Lie Algebras Script

Joachim Wehler
Lie Algebras
DRAFT, Release 1.27
October 4, 2022
2
© Joachim Wehler, 2017 - 2022
I have prepared these notes for the students of my lectures and my seminar on Lie
algebras. The lecture has been repeated several times since the summer
semester 2017 at the mathematical department of LMU
(Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität) at Munich. I thank the participants of the
seminar for making some simplifications and corrections.
Compared to the oral lecture in class these written notes contain some additional
material.
Please report any errors or typos to
wehler@math.lmu.de
Release notes:
• Release 1.27: Chapter 1: Minor revision.
• Release 1.26: Chapter 1 and Chapter 2: General revision.
...
• Release 1.1: General revision Chapter 1.
Contents
Part I General Lie Algebra Theory
1 Matrix functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1 Power series of matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Jordan decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.3 The exponential map of matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2 Fundamentals of Lie algebra theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

2.1 Definitions and first examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2.2 Lie algebras of the classical groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
2.3 Topology of the classical groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
3 Nilpotent Lie algebras and solvable Lie algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

3.1 Engel’s theorem for nilpotent Lie algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
3.2 Lie’s theorem for solvable Lie algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
3.3 Semidirect product of Lie algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
4 Killing form and semisimple Lie algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

4.1 Traces of endomorphisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
4.2 Fundamentals of semisimple Lie algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
4.3 Weyl’s theorem on complete reducibility of representations . . . . . . . 112
Part II Complex Semisimple Lie Algebras
5 Cartan decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

5.1 Toral subalgebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
5.2 sl(2, C)-modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
5.3 Cartan subalgebra and root space decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
6 Root systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

6.1 Abstract root system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
6.2 Action of the Weyl group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
v
vi Contents
6.3 Coxeter graph and Dynkin diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
7 Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
7.1 The root system of a complex semisimple Lie algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
7.2 Root systems of the A, B,C, D-series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
7.3 Outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
8 Irreducible Representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225

8.1 The universal enveloping algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
8.2 General weight theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
8.3 Finite-dimensional irreducible representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
List of results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
Part I
General Lie Algebra Theory
Chapter 1
Matrix functions
The paradigm of a Lie algebra is the vector space of matrices with the commutator
of two matrices as Lie bracket. These concrete examples even cover all abstract
finite dimensional Lie algebras. They are the focus of these notes. Nevertheless it is
useful to consider Lie algebras from an abstract viewpoint as a separate algebraic
structure like groups or rings.
If not stated otherwise, we denote by K either the field R of real numbers or the
field C of complex numbers. Both fields have characteristic 0. The relevant differ-
ence is the fact that C is algebraically closed, i.e. each polynomial with coefficients
from K of degree n has exactly n complex roots. This result allows to transform
matrices over C to certain standard forms by transformations which make use of the
eigenvalues of the matrix.
If not stated otherwise all vector spaces in this chapter are assumed finite-
dimensional K-vector spaces.
1.1 Power series of matrices
At high school every student learns the equation
exp(x) · exp(y) = exp(x + y)
This formula holds for all real numbers x, y ∈ R. Then exponentiation defines a
group morphism
exp : (R, +) → (R∗ , ·)
Those students who attended a class on complex analysis will remember that
exponentiation is defined also for complex numbers. Hence exponentiation extends
to a map
exp : (C, +) → (C∗ , ·)
which also satisfies the functional equation above.
3
4 1 Matrix functions
The seamless transition from the real field R to the complex field C is due to the
fact that the exponential map is defined by a power series
∞ 1
exp(z) = ∑ ν! · zν
ν=0
The series converges not only for real numbers but for all complex numbers too.
In order to generalize the exponential map one step further we now exponentiate
strictly upper triangular matrices as arguments.
Example 1.1 (Exponential of strictly upper triangular matrices). We denote by

  
 0∗∗ 
n(3, K) := 0 0 ∗ ∈ M(3 × 3, K) = (ai j )i j ∈ M(n × n, K) : ai j = 0 if i ≥ j
000
 
the K-algebra of strictly upper triangular matrices. Matrices from n(3, K) can be
added and multiplied with each other, and they can be multiplied by scalars from
the field K. In particular, we consider two matrices of the form
   
0p0 000
P = 0 0 0 , Q = 0 0 q ∈ n(3, K).
000 000
We compute  
∞ 1 ν 1 p0
exp(P) := ∑ · P = 1 + P = 0 1 0
ν=0 ν! 0 01
 
∞ 1 ν 1 00
exp(Q) := ∑ · Q = 1 + Q = 0 1 q .
ν=0 ν! 0 01
Note: For all ν ≥ 2
Pν = Qν = 0
Hence we do not need to care about questions of convergence.
i) To test the functional equation we compute on one hand

     
1 p0 1 00 1 p pq
exp(P) · exp(Q) = 0 1 0 · 0 1 q = 0 1 q  = 1 + P + Q + PQ.
0 01 0 01 0 0 1
On the other hand we compute

1.1 Power series of matrices 5
exp(P + Q).
For the computation of matrix products it is often helpful to introduce the

basis (Ei j )1≤i, j≤n of the K-vector space M(n × n, K) with the matrices
Ei j ∈ M(n × n, K)
having value = 1 at position with index i j and value = 0 at all other positions. Then
Ei j · Ekm = δ jk · Eim
We have
 
0 0 pq
(P + Q)2 = (pE12 + qE23 ) · (pE12 + qE23 ) = pqE13 = 0 0 0  = PQ
0 0 0
and
(P + Q)ν = 0, ν ≥ 3.
As a consequence
 
1 p (pq)/2
exp(P+Q) = 1 +P+Q+(1/2)·(P+Q)2 = 1 +P+Q+(1/2)·PQ = 0 1 q .
0 0 1
Apparently, in general the functional equation is not satisfied:
exp(P + Q) ̸= exp(P) · exp(Q).
ii) Fortunately, the defect can be fixed by introducing a correcting term which
derives from the commutator of the matrices P and Q
[P, Q] := PQ − QP ∈ n(3, K)
We set
C := (1/2) · [P, Q]
Computing
PQ = pE12 · qE23 = pq · E13 and QP = q · E23 · E13 = 0
we obtain
pq
[P, Q] = pq · E13 , C = · E13
2
(P+Q+C)2 = (pE12 +qE23 +(pq/2)·E13 )·(pE12 +qE23 +(pq/2)·E13 ) = pq·E13 = 2C
and
(P + Q +C)ν = 0, ν ≥ 3.
Hence
exp(P + Q + (1/2) · [P, Q]) =
exp(P + Q +C) = 1 + (P + Q +C) + (1/2)(P + Q +C)2
 
0 p pq
= 1 + P + Q + 2C = 1 + P + Q + PQ = 0 0 q  =
00 0
= exp(P) · exp(Q).
iii) More general one can show: The exponential map can be defined on the vector
space of strict upper triangular matrices as a map
exp : n(3, K) → GL(3, K).
It satisfies the functional equation in the generalized form: For A, B ∈ n(3 × 3, K)
exp(A) · exp(B) = exp(A + B + (1/2)[A, B])
The goal of the present section is to extend the exponential map to all matrices
from M(n × n, K). Therefore, we first need a concept of convergence for sequences
and series of matrices. The basic ingredience is the operator norm of a matrix.
Definition 1.2 (Operator norm). We consider the K-vector space Kn , n ∈ N, with

the Euclidean norm
s
n
∥x∥ := ∑ |xi |2 f or x = (x1 , ..., xn ) ∈ Kn .
i=1
For matrices A ∈ M(n × n, K) we define the operator norm
∥A∥ := sup{∥Ax∥ : x ∈ Kn and ∥x∥ ≤ 1}
as the supremum on the unit ball of Kn of the linear map represented by A.
Note that ∥A∥ < ∞ due to compactness of the unit ball
{x ∈ Kn : ∥x∥ ≤ 1}.
Intuitively, the operator norm of A is the volume to which the linear map
determined by A blows-up or blows-down the unit ball of Kn .
The operator norm ∥A∥ depends only on the linear map represented by A. Hence,
all matrices which represent the same linear map with repect to different bases
have the same operator norm.
The K-vector space M(n × n, K) of all matrices with components from K is an

associative K-algebra with respect to the matrix product
A · B ∈ M(n × n, K)
because
(A · B) ·C = A · (B ·C)
for matrices A, B,C ∈ M(n × n, K).
Proposition 1.3 (Normed associative matrix algebra). The matrix algebra (M(n × n, K), ∥∥)
is a normed associative algebra:
1. ∥A∥ = 0 iff A = 0
2. ∥A + B∥ ≤ ∥A∥ + ∥B∥
3. ∥λ · A∥ = |λ | · ∥A∥ with λ ∈ R
4. ∥A · B∥ ≤ ∥A∥ · ∥B∥
5. ∥1∥ = 1 with 1 ∈ M(n × n, K) the unit matrix.
6. For a matrix A = (ai, j )i, j ∈ M(n × n, K) holds
∥A∥sup ≤ ∥A∥ ≤ n · ∥A∥sup
with the supremum norm of the matrix components
∥A∥sup := sup{|ai j | : 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n}.
Proof. ad 6) For j = 1, ..., n denote by e j the j-th canonical basis vector of Kn . Then
for all i = 1, ..., n s
n
∥A∥ ≥ ∥Ae j ∥ = ∑ |ak j |2 ≥ |ai j |,
k=1
hence
∥A∥ ≥ ∥A∥sup .
Concerning the other estimate, the inequality of Cauchy Schwarz
| < x, y > |2 ≤ ∥x∥2 · ∥y∥2
implies for all x ∈ Kn , in particular for |x| ≤ 1

!
n n n n n
2 2 2 2
∥Ax∥ = ∑ | ∑ ai j · x j | ≤ ∑ ∑ |ai j | · ∑ |x j |
i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1 j=1
!
n n
2
≤ ∥x∥ · ∑ ∑ sup |ai j | 2
= n2 · ∥x∥2 ∥A∥sup 2 ,
i=1 j=1 i, j
hence
∥A∥ ≤ n · ∥A∥sup
⊔
⊓
Remark 1.4 (Equivalence of norms).

1. Because the operator norm ∥A∥ and the sup-norm refering to the entries of A
dominate each other up to a constant, the following two convergence concepts
are equivalent for a sequence (Aν )ν∈N of matrices
Aν ∈ M(n × n, K), ν ∈ N,
and a matrix A ∈ M(n × n, K):
• lim ∥Aν − A∥ = 0, i.e. lim Aν = A (norm convergence).

ν→∞ ν→∞
• The sequence (Aν )ν∈N converges to A component-by-component.

2. In particular each Cauchy sequence of matrices wih respect to the operator norm
is convergent: The matrix algebra
(M(n × n, K), ∥∥)
is complete, i.e. it is a Banach algebra.
3. The vector space M(n × n, K) is finite dimensional, its dimension is n2 . Hence

any two norms are equivalent in the sense that they dominate each other. There-
fore the structure of a topological vector space on M(n × n, K) does not depend
on the choice of the norm.
Because (M(n ×n, K), ∥∥) is a normed algebra according to Proposition 1.3, con-
cepts from analysis like convergence, Cauchy sequence, continuous function, and
power series also apply to matrices. In particular, the commutator is a continuous
map: For A, B ∈ M(n × n, K)
∥[A, B]∥ = ∥AB − BA∥ ≤ ∥AB∥ + ∥BA∥ ≤ 2∥A∥∥B∥.
We recall the fundamental properties of a complex power series

∞
∑ cν · zν
ν=0
with radius of convergence R > 0. Set
∆ (R) := {z ∈ C : |z| < R}.
Then
• The series is absolutely convergent in ∆ (R), i.e. ∑∞
ν=0 |cν | · |z| is convergent
ν
for z ∈ ∆ (R).
• The series converges compact in ∆ (R), i.e. the convergence is uniform on each
compact subset of ∆ (R).
• The series is infinitely often differentiable in ∆ (R), its derivation is obtained by

termwise differentiation.
Lemma 1.5 (Power series of matrices). Consider a power series

∞
f (z) = ∑ cν · zν
ν=0
with coefficients cν ∈ K, ν ∈ N, and radius of convergence R > 0. Let
B(R) := {A ∈ M(n × n, K) : ∥A∥ < R}
be the open ball in M(n × n, K) around zero with radius R. For a matrix A ∈ B(R)
then:
• The series
!
∞ n
ν ν
f (A) := ∑ cν · A := lim
n→∞
∑ cν · A ∈ M(n × n, K)
ν=0 ν=0
is convergent, absolutely convergent and compact convergent in B(R).
• The series f (A) satisfies [ f (A), A] = 0 with the commutator
[ f (A), A] := f (A) · A − A · f (A).
• The function
f : B(R) → M(n × n, K), A 7→ f (A),
is continuous.
Proof. i) We apply the Cauchy criterion: For N > M holds

N M N
∥ ∑ cν · Aν − ∑ cν · Aν ∥ ≤ ∑ |cν | · ∥A∥ν .
ν=0 ν=0 ν=M+1
If r := ∥A∥ < R then ∑∞

ν=0 |cν | · r converges. Hence the Cauchy criterion is satisfied
ν
and the limit !

n
lim
n→∞
∑ cν · Aν
ν=0
exists. The remaining statements about convergence follow from the estimate
∞
∥ f (A)∥ ≤ ∑ |cν | · ∥A∥ν
ν=0
and the corresponding properties of complex power series.
ii) The equation [A, f (A)] = 0 about the commutator follows: We take the limit lim
n→∞
and employ the continuity of the commutator
" # " #
∞ n n
A, ∑ cν · Aν = lim A, ∑ cν · Aν = lim ∑ cν [A, ·Aν ] = 0
n→∞ n→∞
ν=0 ν=0 ν=0
iii) Continuity of f is a consequence of the compact convergence. ⊔

⊓
Definition 1.6 (Derivation of matrix functions). Let I ⊂ R be an open interval. A

matrix function
A : I → M(n × n, K)
is differentiable at a point t0 ∈ I iff the limit
A(t0 + h) − A(t0 )
lim =: A′ (t0 ) ∈ M(n × n, K)
h→0 h
exists. In this case we employ the notation
dA
(t0 ) := A′ (t0 ).
dt
Lemma 1.7 (Derivation of power series of matrices depending on a parameter).

Let I ⊂ R be an open interval.
i) Consider a complex power series
∞
f (z) = ∑ cν · zν
ν=0
with radius of convergence R > 0. and
A : I → B(R) ⊂ M(n × n, K)
a differentiable function, which satisfies for all t ∈ I
[A′ (t), A(t)] = 0.
Then also the function

∞
f ◦ A : I → M(n × n, K),t 7→ f (A(t)) := ∑ cν · Aν (t),
ν=0
is differentiable for all t ∈ I and satisfies the chain rule

d
f (A(t)) = f ′ (A(t)) · A′ (t) = A′ (t) · f ′ (A(t)).
dt
Here f ′ denotes the derivation of the complex power series f term by term.
ii) Consider two differentiable maps
A, B : I →
− M(n × n, K).
Then for all t ∈ I holds the product rule
d
A(t) · B(t) = A′ (t) · B(t) + A(t) · B′ (t).
dt
Proof. i) The series
∞
f (A(t)) = ∑ cν · Aν (t)
ν=0
and
∞
f ′ (A(t)) = ∑ ν · cν · Aν−1 (t)
ν=1
are convergent because ∥A(t)∥ < R. We have

!
∞
′ ′
f (A(t)) · A = ∑ ν · cν · A ν−1
(t) · A′ .
ν=1
Due to the compact convergence we may differentiate f (A(t)) term by term. The
proof of the lemma reduces to proving
d ν
A (t) = ν · Aν−1 (t) · A′ (t) = ν · A′ (t) · Aν−1 (t).
dt
Here the proof goes by induction on ν ∈ N. For the induction step assume the claim
to hold for ν ∈ N. Analogous to the proof of the product rule from calculus by clever
insert of a suitable term:
d ν+1 Aν+1 (t + h) − Aν+1 (t) Aν (t + h) · A(t + h) − Aν (t) · A(t)

A (t) = lim = lim =
dt h→0 h h→0 h
Aν (t + h) · A(t + h) − Aν (t) · A(t + h) + Aν (t) · A(t + h) − Aν (t) · A(t)

= lim =
h→0 h
Aν (t + h) · A(t + h) − Aν (t) · A(t + h) Aν (t) · A(t + h) − Aν (t) · A(t)
= lim + lim =
h→0 h h→0 h
! !
Aν (t + h) − Aν (t) ν A(t + h) − A(t)
= lim · A(t + h) + lim A (t) · =
h→0 h h→0 h
!
d ν
= A (t) · A(t) + Aν (t) · A′ (t) = ν · Aν−1 (t) · A′ (t) · A(t) + Aν (t) · A′ (t) =
dt
(ν + 1) · Aν (t) · A′ (t) = (ν + 1) · A′ (t) · Aν (t).

To obtain the third last equation we have employed the induction assumption. The
second last equation and the last equation follow from the precondition [A′ (t), A(t)] = 0.
ii) The proof is similar to part i):
A(t + h) · B(t + h) − A(t) · B(t)

lim =
h→0 h
A(t + h) · B(t + h) − A(t) · B(t + h) + A(t) · B(t + h) − A(t)B(t)

= lim =
h→0 h
A(t + h) − A(t) B(t + h) − B(t)
lim · lim B(t + h) − A(t) · lim
h→0 h h→0 h→0 h
⊔
⊓
1.2 Jordan decomposition
The central aim of Jordan theory is

• decomposing a complex vector space V with respect to a given endomorphism f ∈ End(V )
into eigenspaces or generalized eigenspaces of f
• and decomposing f as the sum of two endomorphisms of special type.

1.2 Jordan decomposition 13
Definition 1.8 (Eigenspaces and generalized eigenspaces). Consider a K-vector

space V , a fixed endomorphism f ∈ End(V ), and λ ∈ K.
• If
Vλ ( f ) := ker( f − λ ) ̸= {0}
then Vλ ( f ) is the eigenspace of f with respect to λ , which is named an eigenvalue
of f .
• If [
V λ ( f ) := ker( f − λ )n ̸= {0}
n∈N
then V λ ( f ) is the generalized eigenspace of f with respect to λ .
Remark 1.9 (Stableness of generalized eigenspaces).

1. All generalized eigenspaces V λ ( f ) are f -invariant, i.e.
f (V λ ( f )) ⊂ V λ ( f ),
because
[( f − λ )n , f ] = 0.
2. Every non-zero generalized eigenspace V λ ( f ) contains at least one eigenvector v
of f with eigenvalue λ : Take a non-zero vector v0 ∈ V λ ( f ) and choose n ∈ N
maximal with
v := ( f − λ )n (v0 ) ̸= 0.
Hence knowing a generalized eigenspace of f allows to find an actual eigenvector
of f .
We recall the following types of matrix representation of an endomorphisms.

Definition 1.10 (Diagonalizable, triangularizable, nilpotent). Consider an n-dimensional K-vector
space V .
1. An endomorphism f ∈ End(V ) is diagonalizable iff it can be represented by a
diagonal matrix from M(n × n, K) .
2. An endomorphism f ∈ End(V ) is triangularizable iff V has an f -stable flag, i.e.

there exists a sequence (Vi )i=0,...,n of subspaces
Vi ⊊ Vi+1 , i = 0, ..., n − 1
satisfying
f (Vi ) ⊂ Vi , i = 0, ..., n
3. An endomorphism f ∈ End(V ) is nilpotent iff f k (V ) = 0 for a suitable k ∈ N.
A matrix A = (ai j ) ∈ M(n × n, K) is an upper triangular matrix iff ai j = 0 for

all i > j. Apparently an endomorphism is triangularizable iff it can be represented
by an upper triangular matrix from M(n × n, K).
Note: The only endomorphism f ∈ End(V ), which is both diagonalizable and

nilpotent, is f = 0.
The question whether an endomorphism f is triangularizable or even diagonal-

izable depends on the roots of its characteristic polynomial. These roots are the
eigenvalues of f .
Definition 1.11 (Characteristic polynomial of an endomorphism). Denote by V

a K-vector space and by f ∈ End(V ) an endomorphism.
1. The characteristic polynomial of f is the polynomial
det(T · 1 − A) ∈ K[T ]
with 1 ∈ M(n × n, K) the unit matrix and A ∈ M(n × n, K) an arbitrary matrix

representing f . The polynomial is independent from the representing matrix.
2. The roots λ ∈ C of pmin are the eigenvalues of f . We denote by
µ(pchar ; λ ) ∈ N
the multiplicity of the root, i.e. the algebraic multiplicity of λ .
The criteria for respectively triangularization and diagonalization of an endomor-

phism are stated in the following Propositions 1.12 and 1.13.
Proposition 1.12 (Triangular form). For an endomorphism f ∈ End(V ) with a
finite dimensional K-vector space V are equivalent:
1. The endomorphism f is triangularizable.
2. The characteristic polynomial pchar splits over K into linear factors.
For the proof see [12].
In particular, over K = C every endomorphism is triangularizable.
Proposition 1.13 (Diagonal form). For an endomorphism f ∈ End(V ) with a finite

dimensional K-vector space V are equivalent:
1. The endomorphism f is diagonalizable.
2. The characteristic polynomial pchar splits over K into linear factors, and for all
eigenvalues λ of f the algebraic multiplicity equals the geometric multiplicity,
i.e.
µ(pchar ; λ ) = dim Vλ ( f )(Geometric multiplicity).
3. The vector space V splits as direct sum of eigenspaces
M
V= Vλ ( f ).
λ eigenvalue
For the proof see [12].
Lemma 1.14 (Diagonal approximation). Consider a complex, finite dimensional

vector space V . For each endomorphism f ∈ End(V ) a sequence ( fν )ν∈N of diago-
nalizable endomorphisms fν ∈ End(V ) exists with
f = lim fν .
ν→∞
Proof. Consider an endomorphism f ∈ End(V ). Because the base field C is alge-

braically closed the characteristic polynomial pchar (T ) ∈ C of f splits into linear
factors. According to Proposition 1.12 the endomorphism f can be represented by
an upper triangular matrix A
A = ∆ +N
with a diagonal matrix ∆ = diag(λ1 , ..., λn ) and a strictly upper triangular matrix
N = (ai j ), ai j = 0 if i ≥ j.
For i = 1, ..., n define successively sequences ai = (aiν )ν∈N of complex numbers

converging to zero such that the sets
{λ j + aνj : j = 1, ..., i − 1 and ν ∈ N}
and
{λi + aiν : ν ∈ N}
are disjoint. For each ν ∈ N define
Aν := diag(λ1 + a1ν , ..., λn + anν ) + N.
Each matrix Aν has eigenvalues
λi + aiν , i = 1, ..., n
and for each fixed ν ∈ N all eigenvalues of Aν are pairwise distinct. Hence Aν
represents a diagonalizable endomorphism fν due to Proposition 1.13. Moreover
A = lim Aν ,
ν→∞
i.e.
f = lim fν
ν→∞
⊔
⊓
Definition 1.15 (Minimal polynomial and semisimpleness). Let V be an n-dimensional K-vector

space. The K-vector space End(V ) of endomorphisms has dimension = n2 . Hence
for each endomorphism f ∈ End(V ) the family ( f k )k∈N is linearly dependent and
each endomorphism f ∈ End(V ) satisfies an equation
k−1
fk = ∑ αi · f i , αi ∈ C.
i=0
with suitable k ∈ N∗ .
1. Because the ring R := K[T ] is a principal ideal domain, the ideal of all polyno-
mials which annihilate f
< p ∈ R : p( f ) = 0 ∈ End(V ) >
has a unique generator of positive degree with leading coefficient = 1. It is named

the minimal polynomial of f
pmin (T ) ∈ R.
2. The endomorphism f is semisimple if each root of its minimal polynomial pmin (T )
is a simple root.
Proposition 1.16 (Minimal polynomial and diagonalizability). An endomorphism f ∈ End(V )

of a complex vector space V is semisimple iff f is diagonalizable.
Theorem 1.17 (Jordan decomposition). Let f ∈ End(V ) be an endomorphism of

a finite dimensional complex vector space V .
1. A unique decomposition
f = fs + fn (Jordan decomposition)
exists with a semisimple endomorphism fs ∈ End(V ) and a nilpotent endomor-

phism fn ∈ End(V ) such that both satisfy
[ fs , fn ] = 0.
2. The components fs and fn depend on f in a polynomial way, i.e. polynomials
ps (T ), pn (T ) ∈ C[T ]
exist with ps (0) = pn (0) = 0 such that
fs = ps ( f ) and fn = pn ( f ).
In particular, if [ f , g] = 0 for an endomorphism g ∈ End(V ) then
[ fs , g] = [ fn , g] = 0.
3. The vector space V splits as direct sum of the generalized eigenspaces of f

