by the Lefschetz fixed point theorem.
Alternatively, you can show in various ways that the rational cohomology ring of a compact Lie group must be an exterior algebra on a finite number of odd generators. But $H^{bullet}(mathbb{CP}^n, mathbb{Q})$ is concentrated in even degrees, so doesn't admit odd generators.
$mathbb{CP}^n$ has Euler characteristic $n+1$, but a compact (positive-dimensional) Lie group has Euler characteristic $0$, for example by the Lefschetz fixed point theorem.
Alternatively, you can show in various ways that the rational cohomology ring of a compact Lie group must be an exterior algebra on a finite number of odd generators. But $H^{bullet}(mathbb{CP}^n, mathbb{Q})$ is concentrated in even degrees, so doesn't admit odd generators.
answered Dec 17 at 3:15
Qiaochu Yuan
276k32580918
276k32580918
add a comment |
add a comment |
A complex projective space (of positive dimension) never admits a Lie group structure. There are lots of ways to prove this. For instance, the rational cohomology ring of any Lie group is a graded Hopf algebra (the comultiplication coming from the group operation) but the cohomology ring $mathbb{Q}[x]/(x^{n+1})$ of $mathbb{CP}^n$ does not admit a Hopf algebra structure. Indeed, for reasons of degree, $Delta(x)$ would have to be $xotimes 1+1otimes x$ but then $Delta(x^n)=Delta(x)^n=sum_{k=0}^n binom{n}{k} x^kotimes x^{n-k}$ would be nonzero (all the terms except $k=0$ and $k=n$ are nonzero), which is a contradiction.
Can you talk a bit about the Hopf structure on the cohomology ring? The "standard" way I've seen to get a Hopf algebra out of a Lie group is to consider the universal enveloping algebra of its Lie algebra, but this is obviously coarser. Are the two related in any way?
– Ashwin Trisal
Dec 17 at 3:48
1
It's very simple: if $G$ is a topological group, the multiplication $mu:Gtimes Gto G$ gives a map $mu^*: H^*(G)to H^*(Gtimes G)cong H^*(G)otimes H^*(G)$ (here cohomology is with coefficients in a field to get the latter isomorphism), and the group axioms for $mu$ say exactly that $mu^*$ is the comultiplication of a Hopf algebra structure on $H^*(G)$. I don't know of any connection to the universal enveloping algebra (there may be one but it would have to be fairly indirect).
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 17 at 3:54
$H^*(G;mathbb{Q})$ is the universal enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra given by $pi_*(Omega G) otimes_mathbb{Z} mathbb{Q}$ (with Whitehead product, which is trivial here). But of course the Lie algebra involved isn't $mathfrak{g} = T_e G$...
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
@Najib: I think you want $H_{bullet}(Omega G, mathbb{Q})$ there.
– Qiaochu Yuan
2 days ago
add a comment |
A complex projective space (of positive dimension) never admits a Lie group structure. There are lots of ways to prove this. For instance, the rational cohomology ring of any Lie group is a graded Hopf algebra (the comultiplication coming from the group operation) but the cohomology ring $mathbb{Q}[x]/(x^{n+1})$ of $mathbb{CP}^n$ does not admit a Hopf algebra structure. Indeed, for reasons of degree, $Delta(x)$ would have to be $xotimes 1+1otimes x$ but then $Delta(x^n)=Delta(x)^n=sum_{k=0}^n binom{n}{k} x^kotimes x^{n-k}$ would be nonzero (all the terms except $k=0$ and $k=n$ are nonzero), which is a contradiction.
Can you talk a bit about the Hopf structure on the cohomology ring? The "standard" way I've seen to get a Hopf algebra out of a Lie group is to consider the universal enveloping algebra of its Lie algebra, but this is obviously coarser. Are the two related in any way?
– Ashwin Trisal
Dec 17 at 3:48
1
It's very simple: if $G$ is a topological group, the multiplication $mu:Gtimes Gto G$ gives a map $mu^*: H^*(G)to H^*(Gtimes G)cong H^*(G)otimes H^*(G)$ (here cohomology is with coefficients in a field to get the latter isomorphism), and the group axioms for $mu$ say exactly that $mu^*$ is the comultiplication of a Hopf algebra structure on $H^*(G)$. I don't know of any connection to the universal enveloping algebra (there may be one but it would have to be fairly indirect).
