8

Let $V$ be an integrable module over a Kac-Moody algebra. Then $\dim V_\lambda=\dim V_{w(\lambda)}$ for each $\lambda\in\mathfrak{h}^*$ and $w\in W$ (the Weyl group).

It's a proposition stated in Kac's book Infinite dimensional Lie algebras, however he just states it follows form the two following lemmas:

  1. $\textrm{ad}\ e_i$ and $\textrm{ad}\ f_i$ are locally nilpotent over a Kac-Moody algebra.
  1. If $\lambda$ is a weight of $V$, then $\lambda-\lambda(\alpha_i^\vee)\alpha_i$ is also a weight of the same multiplicity.

However I don't see why this is the case?

Also the first lemma is pretty clear to me, but I don't see why the second lemma holds?

I'm also happy to see, if there is another way of proving this. Maybe it can somehow be reduced to the finite-dimensional case like when showing that "The module $L(\Lambda)=M(\Lambda)/N(\Lambda)$ (the quotient of a Verma module) over a Kac-Moody algebra is integrable if and only if $\lambda(\alpha_i^\vee)\geq 0$ for all $i=1,\cdots,n$"?

It should also be noted, that it've been earlier shown that "If $\alpha\in\Delta, w\in W$ then $w\alpha\in W$ and $\textrm{mult}(\alpha)=\textrm{mult}(w\alpha)$." Here $\Delta$ denotes the union of the positive and negative roots.


I've managed to prove that $V$ decomposes into a direct sum of finite-dimensional irreducible $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-modules.

Now in order to finish the proof, we need to justify that given a module $N$ in the $\mathfrak{sl_2}$-decomposition then $\dim N_\lambda=\dim N_{r_i\lambda}$. I think this i exactly the second lemma stated by Kac above. However we also need to justify that the weights have the form Joppy mentions. We also need to justify that $\lambda(\alpha_i^\vee)\in\mathbb{Z}$. This is where I'm still in doubt.

KJA
  • 169

1 Answers1

5

When $\mathfrak{g}$ is a Kac-Moody algebra with Cartan indexing set $I$, the vector space $\mathfrak{g}_{(i)} := \mathbb{C}\{e_i, \alpha_i^\vee, f_i\}$ is a Lie subalgebra isomorphic to $\mathfrak{sl}_2$ for each $i \in I$. An $\mathfrak{h}$-diagonalisable $\mathfrak{g}$-module $V$ is integrable if it is a locally finite $\mathfrak{g}_{(i)}$-module for all $i \in I$. (Recall that to be locally finite means that $V$ is a union of finite-dimensional modules). This means that an integrable module $V$ decomposes as a (possibly infinite) direct sum of finite-dimensional $\mathfrak{g}_{(i)}$-modules, or in other words a direct sum of $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-modules.

The weights of finite-dimensional $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-modules are symmetric around zero, with the reflection $s: \lambda \mapsto - \lambda$ giving the symmetry. Similarly, the weights of $\mathfrak{h}$-invariant finite-dimensional $\mathfrak{g}_{(i)}$-modules are symmetric around the hyperplane $\ker \langle \alpha_i^\vee, - \rangle \subseteq \mathfrak{h}^*$, with the simple reflection $r_i(\lambda) = \lambda - \langle \alpha_i^\vee, \lambda \rangle \alpha$ giving the symmetry. If we were to zoom in on a single finite-dimensional $\mathfrak{g}_{(i)}$-submodule in $V$, with highest weight vector $v_{\Lambda}$ say, then we would find that its weights were $$ \Lambda, \Lambda - \alpha, \Lambda - 2\alpha, \cdots, r_i(\Lambda) + \alpha, r_i(\Lambda). $$ What I picture in my head is that I have the large representation $V$, and when I only look at a single $i \in I$, it breaks down into finite $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-strings. On this finite-dimensional $\mathfrak{g}_{(i)}$-submodule $U \subseteq V$ we have $\dim U_\lambda = \dim U_{r_i \lambda}$ for all $\lambda$, therefore adding this up across all the submodules we get $\dim V_\lambda = \dim V_{r_i \lambda}$. Since we can do this for any $i \in I$, we get $\dim V_\lambda = \dim V_{w \lambda}$ for any element $w$ of the Weyl group.