M
V= V λ ( f ).
λ eigenvalue
For each eigenvalue λ the generalized eigenspace of f equals the eigenspace

of fs :
V λ ( f ) = Vλ ( fs ).
The proof uses the fact that the field C is algebraically closed. Hence the minimal
polynomial pmin of f splits completely into linear factors. If pmin has the roots
λi , i = 1, ..., r,
then the linear factors of pmin induce a family of polynomials without a common
factor. Because R := C[T ] is a principal domain, one obtains a partition of unity in
R. It induces a partition of the identity id ∈ End(V ). The corresponding summands
form a family of pairwise commuting projectors
Ei : V →
− V, i = 1, ..., r
Setting
Vi := im Ei ⊂ V, i = 1, ..., r,
decomposes V as the direct sum
r
M
V= Vi ,
i=1
and f operates on each Vi by multiplication with λi . One checks that

r
fs := ∑ λi · Ei
i=1
is semisimple and
f − fs =: fn
is the searched nilpotent summand of f . The main tool for the verification is the
concept of the generalized eigenspaces of f .
Proof (Theorem 1.17).

i) Splitting idV as a sum of pairwise commuting projectors: Because the field C is
algebraically closed, the minimal polynomial pmin (T ) of f splits into linear factors
with positive exponents mi ∈ N∗
r
pmin (T ) = ∏(T − λi )mi
i=1
with λi ̸= λ j if i ̸= j.
For i = 1, ..., r consider the polynomials
pmin (T )
pi := ∈ R,
(T − λi )mi
which are obtained by multiplying the residues obtained by successively dividing

out one factor from the minimal poylnomial. Because R is a principal ideal domain,
a polynomial g ∈ R exists with
< pi : i = 1, ..., r >=< g > .
The only factor common to all pi , i = 1, ..., r, are the units of R, hence w.l.o.g we
have g = 1. Therefore, for i = 1, ..., r polynomials ri ∈ R exist with
r
1 = ∑ ri · pi ∈ R.
i=1
The sum decomposition of the identity induces a sum decomposition of the

endomorphism f : For i = 1, ..., r we define the endomorphisms
Ei := ri ( f ) · pi ( f ) ∈ End(V ).
They satisfy:
•
n
idV = ∑ Ei
i=1
• If i ̸= j then pmin divides
(ri · pi ) · (r j · p j ) ∈ R.
Therefore pmin ( f ) = 0 ∈ End(V ) implies

Ei · E j = 0 ∈ End(V ).
• The family (Ek )k=1,...,r is a family of projectors:

r
Ek2 = Ek ◦ ∑ Ei = Ek ◦ idV = Ek .
i=1
Hence the family (Ei )i=1,...,r splits the identity idV as a sum of pairwise commuting
projectors. We define the corresponding subspaces
Vi := im Ei ⊂ V, i = 1, ..., r
and obtain the direct sum decomposition

r
M
V= Vi .
i=1
For all i = 1, ..., r the projector Ei is as a polynomial in f by definition, hence

satisfies
[ f , Ei ] = 0,
which implies that the subspace Vi is f -stable.
ii) The semisimple summand: On each subspace
Vi , i = 1, ..., r,
the corresponding projector Ei acts as identity, hence the endomorphism
λi · (Ei |Vi ) ∈ End(Vi )
acts as multiplication by λi . We define the endomorphism

r
fs := ps ( f ) = ∑ λi · Ei ∈ End(V ).
i=1
Due to Proposition 1.13 the decomposition

r
M
V= Vi
i=1
implies that fs is semisimple with eigenspaces
Vi = Vλi ( fs ), i = 1, ..., r.
For each i = 1, ..., r

Vi ⊂ V λi ( f )
because for each v ∈ Vi holds
( f −λi )m (v) = ( f −λi )m (Ei (v)) = ( f −λi )m (ri ( f )◦ pi ( f ))(v) = (ri ( f )◦ pmin ( f ))(v) = 0.
iii) The nilpotent summand: To obtain the nilpotent summand of f we consider the
polynomial
pn (T ) := T − ps (T ) ∈ C[T ]
and define the corresponding endomorphism
fn := pn ( f ) = f − fs ∈ End(V ).
Then
f = fs + fn .
The two definitions
fs := ps ( f ) and fn := pn ( f )
imply
[ f , fs ] = [ f , fn ] = 0.
In order to prove the nilpotency of fn we consider an arbitrary index i ∈ 1, ..., r and
the restriction of fn to Vi . Set
m := mi = dim Vi
On Vi
fn = f − fs = ( f − λi ) − ( fs − λi ).
Using [ fs , f ] = 0 the binomial theorem implies
m
m
f nm = ∑ (−1)m−µ ( f − λi )µ ◦ ( fs − λi )m−µ .
µ=0 µ
Here the second factor

( fs − λi )m−µ
of each summand with index 0 ≤ µ < m vanishes, because λi is an eigenvalue of
the restriction fs |Vi . The first factor
( f − λi )µ
vanishes for the summand with µ = m as proved in part ii). As a consequence of

the binomial theorem
fnmi (Vi ) = 0.
Hence the restriction fn |Vi is nilpotent for every i = 1, ..., r, which implies the
nilpotency of fn ∈ End(V ).
iv) Inclusion V λi ( f ) ⊂ Vi : Consider an arbitrary, but fixed i = 1, ..., r. We use the

direct sum decomposition from part ii)
r
M
V= Vj.
j=1
Consider an arbitrary vector v ∈ V λi ( f ) ⊂ V and decompose

r
v= ∑ v j , v j ∈ V j for j = 1, ..., r.
j=1
We have to show that v reduces to vi , i.e.v j = 0 for j ̸= i.
For large n ∈ N by assumption

r
0 = ( f − λi )n (v) = ∑ ( f − λi )n (v j ).
j=1
The f -stableness of each V j implies
( f − λi )n (v j ) ∈ V j .
Consider an index j = 1, ..., r such that v j ̸= 0. Then
( f − λi )n (v j ) = 0,
i.e. f has the generalized eigenvector v j belonging to eigenvalue λi :
v j ∈ V λi ( f ).
Due to Remark 1.9 the endomorphism f has also an eigenvector w ∈ Vλi ( f ) with
eigenvalue λi . The f -stableness of V j implies w ∈ V j . We obtain for large m
0 = ( f − λ j )m (w) = (λi − λ j )m · w.
Here the left equality is due to
w ∈ Vj ⊂ V λ j ( f )
with the last inclusion proven in part iii). And the right equality is due to
w ∈ Vλi ( f ).
The equality
0 = (λi − λ j )m · w
implies j = i. As a consequence v = vi ∈ Vi , which finishes the proof of the
inclusion
V λi ( f ) ⊂ Vi
Together with the opposite inclusion from part iii) we obtain
Vi = V λi ( f )
and
r r r
V∼ Vi ∼ V λi ( f ) ∼
M M M
= = = Vλi ( fs ).
i=1 i=1 i=1
v) Both polynomials pmin and pchar have the same roots: The roots of the
characteristic polynomial pchar are the eigenvalues of f . For each root λ of the
minimal polynomial pmin (T ) of f the generalized eigenspace V λ ( f ) contains an
eigenvector of f with eigenvalue λ , see Remark 1.9. Therefore any root of pmin (T )
is an eigenvalue of f .
For the oppposite inclusion we consider an eigenvalue λ of f with corresponding
eigenvector v ∈ V :
f (v) = λ · v.
Because pmin ( f ) = 0 ∈ End(V ) we have in particular
pmin ( f )(v) = 0 ∈ V.
Hence
0 = pmin ( f )(v) = pmin (λ ) · v ∈ V.
Because v ̸= 0 we conclude
pmin (λ ) = 0 ∈ C,
i.e. the eigenvalue λ is a root of the minimal polynomial.
vi) Uniqueness of the Jordan decomposition: Assume a second decomposition
f = fs′ + fn′
with the properties stated in part 1) of the theorem. From
[ fs′ , fn′ ] = 0
follows
[ f , fn′ ] = [ fs′ , fn′ ] + [ fn′ , fn′ ] = [ fn′ , fn′ ] = 0.
Part iii) with
fn = pn ( f )
shows
[ fn , fn′ ] = 0.
Analogously, one proves
[ fs , fs′ ] = 0.
As a consequence
fs − fs′ = fn′ − fn ∈ End(V )
is an endomorphism which is both semisimple - being the sum of two commuting
semsisimple endomorphisms - and nilpotent - being the sum of two commuting
nilpotent endomorphisms. Hence the endomorphism is zero.
vii) Killing the constant terms: We prove that the polynomials ps and pn can be
choosen with
ps (0) = pn (0) = 0 :
• If λi = 0 for one index i = 1, ..., r then
V 0 ( f ) ̸= {0}
and the generalized eigenspace of f contains also an eigenvector of f with

eigenvalue 0, i.e.
{0} ̸= ker f .
The representation
ps (T ) = a0 + a1 T + ... + ak T k ∈ C[T ]
implies
fs = ps ( f ) = a0 · id + a1 · f + ... + ak · f k End(V ).
Choosing a non-zero vector v ∈ ker f shows a0 = 0. Hence ps (T ) ∈ C[T ] has no
constant term, i.e. ps (0) = 0. From the definition pn (T ) := T − ps (T ) follows
pn (0) = −ps (0) = 0.
• If λi ̸= 0 for all indices i = 1, ..., r then we claim pmin (0) ̸= 0. The proof is
indirect: Otherwise by factoring out
pmin (T ) = T · q(T ) with q ∈ C[T ], q ̸= 0, deg q < deg pmin .
Therefore the minimality of pmin implies
q( f ) ̸= 0,
i.e. a vector v ∈ V exists with
w := q( f )(v) ̸= 0
As a consequence
0 = pmin ( f ) = f (w)
implies that λ = 0 is an eigenvalue, a contradiction.
Now one replaces the polynomials ps and pn by
ps (0)
p̃s := ps − · pmin
pmin (0)
and
pn (0)
p̃n := pn − · pmin .
pmin (0)
Then
p̃s (0) = p̃n (0)
without changing the polynomial representations
fs = p̃s ( f ) and fn = p̃n ( f ).

⊔
⊓
The decomposition of a complex endomorphism into the sum of its semisimple

and its nilpotent part points to the two fundamental classes of Lie algebras. Semisim-
ple Lie algebras will be studied in Part II. Nilpotent - and slightly more general -
solvable Lie algebras are the subject of Chapter 3 from the present Part I.
The Cayleigh-Hamilton theorem relates the minimal polynomial of an endomor-

phism to its characteristic polynomial. The theorem can be obtained as a corollary
of the Jordan decomposition.
Theorem 1.18 (Cayleigh-Hamilton). Consider a complex, finite-dimensional vec-
tor space V and an endomorphism f ∈ End(V ).
• Then the minimal polynomial pmin (T ) of f divides the characteristic polynomial pchar (T )
in C[T ].
• As a consequence, also the characteristic polynomial pchar (T ) ∈ C annihilates f ,

i.e.
pchar ( f ) = 0 ∈ End(V ).
Note that both polynomials pmin (T ) and pchar (T ) have the same roots due to
part v) in the proof of Theorem 1.17.
Proof. Denote by
f = fs + fn
the Jordan decomposition of f according to Theorem 1.17 and take over the notation
from its proof. In particular
r
pmin (T ) = ∏ (T − λ j )m j
j=1
We choose an arbitrary but fixed index j ∈ {1, ..., r} and set
λ := λ j , m := m j , W := V λ ( f ), and k := dim W.
Because W is f -stable, the Jordan decomposition of f restricts to the Jordan decom-

position on W :
f ′ = fs′ + fn′
Here priming indicates restriction to W . We have
fs′ = λ · idW .
The nilpotent endomorphism fn′ can be represented by a strictly upper triangular

matrix. Hence f ′ is represented by an upper triangular matrix
A ∈ M(k × k, C)
with all diagonal elements equal to λ . The characteristic polynomial of f ′ has the
multiple root λ . It is obtained by applying the determinant formula for upper trian-
gular matrices as
pchar, f ′ (T ) = det(T − A) = (T − λ )k ∈ C[T ].
The minimal polynomial of f ′ is
pmin, f ′ (T ) = (T − λ )m ∈ C[T ]
according to the definition of m. Hence each polynomial in f ′ , which vanishes on W

has degree at least m. In particular,
k
( f ′ − λ )k = ( fn′ ) = 0
implies
m ≤ k.
Summing up these considerations for all indices j = 1, ..., r, the characteristic poly-
nomial of f is
r λj
(f)
pchar (T ) = ∏ (T − λ j )dim V
j=1
and for each j = 1, ..., r holds
m j ≤ dim V λ j ( f ).
In particular,
pmin (T ) divides pchar (T ),

and both polynomials have the same roots. In particular,
pmin ( f ) = 0 =⇒ pchar ( f ) = 0
⊔
⊓
Apparently the statement pchar ( f ) = 0 of the Cayleigh-Hamilton theorem also

holds for an endomorphism of a real vector space V . Because any real endomor-
phism f defines the complex endomomorphism
f ⊗ id
of the complexification V ⊗ R C.
1.3 The exponential map of matrices
The complex exponential series

∞ zν
exp(z) = ∑
ν=0 ν!
has convergence radius R = ∞. We now generalize the exponential series from com-
plex numbers z ∈ C as argument to matrices A ∈ M(n × n, K) as argument.
Definition 1.19 (Exponential of matrices). For any matrix A ∈ M(n × n, K) one

defines the exponential
∞
Aν
exp(A) := ∑ ∈ M(n × n, K).
ν=0 ν!
Proposition 1.20 (Derivation of the exponential). Consider an open interval I ⊂ R

and a differentiable function
A : I → M(n × n, K)
with [A′ (t), A(t)] = 0 for all t ∈ I. Then for all t ∈ I
d
(exp A(t)) = A′ (t) · exp A(t) = exp A(t) · A′ (t).
dt
1.3 The exponential map of matrices 27
Proof. We apply Lemma 1.7 with the power series

∞ 1
f (z) = ∑ ν! · zν
ν=0
and its derivative

f ′ (z) = f (z).
We obtain
!
d ∞ 1 ν
dt
(exp A(t)) = ∑ ν! · A (t) · A′ (t) = exp A(t) · A′ (t) = A′ (t) · exp A(t).
ν=0
Theorem 1.21 (Exponential of commuting matrices). The exponential of matrices A, B ∈ M(n × n, C)

satisfies the following rules:
1. Functional equation in the commutative case: If [A, B] = 0 then
exp(A + B) = exp(A) · exp(B).
2. Transposition: (exp A)⊤ = exp(A⊤ )
3. Base change: If S ∈ GL(n, C) then
exp(S · A · S−1 ) = S · exp(A) · S−1 .
4. Determinant and trace: det(exp A) = exp(tr A).

Proof. ad 1: First we apply the binomial theorem with [A, B] = 0:
!
∞ ∞ 1 ν
(A + B)ν ν ν−µ µ
exp(A + B) = ∑ = ∑ ∑ A ·B =
ν=0 ν! ν=0 ν! µ=0 µ
!
∞ ν Aν−µ Bµ
= ∑ ∑ ·
ν=0 µ=0 (ν − µ)! µ!
Secondly we invoke the Cauchy product formula. It rests on the fact that any rear-
rangement of absolutely convergent series is admissible:
!
∞ ν Aν−µ Bµ ∞ Aν ∞ Bν
∑ ∑ · = ∑ · ∑ = exp(A) · exp(B).
ν=0 µ=0 (ν − µ)! µ! ν=0 ν! ν=0 ν!
ad 2: Taking lim of
N→∞
!⊤
N
Aν N
(A⊤ )ν
∑ ν! = ∑
ν=0 ν=0 ν!
ad 3: Taking lim of
N→∞
!
N
Aν N
S · Aν · S−1 N
(S · A · S−1 )ν
S· ∑ · S−1 = ∑ = ∑
ν=0 ν! ν=0 ν! ν=0 ν!
ad 4: According to Proposition 1.12 and part 3) of the proposition w.o.l.g.

 
λ1 ∗
..
A= .  , λi ∈ C, i = 1, ..., n,
 
0 λn
is an upper triangular matrix. We obtain

 ν 
λ1 ∗
ν
A =
 ..  , ν ∈ N,

.
0 λnν
and conclude
 
∞
! eλ1 ∗
Aν ..
det(exp A) = det = det  .
 
∑ ν! .
ν=0
0 eλn
Hence
n
det(exp A) = ∏ eλi = eλ1 +...+λn = exp(tr A).
i=1
Corollary 1.22 (Exponential map). The exponential defines a map
exp : M(n × n, K) → GL(n, K), A 7→ exp(A),
i.e. the matrix exp(A) is invertible, and exp(A)−1 = exp(−A).
The inverse of exponentiation is taking the logarithm. But even in the case of
complex numbers the exponential map is not injective because
exp(z + 2πi) = exp(z)
Anyhow the exponential map of complex numbers is locally invertible. And this
property continues to hold for the exponential of matrices. Therefore recall the com-
plex power series of the logarithm
∞ (−1)ν+1 ν
log(1 + z) = ∑ · z , z ∈ C,
ν=1 ν
and the complex geometric series

∞
∑ zν , z ∈ C.
ν=0
Both power series have radius of convergence R = 1.

Definition 1.23 (Logarithm and geometric series of matrices). For a matrix A ∈ M(n × n, K)
with ∥A∥ < 1 one defines its logarithm
∞
Aν
log(1 + A) := ∑ (−1)ν+1 · ∈ M(n × n, K)
ν=1 ν
and its geometric series

∞
∑ Aν ∈ M(n × n, K).
ν=0
Proposition 1.24 (Derivation of logarithm).

1. For a matrix A ∈ M(n × n, K) with ∥A∥ < 1 the matrix 1 − A is invertible with
inverse the geometric series
∞
(1 − A)−1 = ∑ Aν .
ν=0
2. Consider an open interval I ⊂ R and a differentiable function
B : I → M(n × n, K)
with ∥B(t) − 1∥ < 1 and [B′ (t), B(t)] = 0 for all t ∈ I.
Then for all t ∈ I the inverse B(t)−1 exists and
d
(log B(t)) = B(t)−1 · B′ (t) = B′ (t) · B(t)−1 .
dt
Proof. ad 1) For each n ∈ N
n n n+1
(1 − A) · ∑ Aν = ∑ Aν − ∑ Aν = 1 − An+1 .
ν=0 ν=0 ν=1
Because ∥A∥ < 1 it follows

∞
(1 − A) · ∑ Aν = 1 − n→∞
lim ∥A∥n+1 = 1.
ν=0
ad 2) For t ∈ I define
A := 1 − B(t).
Because ∥A∥ = ∥1 − B(t)∥ < 1 apply part 1) to A:
B(t) = 1 − A
has the inverse

∞ ∞
B(t)−1 = ∑ Aν = ∑ (1 − B(t))ν .
ν=0 ν=0
In addition,
log(B(t)) = log(1 + (B(t) − 1))
is well-defined. The chain rule from Lemma 1.7 with the power series of the loga-
rithm
∞ (−1)ν+1
f (1 + z) = ∑ · zν
ν=1 ν
and its derivative
∞
f ′ (1 + z) = ∑ (−z)ν
ν=0
implies
!
d d ∞
(log B(t)) = log(1 + (B(t) − 1)) = ∑ (1 − B(t))ν · B′ (t) =
dt dt ν=0
= B(t)−1 · B′ (t) = B′ (t) · B(t)−1 .
Proposition 1.25 (Exponential and logarithm as locally inverse maps). Consider

a matrix A ∈ M(n × n, C).
1. If ∥A∥ < log 2 then
log(exp A) = A
2. If ∥A − 1∥ < 1 or (A − 1) nilpotent then
exp(log A) = A
Proof. ad 1) The assumption ∥A∥ < log 2 implies

∞ Aν ∞ ∥A∥ν
∥exp(A) − 1∥ = ∥ ∑ ∥≤ ∑ = exp(∥A∥) − 1 < 2 − 1 = 1.
ν=1 ν! ν=1 ν!
Hence
log(exp A) = log(1 + (exp(A) − 1))
is a well-defined convergent power series.
In order to prove the equality
log(exp A) = A
we first consider a diagonal matrix
 
λ1 0
A=
 .. .

.
0 λn
Then
   
log(eλ1 ) 0 λ1 0
log(exp(A)) = 
 .. = 
  ..  = A.

. .
0 log(eλn ) 0 λn
Here we use that the series of the logarithm log(eλi ), i = 1, ..., n, computes the main
value of the logarithm.
According to Proposition 1.12 an arbitrary complex matrix A ∈ M(n × n, C) is

triangularizable, i.e. an invertible matrix S ∈ GL(n, C) exists with
S · A · S−1 = B
an upper triangular matrix. According to Lemma 1.14 a series of diagonalizable

matrices (Bν )ν∈N exists with
B = lim Bν .
ν→∞
For each ν ∈ N an invertible matrix Sν ∈ GL(n, C) exists with
Sν · Bν · Sν−1 = ∆ν
a diagonal matrix. Because ∥A∥ = ∥B∥ we may assume: For ν ∈ N sufficiently large
also
∥∆ν ∥ = ∥Bν ∥ < log 2
and
Bν = Sν−1 · ∆ν · Sν = Sν−1 · log(exp ∆ν ) · Sν =
= log(exp(Sν−1 · ∆ν · Sν )) = log(exp Bν ).
Taking the limit and using the continuity of the functions log and exp gives
B = log(exp(B))
and
A = S−1 · B · S = S−1 · log(exp(B)) · S = log(exp(S−1 · B · S)) = log(exp(A)).

ad 2) By assumption
exp(log(A)) = exp(log(1 + (A − 1)))
is a convergent power series. The proof of the equality
exp(log A) = B
goes along the same line as the proof of part 1): First, one proves the equality for
diagonal matrices. Secondly, one approximates the triagonizable matrix A by a se-
quence of diagonalizable matrices. And finally one uses the continuity of functions
which are given by power series. ⊔ ⊓
Remark 1.26 (Counter example against invertibility). In Proposition 1.25, part 1)

the assumption ∥A∥ < log 2 cannot be dropped: Consider the matrix
A = 2π i · 1 ∈ M(n × n, C)
with ∥A∥ = 2π > log 2. We have
exp(A) = e2π i · 1 = 1
hence
log(exp(A)) = log(1) = 0 ̸= A.
Theorem 1.27 (Surjectivity of the complex exponential map). The exponential

map of complex matrices
exp : M(n × n, C) → GL(n, C), A 7→ exp A,
is surjective.
Proof. Consider a fixed but arbitrary matrix B ∈ GL(n, C). According to Theorem 1.17
the vector space Cn splits into the sum of the generalized eigenspaces with respect
to the eigenvalues λ of B
Cn ∼
M
= V λ (B)
λ
and for each eigenvalue λ the restriction Bλ := B|V λ (B) is an endomorphism

of V λ (B).
W.l.o.g. we may assume B = Bλ with a fixed λ ∈ C∗ . The matrix

N := B − λ · 1
is nilpotent and
1
B = λ · 1 + N = λ (1 + · N).
λ
Moreover
∞
1 (−1)ν+1 N ν
A1 := log(1 + · N) = ∑ · ν
λ ν=1 ν λ
is well-defined because the sum is finite. We have
1 1
exp A1 = exp(log(1 + · N)) = 1 + · N
λ λ
according to Proposition 1.25. After choosing a complex logarithm µ ∈ C with
eµ = λ
and setting
A := µ · 1 + A1 ,
Theorem 1.21 implies
1
exp A = exp(µ · 1) · exp A1 = (λ · 1) · exp A1 = λ (1 + · N) = B.
λ
⊔
⊓
Remark 1.28 (Counter examples against surjectivity). In general, the exponential

map is not surjective on domains where one could possibly expect it to be.
1. Complex case: Set
sl(2, C) := {A ∈ M(2 × 2, C) : tr A = 0}
and
SL(2, C) := {B ∈ GL(2, C) : det B = 1}
and consider
exp : sl(2, C) → SL(2, C).
The map is well-defined due to Theorem 1.21. The matrix

−1 b
B= ∈ SL(2, C), b ∈ C∗ ,
0 −1
has no inverse image.
2. Real case: Set

GL+ (2, R) := {B ∈ GL(2, R) : det B > 0}
and consider
exp : M(2 × 2, R) → GL+ (2, R).
The matrix
−1 b
B= ∈ GL+ (2, R), b ∈ R∗ ,
0 −1
has no inverse image.
Proof. If a matrix A ∈ M(n × n, K) has the eigenvector v with eigenvalue λ then

the matrix exp A has the same vector as eigenvector with eigenvalue eλ : The
equation A · v = λ · v and its iterates
Aµ · v = λ µ · v, µ ∈ N,
imply ! !
n n
Aµ λµ
∑ µ! ·v = ∑ ν! · v ∈ Kn .
µ=0 µ=0
Taking the limit on both sides proves the claim.
1. Assume the existence of a matrix A ∈ sl(2, C) with
exp A = B.
The two complex eigenvalues λi , i = 1, 2, of A satisfy
0 = tr A = λ1 + λ2 .
• The case λ1 = λ2 , i.e. 0 = λ1 = λ2 is excluded, because then exp A has the

eigenvalue e0 = 1. But B has the only eigenvalue −1.
• Hence λ1 ̸= λ2 . Then A is diagonalizable: A matrix S ∈ GL(2, C) exists with

λ1 0
S · A · S−1 = .
0 λ2
We obtain
λ
−1 −1 −1 e 1 0
S·B·S = S · (exp A) · S = exp(S · A · S )=
0 eλ2
Hence B is diagonalizable, a contradiction.
2. Assume the existence of a matrix A ∈ M(2 × 2, R) with

exp A = B.
The real matrix A has two complex eigenvalues λi , i = 1, 2, which are conjugate
to each other.
• If both eigenvalues are real, then
λ1 = λ2 =: λ ∈ R
and exp A has an eigenvalue eλ > 0, while B has the single eigenvalue −1, a
contradiction.
• If λ1 is not real, then

λ2 = λ1 ̸= λ1 .
Hence A has two distinct eigenvalues. Therefore A is diagonalizable and
also B is diagonalizable, a contradiction.
⊔
⊓
For later application in Proposition 2.14 we provide the following useful formula:
Proposition 1.29 (Lie product formula). For any two matrices A, B ∈ M(n × n, C)
the exponential satisfies
!ν
A B
exp(A + B) = lim exp · exp .
ν→∞ ν ν
In the proof we will use for a power series f the standard notation
f = O(1/ν 2 )
iff the quotient

f
= ν2 · f
1/ν 2
remains bounded for the limit lim .
ν→∞
Proof. We conside the Taylor series
A A
exp = 1 + + O(1/ν 2 )
ν ν
B B
exp = 1 + + O(1/ν 2 )
ν ν
and
A B A B
exp · exp = 1 + + + O(1/ν 2 ).
ν ν ν ν
For large ν ∈ N we have
! !
A B
exp · exp − 1 < log 2.