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 17 at 3:54
$H^*(G;mathbb{Q})$ is the universal enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra given by $pi_*(Omega G) otimes_mathbb{Z} mathbb{Q}$ (with Whitehead product, which is trivial here). But of course the Lie algebra involved isn't $mathfrak{g} = T_e G$...
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
@Najib: I think you want $H_{bullet}(Omega G, mathbb{Q})$ there.
– Qiaochu Yuan
2 days ago
add a comment |
A complex projective space (of positive dimension) never admits a Lie group structure. There are lots of ways to prove this. For instance, the rational cohomology ring of any Lie group is a graded Hopf algebra (the comultiplication coming from the group operation) but the cohomology ring $mathbb{Q}[x]/(x^{n+1})$ of $mathbb{CP}^n$ does not admit a Hopf algebra structure. Indeed, for reasons of degree, $Delta(x)$ would have to be $xotimes 1+1otimes x$ but then $Delta(x^n)=Delta(x)^n=sum_{k=0}^n binom{n}{k} x^kotimes x^{n-k}$ would be nonzero (all the terms except $k=0$ and $k=n$ are nonzero), which is a contradiction.
A complex projective space (of positive dimension) never admits a Lie group structure. There are lots of ways to prove this. For instance, the rational cohomology ring of any Lie group is a graded Hopf algebra (the comultiplication coming from the group operation) but the cohomology ring $mathbb{Q}[x]/(x^{n+1})$ of $mathbb{CP}^n$ does not admit a Hopf algebra structure. Indeed, for reasons of degree, $Delta(x)$ would have to be $xotimes 1+1otimes x$ but then $Delta(x^n)=Delta(x)^n=sum_{k=0}^n binom{n}{k} x^kotimes x^{n-k}$ would be nonzero (all the terms except $k=0$ and $k=n$ are nonzero), which is a contradiction.
edited Dec 17 at 4:04
answered Dec 17 at 3:19
Eric Wofsey
178k12202330
178k12202330
Can you talk a bit about the Hopf structure on the cohomology ring? The "standard" way I've seen to get a Hopf algebra out of a Lie group is to consider the universal enveloping algebra of its Lie algebra, but this is obviously coarser. Are the two related in any way?
– Ashwin Trisal
Dec 17 at 3:48
1
It's very simple: if $G$ is a topological group, the multiplication $mu:Gtimes Gto G$ gives a map $mu^*: H^*(G)to H^*(Gtimes G)cong H^*(G)otimes H^*(G)$ (here cohomology is with coefficients in a field to get the latter isomorphism), and the group axioms for $mu$ say exactly that $mu^*$ is the comultiplication of a Hopf algebra structure on $H^*(G)$. I don't know of any connection to the universal enveloping algebra (there may be one but it would have to be fairly indirect).
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 17 at 3:54
$H^*(G;mathbb{Q})$ is the universal enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra given by $pi_*(Omega G) otimes_mathbb{Z} mathbb{Q}$ (with Whitehead product, which is trivial here). But of course the Lie algebra involved isn't $mathfrak{g} = T_e G$...
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
@Najib: I think you want $H_{bullet}(Omega G, mathbb{Q})$ there.
– Qiaochu Yuan
2 days ago
add a comment |
Can you talk a bit about the Hopf structure on the cohomology ring? The "standard" way I've seen to get a Hopf algebra out of a Lie group is to consider the universal enveloping algebra of its Lie algebra, but this is obviously coarser. Are the two related in any way?
– Ashwin Trisal
Dec 17 at 3:48
1
It's very simple: if $G$ is a topological group, the multiplication $mu:Gtimes Gto G$ gives a map $mu^*: H^*(G)to H^*(Gtimes G)cong H^*(G)otimes H^*(G)$ (here cohomology is with coefficients in a field to get the latter isomorphism), and the group axioms for $mu$ say exactly that $mu^*$ is the comultiplication of a Hopf algebra structure on $H^*(G)$. I don't know of any connection to the universal enveloping algebra (there may be one but it would have to be fairly indirect).
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 17 at 3:54
$H^*(G;mathbb{Q})$ is the universal enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra given by $pi_*(Omega G) otimes_mathbb{Z} mathbb{Q}$ (with Whitehead product, which is trivial here). But of course the Lie algebra involved isn't $mathfrak{g} = T_e G$...
