1
$\begingroup$

I had problems understanding the following proof. Maybe someone could help me with this?

Let {$\ x_i, y_i $} be the standard generators of the Lie Algebra L.

Let \ V'(\lambda)=U(L)/J'(\lambda).

Let \ V'(\lambda) be an irreducible standard cyclic module.

Let U(L) be the universal enveloping algebra.

Let \ J'(\lambda) be the left ideal generated by $\ I(\lambda)$ along with all $\ y_i^{m_i+1}.$ $\ I(\lambda)$ is the left ideal of U(L) generated by all $\ x_\alpha, (\alpha \succ 0)$, and by all $\ h_\alpha - \lambda(h_\alpha)1, (\alpha \in \Phi).$

Show that \ V'(\lambda) is finite dimensional.

For this it would suffice to show that it is a sum of finite dimensional $\ S_i$-submodules.

To show this we have to show that each $\ y_i $ is locally nilpotent on $\ V(\lambda) $.

This is obvious for the $\ x_i $, since we cannot have $\ \mu+k\alpha_i \prec \lambda$ for all $\ k \geq 0 $.

The coset of 1 in \ V'(\lambda) is killed by a suitable power of $\ y_i$ (namely, $\ m_i+1$).

\ V'(\lambda) is spanned by the cosets of all $\ y_{i_1}...y_{i_t}. (1\leq i_j \leq l) $.

If the coset of this monomial is killed by $\ y_i^k$, the coset of the longer monomial $\ y_{i_0}y_{i_1}...y_{i_t}$ is killed by $\ y_i^{k+3}$.

Induction on length of monomials, starting at 1, then proves the local nilpotence of $\ y_i$.

We have already proven before that $\ J(\lambda)$ is generated by $\ I(\lambda)$ along with all $\ y_i^{m+1}. m_i=\langle \lambda,\alpha_i \rangle, 1\leq i \leq l$, \lambda is a dominant integral linear function. For this we have assumed that \ V'(\lambda) is finite dimensional, which remains to show for the proof to be completed.

The whole proof is based upon the following theorem, which we have already proven before: If $\ \lambda \in H*$ is dominant integral, then the irreducible L-module $\ V=V(\lambda)$ is finite dimensional, and its set of weights $\ \Pi(\lambda)$ is permuted by the Weyl group, with $\ dimV_\mu=dimV_{\sigma\mu}$ for $\ \sigma \in$ Weyl group.

1 Answers 1

0

Ok, now I think I can follow your notation. Presumably the hard part is the inductive step. So if you know that $y_i^k$ kills the coset of $y_{i_1}\cdots y_{i_t}$, then you need to show that $y_i^{k+3}$ kills the coset of $y_{i_0}y_{i_1}\cdots y_{i_t}$. To do that, you need to write $y_i^{k+3}y_{i_0}$ as a sum of terms of the form $z y_i^{\ell}$, where $\ell\ge k$ for each term. Achieving this really boils down to the relation $(ad\; y)^4(z)=0$. This is because in the universal enveloping algebra we have the relation $ y_i z = z y_i+ (ad\; y)(z), $ for all $z\in U(L)$. We shall be needing the derivation rule $ (ad\;x)(x_1\cdots x_t)=\sum_i)x_1\cdots x_{i-1}(ad\;x)(x_i)x_{i+1}\cdots x_t $ a lot. So we first get $ y_i y_{i_0}=y_{i_0} y_i + (ad\; y_i) (y_{i_0}), $ where $z=y_{i_0}$. Applying this rule for another time we get first $ y_i^2 y_{i_0}=(y_i y_{i_0})y_i+(ad\;y_i)(y_i y_{i_0}). $ Here the first term we already sort of handled with our earlier calculation. By the derivation rule the second term is (using the rule $(ad\;y_i)(y_i)=0$) $ (ad\;y_i)(y_i y_{i_0})=y_i (ad\; y_i)(y_{i_0})=(ad\; y_i)(y_{i_0})y_i+(ad\;y_i)^2(y_{i_0}). $ Altogether we get $ y_i^2y_{i_0}=y_{i_10}y_i^2+2[(ad\; y_i)(y_{i_0})]y_i+(ad\; y_i)^2(y_{i_0}). $ Here I invite you to go on and compute $y_i^3y_{i_0}$, $y_i^4y_{i_0}$ et cetera. Always keep pushing the new $y_i$-factor `to the right'. You see the general structure that the result for $y_i^my_{i_0}$ consists of terms of something$_\ell$ times $y_i^{m-\ell}$, where something$_\ell$ has a factor of the form $(ad\;y_i)^\ell (y_{i_0})$. Because the latter is zero, whenever $\ell\ge4$, the induction step follows from this.

I really hope that a calculation making this clearer has been done in your textbook.

Hopefully TeX comes out right. The damn auto-preview makes this painfully slow by now, so I have to stop.

  • 0
    Oh, that's right! Thanks a lot for all your help!2011-07-11