ν ν
Therefore the logarithm is well-defined:

! !
A B A B A B
log exp · exp = log 1 + + + O(1/ν ) = + + O(1/ν 2 ).
2
ν ν ν ν ν ν
Hence on one hand,

! !
A B A B 2
(exp ◦ log) exp · exp = exp + + O(1/ν ) .
ν ν ν ν
On the other hand, Proposition 1.25 implies

!
A B A B
(exp ◦ log) exp · exp = exp · exp .
ν ν ν ν
We get !
A B A B 2
exp · exp = exp + + O(1/ν )
ν ν ν ν
and
!ν !!ν
A B A B 2
exp · exp = exp + + O(1/ν ) = exp(A + B + O(1/ν)).
ν ν ν ν
Taking lim and using lim O(1/ν) = 0 and the continuity of the exponential proves
ν→∞ ν→∞
the claim !ν
A B
lim exp · exp = exp(A + B)
ν→∞ ν ν
⊔
⊓
The exponential map of matrices
exp : M(n × n, K) →
− GL(n, K)
is a well-defined map according to Corollary 1.22. But the map is no(!) group
morphism
exp : (M(n × n, K), +) →

− (GL(n, K), ·)
as the counter example from Example 1.1, part i) shows. Instead, the functional
equation of the exponential map depends in a certain way on the commutator of the
matrices in question. The correct statement of the functional equation in the case of
matrices is the special case of a deep theorem from general Lie group theory:
Remark 1.30 (Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula for matrices). There exists a

family of polynomials with values in M(n × n, K)
(Hn (X,Y )n∈N∗ ) with Hn (X,Y ) ∈ Z[X,Y ]
homogeneous with respect to commutators of degree n, and an open

neighbourhood
U ⊂ M(n × n, K),
which together satisfy the following properties:
• The Hausdorff polynomials of low order are
H1 (X,Y ) = X +Y
H2 (X,Y ) = (1/2)[X,Y ]
H3 (X,Y ) = (1/12)[[X,Y ],Y ] − [[X,Y ], X])
H4 (X,Y ) = −(1/24)[Y, [X, [X,Y ]]]
• The Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff series

∞
H(X,Y ) := ∑ Hn (X,Y )
n=1
is absolute and compact convergent in U ×U. It satisfies for all X,Y ∈ U the
functional equation
exp(Hn (X,Y )) = exp X · exp Y
Chapter 2
Fundamentals of Lie algebra theory
In this chapter the base field is either K = R or K = C.
2.1 Definitions and first examples
In general, in the associative algebra M(n × n, K) the product of two matrices is not
commutative:
AB ̸= BA, A, B ∈ M(n × n, K).
The commutator
[A, B] := AB − BA ∈ M(n × n, K)
is a measure for the degree of non-commutativity. The commutator depends K-linearly
on both matrices A and B. In addition, it satisfies the following rules:
1. Permutation of two matrices: [A, B] + [B, A] = 0.
2. Cyclic permutation of three matrices: [A, [B,C]] + [B, [C, A]] + [C, [A, B]] = 0.
These properties make
gl(n, K) := (M(n × n, K), [−, −])
the prototype of a Lie algebra.
Definition 2.1 (Lie algebra).
1. A K-Lie algebra is a K-vector space L together with a K-bilinear map
[−, −] : L × L → L (Lie bracket)
such that
• [x, x] = 0 for all x ∈ L and
39
40 2 Fundamentals of Lie algebra theory
• [x, [y, z]] + [y, [z, x]] + [z, [x, y]] = 0 for all x, y, z ∈ L (Jacobi identity).
2. A morphism of K-Lie algebras is a K-linear map f : L1 → L2 between two K-Lie

algebras satisfying
f ([x1 , x2 ]) = [( f (x1 ), f (x2 ))], x1 , x2 ∈ L1 .
Note that the Lie bracket satisfies
[x, y] + [y, x] = 0 f or all x, y ∈ L.
For the proof one computes [x + y, x + y] ∈ L.
We have just seen that the Lie algebra gl(n, K) derives from the associative al-
gebra M(n × n, K). Actually, any finite dimensional K-Lie algebra derives from a
matrix algebra, see Theorem ??. But the theory becomes more transparent when
considering Lie algebras and their morphisms as abstract mathematical objects.
A Lie algebra is a vector space with the Lie bracket as additional operator. This
additional algebraic structure resembles the multiplication within a group or a ring.
The Lie algebra concept of the commutator is taken from group theory while the
concept of an ideal comes from ring theory.
Definition 2.2 (Basic algebraic concepts). Consider a K-Lie algebra L. One de-
fines:
• A vector subspace M ⊂ L is a subalgebra of L iff
[M, M] ⊂ M,
i.e. iff M is closed with respect to the Lie bracket of L.
• A vector subspace I ⊂ L is an ideal of L iff
[L, I] ⊂ I,
i.e. if I is L-invariant.
• The normalizer of a subalgebra M ⊂ L is the subalgebra
NL (M) := {x ∈ L : [x, M] ⊂ M} ⊂ L,
i.e. the largest subalgebra which includes M as an ideal.

2.1 Definitions and first examples 41
• The center of L is the ideal
Z(L) := {x ∈ L : [x, L] = 0}.
The center collects those elements which commute with all elements from L.
• The centralizer CL (Y ) of a subset Y ⊂ L is the largest subalgebra of L which

commutes with Y
CL (Y ) := {x ∈ L : [x,Y ] = 0}
• The derived algebra or commutator algebra of L is the subalgebra generated by
all commutators
[L, L] := spanK {[x, y] : x, y ∈ L}.
Iff [L, L] = 0 then L is Abelian.
For a morphism
f : L1 → L2
between to K-Lie algebras the kernel ker( f ) ∈ L1 is an ideal. Apparently, for each
Lie algebra L the derived algebra [L, L] ⊂ L is an ideal.
If one compares these basic concepts from Lie algebra theory with concepts from
group theory then subalgebras correspond to subgroups, while ideals correspond to
normal subgroups.
Definition 2.3 (Specific matrix Lie algebras).

1. For a finite dimensional K-vector space V we define the K-Lie algebra
gl(V ) := (End(V ), [−, −])
with
[ f , g] := f ◦ g − g ◦ f .
In particular
gl(n, K) := gl(Kn ).
Subalgebras of the Lie algebra gl(n, K) are named matrix algebras.
2. The subalgebra of gl(n, K) of strictly upper triangular matrices is
n(n, K) := {A = (ai j ) ∈ gl(n, K) : ai j = 0 if i ≥ j}.
Each strictly upper triangular matrix has the form

 
0 ∗
 .. 
 . 
0 0
3. The subalgebra of gl(n, K) of upper triangular matrices
t(n, K) := {A = (ai j ) ∈ gl(n, K) : ai j = 0 if i > j}.
Each upper triangular matrix has the form

 
∗ ∗
 .. 
 . 
0 ∗
4. The subalgebra of gl(n, K) of diagonal matrices
d(n, K) := {A = (ai j ) ∈ gl(n, K) : ai j = 0 if i ̸= j}.
Each diagonal matrix has the form

 
∗ 0
 .. 
 . 
0 ∗
All three vector spaces of matrices are stable with respect to the commutator of
matrices. Therefore they are subalgebras of gl(n, K).
Moreover for n ≥ 2
n(n, K) ⊊ t(n, K) ⊊ gl(n, K)
and
d(n, K) ⊊ t(n, K).
We will see in Chapter 3.1 and Chapter 3.2 that n(n, K) and t(n, K) are the prototype
of the important classes of respectively nilpotent and solvable Lie algebras.
Notation 2.4 (Restricting scalars from C to R). Consider a complex Lie algebra L.
By restricting scalars from C to R the elements of L also form a real Lie algebra
which is denoted LR .
The fundamental tool for studying Lie algebras are their representations. To rep-
resent an abstract Lie algebra L means to define a map from L to a Lie algebra of
matrices. The concept of a representation has also many applications in physics.
Some examples we will see in in later chapters. The scope of the concept of a
representation is not restricted to Lie algebra theory.
Definition 2.5 (Representation of a Lie algebra). Consider a K-Lie algebra L.

2.1 Definitions and first examples 43
1. A representation of L on a finite dimensional K-vector space V is a morphism of

Lie algebras
ρ : L → gl(V ).
In particular,
ρ([x, y]) = [ρ(x), ρ(y)] = ρ(x) ◦ ρ(y) − ρ(y) ◦ ρ(x).
The vector space V is named an L-module with respect to the multiplication
L ×V → V, (x, v) 7→ x.v := ρ(x)(v),
which satisfies
[x, y].v = ρ([x, y])(v) = [ρ(x), ρ(y)](v) = ρ(x)(ρ(y)(v)) − ρ(y)(ρ(x)(v)) =
x.(y.v) − y.(x.v).
The representation ρ is faithful iff ρ is injective, i.e. ρ embeds L into a Lie algebra
of matrices.
2. A linear map
f :V →
−W
between two L-modules is a morphism of L-modules if for all x ∈ L, v ∈ V :
f (x.v) = x. f (v).
3. The adjoint representation of L is the map
ad : L → gl(L), x 7→ ad x,
defined as
ad x : L → L, y 7→ (ad x)(y) := [x, y].
Note. One often speaks about an L-module V without naming explicitly the
representation
ρ : L → gl(V ).
Lemma 2.6 (Adjoint representation of a Lie algebra). The adjoint representation

is a representation, i.e. a morphism of Lie algebras.
Proof. For a Lie algebra L we have to show
ad [x, y] = [ad x, ad y] : L → L.
Consider z ∈ L. On one hand,
ad[x, y](z) = [[x, y], z] = −[[y, z], x] − [[z, x], y] (Jacobi identity)
On the other hand
[ad x, ad y](z) := (ad x ◦ ad y − ad y ◦ ad x)(z) = [x, [y, z]] − [y, [x, z]].
Both results are equal because the Lie bracket is antisymmetric. ⊔

⊓
The adjoint representation maps any abstract Lie algebra to a matrix algebra.
But in general the adjoint representation is not injective. The kernel of the adjoint
representation of a Lie algebra L is the center Z(L). Nevertheless Theorem ?? will
show that any finite dimensional Lie algebra has a faithful representation, hence is
a subalgebra of a Lie algebra of matrices.
The characteristic feature of a Lie algebra L is the Lie bracket. It refines the
underlying vector space of L. In order to investigate the Lie bracket of L one studies
how each given element x ∈ L acts on L as the endomorphism ad x.
This procedure is similar to the study of number fields Q ⊂ K ⊂ C. The multi-
plication on K refines the underlying Q-vector space structure. And one studies the
multiplication by considering the Q-endomorphisms which result from the multipli-
cation by all elements x ∈ K. Norm and trace of these endomorphisms are important
parameters in algebraic number theory.
For all x ∈ L the element ad x is not only an endomorphism of L, but also a deriva-
tion of L: With respect to the Lie bracket it satisfies a rule similar to the Leibniz rule
for the derivation of the product of two functions.
Definition 2.7 (Derivation of a Lie algebra). Let L be a Lie algebra. A derivation
of L is an endomorphism
D:L→L
which satisfies the product rule
D([y, z]) = [D(y), z] + [y, D(z)].
Lemma 2.8 (Adjoint representation and derivation). Consider a Lie algebra L.

For every x ∈ L
ad x : L → L
is a derivation of L.
Proof. Set D := ad x ∈ End(L). The Jacobi identity implies
D([y, z]) := (ad x)([y, z]) = [x, [y, z]] = −[y, [z, x]] − [z, [x, y]] = [y, [x, z]] + [[x, y], z] =
= [y, (ad x)(z)] + [(ad x)(y), z] = [y, D(z)] + [D(y), z].

2.2 Lie algebras of the classical groups 45
Derivations arising from the adjoint representation are named inner derivations,
all other derivations are outer derivations.
Lemma 2.9 (Algebra of derivations). Let L be a Lie algebra. The set of all deriva-
tions of L
Der(L) := {D ∈ End(L) : D derivation}
is a subalgebra Der(L) ⊂ gl(L).
Proof. Apparently Der(L) ⊂ End(V ) is a subspace. In order to show that Der(L) is

even a subalgebra, we have to prove: If D1 , D2 ∈ Der(L) then [D1 , D2 ] ∈ Der(L).
[D1 , D2 ]([x, y]) = (D1 ◦ D2 )([x, y]) − (D2 ◦ D1 )([x, y]) =
= D1 ([D2 (x), y] + [x, D2 (y)]) − D2 ([D1 (x), y] + [x, D1 (y)]) =

= [D1 (D2 (x)), y] + [D2 (x), D1 (y)] + [D1 (x), D2 (y)] + [x, D1 (D2 (y)]
−[D2 (D1 (x)), y] − [D1 (x), D2 (y)] − [D2 (x), D1 (y)] − [x, D2 (D1 (y)] =
= [[D1 , D2 ](x), y] + [x, [D1 , D2 ](y)].
2.2 Lie algebras of the classical groups
An important class of Lie algebras are the Lie algebras attached to the classical
groups. The classical groups are groups of matrices, and the corresponding Lie al-
gebras are the Lie algebras of their infinitesimal generators.
Definition 2.10 (1-parameter group and infinitesimal generator). For a given

matrix X ∈ M(n × n, C) the differentiable group morphism
fX : (R, +) → (GL(n, C), ·), t 7→ exp(t · X),
with derivation
d
exp(t · X) (0) = X
dt
from Proposition 1.20 is named the 1-parameter group of GL(n, C) with infinitesi-
mal generator X.
Definition 2.11 (Matrix group and 1-parameter subgroups).

1. A matrix group G is a closed subgroup
G ⊂ GL(n, C).
2
Here GL(n, C) ⊂ Cn is equipped with the subspace topology of the Euclidean
space.
2. Consider a matrix group G. For a matrix X ∈ M(n × n, C) the group morphism
fX : R → GL(n, C), t 7→ exp(t · X),
is a 1-parameter subgroup of G with infinitesimal generator X iff for all t ∈ R
fX (t) ∈ G.
Remark 2.12 (Matrix group and 1-parameter subgroups).

1. The term closed subgroup of G ⊂ GL(n, C) in Definition 2.11 refers to the topol-
ogy of GL(n, C). A subgroup
G ⊂ GL(n, C)
is closed iff for any sequence (Aν )ν∈N of matrices Aν ∈ H, ν ∈ N, which con-
verges in GL(n, C), i.e. with
A = lim Aν ∈ GL(n, C),

ν→∞
the limit belongs to G, i.e. A ∈ G.
2. In the general context of a Lie group G one defines a Lie subgroup as a subgroup
which is also submanifold of G. One proves that any Lie subgroup of G is closed
and a Lie group itself. Therefore Definition 2.11 requires a matrix group to be a
closed subgroup.
3. The general definition of a 1-parameter subgroup of an arbitrary Lie group G

requires only a continuous group morphism
f : R → G.
But one can show: All continuous 1-parameter subgroups of a Lie group G have
the form
f (t) = exp(t · X)
with an element X ∈ Lie G, the Lie algebra of G, and with respect to the expo-
nential map
exp : Lie G →
− G.
In particular, every continuous 1-parameter subgroup depends on the parameter t
in a differentiable - even analytical - way.
Proposition 2.13 (The classical groups and the Lie algebra of their infinitesimal
generators). Consider a parameter r ∈ N and a number m = m(r) ∈ N. We use the
shorthand
G := GL(m, K)
for the matrix group and
M := gl(m, K)
for the Lie algebra. Then the classical groups and the Lie algebra of their infinitesimal
generators are defined as:
i) Series Ar , r ≥ 1, m := r + 1: The infinitesimal generators of all 1-parameter

subgroups of the special linear group
SL(m, K) := {g ∈ G : det g = 1} ⊂ G
form the subalgebra of traceless matrices
sl(m, K) := {X ∈ M : tr X = 0}.
ii) Series Br , r ≥ 2, m := 2r + 1: The infinitesimal generators of all 1-parameter

subgroups of the special orthogonal group
SO(m, K) := {g ∈ G : g · g⊤ = 1, det g = 1}
form the subalgebra of skew-symmetric matrices
so(m, K) := {X ∈ M : X + X ⊤ = 0}.
iii) Series Cr , r ≥ 3, m = 2r: The infinitesimal generators of all 1-parameter sub-

groups of the symplectic group
Sp(m, K) := {g ∈ G : g⊤ · σ · g = σ }
with
0 1 0 −1

σ :=
−1 0
, σ −1 =
1 0 = −σ , 1 ∈ GL(r, K) unit matrix,
form the subalgebra of symplectic matrices
sp(m, K) := {X ∈ M : X ⊤ · σ + σ · X = 0}.
iv) Series Dr , r ≥ 4, m = 2r: The infinitesimal generators of all 1-parameter sub-

groups of the special orthogonal group
SO(m, K) := {g ∈ G : g · g⊤ = 1, det g = 1}
form the subalgebra of skew-symmetric matrices

so(m, K) := {X ∈ M : X + X ⊤ = 0}.
v) Special unitary group: The infinitesimal generators of all 1-parameter subgroups

of the special unitary group
SU(m) := {g ∈ GL(m, C) : g · g∗ = 1, det g = 1}, g∗ := g⊤ Hermitian con jugate,
span the real Lie algebra of traceless skew-Hermitian matrices
su(m) := {X ∈ gl(m, C) : X + X ∗ = 0,tr X = 0}.
Note that any g ∈ Sp(m, K) has det g = 1, see [43].
Proof. We show for all cases that any infinitesimal generator of a 1-parameter
subgroup of the matrix group belongs to the Lie algebra in question. Vice versa,
Theorem 1.21 implies that any element of the Lie algebra is an infinitesimal
generator of a 1-parameter subgroup of the matrix group.
d
i) Taking the derivative on both sides of the equation
dt
1 = det(exp(t · X)) = exp(tr (t · X))
gives
0 = (tr X) · exp(tr (t · X)).
Hence for t = 0:
0 = tr X.
In the opposite direction: If tr X = 0 then
det etX = etr (tX) = et·(tr X) = e0 = 1.
Moreover
tr
sl(m, K) = ker [gl(m, K) −
→ K]
is the kernel of the trace morphism with K considered as an Abelian Lie algebra.
Hence
sl(m, K) ⊂ gl(m, K)
is even an ideal and a posteriori a subalgebra.
ii) and iv) Taking the derivative of
1 = exp(t · X) · exp(t · X)⊤ = exp(t · X) · exp(t · X ⊤ )

and using the product rule gives
0 = X · exp(t · X) · exp(t · X ⊤ ) + exp(t · X) · X ⊤ · exp(t · X ⊤ ).

Hence for t = 0:
X + X ⊤ = 0.
In the opposite direction:
X + X⊤ = 0
implies
exp(tX) · exp(tX ⊤ ) = exp(t(X + X ⊤ )) = e0 = 1
and tr X = 0 implies
det(exp(tX)) = etr X = 1.
Moreover for X,Y ∈ so(m, K)
[X,Y ] + [X,Y ]⊤ = XY −Y X + (XY −Y X)⊤ = XY −Y X +Y ⊤ X ⊤ − X ⊤Y ⊤ =
X(Y +Y ⊤ ) + (Y ⊤ +Y )X ⊤ = 0
using X = −X ⊤ . Hence so(m, K) is closed with respect to taking the commutator.
iii) Taking the derivative of
σ = exp(t · X)⊤ · σ · exp(t · X) = exp(t · X ⊤ ) · σ · exp(t · X)
gives
0 = X ⊤ · exp(t · X ⊤ ) · σ · exp(t · X) + exp(t · X ⊤ ) · σ · X · exp(t · X).
Hence for t = 0:
0 = X ⊤ · σ + σ · X.
0 = X ⊤ + σ · X · σ −1
implies
(exp(tX))⊤ · σ · exp(tX) · σ −1 = 1.
And for X,Y ∈ sp(2n, K)
[X,Y ]⊤ · σ + σ · [X,Y ] = (Y ⊤ X ⊤ − X ⊤Y ⊤ ) · σ + σ · (XY −Y X) = 0
after inserting
X ⊤ · σ ·Y − X ⊤ · σ ·Y
and
Y ⊤ · σ · X −Y ⊤ · σ · X
and using
X ⊤ · σ = −σ · X.
v) Taking the derivative of
1 = exp(t · X) · exp(t · X)∗

and using the product rule gives
0 = X · exp(t · X) · exp(t · X ∗ ) + exp(t · X) · X ∗ · exp(t · X ∗ ).
Hence for t = 0
X + X ∗ = 0.
Moreover det(exp(tX)) = 1 for all t ∈ K implies
tr X = 0.