Joppy
  • 13,983
  • So we use the locally nilpotency to justify that $V$ decomposes as a direct sum of finite dimensional $\mathfrak{sl}2$-modules. In fact we use it to justify that the space spanned by vectors $f_i^be_i^av$ is an $\mathfrak{g}{(i)}\cong\mathfrak{sl}_2$-module? So each vector $v\in V$ lies in a finite-dimensional $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-module, which decomposes as a direct sum? So then $V$ necersarrily decomposes as a direct sum of $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-modules? – KJA Jan 18 '21 at 13:15
  • Why are the modules $\mathfrak{h}$-invariant (and why is that important)? And where are we exactly using, that the weights have the form you mention? Is it to justify $\dim U_\lambda=\dim U_{r_i\lambda}$ (this doesn't seem obvious to me)? – KJA Jan 18 '21 at 13:17
  • 2
    @KJA: yes, this is essentially the whole point of the definition of “integrable”: the ability to re-use the finite-dimensional representation theory of $\mathfrak{sl}2$ for each $\mathfrak{g}{(i)}$ (but with the same weight lattice as in the Kac-Moody algebra). For similar reasons, we find that $\langle \lambda, \alpha_i^\vee\rangle \in \mathbb{Z}$ for any weight $\lambda$ of an integrable representation. – Joppy Jan 18 '21 at 13:20
  • 1
    The $\mathfrak{h}$-invariance is just the extra condition you need (along with being a direct sum of finite-dimensional $\mathfrak{g}_{(i)}$-modules) to get back to the fact that $V$ is integrable (in the $\mathfrak{h}$-diagonalisable and nilpotency sense). Since $\dim \mathfrak{h}$ can be larger than $|I|$, you need to make sure that those extra dimensions aren’t acting on $V$ in a weird non-diagonalisable way. And yes I am justifying the dimension symmetry just by looking at the “shape” of an sl2 module - try the usual sl2 argument yourself, but with $\mathfrak{h}$ larger. – Joppy Jan 18 '21 at 13:27
  • Doesn't a $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-module only have the weights ${\lambda,\lambda-\alpha,\cdots,\lambda-p\alpha}$ for some $p>0$? Why is $r_i(\lambda)$ necessarily also a weight? Also why is $\langle\lambda,\alpha_i^\vee\rangle\in\mathbb{Z}$? – KJA Jan 26 '21 at 19:55
  • Ohh it's just the thing I've already shown, namely "If $\alpha\in\Delta, w\in W$ then $w\alpha\in W$ and $\textrm{mult}(\alpha)=\textrm{mult}(w\alpha)$". However for it to work, then $\langle\lambda,\alpha_i^\vee\rangle$ must be an integer - I don't see why this is the case? – KJA Jan 26 '21 at 20:28
  • @KJA: A finite-dimensional $\mathfrak{sl}2$-module necessarily has integral weights (this is not an obvious fact, and if you haven’t proven it yourself before, I would recommend going through the relevant exercises in a book). On a finite-dimensional $\mathfrak{g}{(i)}$-module, this immediately implies that its weights pair with $\alpha_i^\vee$ integrally. – Joppy Jan 26 '21 at 20:53
  • Thank you I will take a look at that. One last thing; You write that the weights are ${\Lambda,\cdots,r_i(\Lambda)}$ so $\dim U_\Lambda=\dim U_{r_i\Lambda}$, however why does it then hold $\dim U_\lambda=\dim U_{r_i\lambda}$? Why is $\lambda$ necersarrily the highest weight? – KJA Jan 26 '21 at 21:14
  • @KJA: for every finite-dimensional irreducible sl2 module, the dimension of $V_\lambda$ is the same as the dimension of $V_{-\lambda}$ (just look at the string basis). Hence this holds on every finite-dimensional sl2 module. When moving to $\mathfrak{g}_{(i)}$-modules, the same logic works, replacing the reflection with $r_i$ rather than negation. I really think the best way to get a hold on this is to work through the usual structure theory for finite-dimensional sl2 modules, then replace the Cartan with something a bit larger (but still acting diagonalisably) - check everything still works. – Joppy Jan 26 '21 at 22:03