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
@Najib: I think you want $H_{bullet}(Omega G, mathbb{Q})$ there.
– Qiaochu Yuan
2 days ago
Can you talk a bit about the Hopf structure on the cohomology ring? The "standard" way I've seen to get a Hopf algebra out of a Lie group is to consider the universal enveloping algebra of its Lie algebra, but this is obviously coarser. Are the two related in any way?
– Ashwin Trisal
Dec 17 at 3:48
Can you talk a bit about the Hopf structure on the cohomology ring? The "standard" way I've seen to get a Hopf algebra out of a Lie group is to consider the universal enveloping algebra of its Lie algebra, but this is obviously coarser. Are the two related in any way?
– Ashwin Trisal
Dec 17 at 3:48
1
1
It's very simple: if $G$ is a topological group, the multiplication $mu:Gtimes Gto G$ gives a map $mu^*: H^*(G)to H^*(Gtimes G)cong H^*(G)otimes H^*(G)$ (here cohomology is with coefficients in a field to get the latter isomorphism), and the group axioms for $mu$ say exactly that $mu^*$ is the comultiplication of a Hopf algebra structure on $H^*(G)$. I don't know of any connection to the universal enveloping algebra (there may be one but it would have to be fairly indirect).
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 17 at 3:54
It's very simple: if $G$ is a topological group, the multiplication $mu:Gtimes Gto G$ gives a map $mu^*: H^*(G)to H^*(Gtimes G)cong H^*(G)otimes H^*(G)$ (here cohomology is with coefficients in a field to get the latter isomorphism), and the group axioms for $mu$ say exactly that $mu^*$ is the comultiplication of a Hopf algebra structure on $H^*(G)$. I don't know of any connection to the universal enveloping algebra (there may be one but it would have to be fairly indirect).
– Eric Wofsey
Dec 17 at 3:54
$H^*(G;mathbb{Q})$ is the universal enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra given by $pi_*(Omega G) otimes_mathbb{Z} mathbb{Q}$ (with Whitehead product, which is trivial here). But of course the Lie algebra involved isn't $mathfrak{g} = T_e G$...
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
$H^*(G;mathbb{Q})$ is the universal enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra given by $pi_*(Omega G) otimes_mathbb{Z} mathbb{Q}$ (with Whitehead product, which is trivial here). But of course the Lie algebra involved isn't $mathfrak{g} = T_e G$...
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
@Najib: I think you want $H_{bullet}(Omega G, mathbb{Q})$ there.
– Qiaochu Yuan
2 days ago
@Najib: I think you want $H_{bullet}(Omega G, mathbb{Q})$ there.
– Qiaochu Yuan
2 days ago
add a comment |
$pi_2(mathbb{C}P^n)$ is $mathbb{Z}$ and $pi_2(G)$ is trivial where $G$ is a connected Lie group.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_projective_space#Homotopy_groups
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/8957/homotopy-groups-of-lie-groups
add a comment |
$pi_2(mathbb{C}P^n)$ is $mathbb{Z}$ and $pi_2(G)$ is trivial where $G$ is a connected Lie group.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_projective_space#Homotopy_groups
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/8957/homotopy-groups-of-lie-groups
add a comment |
$pi_2(mathbb{C}P^n)$ is $mathbb{Z}$ and $pi_2(G)$ is trivial where $G$ is a connected Lie group.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_projective_space#Homotopy_groups
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/8957/homotopy-groups-of-lie-groups
$pi_2(mathbb{C}P^n)$ is $mathbb{Z}$ and $pi_2(G)$ is trivial where $G$ is a connected Lie group.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_projective_space#Homotopy_groups
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/8957/homotopy-groups-of-lie-groups
answered Dec 17 at 3:17
Tsemo Aristide
55.3k11444
55.3k11444
add a comment |
add a comment |
You can actually generalise everything in the question to show that $mathbb{C}P^n$ ($1leq n<infty$) cannot even admit a Hopf structure (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-space). And one way to see this is to demonstrate the existence of a non-trivial Whitehead product in $pi_*mathbb{C}P^n$. I'll point out that you already have fantastic answers, and most of them can be generalised directly to cover this case. This answer is only supposed to add another perspective.