X + X∗ = 0
implies
[X, X ∗ ] = −[X, X] = 0
and
exp(tX) · (exp(tX))∗ = exp(tX) · exp(tX ∗ ) = exp(t(X + X ∗ )) = 1.
And
tr X = 0
implies
det(exp(tX)) = etr X = 1.
One checks that su(m) is a real Lie algebra, i.e. a Lie algebra over the base field R.
But note that su(m) is not a complex Lie algebra:

ia b
X ∈ su(2) ⇐⇒ X = , a ∈ R, b ∈ C.
−b −ia
If X ∈ su(2) and X ̸= 0 then iX ∈

/ su(2). ⊔
⊓
The reason for introducing the series in Proposition 2.13 and for the distinction
between the two series Br and Dr will become clear later in Chapter 7. The lower
bound for the parameter r ∈ N has been choosen to avoid duplicates or direct sum
decompositions. Otherwise we would have for the base field K = C and the corre-
sponding Lie algebras:
A1 = B1 = C1 , C2 = A1 ⊕ A1 , D3 = A3 .
• Elements of the complex matrix groups of the series Br , Dr preserve the K-bilinear
form on Km
m
(z, w) = ∑ z j · w j.
j=1
• Elements of the complex matrix groups of the series Cr preserve the K-bilinear
form on Km
r
(x, y) = ∑ xi · yr+i − xr+i · yi .
i=1
• Elements of the special unitary group SU(m) preserve the sesquilinear (Hermi-
tian) form on Cm
m
(z, w) = ∑ z j · w j.
j=1
The bilinear form (z, w) is C-linear with respect to the first component and C-
antilinear with respect to the second component.
Over the complex numbers quadratic forms always transform to these normal
forms by a change of basis. Therefore one can restrict the investigation to the normal
forms. The situation changes over the real numbers. Here one has to discriminate
between different normal forms, depending on the signature of the quadratic form
in question.
The examples from Proposition 2.13 illustrate the general fact that the infinites-
imal generators of all 1-parameter subgroups of a matrix group form a real Lie
algebra.
Proposition 2.14 (Infinitesimal generators of a matrix group). For a matrix
group
G ⊂ GL(n, C)
the set of infinitesimal generators of all 1-parameter subgroups of G
L := {X ∈ M(n × n, C) : fX (t) ∈ G for all t ∈ R}
defined by the function fX from Definition 2.11, is a real subalgebra of gl(n, C)R ,
using the Notation 2.4.
Proof. i) Scalar multiplication: If X ∈ L and s ∈ R then for all t ∈ R also
exp(t · (sX)) = exp((t · s)X) ∈ G.
ii) Additivity: If X, Y ∈ L then Proposition 1.29 implies

!ν
tX tY
exp(t(X +Y )) = lim exp · exp .
ν→∞ ν ν
The closedness of G ⊂ GL(n, C) implies
exp(t(X +Y )) ∈ G.
iii) Lie bracket: First, for all X ∈ L and all A ∈ G also the conjugate
AXA−1 ∈ L :
Theorem 1.21 implies for all t ∈ R
exp(t(AXA−1 )) = exp(A(tX)A−1 ) = A · exp(tX) · A−1 ∈ G.
Secondly, consider for arbitrary fixed X, Y ∈ L the differentiable map
f :R→
− GL(n, C), f (t) := exp(tX) ·Y · exp(−tX).
Due to the first step

f (t) ∈ L for all t ∈ R.
The chain rule and the product rule from Proposition 1.7 imply:
d d
f (t) = (exp(tX) ·Y · exp(−tX)) = X · exp(tX) ·Y · exp(−tX) − exp(tX) ·Y · X
dt dt
Hence
df
(0) = XY −Y X = [X,Y ].
dt
On the other hand
df f (t) − f (0) exp(tX) ·Y · exp(−tX) −Y
(0) = lim = lim
dt t→0 t t→0 t
Because each fraction belongs to L, also in the limit
df
(0) = [X,Y ] ∈ L.
dt
⊔
⊓
Definition 2.15 (Real form of a complex Lie algebra, complexification of a real

Lie algebra).
1. Consider a real Lie algebra M. The complexification of M is the complex Lie
algebra
M ⊗R C
with Lie bracket
[m1 ⊗ z1 , m2 ⊗ z2 ] := [m1 , m2 ] ⊗ (z1 · z2 ), m1 , m2 ∈ M, z1 , z2 ∈ C,
2. A real form of the complex Lie algebra L is a real subalgebra M ⊂ LR such that
the complex linear map
M ⊗R C → L, m ⊗ 1 7→ m, m ⊗ i 7→ i · m,
is an isomorphism of complex Lie algebras.

Remark 2.16 (Real forms are not necessarily unique).

1. The complex Lie algebra sl(2, C) has the non-isomorphic real forms su(2) and
sl(2, R). The proof goes along the following steps:
i) Real forms: Apparently, sl(2, R) is a real form of sl(2, C). The C-linear map
su(2) ⊗ R C →
− sl(2, C), X ⊗ 1 7→ X, X ⊗ i 7→ iX,
has the inverse C-linear map
sl(2, C) →
− su(2) ⊗ R C, Z = X + iY 7→ (−iX) ⊗ i + iY ⊗ 1
with
Z + Z∗ Z − Z∗
X := , Y := .
2 2i
ii) 2-dimensional subalgebra of sl(2, R): The real Lie algebra sl(2, R) contains
the 2-dimensional subalgebra

1 0 01
spanR < , >.
0 −1 00
iii) No 2-dimensional subalgebra of su(2): Introducing the trace zero Hermitian

Pauli matrices

01 0 −i 1 0
σ1 := , σ2 := , σ3 :=
10 i 0 0 −1
we obtain the basis (i · σ j ) j=1,2,3 of the real Lie algebra su(2) of skew-Hermitian
trace zero matrices. The Pauli matrices have the non-zero commutator
[σ1 , σ2 ] = 2i · σ3 ,
and all further non-zero commutators result from cyclic permutation.
We denote the infinitesimal generators of the standard 1-parameter groups of

rotations around the coordinate axes of R3 by
     
00 0 0 01 0 10
X := 0 0 −1 , Y :=  0 0 0 , Z := −1 0 0 ∈ so(3, R).
01 0 −1 0 0 0 00
Then one has an isomorphism of real Lie algebras

≃
f : su(2) −
→ so(3, R)
defined by
f (i · σ3 ) := 2Z, f (i · σ2 ) := 2Y, f (i · σ1 ) := 2X.
The Lie algebra so(3, R) is isomorphic to the Lie algebra vector product
Vect := (R3 , ×).
But for any two linear independent vectors x1 , x2 ∈ Vect the product x1 × x2 is
orthogonal to the plane generated by x1 and x2 . Hence
Vect ≃ so(3, R) ≃ su(2)
does not contain a 2-dimensional subalgebra.
2. The real Lie algebra su(2) is the Lie algebra of the compact matrix group SU(2).
The real form sl(2, R) is the Lie algebra of the matrix group SL(2, R) which is
not compact.
2.3 Topology of the classical groups
The present sections illustrates some topological properties ofclassical matrix groups.
The investigation of matrix groups often reduces to the study of simply connected
matrix groups. And the latter can be studied by their Lie algebras. The following
proofs are special cases from general Lie group theory.
Proposition 2.17 (Topology of SO(3, R), SU(2), SL(2, C)).

1. The matrix group SO(3, R) is connected, the matrix group O(3, R) has two con-
nected components.
2. The matrix group SU(2) - as a differentiable manifold - is diffeomorphic to

the 3-sphere:
SU(2) ≃ S3 := {x ∈ R4 : ∥x∥ = 1}.
In particular, SU(2) is simply connected.
3. The matrix group SL(2, C) - as a differentiable manifold - is diffeomorphic to the

product
(C2 \ {0}) × C,
and the latter is homeomorphic to
S 3 × R3 .
In particular, SL(2, C) is simply connected.

2.3 Topology of the classical groups 55
Proof. 1. We show that the matrix group SO(3, R) is path-connected: For a given
rotation matrix A we choose an orthonormal basis of R3 with the rotation axis as
third basis element. Then we may assume
 
cos δ sin δ 0
A =  −sin δ cos δ 0  ∈ SO(3, R), δ ∈ [0, 2π[.
0 0 1
The path
 
cos (t · δ ) sin (t · δ ) 0
γ : [0, 1] → SO(3, R),t 7→  −sin (t · δ ) cos (t · δ ) 0  ∈ SO(3, R)
0 0 1
is a continuous map and connects γ(0) = 1 with γ(1) = A in SO(3, R).
Each matrix A ∈ O(3, R) has

det A = ±1.
Hence O(3, R) has two connected components: SO(3, R), the connected compo-
nent of the identity, and the residue class
 
10 0
SO(3, R) · 0 1 0  .
0 0 −1
As a consequence, both Lie groups SO(3, R) and O(3, R) have the same Lie al-
gebra
so(3, R) = o(3, R).
2. Consider a matrix
a z
A= ∈ SU(2).
cw
Then
−1 w −z ∗ a z
A = and A = .
−c a c w
Hence
SU := {A ∈ GL(2, C) : A · A∗ = 1, det A = 1} =

w z 2 2
: z, w ∈ C, |z| + |w| = 1 ≃
−z w
≃ S 3 ⊂ C 2 ≃ R4
is homeomorphic to the 3-dimensional unit sphere. The unit sphere S3 is com-
pact, connected and simply connected. Simply connected means the vanishing of
the fundamental group
π1 (S3 , ∗) = 0
or equivalently: Any closed path in S3 is contractible in S3 to one point. Intu-

itively, simple connectedness means that S3 has no “holes”.
The result π1 (S3 , ∗) = 0 is a particular case of the theorem by Seifert and van
Kampen, see [48, Kap. 5.3]: One decomposes S3 as the union of its northern and
southern hemispheres, which are homeomorphic to the 2-dimensional ball B2
and intersect each other in a space homeomorphic to S2 . The Seifert-van Kam-
pen theorem, see [23, Theor. 1.20], represents π1 (S3 , ∗) as the quotient of a free
product:
π1 (S3 , ∗) = π1 (B2 , ∗) ·π1 (S2 ,∗) π1 (B2 , ∗) = 0
3. Set B := C2 \ {0}. On one hand, projecting a matrix onto its last column defines
the differentiable map

a z z
p : SL(2, C) → B, A = 7→ .
cw w
On the other hand, one considers the open covering U = (U1 ,U2 ) of the base B
with
U1 := {(z, w) ∈ B : z ̸= 0}, U2 := {(z, w) ∈ B : w ̸= 0}
One obtains a well-defined map
f : SL(2, C) → B × C
(
(p(A), (a − w · r−2 ) · z−1 ) if p(A) ∈ U1

a z
A= 7→
cw (p(A), (c + z · r−2 ) · w−1 ) if p(A) ∈ U2
with
r2 := |z|2 + |w|2 .
Note: If p(A) ∈ U1 ∩U2 then
(a − w · r−2 ) · z−1 = (c + z · r−2 ) · w−1 .
The map f is a differentiable isomorphism satisfying pr1 ◦ f = p. We have the

diffeomorphisms
B = C2 \ {0} ≃ S3 × ]0, ∞[≃ S3 × R.
Because S3 is simply connected according to part 1), also B and eventually
SL(2, C) ≃ B × C
are simply connected. ⊔

⊓
Several relations exists between the classical groups. These relations can be made
explicit by differentiable group morphisms. Hence it is advantegeous not to study
each group in isolation. Instead, one should focus on the relations between different
classical groups and study those properties, which the groups have in common. We
give two examples in low dimension.
Recall Remark 2.16 which started from the two different real Lie algebras
sl(2, R) ̸= su(2).
Nevertheless, both have the same complexification
sl(2, R) ⊗ R C ≃ sl(2, C) ≃ su(2) ⊗ R C.
We now show the identity of the two real Lie algebras
su(2) ≃ so(3, R).
The corresponding matrix groups
SU(2) and SO(3, R)
are not equal. But Example 2.18 constructs a 2-fold covering projection
Φ : SU(2) →
− SO(3, R).
Due to Proposition 2.17 the group SU(2) is simply connected. The existence of
the 2-fold covering projection Φ implies that SO(3, R) is not simply connected. In
order to obtain the morphism Φ we have to find out first: How does a complex
matrix U ∈ SU(2) act on the 3-dimensional real space R3 ?
Example 2.18 (SU(2) as two-fold covering of SO(3, R)).

1. Vector space of Hermitian matrices: Consider the real vector space of complex
selfadjoint two-by-two matrices with trace zero
Herm0 (2) := {X ∈ M(2 × 2, C) : X = X ∗ , tr X = 0}.
The family of Pauli matrices (σ j ) j=1,2,3 , see Remark 2.16, is a basis of Herm0 (2).
We define the map
3
3 x3 x1 − i · x2
α : R → Herm0 (2), x = (x1 , x2 , x3 ) 7→ X := ∑ xj ·σj = .
j=1
x1 + i · x2 −x3
On R3 we consider the Euclidean quadratic form

3
qE : R3 → R, x = (x1 , x2 , x3 ) 7→ ∑ x2j .
j=1
Correspondingly, on the real vector space Herm0 (2) we consider the quadratic
form
qH : Herm0 (2) → R, X 7→ −det X,

i.e.
a b
qH (X) = a2 + |b |2 f or X = , a ∈ R, b ∈ C.
b −a
Then the map
∼
α : (R3 , qE ) −
→ H := (Herm0 (2), qH )
is an isometric isomorphism of Euclidean spaces , i.e. α is an isomorphism of
real vector spaces with
qH (α(x)) = qE (x), x ∈ R3 .
By means of the isometric isomorphism α we identify O(3, R), the group of

isometries of (R3 , qE ), with the group of isometries of H
O(H) := {g ∈ GL(Herm0 (2)) : qH (g(X)) = qH (X) f or all X ∈ Herm0 (2)}.
Moreover, we identify the subgroup SO(3, R) ⊂ O(3, R) with the subgroup
SO(H) := {g ∈ O(H) : det g = 1} ⊂ O(H),
the connected component of the neutral element e ∈ O(H).
2. Definition of Φ: We define the group morphism
Φ : SU(2) → SO(H), B 7→ ΦB ,
by setting
ΦB : Herm0 (2) → Herm0 (2), X 7→ B · X · B−1 .
Note B · X · B−1 ∈ Herm0 (2), because B−1 = B∗ and X ∗ = X imply
(B · X · B−1 )∗ = (B · X · B∗ )∗ = B · X · B∗ = B · X · B−1 .
We have ΦB ∈ O(H) because
−det(B · X · B−1 ) = −det X.
Because
SO(H) ≃ SO(3, R)
is connected due to Proposition 2.17, we even have
ΦB ∈ SO(H).
3. Tangent map of Φ: We use from the theory of Lie groups without proof:
• The underlying vector space of the Lie algebra of a matrix group G is the
tangent space Lie G = Te G at the neutral element e ∈ G.
• For each differentiable homomorphism of matrix groups
Ψ : G1 → G2
the induced tangent map at the neutral element e ∈ G1 is a morphism
ψ := Lie Ψ := TeΨ : Lie G1 → Lie G2
of Lie algebras.
It is common, to interpret the tangent map of the differentiable map Φ at e ∈ G1
as the linearization of Ψ at e.
We now determine the linearization of
Φ : SU(2) → SO(H), B 7→ ΦB ,
as a Lie algebra morphism
φ : su(2) →
− so(H), A 7→ φA .
Here so(H) ⊂ gl(Herm0 (2)) is the subalgebra of the infinitesimal generators of

all 1-parameter subgroups of SO(H).
We compute for
B = exp A with A ∈ su(2), X ∈ Herm0 (2) :
ΦB (X) = Φexp A (X) = exp(A) · X · exp(−A) =

= (1 + A + O(A2 )) · X · (1 − A + O(A2 )) =
= X + A · X − X · A + O(A2 ) = X + [A, X] + O(A2 ).
As linearisation with respect to A ∈ su(2) we obtain
ϕA : H →
− H, X 7→ ϕA (X) = [A, X].
Similarly to Lemma 2.6 one verifies that ϕ is indeed a morphism of Lie

algebras.
To determine the value of

ϕ : su(2) →
− so(H)
on the basis elements (i · σ j ) j=1,2,3 of su(2) we compute:
ϕiσ1 : H → H
ϕiσ1 (σ1 ) = 0, ϕiσ1 (σ2 ) = i · [σ1 , σ2 ] = −2 · σ3

ϕiσ1 (σ3 ) = i · [σ1 , σ3 ] = −i · [σ3 , σ1 ] = 2 · σ2

With respect to the basis (σ j ) j=1,2,3 of H we obtain
 
0 0 0
ϕiσ1 = 2 ·  0 0 1  ∈ so(H).
0 −1 0
A similar evaluation of φ on the other two basis elements i · σ2 and i · σ3 gives

   
0 0 −1 0 10
ϕiσ2 = 2 ·  0 0 0  , ϕiσ3 = 2 ·  −1 0 0  ∈ so(H).
10 0 0 00
Hence the family (ϕi·σ j ) j=1,2,3 is linearly independent in so(H). As a

consequence,
∼
ϕ : su(2) −→ so(H)
is an isomorphism of Lie algebras.
4. Surjectivity of Φ: The morphism
Φ : SU(2) → SO(3, R)
is a local isomorphism at 1 ∈ SU(2) because its tangent map is bijective due to

part iii). In particular, Φ is an open map. The image
Φ(SU(2)) ⊂ SO(3, R)
is compact because SU(2) is compact due to Proposition 2.17.

As a consequence, the open and closed subset Φ(SU(2)) ⊂ SO(3, R) equals the
connected set SO(3, R), i.e. the map Φ is surjective.
5. Discrete kernel: We are left with calculating the kernel of Φ. We claim:
ker Φ = {±1} ⊂ SU(2).
For the proof consider an arbitrary but fixed matrix

z w
B= ∈ SU(2)
−w z
with B · X · B−1 = X for all X ∈ Herm0 (2). Then

z −w
B−1 = B∗ = .
w z
Choosing for X successively the basis elements σ1 , σ2 ∈ Herm0 (2) we obtain

B · σ1 · B−1 = σ1 and B · σ2 · B−1 = σ2 .
Comparing on both sides the components and using the determinant condition
1 = det B = |z|2 + |w|2
gives
1 = |z|2 − |w|2 , w = 0, and z2 = 1.
Hence z = ±1. As a consequence
B = ±1.
vi) Universal covering space: We use from Lie group theory without proof that
a surjective morphism between Lie groups with discrete kernel is a covering
projection. The group SU(2) is simply connected according to Proposition 2.17.
Hence the map
Φ : SU(2) → SO(3, R)
is the univeral covering projection of SO(3, R), and SU(2) is a double cover
of SO(3, R).
6. Fundamental group of SO(3, R): As a consequence of part vi) we have
π1 (SO(3, R), ∗) = Z2 .
Nearly the same method as in Example 2.18 allows to compute the universal cov-
ering space of the connected component of the neutral element of the Lorentz group.
More specific, the covering projection Φ of SO(3, R) from Example 2.18 extends to
a covering projection Ψ of the orthochronous Lorentz group, see Proposition 2.20:
Definition 2.19 (Minkowski space and Lorentz group).

Fig. 2.1 World model of Minkowski space
Figure 2.1 shows Minkowski space with the embedded light cone. Points of
Minkowski space are named events. Referring to the event e at the origin, the closure
of the interior of the light cone, the set with qM (x) ≤ 0, splits into the disjoint union
of e, the future and the past cone of e. This splitting refers to the causal structure
of the world: Events from the past may have influenced e, while e may influence
events in its future. All other events, qM (x) > 0, have no causal relation to e. They
are the presence of the event e.
1. Minkowski space is the pair

M := (R4 , qM )
with the quadratic form of signature (3,1)
qM : R4 → R, qM (x) := −x0 2 + x1 2 + x2 2 + x3 2 , x = (x0 , ..., x3 )⊤ .
Here x0 denotes the time coordinate while x j , j = 1, 2, 3, are the space coordi-
nates. Using these conventions Euclidean space embeds into Minkowski space in
a natural way.
2. Lorentz group: The Lorentz group is the matrix group of isometries of the
Minkowski space
O(3, 1) := { f ∈ GL(4, R) : qM ( f (x)) = qM (x) f or all x ∈ R4 }.

3. Proper orthochronous Lorentz group: If

 
−1 000
0 1 0 0
η := 
0

0 1 0
0 001
then
B ∈ O(3, 1) ⇐⇒ η = B⊤ · η · B.
Hence for B ∈ O(3, 1):
−1 = det η = det(B⊤ · η · B) = det B⊤ · det η · det B = −(det B)2
which implies
det B = ±1.
For B = (b jk )0≤ j,k≤3 ∈ O(3, 1) the time like vector
e0 := (1, 0, 0, 0)⊤
satisfies
−1 = qM (e0 ) = qM (B · e0 ) = −b200 + b210 + b220 + b230 .
Hence
b200 = 1 + b210 + b220 + b230 ≥ 1.
The subgroup
↑
L+ := {B = (b jk )0≤ j,k≤3 ∈ O(3, 1) : det B = 1, b00 ≥ 1}
↑
is named the proper orthochronous Lorentz group. It is connected because L+ is
closed and also open:
↑
L+ = {B = (b jk )0≤ j,k≤3 ∈ O(3, 1) : det B > 0 and b00 > 0}.
Hence the subgroup

↑
L+ ⊂ O(3, 1)
is the connected component of 1 ∈ O(3, 1): The elements from L+

↑
keep the ori-
entation of vectors and the sign of their time component.
↑
4. Connected components of the Lorentz group: Besides L+ ⊂ O(3, 1) the other
three connected components of O(3, 1) are the neben-classes
↑
L− := {B = (b jk )0≤ j,k≤3 ∈ O(3, 1) : det B = −1, b00 ≥ 1}
↓
L+ := {B = (b jk )0≤ j,k≤3 ∈ O(3, 1) : det B = 1, b00 ≤ −1}
↓
L− := {B = (b jk )0≤ j,k≤3 ∈ O(3, 1) : det B = −1, b00 ≤ −1}
Proposition 2.20 (Universal covering projection of the Lorentz group). The

proper orthochronous Lorentz group has the universal covering projection
↑
Ψ : SL(2, C) → L+
with a group homomorphism Ψ of real matrix groups, which is a two-fold covering

projection. The following diagram commutes
SO(3, R)
Φ
SU(2)
Ψ
SL(2, C) O(3, 1)
with the canonical inclusions in the vertical direction.
Proof. See also [47, Anhang L.8].
1. Minkowski space as a vector space of matrices: Let
H := (Herm(2), qH )
denote the real vector space of Hermitian matrices
Herm(2) := {X ∈ M(2 × 2, C) : X = X ∗ }
equipped with the real quadratic form
qH : Herm(2) → R, X 7→ −det X,
i.e.
qH (X) = −(a · d) + |b|2
for
ab
X= , a, d ∈ R, b ∈ C.
bd
Set σ0 := 1 ∈ Herm(2). Then the family (σ j ) j=0,...,3 is a basis of the vector
space Herm(2). The map
3
x0 + x3 x1 − i · x2
β : M → H, x = (x0 , ..., x3 ) 7→ X := ∑ xj ·σj =
j=0
x1 + i · x2 x0 − x3
is an isometric isomorphism, i.e. an isomorphism of vector spaces satisfying
qH (β (x)) = qM (x), x ∈ R4 .
The isometry property is due to
qH (β (x)) = −det β (x) = −x02 + x12 + x22 + x32 = qM (x).
By means of the isometric isomorphism β we identify the group of isometries

of H
O(H) := {g ∈ GL(Herm(2)) : qH (g(X)) = qH (X) f or all X ∈ Herm(2)}
with O(3, 1) and denote by

↑
L+ (H) ⊂ O(H)
the connected component of the neutral element idH ∈ O(H).
2. Definition of Ψ : The map
Ψ : SL(2, C) → O(H), B 7→ ΨB ,
with
ΨB : H → H, X 7→ B · X · B∗ ,
is a well-defined morphism of real matrix groups. We have
↑
Ψ (SL(2C)) ⊂ L+ (H)
because SL(2, C) is connected due to Proposition 2.17.
3. Tangent map of Ψ : The family (A j ) j=1,...,6 with

(
σj if j = 1, 2, 3
A j :=
i · σ j−3 if j = 4, 5, 6
is a basis of the real vector space sl(2, C)R . Note that
su(2) = spanR < i · σ j : j = 1, 2, 3 >
is a real subalgebra of sl(2, C)R , but
spanR < σ j : j = 1, 2, 3 >
is not a subalgebra of sl(2, C)R . Denote by
o(H) = so(H) ⊂ gl(Herm(2))

the subalgebra of infinitesimal generators of all 1-parameter subgroups of O(H).

And let
ψ := Lie Ψ : sl(2, C)R → o(H), A 7→ ψA ,
be the tangent map of Ψ at 1 ∈ SL(2, C). It is a morphism of real Lie algebras:
ψA (X) = A · X + X · A∗ , A ∈ sl(2, C)R , X ∈ Herm(2).
One checks that indeed

ψ[A1 , A2 ] = [ψA1 , ψA2 ]
by using the commutator relation of the Pauli matrices and the Hermitian prop-
erties
σ ∗j = −σ j , (i · σ j )∗ = i · σ j for j = 1, 2, 3.
Explicit computation of the matrices representing
ψA j , j = 1, ..., 6,
shows: The family (ψA j ) j=1,...,6 is linearly independent in the vector space End(Herm(2)).
4. Surjectivity of Ψ : The map

↑
Ψ : SL(2, C) →
− L+ (H)
is open because its tangent map 1 ∈ SL(2, C) is a local isomorphism. The image
↑
Ψ (SL(2, C)) ⊂ L+ (H)
is also closed because

↑
[
L+ (H) = g ·Ψ (SL(2, C))
↑
g∈L+ (H)
represents the complement

↑
L+ (H) \Ψ (SL(2, C))
as a union of open subsets. Hence

↑
Ψ : SL(2, C) → L+ (H)
is surjective.
5. Discrete kernel: The kernel is
ker Ψ = {±1} ⊂ SL(2, C) :

For the proof one checks the condition
ΨB (X) = X
for all B ⊂ SL(2, C) and the matrices X ∈ Herm(2) from the basis (σ j ) j=0,...,3
of Herm(2).
6. Fundamental group: As a consequence of the previous parts

↑
Ψ : SL(2, C) → L+ (H)
is the universal covering projection of the proper orthochronous Lorentz group. It

is a two-fold covering projection. Because SL(2, C) is simply connected accord-
ing to Proposition 2.17, the orthochronous Lorentz group has the fundamental
group
↑
π1 (L+ , ∗) = Z2 .
⊔
⊓
For general dimensions we have the following topological results, e.g. see [25, Chap. 10, §2]
and [27, Chap. 17]:
Remark 2.21 (More topological results about the classical groups).

1. General linear group, m ≥ 1:
The group GL(m, C) is connected.
The real group GL(m, R) has two connected components. The component of the
identity is not simply connected for m ≥ 2.
2. Series Ar , r ≥ 1, m = r + 1:
For K ∈ {R, C} the group SL(m, K) is connected. The groups SL(m, C) are sim-
ply connected. One has
(
Z m=2
π1 (SL(m, R), ∗) =
Z/2 m ≥ 3
3. Series Br , r ≥ 2, m = 2r, and series Dr , r ≥ 4, m = 2r + 1:

For K ∈ {R, C} the group SO(m, K) is connected. The groups SO(m, R) are com-
pact. One has (
Z m=2
π1 (SO(m, R), ∗) =
Z/2 m ≥ 3
For m ≥ 3 the universal covering of SO(m, R) is Spin(m, R). One has
Spin(3, R) = SU(2),
cf. Example 2.18. Moreover
Spin(4, R) = SU(2) × SU(2).
4. Series Cr : r ≥ 3, m = 2r: For K ∈ {R, C} the symplectic groups Sp(m, K) are

connected. The groups Sp(m, C)) are simply connected, the real symplectic
groups satisfy
π1 (Sp(m, R), ∗) = Z.
5. Special unitary group, m ≥ 1:

The group SU(m) is compact, connected and simply connected.
No complex group from this list is compact, because any complex, connected
and compact Lie group is Abelian, see [27, Prop. 15.3.7].
Proposition 2.22 (Compact real form). Each complex Lie algebra from Proposition 2.13
has a compact real form, i.e. the real form can be choosen as the Lie algebra of a
compact matrix group:
1. General linear group, m ≥ 1: The real Lie algebra
u(m) = {X ∈ gl(m, C); X + X ∗ = 0}
is a compact real form of gl(m, C). It is the Lie algebra of infinitesimal genera-
tors of the unitary group U(m) which is a compact matrix group.
2. Series Ar , m = r + 1: The real Lie algebra su(m) is a compact real form

of sl(m, C). It is the Lie algebra of infinitesimal generators of the compact matrix
group SU(m).
3. Series Br , m = 2r: The real Lie algebra so(m, R) is a compact real form
of so(m, C). It is the Lie algebra of infinitesimal generators of the compact real
matrix group SO(m, R).
4. Series Cr , m = 2r: The real Lie algebra
sp(m) = {X ∈ gl(m, R) : g⊤ σ − σ · g∗ = 0}
is a compact real form of sp(m, C). It is the Lie algebra of infinitesimal genera-
tors of the compact symplectic group
Sp(m) := U(m) ∩ Sp(m, C).

Here U(m) denotes the unitary group
U(m) := {g ∈ GL(m, C) : g · g∗ = 1}.
5. Series Dr , m = 2r + 1: The real Lie algebra so(m, R) is a compact real form

of so(m, C). It is the Lie algebra of infinitesimal generators of the compact real
matrix group SO(m, R).
Proof. All groups

SU(m), Sp(m), SO(m, R)
are closed subgroups of a suitable unitary group U(n). Hence it suffices to prove
the compactness of U(n): A matrix A ∈ U(n) preserves the Euclidean metric of Cn ,
hence ∥U∥sup ≤ ∥U∥ = 1. ⊔ ⊓
Remark 2.23 (Exponential map of classical matrix groups). On one hand, in general
the exponential map
exp : Lie G → G
is not surjective for a connected classical matrix group G: According to Example 1.28
the matrix
−1 b
B= ∈ SL(2, R), b ∈ R∗ ,
0 −1
has not the form B = exp A with a matrix A ∈ sl(2, R).
On the other hand, the exponential map
exp : Lie G → G
is surjective for a connected matrix group G if Lie G is the compact form of a

complex Lie algebra, see [25, Chap. II, Prop. 6.10].
Chapter 3
Nilpotent Lie algebras and solvable Lie algebras
If not stated otherwise, all Lie algebras and vector spaces in this chapter will be
assumed finite dimensional over the base field K = C or K = R.
3.1 Engel’s theorem for nilpotent Lie algebras
Recall Definition 1.10: An endomorphism f ∈ End(V ) with V a vector space is

nilpotent iff an index n ∈ N exists with f n = 0.
Definition 3.1 (Ad-nilpotency). Consider a Lie algebra L. An element x ∈ L is ad-

nilpotent iff the induced endomorphism of L
ad x : L → L, y 7→ [x, y],
is nilpotent.
Nilpotency and ad-nilpotency refer to two different structures: Nilpotency iter-

ates the associative product, while ad-nilpotency iterates the Lie product. If the Lie
algebra results from a matrix algebra both concepts are related: A Lie algebra of
nilpotent endomorphisms of a vector space acts “nilpotent” on itself by the adjoint
representation.
Lemma 3.2 (Nilpotency implies ad-nilpotency). Consider a vector space V , a Lie

algebra L ⊂ gl(V ) and an element x ∈ L. If the endomorphism x ∈ gl(V ), i.e. the
map
x :V →V
is nilpotent, then also the induced endomorphism ad x ∈ gl(End L), i.e. the map
71
72 3 Nilpotent Lie algebras and solvable Lie algebras
ad x : L → L
is nilpotent.
The content of Lemma 3.2 can be parafrased as: Nilpotency implies ad-nilpotency.
Proof. The endomorphism x ∈ End(V ) acts on End(V ) by left composition and
right composition
l : End(V ) → End(V ), y 7→ x ◦ y,
r : End(V ) → End(V ), y 7→ y ◦ x.
Then
ad x = l − r
because for all y ∈ End(V )
(ad x)(y) = [x, y] = (l − r)(y).
Nilpotency of x implies that both actions are nilpotent. Hence
l N = rN = 0
for a suitable exponent N ∈ N.

Both actions commute: For all y ∈ End(V )
[l, r](y) = x ◦ (y ◦ x) − (x ◦ y) ◦ x = 0.
Hence the binomial theorem implies

2N
2N 2N 2N ν 2N−ν
(ad x) = (l − r) = ∑ l ·r · (−1)2N−ν = 0
ν=0 ν
because each summand has at least one factor equal to zero. ⊔

⊓
An important relation between the elements of End(V ) and the elements of the
Lie algebra gl(End V ) derives from the Jordan decomposition of endomorphisms
according to Theorem 1.17.
Proposition 3.3 (Jordan decomposition of the adjoint representation). Consider

an n-dimensional complex vector space V , an endomorphism f ∈ End(V ) and its
Jordan decomposition
f = fs + fn .
Then the Jordan decomposition of
ad f ∈ L := gl(End V ),
defined as
3.1 Engel’s theorem for nilpotent Lie algebras 73
ad f : End(V ) →
− End(V ), g 7→ [ f , g],
is
ad f = ad fs + ad fn ∈ L.
In particular, ad fs is semisimple, ad fn is nilpotent and
[ad fs , ad fn ] = 0.
Proof. i) According to Lemma 3.2 the endomorphism ad fn is nilpotent.
ii) In order to show that ad fs is semisimple we choose a base (v1 , ..., vn ) of V

consisting of eigenvectors of fs with corresponding eigenvalues λ1 , ..., λn .
Let (Ei j )1≤i, j≤n denote the standard base of End(V ) relatively to (v1 , ..., vn ), i.e.
Ei j (vk ) = δ jk vi .
For 1 ≤ i, j, k ≤ n:
((ad fs )Ei j )(vk ) = [ fs , Ei j ](vk ) = fs (Ei j (vk )) − Ei j ( fs (vk )) = ( fs − λk )(Ei j (vk )) =
= ( fs − λk )(δ jk vi ) = (λi − λ j )(δ jk vi ) = (λi − λ j ) · Ei j (vk )

Hence
(ad fs )(Ei j ) = (λi − λ j ) · Ei j
and ad fs acts diagonally on the vector space End(V ) with eigenvalues
λi − λ j , 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n.
iii) Because
ad : gl(V ) → L
is a morphism of Lie algebras:
[ad fs , ad fn ] = ad([ fs , fn ]) = 0.
⊔
⊓
Using the adjoint representation we generalize the concept of a semisimple en-

domorphism to elements of arbitrary complex Lie algebra.
Definition 3.4 (Ad-semisimple element of a complex Lie algebra). Consider a

complex Lie algebra L. An element x ∈ L is ad-semisimple iff the induced endomorphism ad x ∈ End(L)
is semisimple.
It is a trivial fact that a nilpotent endomorphism of a non-zero vector space V has

an eigenvector with eigenvalue zero. Theorem 3.5 strongly generalizes this fact: It
proves the existence of a common eigenvector for a whole Lie algebra of nilpotent
endomorphisms.
Theorem 3.5 (Annihilation of a common eigenvector).

Consider a vector space V ̸= {0} and a matrix algebra L ⊂ gl(V ) of
endomorphisms. If each endomorphism x ∈ L is nilpotent, then all elements x ∈ L
annihilate a common eigenvector, i.e., a nonzero vector v ∈ V exists with
x(v) = 0 f or all x ∈ L.
Proof. The proof goes by induction on dim L, while the dimension of the
finite-dimensional vector space V is left arbitrary.
As noted before the theorem is true for dim L = 1.
For the induction step assume dim L > 1 and assume that the theorem is true for all
Lie algebras of less dimension.
i) Existence of an ideal of codimension 1: By assumption all x ∈ L are nilpotent
endomorphisms of V . Hence by Lemma 3.2 each action
ad x : L → L, x ∈ L,
is nilpotent.
Define the set

A := {K ⊊ L : K subalgebra}
of all proper subalgebras of L. We have A ̸= 0,
/ because the zero-dimensional
vector subspace {0} ⊂ L is also a subalgebra of L.
Choose
I∈A
as a subalgebra of L having maximal dimension with respect to all Lie algebras
from A . In particular
dim I < dim L
Because I is a Lie algebra, for all x ∈ I
(ad x)(I) ⊂ I
Hence the adjoint representation of L induces a representation of I on the

vector space L/I: For x ∈ L
ad x : L/I → L/I, y + I 7→ [x, y] + I

For each x ∈ I the nilpotency of ad x ∈ L implies the nilpotency of ad x. The

induction hypothesis applies to the Lie algebra I and the vector space V := L/I,
and provides a common eigenvector
y + I ∈ L/I
which has for all x ∈ I the eigenvalue zero with respect to ad x. Eigenvectors are
non-zero vectors, hence
y∈
/ I and [x, y] ∈ I for all x ∈ I.
As a consequence
y ∈ NL (I) \ I
i.e. I is properly contained in its normalizer. Due to the maximality of the
dimension of I we have NL (I) ∈ / A , hence
NL (I) = L,
i.e. I ⊂ L is a proper ideal.
The ideal I ⊂ L induces a canonical projection of Lie algebras
π : L → L/I.
In case dim L/I ≥ 2 the inverse image π −1 (K) ⊂ L of a 1-dimensional

subalgebra K ⊂ L/I were a proper Lie subalgebra of L, properly containing I, a
contradiction to the maximality of I. Hence dim L/I = 1.
ii) Constructing a common eigenvector: The construction from part i) implies the
vector space decomposition
L = I + K · x0
with a suitable element x0 ∈ L \ I. By induction assumption the elements of the Lie
algebra I annihilate a common non-zero eigenvector, i.e.
W := {w ∈ V : x(w) = 0 f or all x ∈ I} ̸= {0}.
In addition, the subspace W ⊂ V is stable with respect to the

endomorphism x0 ∈ End(V ), i.e. for all w ∈ W holds
x0 (w) ∈ W :
For all x ∈ I
x(x0 (w)) = x0 (x(w)) − [x0 , x](w) = 0.
Here the first summand vanishes because w ∈ W and x ∈ I. The second summand
vanishes because I ⊂ L is an ideal and therefore
[x0 , x] ∈ I and [x0 , x](w) = 0
The restriction
x0 |W : W → W
is a nilpotent endomorphism and has an eigenvector v0 ∈ W with eigenvalue 0.
From the decomposition
L = I + K · x0
follows x(v0 ) = 0 for all x ∈ L. This finishes the induction step. ⊔
⊓
The fact, that any Lie algebra L ⊂ gl(V ) of nilpotent endomorphisms annihilates
a common eigenvector, allows the simultaneous triagonalization of all endomor-
phisms of L to obtain strict upper triangular matrices.
Corollary 3.6 (Simultaneous strict triagonalization of nilpotent endomorphisms).

Consider an n-dimensional K-vector space V and a matrix algebra L ⊂ gl(V ) of en-
domorphisms of V .
Then the following properties are equivalent:
1. Each endomorphism x ∈ L is nilpotent.
2. A flag (Vi )i=0,...,n of subspaces of V exists such that L(Vi ) ⊂ Vi−1 for all i = 1, ..., n.
3. The Lie algebra L is isomorphic to a subalgebra of the Lie algebra of strictly

upper triangular matrices
  
 0
 ∗ 

n(n, K) =  . . .  ∈ gl(n, K) .
 
 
0 0
 
In particular, any endomorphism x ∈ L has zero trace.
Proof. 1) =⇒ 2): The proof goes by induction on n = dim V . The implication is

valid for n = 0.
Assume n > 0 and part 2) valid for all vector spaces of less dimension. Set V0 := {0}.
According to Theorem 3.5 all elements from L annihilate a common eigenvector v1 ∈ V .
Consider the quotient vector space
W := V /(K · v1 )
with canonical projection

π : V → W.
Any endomorphism x ∈ L ⊂ gl(V ) annihilates V1 . Hence it induces an endomor-
phism x : W → W such that the following diagram commutes
x
V V
π π
x
W W
In particular, the endomorphism x ∈ End(W ) is nilpotent. The induction assumption

applied to W with
dim W < dim V
and L ⊂ gl(W ) provides a flag (Wi )i=0,...,n−1 of subspaces of W with
x(Wi ) ⊂ Wi−1 f or all i = 1, ..., n − 1.
Now define
Vi := π −1 (Wi−1 ), i = 1, ..., n.
Then
x(Wi ) ⊂ Wi−1
implies
x(Vi ) ⊂ Vi−1 , i = 1, ..., n.
2) =⇒ 3) For the proof one extends successively a basis (v1 ) of V1 to a basis (v j ) j=1,...,i
of Vi , i = 1, ..., n.
3) =⇒ 1) The proof is obvious. ⊔

⊓
A Lie algebra is Abelian when the commutator of any two elements vanishes.
Nilpotent Lie algebras are a first step to generalize this property: A Lie algebra is
named nilpotent when a number N ∈ N exists such that all N-fold commutators
vanish.
Definition 3.7 (Descending central series and nilpotent Lie algebra). Consider a
Lie algebra L.
1. The descending central series of L is the sequence (Ci L)i∈N of ideals Ci L ⊂ L,
inductively defined as
C0 L := L and Ci+1 L := [L,Ci L], i ∈ N.
2. The Lie algebra L is nilpotent iff an index i0 ∈ N exists with Ci0 L = 0. The
smallest index with this property is named the length of the descending central
series.
3. An ideal I ⊂ L is nilpotent if I is nilpotent when considered as a Lie algebra with

respect to the restricted Lie bracket.
One easily verifies Ci+1 L ⊂ Ci L and each Ci L ⊂ L, i ∈ N, being an ideal.
Apparently, any subalgebra and any quotient algebra of a nilpotent Lie algebra L is
nilpotent too: The respective descending central series arise from the descending
central series of L. Concerning the reverse implication consider Lemma 3.8.
The Lie algebra n(n, K) of strictly upper triangular matrices and all subalgebras
of n(n, K) are nilpotent Lie algebras.
Lemma 3.8 (Central extension of a nilpotent Lie algebra). Consider a Lie al-
gebra L and an ideal I ⊂ L which is contained in the center, i.e. I ⊂ Z(L). If the
quotient L/I is nilpotent then L is nilpotent too.
Proof. The descending central series of L and L′ := L/I relate as
Ci (π(L)) = π(Ci L), i ∈ N.
If Ci0 L′ = 0 then π(Ci0 L) = 0, i.e.
Ci0 L ⊂ I ⊂ Z(L).
The center satisfies [L, Z(L)] = 0, hence
Ci0 +1 L = [L,Ci0 L] = 0.
⊔
⊓
In Lemma 3.8 one must not drop the assumption that the ideal I ⊂ L belongs to
the center.
Example 3.9 (Counter example for nilpotent extension). The descending central se-
ries of the Lie algebra

∗∗
L := t(2, K) = ∈ gl(2, K)
0∗
is
01
C0 L = [L, L] = n(2, K) = K ·
00
and
C1 L = [L, n(2, K)] = n(2, K) = C0 L ̸= 0.
Hence L is not nilpotent. Moreover
I := n(2, K) ⊂ L
is a nilpotent ideal, and the quotient of diagonal matrices
L/I ≃ d(2, K)
is also nilpotent.
We now prove Engel’s theorem. It is the main result about nilpotent Lie alge-
bras. It characterizes the nilpotency of a Lie algebra by the ad-nilpotency of all its
elements. Engel’s theorem follows as a corollary from Theorem 3.5.
Theorem 3.10 (Engel’s theorem for nilpotent Lie algebras). A Lie algebra L is
nilpotent if and only if every element x ∈ L is ad-nilpotent.
Proof. i) Assume that every endomorphism
ad x : L → L, x ∈ L,
is nilpotent. According to Corollary 3.6 the Lie algebra ad L is isomorphic to a

subalgebra of
n(n, K), n = dim L,
of strictly upper triangular matrices, hence nilpotent. Due to Lemma 3.8 the com-
mutative diagram
ad
L ad L
∼
π
L/Z(L)
implies the nilpotency of L.
ii) Suppose L to be nilpotent. An index i0 ∈ N exists with Ci0 L = 0. Hence for

all x ∈ L
ad i0 (x) = 0,
i.e. ad x is nilpotent, q.e.d.
From a categorical point of view the concept of a short exact sequence is a useful
tool to handle injective or surjective morphisms and respectively their kernels and
cokernels.
Definition 3.11 (Exact sequence of Lie algebra morphisms).

1. A chain complex of Lie algebra morphisms is a sequence of Lie algebra mor-
phisms
f
i
(Li −
→ Li+1 )i∈Z
such that for all i ∈ Z the composition fi+1 ◦ fi = 0, i.e.

fi−1 i f
im[Li−1 −−→ Li ] ⊂ ker[Li −
→ Li+1 ].
i f
2. A chain complex of Lie algebra morphisms (Li − → Li+1 )i∈Z is exact or an exact
sequence of Lie algebra morphisms if for all i ∈ Z
fi−1 i f
im[Li−1 −−→ Li ] = ker[Li −
→ Li+1 ].
3. A short exact sequence of Lie algebra morphisms is an exact sequence of the

form
f0 f1
0 → L0 −→ L1 −
→ L2 → 0.
A short exact sequence

0f 1 f
0 → L0 −
→ L1 −
→ L2 → 0
expresses the following fact about two morphisms:
• f0 : L0 → L1 is injective,
• f1 : L1 → L2 is surjective and
• im f0 = ker f1 , in particular L2 ≃ L1 /L0 .
Using the concept of exact sequences we restate the relation between the nilpo-
tency of a Lie algebra L, an ideal of L and a quotient of L as follows:
Proposition 3.12 (Nilpotency and short exact sequences). Consider a short exact
sequence of Lie algebra morphisms
π
0 → L0 → L1 −
→ L2 → 0.
1. If the Lie algebra L1 is nilpotent, then also L0 and L2 are nilpotent.
2. If L2 is nilpotent and L0 ⊂ Z(L1 ), then also L1 is nilpotent.
For a Lie algebra L one obtains for any i ∈ N a short exact sequence
0 → Ci L/Ci+1 L → L/Ci+1 L → L/Ci L → 0
By definition of the descending central series, the Lie algebra on the left-hand
side is contained in the center of the Lie algebra in the middle, i.e.
Ci L/Ci+1 L ⊂ Z(L/Ci+1 L).
For a nilpotent Lie algebra L and minimal index i0 with Ci0 L = 0 the exact sequence
0 → Ci0 −1 L → L → L/Ci0 −1 L
presents L as a central extension of L/Ci0 −1 L. Successively one obtains L as a finite

sequence of central extensions of nilpotent Lie algebras, starting with the Abelian
Lie algebra Z(L) ≃ L/C1 L.
Corollary 3.13 (Centralizer in nilpotent Lie algebras). Consider a nilpotent Lie

algebra L and an ideal I ⊂ L, I ̸= 0. Then
Z(L) ∩ I ̸= {0}.
In particular
CL (I) ̸= {0}.
Proof. According to Theorem 3.10 all endomorphisms
ad x : L → L, x ∈ L,
are nilpotent. Because I ⊂ L is an ideal each restriction
(ad x)|I : I → I, x ∈ L,
is well-defined and also nilpotent. According to Theorem 3.5, applied to ad L ⊂ gl(I),

a non-zero element x0 ∈ I exists with
[L, x0 ] = 0,
i.e. 0 ̸= x0 ∈ Z(L) ∩ I, q.e.d.
Proposition 3.14 (Normalizer in nilpotent Lie algebras). Any proper subalgebra M ⊊ L

of a nilpotent Lie algebra L is properly contained in its normalizer M ⊊ NL (M).
Proof. We consider the descending central series of L. Because M ⊊ L = C0 L we

start with
M ⊊ M +C0 L.
Due to Ci0 L = 0 for a suitable index i0 ∈ N we end with
M = M +Ci0 L.
Let i < i0 be the largest index with
M ⊊ M +Ci L.
Then
M = M +Ci+1 L.
Therefore
[M +Ci L, M] ⊂ [M, M] + [Ci L, M] ⊂ M + [Ci L, L] ⊂ M +Ci+1 L = M.
We obtain
M ⊊ M +Ci L ⊂ NL (M), q.e.d.
3.2 Lie’s theorem for solvable Lie algebras
Solvability generalizes nilpotency. Solvable Lie algebras relate to nilpotent Lie al-
gebras like upper triangular matrices to strictly upper triangular matrices.
Definition 3.15 (Derived series and solvable Lie algebra). Consider a Lie algebra L.
1. The derived series of L is the sequence (Di L)i∈N inductively defined as
D0 L := L and Di+1 L := [Di L, Di L], i ∈ N.
2. The Lie algebra L is solvable iff an index i0 ∈ N exists with Di0 L = 0. The small-
est index with this property is named the length of the derived series.
3. An ideal I ⊂ L is solvable iff I is solvable when considered as Lie algebra.
By induction on i ∈ N one easily shows that each Di L, i ∈ N, is an ideal in L. Note

that
D1 L = [L, L]
is the derived or commutator algebra. Comparing the derived series with the lower
central series one has Di L ⊂ Ci L for all i ∈ N. Hence for Lie algebras:
Abelian =⇒ nil potent =⇒ solvable.
Lemma 3.16 (Solvability and short exact sequences). Consider an exact sequence
of Lie algebra morphisms
π
0 → L0 → L1 −
→ L2 → 0.
If any two terms of the sequence are solvable then the third term is solvable too.
Proof. We prove that solvability of both L0 and L2 implies solvability of L1 . Assume

Di0 L2 = 0 and D j0 L0 = 0. For all i ∈ N
Di L2 = Di π(L1 ) = π(Di L1 ).
Hence Di0 L2 = 0 implies Di0 L1 ⊂ L0 . Then

3.2 Lie’s theorem for solvable Lie algebras 83
Di0 + j0 L1 ⊂ D j0 L0 = 0.
The proof of the other direction uses the following relations between the derived
series:
Di L0 ⊂ Di L1 , π(Di L1 ) = Di L2 , q.e.d.
Example 3.9 demonstrates that an analogous statement concerning the nilpotency

of the Lie algebra in the middle is not valid.
Corollary 3.17 (Solvable ideals). Consider a Lie algebra L. The sum I + J of two
solvable ideals I, J ⊂ L is solvable.
Proof. We apply Lemma 3.16: The quotient I/(I ∩ J) of the solvable Lie algebra I
is solvable too. By means of the canonical isomorphy
(I + J)/J ≃ I/(I ∩ J)
the exact sequence

0 → J → I + J → (I + J)/J → 0
implies the solvability of
I + J, q.e.d.
Definition 3.18 (Radical of a Lie algebra). The unique solvable ideal of L which
is maximal with respect to all solvable ideals of L is denoted rad L, the radical of L.
To verify that the concept is well-defined take rad L as a solvable ideal not con-
tained in any distinct solvable ideal. For an arbitrary solvable ideal I ⊂ L also
I + rad L
is solvable by Lemma 3.16. The inclusion
rad L ⊂ I + rad L
implies by the maximality of rad L that
rad L = I + rad L.
Hence I ⊂ rad L.
The following Lemma 3.19 prepares the proof of Theorem 3.20 and therefore
also of Lie’s theorem about solvable Lie algebras.
Lemma 3.19 (Common triangularization). Consider a K-vector space V and a K-

matrix algebra L ⊂ gl(V ) of endomorphisms of V . Consider an ideal I ⊂ L. Assume:
All endomorphisms
x : V → V, x ∈ I,
have a common eigenvector v ∈ V . Then the eigenvector equation
x(v) = λ (x) · v, x ∈ I,
defines a linear functional λ : I → K such that
λ ([x, y]) = 0
for all x ∈ I, y ∈ L.
Proof. We choose an arbitrary but fixed y ∈ L.
i) Common triangularization on a subspace W ⊂ V : Let n ∈ N∗ be a maximal

index such that the family of iterates
B = (v, y(v), y2 (v), ..., yn−1 (v))
is linearly independent. Denote by W ⊂ V the n-dimensional vector space spanned

by B. By definition W is stable with respect to y, i.e. y(W ) ⊂ W .
We claim: The family
(Wi := span < v, y(v), ..., yi−1 (v) >)i=0,...,n
is a flag of W , invariant with respect to all endomorphisms x : W → W, x ∈ I.
We prove x(Wi ) ⊂ Wi by induction on i = 0, ..., n.