Recall the quotient map $gamma_n:S^{2n+1}rightarrow mathbb{C}P^n$ and the fact that it induces isomorphisms on $pi_*$ for $*>2$. In particular $gamma_{n*}:pi_{4n+1}S^{2n+1}xrightarrow{cong}pi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n$ is an isomorphism that takes the Whitehead square $omega_{2n+1}=[iota_{2n+1},iota_{2n+1}]inpi_{4n+1}S^{2n+1}$ to the Whitehead product
$$gamma_{n*}omega_{2n+1}=[gamma_n,gamma_n]inpi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n.$$
It is classical fact related to the Hopf invariant one problem that for odd $k$, $omega_k$ vanishes exactly when $k=1,3$ or $7$. Therefore, since $gamma_{n*}$ is an isomorphism, $[gamma_n,gamma_n]$ is non-zero in $pi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n$ as long as $nneq 1,3$. Now $mathbb{C}P^1cong S^2$ is not an $H$-space exactly because of Adam's solution to the Hopf invariant one problem (and more in line with the current trail of thought, $[iota_2,iota_2]=-2etainpi_3S^2$).
Therefore we single out $mathbb{C}P^3$ as the interesting case for which this line of reasoning does not apply. In fact all Whitehead products vanish in $mathbb{C}P^3$ (Stasheff: "On homotopy Abelian H-spaces") and $Omega mathbb{C}P^3$ is homotopy commutative. I assure you still that $mathbb{C}P^3$ is not an $H$-space, since either Qiaochu's or Eric's answers for compact Lie groups apply more or less verbatim to finite H-spaces.
add a comment |
You can actually generalise everything in the question to show that $mathbb{C}P^n$ ($1leq n<infty$) cannot even admit a Hopf structure (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-space). And one way to see this is to demonstrate the existence of a non-trivial Whitehead product in $pi_*mathbb{C}P^n$. I'll point out that you already have fantastic answers, and most of them can be generalised directly to cover this case. This answer is only supposed to add another perspective.
Recall the quotient map $gamma_n:S^{2n+1}rightarrow mathbb{C}P^n$ and the fact that it induces isomorphisms on $pi_*$ for $*>2$. In particular $gamma_{n*}:pi_{4n+1}S^{2n+1}xrightarrow{cong}pi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n$ is an isomorphism that takes the Whitehead square $omega_{2n+1}=[iota_{2n+1},iota_{2n+1}]inpi_{4n+1}S^{2n+1}$ to the Whitehead product
$$gamma_{n*}omega_{2n+1}=[gamma_n,gamma_n]inpi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n.$$
It is classical fact related to the Hopf invariant one problem that for odd $k$, $omega_k$ vanishes exactly when $k=1,3$ or $7$. Therefore, since $gamma_{n*}$ is an isomorphism, $[gamma_n,gamma_n]$ is non-zero in $pi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n$ as long as $nneq 1,3$. Now $mathbb{C}P^1cong S^2$ is not an $H$-space exactly because of Adam's solution to the Hopf invariant one problem (and more in line with the current trail of thought, $[iota_2,iota_2]=-2etainpi_3S^2$).
Therefore we single out $mathbb{C}P^3$ as the interesting case for which this line of reasoning does not apply. In fact all Whitehead products vanish in $mathbb{C}P^3$ (Stasheff: "On homotopy Abelian H-spaces") and $Omega mathbb{C}P^3$ is homotopy commutative. I assure you still that $mathbb{C}P^3$ is not an $H$-space, since either Qiaochu's or Eric's answers for compact Lie groups apply more or less verbatim to finite H-spaces.
add a comment |
You can actually generalise everything in the question to show that $mathbb{C}P^n$ ($1leq n<infty$) cannot even admit a Hopf structure (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-space). And one way to see this is to demonstrate the existence of a non-trivial Whitehead product in $pi_*mathbb{C}P^n$. I'll point out that you already have fantastic answers, and most of them can be generalised directly to cover this case. This answer is only supposed to add another perspective.