For the induction step i 7→ i + 1 we consider x ∈ I and decompose
x(yi (v)) = (x ◦ y)(yi−1 (v)) = [x, y](yi−1 (v)) + (y ◦ x)(yi−1 (v)).
The induction assumption applied to yi−1 (v) ∈ Wi proves: For the first summand
[x, y](yi−1 (v)) ∈ I(Wi ) ⊂ Wi ⊂ Wi+1
because yi−1 (v) ∈ Wi and [x, y] ∈ I, and for the second summand
(y ◦ x)(yi−1 (v)) = y(x(yi−1 (v))) ∈ y(Wi ) ⊂ Wi+1 .
Hence x(yi (v)) ∈ Wi+1 .
With respect to the basis B of W each restricted endomorphism
x|W : W → W, x ∈ I,
is represented by an upper triangular matrix

 
∗ ∗
x|W =  . . .  ∈ t(n, K).
 
0 ∗
ii) Diagonal elements of the upper triangular matrices: We claim that all diagonal
elements of x|W are equal to λ (x), i.e.
 
λ (x) ∗
x|W = 
 ..  , x ∈ I.

.
0 λ (x)
The proof of the equation
x(yi (v)) ≡ λ (x) · yi (v) mod Wi
goes by induction on i = 0, ..., n. The induction start i = 0 is the eigenvalue equation
x(v) = λ (x) · v.
For the induction step i − 1 7→ i consider the decomposition from above
x(yi (v)) = [x, y](yi−1 (v)) + (y ◦ x)(yi−1 (v)).
For the first summand

[x, y](yi−1 (v)) ∈ Wi .
For the second summand
(y ◦ x)(yi−1 (v)) = y(x(yi−1 (v))) ≡ λ (x) · yi (v) mod Wi
because by induction assumption
x(yi−1 (v)) ≡ λ (x) · yi−1 (v) mod Wi−1
and by definition y(Wi−1 ) ⊂ Wi .
iii) Vanishing of the trace of a commutator: We have shown: All elements x ∈ I

act on the subspace W ⊂ V as endomorphisms with
trace(x|W ) = n · λ (x).
For all x ∈ I also [y, x] ∈ I because I ⊂ L is an ideal. The trace of a commutator of

two endomorphisms vanishes. Hence for all x ∈ I
0 = tr([y|W, x|W ]) = n · λ ([y, x])

which proves λ ([y, x]) = 0, q.e.d.
The present section deals with eigenvalues of certain endomorphisms. We need

the fact that a polynomial with coefficients from K splits completely into linear
factors over K. Therefore we assume that the underlying field K is algebraically
closed, i.e. we now consider complex Lie algebras.
Theorem 3.20 (Common eigenvector of a complex solvable matrix algebra).

Consider a complex vector space V ̸= {0} and a complex solvable matrix algebra L ⊂ gl(V ).
Then L has a common eigenvector: A vector v ∈ V, v ̸= 0, and a linear functional
λ :V →C
exist such that

x(v) = λ (x) · v f or all x ∈ L.
The proof of this theorem will imitate the proof of Theorem 3.5.
Proof. Without restriction we may assume L ̸= {0}. Then the proof goes by induc-
tion on dim L. The claim trivially holds for dim L = 0. For the induction step we
assume dim L > 0 and suppose that the claim is true for all solvable Lie algebras of
smaller dimension.
i) Construction of an ideal I ⊂ L of codimL (I) = 1: The derived series of L ends

with Di0 = 0, hence it starts with D1 L ⊊ D0 L, i.e. L/[L, L] ̸= 0. Let
π : L → L/[L, L]
be the canonical projection of Lie algebras. The Lie algebra L/[L, L] is Abelian,
hence solvable. Therefore any arbitrary choosen vector subspace D ⊂ L/[L, L] of
codimension 1 is even an ideal D ⊂ L/[L, L]. Then I := π −1 (D) is an ideal of L with
codimL (D) := dim L − dim D = 1.
The latter formula on the codimension is a general statement from the theory of
vector spaces:
dim I = dim π −1 (D) = dim D + dim [L, L]
implies
codimL I = dim L − dim I = dim L − dim [L, L] − dim D =
= dim L/[L, L] − dim D = codimL/[L,L] D.

ii) Subspace of eigenvector candidates: We restrict the action of L on V to an
action of I. By induction assumption applied to I we get an element 0 ̸= v ∈ V and
a linear functional λ : I → C with
x(v) = λ (x) · v f or all x ∈ I.
We define the non-zero subspace of V
W := {v ∈ V : x(v) = λ (x) · v f or all x ∈ I}.
The subspace W ⊂ V is stable under the action of L, i.e. for v ∈ W and y ∈ L holds
y(v) ∈ W : For arbitrary x ∈ I, v ∈ W, y ∈ L we have
x(y(v)) = [x, y](v) + y(x(v)) = [x, y](v) + λ (x) · y(v) = λ ([x, y]) · y(v) + λ (x) · y(v).
Here
[x, y](v) = λ ([x, y]) · y(v)
because [L, I] ⊂ I. Lemma 3.19, applied to I ⊂ gl(W ), gives λ ([x, y]) = 0. Hence
x(y(v)) = λ (x) · y(v)
and y(v) ∈ W .
iii) 1-dimensional complement: According to the choice of the ideal I ⊂ L in

part i) an element x0 ∈ L exists with the vector space decomposition
L = I ⊕ C · x0 .
By part ii) the subspace W is stable under the action of the restricted endomor-
phism x0 |W . Because the field C is algebraic closed an eigenvector v0 ∈ W of x0
with eigenvalue λ ′ exists:
x0 (v0 ) = λ ′ · v0 .
The linear functional λ : I → C extends to a linear functional e
λ : L → C by
λ (x0 ) := λ ′ . Then
defining e
λ (x) · v0 f or all x ∈ L, q.e.d.

x(v0 ) = e
A corollary of Theorem 3.20 is Lie’s theorem about the simultaneous triangular-

ization of a complex solvable matrix algebra.
Theorem 3.21 (Lie’s theorem on complex solvable matrix algebras). Consider
a n-dimensional complex vector space V . Each solvable complex matrix algebra
L ⊂ gl(V ) is isomorphic to a subalgebra of the Lie algebra of upper triangular
matrices   
 ∗
 ∗ 

 .. 
t(n, C) =  .  ∈ gl(n, C) .
 
0 ∗
 
Proof. Similar to the proof of Corollary 3.6 we construct by induction on dim V a

flag (Vi )i=0,...,n of V , each Vi stable with respect to all endomorphisms
x : V → V, x ∈ L.
First we set V0 := {0}. Then we choose a common eigenvector v1 ∈ V satisfying
x(v) = λ (x) · v
for all endomorphisms x ∈ L, see Theorem 3.20. Set
V1 := C · v1 .
Successively we extend the basis (v1 ) of V1 to a basis B = (v1 , ..., vn ) of V with
Vi = spanC < v1 , ..., vi >, i = 0, ..., n.
With respect to the basis B all endomorphism x ∈ L are represented by upper trian-
gular matrices, q.e.d.
Corollary 3.22 (Solvability and nilpotency). Consider a complex Lie algebra L.

Then L is solvable iff its commutator algebra D1 L = [L, L] is nilpotent.
Proof. The derived series of L relates to the lower central series of the Lie algebra
DL as
Di L ⊂ Ci−1 (DL)
for all i ≥ 1. The proof goes by induction on i ∈ N. The inclusion holds for i = 1.
Induction step i 7→ i + 1:
Di+1 L := [Di L, Di L] ⊂ [Ci−1 (DL),Ci−1 (DL)] ⊂ [DL,Ci−1 (DL)] = Ci (DL).
i) Assume that DL is nilpotent. The vanishing of Ci0 (DL) for an index i0 ∈ N

implies the vanishing of Di0 +1 L. Hence L is solvable.
ii) Assume that L solvable and dim L = n. Then also ad L ⊂ gl(L) is solvable
according to Lemma 3.16. Theorem 3.21 implies
ad L ⊂ t(n, C).
If x ∈ DL = [L, L] then
ad x ∈ [t(n, C), t(n, C)] ⊂ n(n, C).
By Engel’s theorem, see Theorem 3.10, the Lie algebra DL is nilpotent, q.e.d.
Note that Corollary 3.22 is also valid for an R-Lie algebra L, because with respect
to complexification
Di L ⊗R C = Di (L ⊗R C),
and similarly for the descending central series.
3.3 Semidirect product of Lie algebras 89
3.3 Semidirect product of Lie algebras
The semidirect product of two Lie algebras is a Lie algebra structure on the product
vector space of the two Lie algebras. The most simple case of a semidirect product
is the direct product. It is obtained by taking the Lie bracket in each component
separately. But using certain derivations one can define a Lie bracket which mixes
the Lie brackets of the components. The semidirect product is an important tool to
construct new Lie algebras, and also for splitting Lie algebras into factors.
Definition 3.23 (Semidirect product). Consider two Lie algebras I and M with Lie
brackets respectively [−, −]I and [−, −]M , together with a morphism of Lie algebras
to the Lie algebra of derivations
θ : M → Der(I).
The semidirect product of I and M with respect to θ is the Lie algebra
I ⋊θ M := (L, [−, −])
with vector space L := I × M and bracket
[−, −] : L × L → L
[(i1 , m1 ), (i2 , m2 )] := ([[i1 , i2 ]I + θ (m1 )i2 − θ (m2 )i1 , [m1 , m2 ]M )

for i1 , i2 ∈ I, m1 , m2 ∈ M.
Proposition 3.24 (Semidirect product). Consider two Lie algebras I and M, and a
morphism of Lie algebras
θ :M→− Der(I).
1. The semidirect product
I ⋊θ M
is a Lie algebra.
2. The semidirect product fits into the exact sequence of Lie algebras
j π
0→
− I→
− I ⋊θ M −
→M→
− 0
with j(i) := (i, 0), π(i, m) := m.
3. The exact sequence has a section against π, i.e. a morphism of Lie algebras exists
s
s:M→
− I ⋊θ M
satisfying
π ◦ s = idM .
4. We have
I ≃ j(I) ⊂ I ⋊θ M
an ideal, and
M ≃ s(M) ⊂ I ⋊θ M
a subalgebra.
Proof. i) In order to verify for
x = (x1 , x2 ), y = (y1 , y2 ), z = (z1 , z2 ) ∈ I × M
the Jacobi identity in the form
[[x, y], z] + [[y, z], x] + [[z, x], y] = 0
we distinguish four cases:

• If x, y, z ∈ I then the claim follows from the Jacobi identity of I.
• If x, y ∈ I and z ∈ M then
[x, y] = ([x1 , y1 ], 0); [[x, y], z] = ([[x1 , y1 ], 0]−θ (z2 )([x1 , y1 ]), 0) = (−θ (z2 )([x1 , y1 ]), 0)
[y, z] = ([y1 , z1 ]−θ (z2 )(y1 ), 0) = ([−θ (z2 )(y1 ), 0), [[y, z], x] = (−[θ (z2 )(y1 ), x1 ], 0)
[z, x] = ([z1 , x1 ] + θ (z2 )(x1 ), 0) = (θ (z2 )(x1 ), 0), [[z, x], y] = ([θ (z2 )(x1 ), y1 ], 0)
Because I is a Lie algebra, the claim reduces to
θ (z2 )([x1 , y1 ]) + [θ (z2 )(y1 ), x1 ]) − [θ (z2 )(x1 ), y1 ]) = 0.
The latter equation holds because θ (z2 ) is a derivation of I.
• If x ∈ I and y, z ∈ M then
[x, y] = (−θ (y2 )(x1 ), 0); [[x, y], z] = (θ (z2 )(θ (y2 )(x1 )), 0)
[y, z] = (0, [y2 , z2 ]); [[y, z], x] = (θ ([y2 , z2 ])(x1 ), 0)

[z, x] = (θ (z2 )(x1 ), 0); [[z, x], y] = (−θ (y2 )(θ (z2 )(x1 )), 0)
The claim reduces to
θ (z2 )(θ (y2 )(x1 )) + θ ([y2 , z2 ])(x1 ) − θ (y2 )(θ (z2 )(x1 )) = 0.
The latter equation holds because θ is a morphism of Lie algebras.
• If x, y, z ∈ M then the claim follows from the Jacobi identity of M, q.e.d.

ii) Exactness of the sequence is obvious: j is injective, π is surjective, and
im j = j(I) = ker π.
iii) The map

s:M→
− I ⋊θ M, m 7→ (0, m),
is a morphism of Lie algebras, satisfying
π(s(m)) = π((m, 0)) = m.
iv) The kernel of a morphism of Lie algebras is an ideal:
ker π = im j = j(I) ≃ I.
The image of a morphism of Lie algebras is a subalgebra. Moreover,
π ◦ s = idM
implies the injectivity of s. Hence
s(M) ≃ M
is a subalgebra of I ⋊θ M.
Note. The semidirect product I ⋊θ M is a direct product, i.e.
I ⋊θ M ≃ I × M
iff θ = 0. And the latter equation is equivalent to
s(M) ⊂ I ⋊θ M
being an ideal.
A corner stone of quantum mechanics is the canonical commutation relation
[P, Q] = −iℏ · 1
with P the momentum operator, Q the position operator, the unit operator 1, and
Planck’s constant
h
ℏ= = 1.054 × 10−27 erg · sec.
2π
This relation has been introduced by Born and Jordan and termed strict quantum
condition (German: verschärfte Quantenbedingung), see [3, Equation (38)].
Proposition 3.25 (Heisenberg algebra). The set

  
 0 p c 
heis(n) := 0 0n q ⊂ n(n + 2, R) : p = (p1 , ..., pn ) ∈ Rn , q = (q1 , ..., qn )⊤ ∈ Rn , c ∈ R
0 0 0
 
is a real n + 2-dimensional subalgebra, named Heisenberg algebra of n-dimensional

quantum mechanics. In particular: heis(1) = n(3, R). A basis of heis(n)
(P1 , ..., Pn , Q1 , ..., Qn , I)
is defined as
• Pj = E1,1+ j , the matrix with the only non-zero entry p j = 1,
• Q j = E1+ j,n+2 , the matrix with the only non-zero entry q j = 1, and
• I = E1,n+2 , the matrix with the only non-zero entry c = 1
has the commutators
[Pj , Qk ] = δ jk · I and [Pj , I] = [Q j , I] = [Pj , Pk ] = [Q j , Qk ] = 0.
Proof. Similarly to the case n = 1 one checks that heis(n) ⊂ n(n + 2, R) is closed
with respect to the Lie bracket.
The commutator relations follow from the commutator formula
[Ei, j , Es,t ] = δ j,s · Ei,t − δt,i · Es, j , q.e.d.
The Heisenberg algebra is nilpotent, being a subalgebra of the nilpotent Lie al-
gebra n(n + 2, R).
The Heisenberg algebra captures the kinematics of an n-dimensional quantum

mechanical problem. For a complete description which also covers the dynamics of
the problem one needs a further operator: The Hamiltonian H of the problem and
its relation to the kinematical operators. How to extend the Heisenberg algebra to
include also the Hamiltonian H?
The solution is to construct the dynamical Lie algebra of quantum mechanics as

the semidirect product of the Heisenberg algebra and the 1-dimensional Lie alge-
bra which corresponds to the Hamiltonian. For the case of 1-dimensional quantum
mechanics see also [27, Example 5.1.19].
Definition 3.26 (Dynamical Lie algebra of quantum mechanics). For n ∈ N con-

sider the Heisenberg algebra heis(n) of n-dimensional quantum mechanics with vec-
tor space basis
(P1 , ..., Pn , Q1 , ..., Qn , I),
the 1-dimensional Abelian Lie algebra R with vector space basis
(H := 1),
and the morphism of Lie algebras
θ :R→
− Der(heis(n))
with
θ (H)(Pj ) := Q j , θ (H)(Q j ) := −Pj , j = 1, ..., n, and θ (H)(I) := 0.
The semidirect product

quant(n) := heis(n) ⋊θ R
is the dynamical Lie algebra of n-dimensional quantum mechanics. It fits into the
short exact sequence
j π
0→
− heis(n) →
− quant(n) −
→R→
− 0.
Lemma 3.27 (Dynamical Lie algebra of quantum mechanics). The dynamical

Lie algebra of n-dimensional quantum mechanics quant(n) is a well-defined real
Lie algebra. Identifying heis(n) with the ideal
j(heis(n)) ⊂ heis(n) ⋊θ R
and R with the subalgebra
s(R) := {0} × R ⊂ heis(n) ⋊θ R
the distinguished commutators of quant(n) are
[H, Pj ] = Q j , [H, Q j ] = −Pj , j = 1, ..., n, [H, I] = 0.
Proof. i) We have to show that θ maps to derivations. Using the shorthand D := θ (H):
• Left-hand side:
D([Pj , Pk )]) = D(0) = 0
Right-hand side:
[D(Pj ), Pk ] + [Pj , D(Pk )] = [Q j , Pk ] + [Pj , Qk ] = −δ jk E + δ jk E = 0.
• Left-hand side:
D([Q j , Qk )]) = D(0) = 0
Right-hand side:
[D(Q j ), Qk ] + [Q j , D(Qk )] = [−Pj , Qk ] + [Q j , −Pk ] = −δ jk E + δ jk E = 0.

• Left-hand side:
D([Pj , Qk )]) = D(δ jk E) = 0
Right-hand side:
[D(Pj ), Qk ] + [Pj , D(Qk )] = [Q j , Qk ] + [Pj , −Pk ] = 0.
• Left-hand side:
D([I, Pj ]) = D(0) = 0
Right-hand side:
[D(I), Pj ] + [I, D(Pj )] = 0 + [I, Q j ] = 0
• Left-hand side:
D([I, Q j ]) = D(0) = 0
Right-hand side:
[D(I), Q j ] + [I, D(Q j )] = 0 − [I, Pj ] = 0.
ii) The map

θ :R→
− Der(heis(n))
is a morphism of Lie algebras: Because R is 1-dimensional and Abelian, the claim
follows from [D, D] = 0.
iii) For j = 1, ..., n the distinguished commutators follow from
[H, Pj ] = [(0, H), (Pj , 0)] = ([0, Pj ] + D(Pj ), [H, 0]) = Q j ,
[H, Q j ] = [(0, H), (Q j , 0)] = ([0, Q j ] + D(Q j ), [H, 0]) = −Pj ,

[H, I] = [(0, H), (I, 0)] = (D(I), 0) = (0, 0), [H, I] = 0, q.e.d.
Proposition 3.28 (Solvability of quant(n)). The dynamical Lie algebra of quantum

mechanics
quant(n) := heis(n) ⋊θ R
is solvable, but not nilpotent. Its derived algebra is
D1 quant(n) = heis(n).
Proof. The descending central series of L := quant(n) is
C1 L := spanR < [H, Pj ], [H, Q j ], [H, I] : j = 1, ..., n > + C1 (heis(n)) =
= spanR < Pj , Q j , I >= heis(n)

and
C2 L = [L, heis(n)] = C1 L.
Hence for all i ∈ N
Ci L ̸= {0},
which shows that quant(n) is not nilpotent. Corollary 3.22 and the subsequent note
imply that L is solvable, q.e.d.
Remark 3.29 (Heisenberg picture of quantum mechanics).

1. Like classical mechanics also quantum mechanics distinguishes between states
and observables to describe a physical system, cf. [42]. Pure states, as the
most simple states, are represented by the 1-dimensional subspaces of a com-
plex Hilbert space Hilb with a Hermitian product < −, − >, and the observ-
able are self-adjoint operators on Hilb. The expectation value of measuring the
observable Ω when the system has been prepared in state φ is
< φ |Ω |φ >:=< φ , Ω (φ ) >=< Ω ∗ φ , φ > .
2. The temporal development of the system, i.e. its dynamics, is governed by the
Hamiltonian H of the system according to the Schrödinger equation, the ordinary
differential equation
1 d
φ (t) + H(φ (t)) = 0, normalization: ℏ = 1.
i dt
The Hamiltonian H is the observable of the total energy of the system. The
Schrödinger picture considers the temporal development of the states and fixes
the observables. For conservative systems - and only these will be considered in
the sequel - the Hamiltonian has no explicit time dependency.
3. The Heisenberg picture takes the opposite approach: It fixes the states and con-
siders the temporal development of the observables. This approach resembles the
Hamiltonian approach of classical mechanics using canonical coordinates. In the
Heisenberg picture, the temporal development of an observable Ω is governed
by the commutator equation
1 . ∂
Ω (t) = [H, Ω (t)] + Ω (t).
i ∂t
∂
Here the partial derivation Ω vanishes in case Ω does not explicitly depend
∂t
on the time t. In particular, for a set of canonical observables P j , Q j , j = 1, ..., n:
1 .
Q (t) = [H, Q j (t)] = −P(t)
i j
1 .
P j (t) = [H, P j (t)] = Q j (t).
i
A simple example of a 1-dimensional quantum system is the 1-dimensional os-
cillator. It has the Hamiltonian
1 2 mω 2 2
H= P + Q
2m 2
with respect to the momentum observable P and the position observable Q. The
real number ω denotes the oscillator frequency, the real number m denotes the
oscillator mass.
Note. There is no finite dimensional, i.e. m-dimensional dimensional representation ρ
of heis(n), m ̸= 0, with
ρ([Pj , Q j ]) = ρ(I) = λ · (−i · 1m ), λ ̸= 0,
because
tr ρ([P, Q]) = 0, but tr(λ · (−i · 1m ) ̸= 0.
The main result on the representation theory of self-adjoint operators P and Q satis-
fying the Born-Jordan commutation rules
[P, Q] = −iℏ · 1
is the Stone-von Neumann theorem, see [21, Theor. 14.8 and Chap. 9.8].
The mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics is well understood: The the-

ory of self-adjoint operators in a Hilbert space forms part of the domain of functional
analysis. But the interpretation of the physical content and even more the philo-
sophical implications of quantum mechanics are still debated. Its first elaborated
interpretation was the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, see [24].
Chapter 4
Killing form and semisimple Lie algebras
All vector spaces are assumed finite-dimensional if not stated otherwise. The com-
position f2 ◦ f1 of two endomorphisms will be denoted as product f2 · f1 or also f2 f1 .
4.1 Traces of endomorphisms
The present section introduces a new tool for the study of Lie algebras: Important
properties of a Lie algebra L express themselves by a bilinear form, which derives
from the trace of the endomorphisms of a suitable representation of L.
Lemma 4.1 (Simple properties of the trace). Consider a vector space V and en-
domorphisms x, y, z ∈ End(V ).
1. For nilpotent x holds
tr x = 0.
2. With respect to two endomorphisms the trace is symmetric, i.e.
tr (xy) = tr (yx).
In particular, tr[x, y] = 0.
3. With respect to cyclic permutation the trace is invariant, i.e.
tr (xyz) = tr (yzx)
4. With respect to the commutator the trace is “associative”
tr ([x, y]z) = tr (x[y, z]).
97
98 4 Killing form and semisimple Lie algebras
Proof. 1) The endomorphism x can be represented by a strictly upper triangular

matrix, e.g. due to Corollary 3.6.
2)With respect to matrix representations of the endomorphisms note

tr (xy) = ∑ xi j y ji = ∑ y ji xi j = tr (yx)
i, j i, j
3) According to part 2) we have
tr(xyz) = tr(x(yz)) = tr((yz)x) = tr(yzx).
4) We have
[x, y]z = xyz − yxz and x[y, z] = xyz − xzy.
The ordering yxz results from the ordering xzy by cyclic permutation. Hence part 3)
implies
tr(yxz) = tr(yxz)
which proves the claim.
Definition 4.2 (Killing form). Let L be a K-Lie algebra.

1. The trace form of a representation
ρ : L → gl(V )
on a K-vector space V is the symmetric bilinear map
β : L × L → K, β (x, y) := tr (ρ(x)ρ(y)).
2. The Killing form of L
κ : L × L → K, κ(x, y) := tr (ad(x)ad(y))
is the trace form of the adjoint representation ad : L → gl(L),
The following Lemma 4.3 prepares the proof of Theorem 4.4.
Lemma 4.3 (Trace check for nilpotency). Consider an n-dimensional complex

vector space V , two subspaces A ⊂ B ⊂ End(V ) and the subspace of endomor-
phisms
M := {x ∈ End(V ) : [x, B] ⊂ A}.
An arbitrary element x ∈ M is nilpotent, if it satisfies the property:
For all y ∈ M holds tr(xy) = 0.

4.1 Traces of endomorphisms 99
Proof. i) Jordan decomposition for endomorphisms of V: Consider an arbitrary but

fixed endomorphism
x :V →V
which satisfies the assumption [x, B] ⊂ A. According to Theorem 1.17 a unique Jor-
dan decomposition exists
x = xs + xn .
For a suitable basis B of V the semisimple part xs is represented by a diagonal
matrix
xs = diag(λ1 , ..., λn )
and the nilpotent part xn by a strictly upper triangular matrix. Denote by
E := spanQ < λ1 , ..., λn >⊂ C
the Q-vector subspace generated by the eigenvalues of xs . In order to show
xs = 0
we will show E = {0} or E ∗ = {0} for the dual space of Q-linear functionals
f : E → Q.
ii) Jordan decomposition for endomorphisms of End(V ): According to Proposi-

tion 3.3 the endomorphism
ad x : End(V ) →
− End(V )
has the Jordan decomposition
ad x = ad xs + ad xn .
Therefore a polynomial
ps (T ) ∈ C[T ], ps (0) = 0,
exists with
ad xs = ps (ad x).
Consider a Q-linear functional f : E → Q. The endomorphism
y:V →V
defined with respect to B by the matrix
y = diag( f (λ1 ), ..., f (λn )).
is semisimple by construction.
According to the proof of Proposition 3.3 both ad xs and ad y act on End(V) as
diagonal matrices with respect to the standard basis (Ei j )1≤i, j≤n of End(V ) corre-
sponding to B:
(ad xs )(Ei j ) = (λi − λ j ) · Ei j and (ad y)(Ei j ) = ( f (λi ) − f (λ j )) · Ei j .
Choose an interpolation polynomial q(T ) ∈ C[T ] with supporting points
(λi − λ j , f (λi ) − f (λ j ))1≤i, j≤n .
By construction q(0) = 0 and
ad y = q(ad xs ) : End(V ) →
− End(V ),
because the latter two map each Ei j to ( f (λi ) − f (λ j )) · Ei j . Therefore,
ad y = (q ◦ ps )(ad x)
and also the polynomial (q ◦ ps )(T ) ∈ C[T ] satisfies (q ◦ ps )(0) = 0.

From
[x, B] = (ad x)(B) ⊂ A
follows
[y, B] = (ad y)(B) ⊂ A,
i.e. y ∈ M.
iii) Trace computation: The product
xn · y ∈ End(V )
is nilpotent, because xn is nilpotent and y is a diagonal matrix. Hence the assumption

n
0 = tr (xy) = tr (xs · y) + tr(xn · y) = tr (xs · y) = ∑ λi · f (λi ) ∈ E ⊂ C
i=1
with λi ∈ E, f (λi ) ∈ Q, i = 1, ..., n, implies

!
n n
0= f ∑ λi · f (λi ) = ∑ f (λi )2 ∈ Q.
i=1 i=1
Therefore, all f (λi ), i = 1, ..., n, vanish. Hence f = 0 because the family (λi )i=1,...,n
spans E. As a consequence xs = 0, q.e.d.
Theorem 4.4 (Cartan’s trace criterion for solvability). Consider a complex vec-
tor space V and a subalgebra L ⊂ gl(V ). The following properties are equivalent:
• L is solvable
4.1 Traces of endomorphisms 101
• The trace form

β : L × L → C, β (x, y) := tr (xy),
satisfies β ([L, L], L) = 0.
Proof. 1) Assume β ([L, L], L) = 0.
i) Reduction to nilpotent endomorphisms: According to Corollary 3.22 it suffices

to prove the nilpotency of the derived algebra DL = [L, L]. According to Engel’s
theorem, see Theorem 3.10, therefore it suffices to prove: Every element x ∈ [L, L]
is a ad-nilpotent. We prove that all endomorphisms
x : V → V, x ∈ [L, L] ⊂ gl(V ),
are nilpotent, and then apply Lemma 3.2.
ii) Trace check for nilpotency: Consider a fixed but arbitrary element
x0 ∈ [L, L] ⊂ gl(V ).
To show nilpotency of x0 we apply the trace check from Lemma 4.3 with A := [L, L], B := L
and
M := {x ∈ End(V ) : [x, L] ⊂ [L, L]}.
Apparently x0 ∈ [L, L] ⊂ L ⊂ M. It remains to show for all endomorphisms y ∈ M:
tr (xy) = 0.
Because [L, L] has generators [u, v], u, v ∈ L, we may assume x0 = [u, v]. According
to Lemma 4.1, part iv)
tr (x0 y) = tr ([u, v]y) = tr (u[v, y]) = tr ([v, y]u).
But [v, y] ∈ [L, L] because y ∈ M. By assumption β ([L, L], L) = 0, which proves
tr (x0 y) = 0.
Lemma 4.3 implies that x0 ∈ gl(V ) is nilpotent.
2) Assume L solvable.
According to Lie’s theorem, see Theorem 3.21, the Lie algebra L is isomorphic
to a subalgebra of upper triangular matrices:
L ⊂ t(n, C) and [L, L] ⊂ n(n, C), n = dim V.
Denote by
(Vi )i=0,...,n , n = dim V,
a corresponding flag of L-invariant subspaces of V . For x ∈ L, [u, v] ∈ [L, L],
[u, v](Vi ) ⊂ Vi−1
and
x[u, v](Vi ) ⊂ x(Vi−1 ) ⊂ Vi−1 , i = 1, ..., n.
Therefore x · [u, v] is nilpotent and
0 = tr (x[u, v]) = tr ([u, v]x).
Note. Theorem 4.4 is valid also in the real case.
4.2 Fundamentals of semisimple Lie algebras
Definition 4.5 (Simple and semisimple Lie algebras). Consider a Lie algebra L.
1. L is semisimple iff L has no Abelian ideal I ̸= 0.
2. L is simple iff L is not Abelian and L has no ideal other than 0 and L.
These concepts apply also to an ideal I ⊂ L when the ideal is considered a Lie
algebra.
Note: The trivial Lie algebra L = {0} is semisimple, but not simple. A semisimple
Lie algebra L ̸= {0} is not Abelian.
If L has a solvable Ideal I ̸= {0} then L has an Abelian ideal ̸= {0} too: Let i ∈ N
be the largest index from the derived series of I with Di I ̸= {0}. Then Di I ⊂ L is an
Abelian ideal because Di+1 I = [Di I, Di I] = {0}. The reverse implication is obvious:
Each Abelian ideal is solvable. As a consequence:
L semisimple ⇐⇒ rad(L) = 0.
The equivalence above indicates a complementarity between semisimplicity and

solvability. The only Lie algebra which is semisimple and also solvable is the zero
Lie algebra L = {0}.
A simple application of the above characterization is the following Proposition 4.6.
Proposition 4.6 (Semisimple Lie algebras are matrix algebras).

4.2 Fundamentals of semisimple Lie algebras 103
The adjoint representation of a semisimple Lie algebra is faithful. In particular,

L ≃ ad(L) ⊂ Der(L)
and L is isomorphic to a matrix algebra.
Proof. According to Proposition 2.9 the adjoint representations maps to the Lie
algebra of derivations. The kernel is the center
ker[ad : L → Der(L)] = Z(L)
which is an Abelian ideal of L. Therefore Z(L) = 0, and the adjoint representation

is injective, q.e.d.
Proposition 4.7 (Semisimple Lie algebra sl(n, K)). The Lie algebra
sl(n, K) := {A ∈ gl(n, K) : det A = 1}
is semisimple.
Proof. i) Complex base field: Set L := sl(n, C) and R := rad(L). According to

Lie’s Theorem 3.21 we may assume that the solvable ideal R is an ideal of upper
triangular matrices
R ⊂ t(n, C) ∩ L.
A direct conclusion from the definition of solvability is the equivalence
X ∈ R ⇐⇒ X ⊤ ∈ R.
Hence the elements from R are even diagonal:
R ⊂ d(n, C) ∩ L.
Because R ⊂ L is an ideal we have
[L, R] ⊂ R.
For arbitrary X ∈ R we compute the commutator [E, X] for elements E ∈ L from a

basis of L: According to part i) the element X ∈ R is a diagonal matrix
n
X= ∑ x j j · E j j.
j=1
For E = Ers with r ̸= s
[X, Ers ] = ∑ x j j · [E j j , Ers ] = ∑ x j j · δ jr · E js − ∑ x j j · δ js · Er j =

j j j
= xrr · Ers − xss Ers = (xrr − xss ) · Ers ∈ R ⊂ d(n, C)

which implies xrr − xss = 0, hence
X = λ · 1, λ ∈ C,
is a scalar matrix. Because tr X = 0 we obtain λ = 0 and
X = 0.
ii) Real base field: A real Lie algebra M is semisimple iff its complexification
M ⊗ RC
is semisimple. According to this general result part i) implies the semisimpleness

of sl(n, R), q.e.d.
Later we will see in Theorem 7.11 that the Lie algebras sl(n, C), so(n, C), sp(2n, C)
are semisimple and - under the dimensional restrictions from Proposition 2.13 - even
simple Lie algebras. The most basic example from these series is the simple Lie al-
gebra sl(2, C).
Any Lie algebra becomes semisimple after dividing out its radical.
Proposition 4.8 (Semisimpleness after dividing out the radical). For any Lie
algebra L the quotient L/rad(L) is semisimple.
Proof. Consider the canonical morphism
π :L→
− L/rad(L).
Any ideal
I ⊂ L/rad(L)
has the form
I = J/rad(L)
with the ideal J := π −1 (I) ⊂ L. If I is an Abelian ideal, then [I, I] = 0, hence [J, J] ⊂ rad(L).
Therefore the derived algebra
D1 J = [J, J]
is solvable. The latter property implies J solvable because
Di+1 J = Di (D1 J) ⊂ Di (rad L) = 0.
As a consequence J ⊂ rad(L) and
I = π(J) = 0, q.e.d.
According to Proposition 4.8 any Lie algebra L fits into an exact sequence
0→
− I→
− L→
− M→
− 0
with I = rad(L), a solvable subalgebra, and M = L/I semisimple. The Levi de-
composition, Theorem ??, will show that one can even obtain L as the semi-direct
product
L ≃ I ⋊θ M.
Definition 4.9 (Orthogonal space of the trace form). Consider a K-Lie algebra L
and a symmetric bilinear map
β : L × L → K.
i) The orthogonal space of a vector subspace M ⊂ L with respect to β is

M ⊥ := {x ∈ L : β (x, M) = 0}.
The nullspace of β is L⊥ .
ii) The form β is non-degenerate if it has trivial nullspace, i.e. L⊥ = {0}.
Lemma 4.10 (Orthogonal space of ideals). Consider a vector space V , a Lie alge-
bra L ⊂ gl(V ) and the trace form
β : L × L → C, β (x, y) := tr(xy).
For an ideal I ⊂ L the orthogonal space I ⊥ ⊂ L of β is an ideal too.

Proof. Consider x ∈ I ⊥ . For arbitrary y ∈ L and u ∈ I
β ([x, y], u) = β (x, [y, u])
according to Lemma 4.1. Because [y, u] ∈ I and x ∈ I ⊥
β (x, [y, u]) = 0.
Hence [x, y] ∈ I ⊥ , q.e.d.
The main step in characterizing semisimplicity of a Lie algebra by its Killing

form is the following Lemma.
Lemma 4.11 (Non-degenerateness of the trace form for semisimple Lie alge-
bras). Consider a vector space V and a semisimple Lie algebra L ⊂ gl(V ). Then
the trace form
β : L × L → C, β (x, y) := tr(xy),
is non-degenerate.
Proof. The nullspace
S := L⊥ = {x ∈ L : tr(xy) = 0 f or all y ∈ L}
is an ideal according to Lemma 4.10. For x, y, z ∈ S
tr([x, y] ◦ z) = 0
because z ∈ S. Cartan’s trace criterion, see Theorem 4.4, applied to the Lie algebra
S, shows that S is solvable. Hence
S⊂L
is a solvable ideal. Semisimpleness of L implies S = {0}, q.e.d.
The principal theorem of the present section is the following Cartan criterion for
semisimplicity. It derives from Cartan’s trace criterion for solvability.
Theorem 4.12 (Cartan criterion for semisimplicity). For a Lie algebra L the fol-
lowing properties are equivalent:
• L is semisimple
• The Killing form κ of L is non-degenerate.
Proof. i) Assume L semisimple. According to Proposition 4.6 the adjoint represen-

tations identifies L with the subalgebra
ad L ⊂ gl(L).
Therefore κ is nondegenerate according to Lemma 4.11.
ii) Assume κ nondegenerate, i.e. with nullspace
S := L⊥ = 0.
Consider an Abelian ideal

I ⊂ L.
We claim I ⊂ S: For arbitrary, but fixed x ∈ I and all y ∈ L the composition
ad(x) ◦ ad(y) : L → I ⊂ L
is a nilpotent endomorphism of L, because

ad y ad x ad y ad x
L −−→ L −−→ I −−→ I −−→ [I, I] = {0}.
Hence
κ(x, y) = tr(ad(x) ◦ ad(y)) = 0.

As a consequence x ∈ S and
I ⊂ S.
Now S = 0 implies I = 0. Therefore {0} is the only Abelian ideal of L, which
forces L to be semisimple, q.e.d.
Lemma 4.13 (Killing form of an ideal). Consider a Lie algebra L. For any ideal I ⊂ L
the Killing form of I is the restriction of the Killing form of L to I
κI = κ|I × I.
Proof. Any base of the vector subspace I ⊂ L extends to a base of L. For x, y ∈ I

the corresponding matrix representations

AB
of (ad x) ◦ (ad y) : L → I
0 0
and
A of the restriction (ad x)|I ◦ (ad y)|I : I → I
show
tr((ad x) ◦ (ad y)) = tr A = tr((ad x)|I ◦ (ad y)|I).
As a consequence
κ(x, y) = tr(ad(x) ◦ ad(y)) = tr((ad(x) ◦ ad(y))|I) = κI (x, y), q.e.d.
The first step on the way to split a semisimple Lie algebra as a direct sum of
simple Lie algebras is the following Proposition 4.14.
Proposition 4.14 (Splitting a semisimple Lie algebra with respect to an ideal).

Consider a semisimple Lie algebra L and an ideal I ⊂ L. Then:
1. The Lie algebra L decomposes as the direct sum of ideals
L = I ⊕ I⊥.
2. Both ideals I ⊂ L and I ⊥ ⊂ L are semisimple.
Note: Taking the direct sum

I ⊕J
of two ideals of a Lie algebra presupposes that the sum of the underlying vector
spaces is direct. Then I ∩ J = {0}, which implies for the Lie bracket
[I, J] ⊂ I ∩ J = {0}.
As a consequence: If a Lie algebra L, when considered as a vector space, splits as

the direct sum
L = I ⊕J
of the vector spaces underlying two ideals I, J ⊂ L, then L is isomorphic as Lie
algebra to the direct product of the Lie algebras I and J:
L ≃ I × J.
Proof. 1) Dimension formula: First we consider the underlying vector spaces. The
Killing form κ of L induces a map of vector spaces
F : L −→ L∗ , x 7→ κ(x, −).
The map is injective because the Killing form is nondegenerate according to Car-
tan’s criterion for semisimplicity, Theorem 4.12. It is also surjective because
dim L = dim L∗ .
On one hand, for x ∈ I ⊥ holds
F(x)(I) = 0, i.e. F(x)|I = 0.
On the other hand: Assume ϕ ∈ L∗ with ϕ|I = 0. Due to the surjectivity of F an

element x ∈ L exists with
ϕ = F(x) = κ(x, −).
Then ϕ|I = 0 implies x ∈ I ⊥ . Hence
F(I ⊥ ) = {ϕ ∈ L∗ : ϕ(I) = 0} = (L/I)∗ .
We obtain
dim I ⊥ = dim F(I ⊥ ) = dim (L/I)∗ = dim (L/I) = dim L − dim I,
i.e.
dim L = dim I + dim I ⊥ .
Secondly, we show I ∩ I ⊥ = {0}: According to Lemma 4.10 also the orthogo-
nal space I ⊥ ⊂ L is an ideal. We apply Cartan’s trace criterion for solvability,
Theorem 4.4, to the ideal
J := I ∩ I ⊥
considered as a Lie algebra. Denote by κ the Killing form of L and by κJ the Killing
form of J. According to Lemma 4.13 the Killing form κJ is the restriction of κ. We
have
κJ ([J, J], J) = κ([J, J], J) = 0
because J ⊂ I ⊥ and [J, J] ⊂ J ⊂ I. The Cartan criterion implies that J ⊂ L is solvable,

and semisimpleness of L implies
J = {0}.
As a consequence, the dimension formula for the sum of vector spaces
dim L = dim I + dim I ⊥ = dim(I + I ⊥ ) + dim (I ∩ I ⊥ )
implies the direct sum decomposition
L = I ⊕ I⊥.
2) Semisimpleness: Due to part 1) any Abelian ideal J ⊂ I is also an Abelian ideal

of L, hence
J = 0.
Analogously for an Abelian ideal of I ⊥ , q.e.d.
Theorem 4.15 (Splitting of a semisimple Lie algebra into simple summands).

Consider a Lie algebra L.
1. The following properties are equivalent:
• L is semisimple
• L decomposes as a direct sum

M
L= Iα , card A < ∞,
α∈A
of simple ideals Iα ⊂ L.
2. Assume L semisimple.
i) Each ideal I ⊂ L is a finite direct sum of simple ideals. In particular, for each
ideal I ⊂ L an ideal J ⊂ L exists with
L = I ⊕ J.
ii) Each simple ideal I ⊂ L is one of the distinguished ideals Iα , α ∈ A. In partic-

ular, the representation of L as direct sum of simple ideals is uniquely determined
up to the order of the summands.
iii) The Lie algebra L equals its derived algebra, i.e.
L = D1 L = [L, L].
Proof. 1. i) Assume L semisimple. In case L = {0} take the empty sum with A = 0.
/
Otherwise L ̸= {0} and L is not Abelian.
If L has no proper ideals, then L itself is simple. Otherwise we choose a proper
ideal
{0} ⊊ I1 ⊊ L
of minimal dimension. Proposition 4.14 implies a direct sum representation
L = I1 ⊕ I1⊥ .
The two ideals I1 and I1⊥ have the following properties:

• Any ideal of I1 or of I1⊥ is also an ideal of L because of the direct sum repre-
sentation.
• The ideal I1 is simple, because any proper ideal of I1 would be a proper ideal
of L of dimension less than dim I1 .
• The ideal I1⊥ is semisimple due to Proposition 4.14.
Continuing with I1⊥ the decomposition can be iterated until the last summand in
the direct sum representation
L = I1 ⊕ I2 ⊕ ... ⊕ In
does not contain any proper ideal. The decomposition stops after finitely many
steps because each steps decreases the dimension of the ideals in question.
ii) Assume the direct sum decomposition of L

M
L= Iα , card A < ∞.
α∈A
For any Abelian ideal I ⊂ L and α ∈ A the intersection
I ∩ Iα
is an Abelian ideal of the simple Lie algebra Iα . Hence either
I ∩ Iα = {0}
or
I ∩ Iα = Iα .
The latter case is excluded because the simple Lie algebra Iα is not Abelian. As
a consequence I = 0.
2. If L is semisimple then we may presuppose the direct sum decomposition of L

according to part 1).
i) and ii) Ideal: The identity

M
idL : L →
− Iα
α∈A
induces for any α ∈ A the projection morphism
pα : L →
− Iα ,
and M
idL = pα .
α∈A
If I ̸= {0} then M
{0} ̸= I = p(I) = pα (I).
α∈A
Hence for at least one α ∈ A
pα (I) ̸= {0}.
Now pα (I) ⊂ Iα is an ideal because
[Iα , pα (I)] = [pα (L), pα (I)] = pα ([L, I]) ⊂ pα (I).
Simpleness of Iα implies
pα (I) = Iα .
Then
pα ([Iα , I]) = [pα (Iα ), p(I)] = [Iα , Iα ] ̸= {0}
because the simple ideal Iα is not Abelian. Hence
{0} ̸= [Iα , I] ⊂ Iα ,
which implies
[Iα , I] = Iα
and eventually
Iα = [Iα , I] ⊂ I.
If I is simple, then
Iα = I.
For a general ideal I ⊂ L we just proved
pα (I) ̸= {0} =⇒ Iα ⊂ I.
For any x ∈ I we have

M
x= ∑ pα (x) ∈ Iα .
α∈A pα (x)̸=0
Hence
Iα , A′ = {α ∈ A : pα (I) ̸= {0}}.
M
I=
α∈A′
iii) Derived algebra: The splitting of L implies the direct sum decomposition
M M M M
[L, L] = [ Iα , Iβ ] = [Iα , Iβ ] = [Iα , Iα ].
α∈A β ∈A α,β ∈A α∈A
For each α ∈ A either [Iα , Iα ] = {0} or [Iα , Iα ] = Iα because the simple Lie alge-
bra Iα has no proper ideals. The case [Iα , Iα ] = {0} is excluded because Iα is not
Abelian. As a consequence
M
[L, L] = Iα = L, q.e.d.
α∈A
4.3 Weyl’s theorem on complete reducibility of representations
Alike to splitting a semisimple Lie algebra into a direct sum of simple Lie alge-
bras Weyl’s Theorem 4.24 splits an arbitrary finite-dimensional representation of a
semisimple Lie algebra L as a direct sum of irreducible representations of L.
Definition 4.16 (Reducible and irreducible modules). Consider a K-Lie algebra L,

a vector space V , and a representation of L
ρ : L → gl(V ).
According to Definition 2.5 the latter is named an L-module with respect to ρ. As

a shorthand one often uses for the module operation the notation from commutative
algebra
L ×V → V, (x, v) 7→ v := x · v := ρ(x)(v).
1. A submodule W of V is a subspace W ⊂ V stable under the action of L, i.e.
ρ(L)(W ) ⊂ W.
2. An L-module V is irreducible iff V has exactly the two L-submodules V and {0}.
Otherwise V is reducible. Notably, the zero-module is reducible.
3. A submodule W of V has a complement iff a submodule W ′ ⊂ V exists with
V = W ⊕W ′
as a direct sum of vector spaces.

4.3 Weyl’s theorem on complete reducibility of representations 113
4. An L-module V is completely reducible iff a decomposition exists

k
M
V= Wj
j=1
with irreducible L-modules W j , j = 1, ..., k.
Applying the standard constructions from linear algebra to L-modules generates

a series of new L-modules based on existing L-modules.
Definition 4.17 (Induced representations). Consider a Lie algebra L. Two repre-

sentations of L
ρ : L → gl(V ) and σ : L → gl(W )
with corresponding L-modules V and W induce further representations of L in a
canonical manner:
1. Dual representation ρ ∗ : L → gl(V ∗ ) with - note the minus sign -
(ρ ∗ (x)λ )(v) := −λ (ρ(x)v), (x ∈ L, λ ∈ V ∗ , v ∈ V ).
Corresponding module: Dual module V ∗ with
(x.λ )(v) = −λ (x.v).
2. Tensor product ρ ⊗ σ : L → gl(V ⊗W ) with
(ρ ⊗ σ )(x)(v ⊗ w) := ρ(x)v ⊗ w + v ⊗ σ (x)w, (x ∈ L, v ∈ V, w ∈ W ).
Corresponding module: Tensor product V ⊗W with
x.(u ⊗ v) = x.u ⊗ v + u ⊗ x.v.