Recall the quotient map $gamma_n:S^{2n+1}rightarrow mathbb{C}P^n$ and the fact that it induces isomorphisms on $pi_*$ for $*>2$. In particular $gamma_{n*}:pi_{4n+1}S^{2n+1}xrightarrow{cong}pi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n$ is an isomorphism that takes the Whitehead square $omega_{2n+1}=[iota_{2n+1},iota_{2n+1}]inpi_{4n+1}S^{2n+1}$ to the Whitehead product
$$gamma_{n*}omega_{2n+1}=[gamma_n,gamma_n]inpi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n.$$
It is classical fact related to the Hopf invariant one problem that for odd $k$, $omega_k$ vanishes exactly when $k=1,3$ or $7$. Therefore, since $gamma_{n*}$ is an isomorphism, $[gamma_n,gamma_n]$ is non-zero in $pi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n$ as long as $nneq 1,3$. Now $mathbb{C}P^1cong S^2$ is not an $H$-space exactly because of Adam's solution to the Hopf invariant one problem (and more in line with the current trail of thought, $[iota_2,iota_2]=-2etainpi_3S^2$).
Therefore we single out $mathbb{C}P^3$ as the interesting case for which this line of reasoning does not apply. In fact all Whitehead products vanish in $mathbb{C}P^3$ (Stasheff: "On homotopy Abelian H-spaces") and $Omega mathbb{C}P^3$ is homotopy commutative. I assure you still that $mathbb{C}P^3$ is not an $H$-space, since either Qiaochu's or Eric's answers for compact Lie groups apply more or less verbatim to finite H-spaces.
You can actually generalise everything in the question to show that $mathbb{C}P^n$ ($1leq n<infty$) cannot even admit a Hopf structure (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-space). And one way to see this is to demonstrate the existence of a non-trivial Whitehead product in $pi_*mathbb{C}P^n$. I'll point out that you already have fantastic answers, and most of them can be generalised directly to cover this case. This answer is only supposed to add another perspective.
Recall the quotient map $gamma_n:S^{2n+1}rightarrow mathbb{C}P^n$ and the fact that it induces isomorphisms on $pi_*$ for $*>2$. In particular $gamma_{n*}:pi_{4n+1}S^{2n+1}xrightarrow{cong}pi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n$ is an isomorphism that takes the Whitehead square $omega_{2n+1}=[iota_{2n+1},iota_{2n+1}]inpi_{4n+1}S^{2n+1}$ to the Whitehead product
$$gamma_{n*}omega_{2n+1}=[gamma_n,gamma_n]inpi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n.$$
It is classical fact related to the Hopf invariant one problem that for odd $k$, $omega_k$ vanishes exactly when $k=1,3$ or $7$. Therefore, since $gamma_{n*}$ is an isomorphism, $[gamma_n,gamma_n]$ is non-zero in $pi_{4n+1}mathbb{C}P^n$ as long as $nneq 1,3$. Now $mathbb{C}P^1cong S^2$ is not an $H$-space exactly because of Adam's solution to the Hopf invariant one problem (and more in line with the current trail of thought, $[iota_2,iota_2]=-2etainpi_3S^2$).
Therefore we single out $mathbb{C}P^3$ as the interesting case for which this line of reasoning does not apply. In fact all Whitehead products vanish in $mathbb{C}P^3$ (Stasheff: "On homotopy Abelian H-spaces") and $Omega mathbb{C}P^3$ is homotopy commutative. I assure you still that $mathbb{C}P^3$ is not an $H$-space, since either Qiaochu's or Eric's answers for compact Lie groups apply more or less verbatim to finite H-spaces.
answered 2 days ago
Tyrone
4,33011225
4,33011225
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3043483%2flie-group-structure-on-the-complex-projective-space%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
7
It is an amusing observation that a polynomial $f$ over $Bbb C$ that does not split into linear factors gives a non-trivial finite field extension $F/Bbb C$, and $Bbb P(F) = Bbb CP^{dim F - 1}$ is then a commutative positive-dimensional Lie group, and so the proofs below give as a corollary the fundamental theorem of algebra.
– Mike Miller
Dec 17 at 3:21
@MikeMiller: Could I ask what makes it amusing?! (I'm not a mathematician...)
– Mehrdad
Dec 17 at 9:02
2
@Mehrdad I'll let Mike answer for himself, but personally, I think that such a sophisticated and conceptual proof (it involves field extensions, Lie groups, algebraic topology) for such a simple-looking result (any non-constant complex polynomial has a root) is amusing. And it doesn't really use any analysis!
– Najib Idrissi
2 days ago
1
@Mehrdad There are many proofs of FTA, most of which are much faster routes to the actual theorem. This is one that requires the technical input of algebraic topology (or by a different proof, the Lie-theoretic notion of exponential map and some easier algebraic topology) for a concise and fully topological argument.
– Mike Miller
yesterday