V2
3. Exterior product ρ ∧ ρ : L → gl( V ) with
(ρ ∧ ρ)(x)(v1 ⊗ v2 ) := ρ(x)v1 ∧ v2 + v1 ∧ ρ(x)v2 , (x ∈ L, v1 , v2 ∈ V ).

V2
Corresponding module: Exterior product V with
x.(u ∧ v) = x.u ∧ v + u ∧ x.v.
4. Symmetric product Sym2 (ρ) : L → gl(Sym2V ) with
(Sym2 (ρ)(x))(v1 · v2 ) := (ρ(x)v1 ) · v2 + v1 · (ρ(x)v2 ), (x ∈ L, v1 , v2 ∈ V ).
Corresponding module: Symmetric product Sym2V with
x.(u · v) = (x.u) · v + u · (x.v).

5. Hom-representation HomK (ρ, σ ) := τ : L → gl(HomK (V,W )) with
(τ(x) f )(v) := σ (x) f (v) − f (ρ(x)v), (x ∈ L, f ∈ HomK (V,W ), v ∈ V ).
Corresponding module: Module of homomorphisms HomK (V,W ) with
(x. f )(v) = x. f (v) − f (x.v).
The constructions from part 2) - 4) generalize to products of more than two fac-
tors. The notations emphasize the tight relationship to similar constructions in Com-
mutative Algebra for modules over rings.
Remark 4.18 (Induced representations).

1. It remains to check that the constructions in Definition 4.17 actually yield L-
modules. As an example we consider the case of the dual module V ∗ and verify
that the induced map
ρ∗ : L →
− V∗
satisfies
(ρ ∗ (x)λ )(v) := −λ (ρ(x)v)
or
(x.λ )(v) = −λ (x.v)
preserves the Lie bracket. Claim: For all x, y ∈ L, λ ∈ V ∗ and v ∈ V
([x, y].λ )(v) = (x.y.λ − y.x.λ )(v)
Left-hand side:
([x, y].λ )(v) = −λ ([x, y].v) = −λ (x.y.v) + λ (y.x.v).
Right-hand side:
(x.y.λ − y.x.λ )(v) = −y.λ (x.v) + x.λ (y.v) = λ (y.x.v) − λ (x.y.v).
2. One can show that the canonical isomorphism of vector spaces

≃
V ∗ ⊗W −
→ HomK (V,W ), λ (−) ⊗ w 7→ λ (−) · w,
is an isomorphism of L-modules.
3. For a K-linear map f ∈ HomK (V,W ):
L. f = 0 ⇐⇒ f : V → W is L-linear.
Theorem 4.19 (Lemma of Schur). Consider a K-Lie algebra L.

1. Then any morphism
f :V →
−W
between two irreducible L-modules is either zero or an isomorphism.
2. If K = C and
ρ : L → gl(V )
is an irreducible complex representation, then any endomorphism f ∈ End(V )
commuting with all elements of ρ is a multiple of the identity, i.e. if for all x ∈ L
[ f , ρ(x)] = 0
then a complex number µ ∈ C exists with
f = µ · id.
3. If K = C, and
f1 , f2 : V → W
are two morphisms of irreducible L-modules with f2 ̸= 0. Then
f1 = c · f2
for a suitable c ∈ C, i.e.

(
C V ≃W
HomL (V,W ) =
{0} V ≃
̸ W
Proof. 1. Because f is a morphism, the kernel ker f ⊂ V is a submodule. Irre-

ducibility of V implies that ker f = {0} or ker f = V . If ker f = {0} then f is
injective and f (V ) ⊂ W is a submodule. Irreducibility of W implies f (V ) = W ,
such that f is injective and surjective, hence an isomorphism.
2. The endomorphism f has a complex eigenvalue µ. Its eigenspace W ⊂ V is also

an L-submodule: If w ∈ W and
f (w) = c · w
then for all x ∈ L
( f ◦ ρ(x))(w) = (ρ(x) ◦ f )(w) = ρ(x)(c · w) = c · ρ(x)w.
Now W ̸= {0} and V irreducible imply W = V .
3. Because of f2 ̸= 0 the morphism f2 is an isomorphism according to part 1). Con-

sider the L-module morphism
f := f1 ◦ f2−1 : W →
− W.
Then f ∈ End(W ), and for all x ∈ L, w ∈ W, holds
x. f (w) = f (x.w),
which implies due to part 2) the existence of a suitable c ∈ C with
f = c · idW
which proves
f1 = c · f2 .
The last claim about HomL (V,W ) follows from part 1), q.e.d.
Definition 4.20 (Casimir element). Consider a complex semisimple Lie algebra L

and a faithful representation ρ : L → gl(V ) on a complex vector space V . The trace
form of ρ
β : L × L → C, β (x, y) := tr(ρ(x)ρ(y)),
is nondegenerate according to Lemma 4.11. For a base (xi )i=1,...,n of L denote
by (y j ) j=1,...,n the base dual with respect to β , i.e.
β (xi , y j ) = δi j .
The Casimir element of ρ is defined as the endomorphism

n
cρ := ∑ ρ(xi )ρ(yi ) ∈ End(V ).
i=1
Note: One checks that the Casimir element does not depend on the choice of the
basis (xi )i=1,...,n .
Remark 4.21 (Reduction to faithful representations). If the representation ρ is not

faithful one considers the direct decomposition
L = ker ρ ⊕ L′
with L′ := (ker ρ)⊥ ⊂ L. The Lie algebra L′ is semisimple according to Proposition 4.14.
The restricted representation ρ|L′ → gl(V ) is faithful.
Theorem 4.22 (Properties of the Casimir element). The Casimir element cρ ∈ End(V )
of a faithful representation ρ of a complex semisimple Lie algebra L has the follow-
ing properties:
• Commutation: The Casimir element commutes with all elements of the represen-
tation:
[cρ , ρ(L)] = 0
• Trace: tr(cρ ) = dim L
• Scalar: For an irreducible representation ρ holds
dim L
cρ = · idV .
dim V
Proof. Set n = dim L and
n
cρ = ∑ ρ(xi )ρ(yi ) ∈ End(V )
i=1
with bases (xi )i=1,...,n and (y j ) j=1,...,n of L, which are dual with respect to the trace
form β of ρ.
i) Commutation: For x ∈ L we show [ρ(x), cρ ] = 0: Define the coefficients (ai j )

and (b jk ) according to
n n
[x, xi ] = ∑ ai j · x j , [x, y j ] = ∑ b jk · yk .
j=1 k=1
Because the families (x j )1≤ j≤n and (yk )1≤k≤n are dual bases with respect to β
n
ai j = β ( ∑ aik · xk , y j ) = β ([x, xi ], y j ) = −β ([xi , x], y j ) = −β (xi , [x, y j ]) =
k=1
n
= −β (xi , ∑ b jk · yk ) = −b ji .
k=1
Here we made use of the associativity of the trace form according to Lemma 4.1. To
compute
n
[ρ(x), cρ ] = ∑ [ρ(x), ρ(xi )ρ(yi )]
i=1
we use the formula

[A, BC] = [A, B]C + B[A,C]
for endomorphisms A, B,C ∈ End(V ). For each summand
[ρ(x), ρ(xi )ρ(yi )] = [ρ(x), ρ(xi )]ρ(yi ) + ρ(xi )[ρ(x), ρ(yi )]

and therefore
n
[ρ(x), cρ ] = ∑ ([ρ(x), ρ(xi )]ρ(yi ) + ρ(xi )[ρ(x), ρ(yi )]) =
i=1
n n n
= ∑ (ρ([x, xi ])ρ(yi )+ρ(xi )ρ([x, yi ]) = ∑ ai j ·ρ(x j )ρ(yi )+ ∑ bik ·ρ(xi )ρ(yk ) =
i=1 i, j=1 i,k=1
n n
= ∑ ai j · ρ(x j )ρ(yi ) + ∑ b ji · ρ(x j )ρ(yi ) =
i, j=1 i, j=1
n
= ∑ (ai j + b ji ) · (ρ(x j )ρ(yi )) = 0.
i, j=1
Here we have changed in the second sum the summation indices (i, k) 7→ ( j, i).
ii) Trace: We have

n n
tr(cρ ) = ∑ tr(ρ(xi )ρ(yi )) = ∑ β (xi , yi ) = n = dim L.
i=1 i=1
iii) Scalar: For an irreducible representation ρ we get with part i) and the Lemma
of Schur, Theorem 4.19,
cρ = µ · idV
and with part ii)
tr(cρ ) = µ · dim V = dim L, q.e.d.
Lemma 4.23 (Representations of semisimple Lie algebras are traceless). Con-

sider a complex semisimple Lie algebra L and a representation ρ : L → gl(V ).
• Then ρ(L) ⊂ sl(V ), i.e. tr(ρ(x)) = 0 for all x ∈ L.
• In particular, 1-dimensional representations of L are trivial, i.e. if dim V = 1

then ρ = 0.
Proof. Due to semisimpleness we have L = [L, L], see Theorem 4.15. If x = [u, v] ∈ L
then
tr(ρ(x)) = tr(ρ([u, v])) = tr([ρ(u), ρ(v)]) = 0
according to Lemma 4.1. For 1-dimensional V , i.e. V = C, and for all x ∈ L
0 = tr(ρ(x)) = ρ(x), q.e.d.

Theorem 4.24 (Weyl’s theorem on complete reducibility). Every finite-dimensional,

non-zero L-module V of a complex semisimple Lie algebra L is completely reducible.
Note: The irreducible direct summands of V are uniquely determined, not only their
isomorphy classes.
Proof. We have to show: Any submodule of a L-module has a complement. Hence

we will consider pairs (V,W ) with an L-module V and a submodule W ⊂ V proceed-
ing along the following steps:
1. codimV W = 1. Proof by induction on n = dim W .
- Subcase 1a): W reducible.
- Subcase 1b): W irreducible.
2. codimV W arbitrary.
1. Codimension = 1: Consider pairs (V,W ) with an L-module V and a submodule
W ⊂ V with codimV W = 1.
Lemma 4.23 implies that the 1-dimensional quotient V /W is a trivial L-module.

Hence (V,W ) fits into an exact sequence of L-modules
0→W →V →C→0
We construct a complement of W by induction on dim W . The induction step em-
ploys one of two alternative subcases. Subcase 1a) uses the induction hypothesis,
while subcase 1b) uses the Casimir element.
Subcase 1a), W reducible: Consider a proper submodule
{0} ⊊ W ′ ⊊ W,
inducing the exact sequence of L-modules
0 → W /W ′ → V /W ′ → C → 0
Because
dim (W /W ′ ) < dim W
the pair (V /W ′ ,W /W ′ ) satisfies the induction assumption. We obtain a submod-
ule W ′ ⊂ W̃ ⊂ V and a splitting of L-modules
V /W ′ = W /W ′ ⊕ W̃ /W ′ .
We have the exact sequence of L-modules

0 → W ′ → W̃ → W̃ /W ′ ≃ C → 0
The estimates
codimW̃ W ′ = 1 and codimW ′ W ≥ 1
imply
dim W ′ < dim W
also the pair (W̃ ,W ′ ) satisfies the induction assumption. We obtain a submodule X ⊂ W̃
and a splitting of L-modules
W̃ = W ′ ⊕ X.
We claim
V = W ⊕ X.
For the proof, on one hand the two splittings imply
dim V = dim W + dim W̃ − dim W ′ and dim W̃ = dim W ′ + dim X.
Hence
dim V = dim W + dim X.
On the other hand,
X ⊂ W̃
(W ∩ X) ⊂ (W ∩ W̃ ).
The first splitting implies
{0} = (W /W ′ ) ∩ (W̃ /W ′ ) = (W ∩ W̃ ) ⊂ W ′ ,
and therefore
(W ∩ X) ⊂ (W ∩ W̃ ) ⊂ W ′ .
As a consequence
W ∩ X = (W ∩ X) ∩W ′ = W ∩ (X ∩W ′ ).
The second splitting implies
X ∩W ′ = {0}.
Hence
W ∩ X = {0}.
Therefore
V =W ⊕X
which finishes the induction step for reducible W .
Subcase 1b), W irreducible: Assume that the representation

ρ : L → gl(V )
defines the L-module structure. According to Remark 4.21 we may assume ρ

faithful. We consider the Casimir element of ρ
dim L
cρ := ∑ ρ(x j )ρ(y j ) ∈ End(V ).
j=1
• Concerning V : The Casimir element cρ : V → V is even L-linear, i.e. for x ∈ V, v ∈ V ,
(cρ ◦ ρ(x))(v) = (ρ(x) ◦ cρ )(v)
because [cρ , ρ(x)] = 0 due to Theorem 4.22. Therefore
X := ker cρ ⊂ V
is an L-submodule.
• Concerning W : Because the 1-dimensional L-module V /W is trivial, we have
ρ(L)(V ) ⊂ W.
As a consequence, the definition of cρ implies that the submodule W ⊂ V is

stable also with respect to cρ , i.e.
cρ (W ) ⊂ W.
The irreducibility of W implies according to Theorem 4.22:
cρ |W = µ · idW .
• Concerning W ⊂ V : If we extend a basis (w1 , ..., wn ) of the vector subspace W

to a basis B = (w1 , ..., wn , v) of the vector space V , then with respect to B the
Casimir element has the matrix
 
µ ∗
 .. 
cρ = 
 . 

 µ ∗
0 ... 0 0
From
tr cρ = dim L
follows µ ̸= 0, and in particular
W ∩ X = {0}.
From det cρ = 0 follows

X = ker cρ ̸= {0}.
Because codimV W = 1 we get
V =W ⊕X
which finishes the induction step for irreducible W .
2. Arbitrary codimension: Consider an arbitrary proper submodule
{0} ⊊ W ⊊ V.
First we claim the existence of a section against the canonical injection
→ V,
W ,−
i.e. the existence of an L-linear map
f0 : V → W
such that f0 |W = idW . Then

X := ker f0
is a complement of W because V /X ≃ W .
The idea is to translate the question on the existence of a section to a problem

about L-modules in a context where case 1 applies. We consider the induced L-module
HomC (V,W )
to reduce the question on sections to a problem concerning pairs of L-modules

of C-linear homomorphism
(V , W )
with codimV W = 1. The latter problem can be solved by case 1.
Consider the following submodules of the L-module HomC (V,W )
V := { f ∈ HomC (V,W ) : f |W = λ · idW , λ ∈ C}
W := { f ∈ V : f |W = 0}.
In order to prove that V is a L-module, consider f ∈ HomC (V,W ) with f |W = λ · idW
and x ∈ L, w ∈ W :
(x. f )(w) = x. f (w) − f (x.w) = x. f (λ · w) − λ · (x.w) = λ · (x.w) − λ · (x.w) = 0.
Therefore even L.V ⊂ W and both V and W are L-modules. By definition
codimV W = 1
because W as submodule of V is defined by one additional linear equation.
We now apply the result of case 1 to the pair (V , W ):
The hyperplane W ⊂ V has a complement
C · f0 , f0 ∈ V ⊂ HomC (V,W ),
i.e.
V = W ⊕ C · f0 .
Without restriction
f0 |W = idW .
The L-module C · f0 is 1-dimensional, hence trivial according to Lemma 4.23.
According to Remark 4.18 the equality L. f0 = 0 implies the L-linearity of
f0 : V → W.
Therefore
X := ker f0 ⊂ V
is a submodule. Due to our considerations at the beginning of case 2)
V = W ⊕ X, q.e.d.
Note. Theorem 4.24 also holds over the base field R.
The following Theorem 4.25 is a consequence of Theorem 4.24.
Theorem 4.25 (Jordan decomposition in semisimple matrix Lie algebras). Con-

sider a vector space V and a semisimple complex matrix Lie algebra L ⊂ gl(V ). For
any element x ∈ L, considered as endomorphism
x :V →V
with Jordan decomposition
x = xs + xn ∈ End(V ),
both summands belong to L, i.e. xs , xn ∈ L.
Proof. The proof has two separate parts. The first part deals with the Lie algebra L
and considers L ⊂ gl(V ) as a matrix algebra. The second part deals with the Lie
algebra L when considered an abstract semisimple Lie algebra.
We consider an arbitrary, but fixed endomorphism

x :V →V
with Jordan decomposition

x = xs + xn .
i) The Lie algebra gl(V ): Here adjoint elements are taken with respect to gl(V ).
Proposition 3.3 implies the Jordan decomposition
ad x = ad xs + ad xn
with polynomials ps (T ), pn (T ) ∈ C[T ] without constant term such that
ad xs = ps (ad x), ad xn = pn (ad x).
Therefore (ad x)(L) ⊂ L implies
[xs , L] = (ad xs )(L) ⊂ L and [xn , L] = (ad xn )(L) ⊂ L.
The normalizer of the subalgebra L ⊂ gl(V )
N := Ngl(V ) L ⊂ gl(V ).
contains L by definition as an ideal. We just proved
xs , xn ∈ N.
ii) The semisimple Lie algebra L: We have xs , xn ∈ N. But unfortunately, in general L ⊊ N.

Therefore we will construct a specific submodule
L ⊂ L̃ ⊂ N
with the property xs , xn ∈ L̃ and show L̃ = L.
For any submodule W ⊂ V of the L-module V we define the subspace

LW := {y ∈ gl(V ) : y(W ) ⊂ W and tr(y|W ) = 0} ⊂ HomC (V,V ).
One checks that LW is even an L-submodule of the induced L-module HomC (V,V ):
For z ∈ L, y ∈ LW , w ∈ W holds
(z.y)(w) = z.y(w) − y(z.w) ∈ W
and
tr((z.y)|W ) = tr([z, y]|W ) = 0.
We define \ \
L̃ := N ∩ LW = (N ∩ LW ).
W ⊂V W ⊂V
With N and each LW also L̃ is an L-module. It satisfies:

• L ⊂ L̃: Because L is semisimple, Lemma 4.23 implies tr(y|W ) = 0 for all y ∈ L.

As a consequence \
L⊂ LW and L ⊂ L̃.
W ⊂V
• xs , xn ∈ L̃: Because the subspace W is stable with respect to the endomorphism x : V → V ,

the same is true for its Jordan components, i.e.
xs (W ) ⊂ W and xn (W ) ⊂ W.
According to Lemma 4.23, the semisimpleness of L implies tr(x|W ) = 0. Hence x ∈ LW .

With xn also the restriction xn |W is nilpotent, therefore
tr (xn |W ) = 0 and xn ∈ LW .
As a consequence also
xs = x − xn ∈ LW .
We obtain
xs , xn ∈ L̃
because xs , xn ∈ N and xs , xn ∈ LW for all L-submodules W ⊂ V .
It remains to show L = L̃. According to Weyl’s theorem on complete reducibility,

Theorem 4.24, an L-submodule M ⊂ L exists with
L̃ = L ⊕ M.
We claim: M = 0. Consider an arbitrary but fixed y ∈ M. Because L̃ ⊂ N we have
[L̃, L] = [L, L̃] ⊂ L
which implies that the action of L on M is trivial. In order to show M = {0} we

consider an arbitrary, but fixed y ∈ M. Then
[L, y] = 0.
As a consequence, for any irreducible L-submodule W ⊂ V on one hand, Schur’s

Lemma, Theorem 4.19, implies
y = µ · idW .
On the other hand, y ∈ LW implies tr(y|W ) = 0, hence
y|W = 0.
The decomposition of V as a direct sum of irreducible L-modules shows y = 0. We

obtain M = {0} and
L = L̃, q.e.d.
The previous Theorem 4.25 assures: For a semisimple Lie algebra L the Jordan
decomposition of elements from ad L induces a decomposition of elements from L.
Definition 4.26 (Abstract Jordan decomposition). Consider a complex semisim-

ple Lie algebra L. Its adjoint representation satisfies
≃
ad : L −
→ ad L ⊂ gl(L).
For any x ∈ L the endomorphism
ad x : L → L, y 7→ [x, y]
has the Jordan decomposition
ad x = fs + fn ∈ End(L)
with
fs ∈ ad(L) and fn ∈ ad(L),
see Theorem 4.25. Defining
s := ad −1 ( fs ) ∈ L and n := ad −1 ( fn ) ∈ L
provides the decomposition
x = s+n
with s ∈ L ad-semisimple, n ∈ L ad-nilpotent and [s, n] = 0. This decomposition is
named the abstract Jordan decomposition of x ∈ L.
Note. The abstract Jordan decomposition

x = s+n
is uniquely determined by the property, that the components s, n ∈ L are respectively
ad-semisimple and ad-nilpotent and satisfy [s, n] = 0. The uniqueness follows from
the uniqueness of the Jordan decomposition of the endomorphism
ad x : L →
− L
and from the isomorphism

≃
ad : L −
→ ad(L).
In the abstract case, neither x ∈ L nor its components s, n ∈ L from the abstract
Jordan decomposition are defined as endomorphisms of a vector space. But Corol-
lary 4.27 will show: For any representation
ρ : L → gl(V )
the abstract Jordan decomposition of x ∈ L induces the Jordan decomposition

of ρ(x) ∈ End(V ). This fact generalizes Proposition 3.3.
Corollary 4.27 (Jordan decomposition of representations). Consider a complex

vector space V and a representation
ρ : L → gl(V )
of a complex semisimple Lie algebra L. If x ∈ L has the abstract Jordan decomposi-

tion
x = s+n
then ρ(x) ∈ End(V ) has the Jordan decomposition
ρ(x) = ρ(s) + ρ(n).
Proof. i) Abstract Jordan decomposition in ρ(L): We consider the semisimple com-

plex matrix Lie algebra
F := ρ(L) ⊂ gl(V )
and the element
ρ(x) ∈ F.
By definition the endomorphism
ad s : L → L
is semisimple, i.e. the eigenvectors (vi )i∈I of ad s ∈ End(L) span the vector space L.
Hence the vectors from ρ(L)
(ρ(vi ))i∈I
span the vector space F. They are eigenvectors of ad(ρ(s)) because
(ad s)(vi ) = [s, vi ] = λi · vi
implies
(ad(ρ(s))(ρ(vi )) = [ρ(s), ρ(vi )] = ρ([s, vi ]) = ρ(λi · vi ) = λi · ρ(vi ).
Therefore the endomorphism
ad ρ(s) ∈ End(F)
is semisimple. Similarly, the endomorphism
ad n ∈ End(L)
is nilpotent by definition, and therefore
ad ρ(n) ∈ End(F)
is nilpotent because
(ad ρ(n))k = ρ ◦ (ad n)k .
Apparently,
[ρ(s), ρ(n)] = ρ([s, n]) = 0
which implies [ad ρ(s), ad ρ(n)] = 0. Summing up:
ad ρ(x) = ad ρ(s) + ad ρ(n)
is the Jordan decomposition of the element
ad ρ(x) ∈ ad(F).
By definition
ρ(x) = ρ(s) + ρ(n) ∈ F
is the abstract Jordan decomposition in the Lie algebra F of the element ρ(x) ∈ F.
ii) Jordan decomposition in End(V ): Now we consider

ρ(x) : V →
−V
as endomorphism of the vector space V . We denote its Jordan decomposition due to
Theorem 1.17 by
ρ(x) = fs + fn .
Because the matrix Lie algebra F ⊂ gl(V ) is semisimple, Theorem 4.25 applies:
fs , fn ∈ ρ(L).
Semisimpleness of fs implies ad-semisimpleness, see proof of Proposition 3.3. And

nilpotency of fn implies ad-nilpotency, see Lemma 3.2. Hence also
ρ(x) = fs + fn
is the abstract Jordan decomposition of ρ(x) ∈ F. From the uniqueness of the ab-
stract Jordan decomposition in F derives
fs = ρ(s) and fn = ρ(n), q.e.d.

Part II
Complex Semisimple Lie Algebras
130
Which are the fundamental results from the theory of complex semisimpleLie
algebras?
Structure of complex semisimple Lie algebras L

1. Cornerstone sl(2, C): The structure of the semisimple Lie algebra sl(2, C) due to
the basis (h, x, y) with commutators
[h, x] = 2x, [h, y] = −2y, [x, y] = h
generalizes to the Cartan decomposition of L, see Definition 5.18,
(Lα ⊕ L−α )
M
L=H⊕
α∈Φ +
with 1-dimensional root spaces
Lα = C · xα , L−α = C · yα
satisfying
[xα , yα ] = hα ∈ H.
For each root α ∈ Φ+ the Lie algebra
Sα := span < hα , xα , yα >
is isomorphic to sl(2, C), see Proposition 7.3.
2. Integrality of the roots: For the first time the importance of integer numbers for
complex Lie algebras shows up as the integer = 2 in the commutator relations
[h, x] = 2x and [h, y] = −2y.
Via the adjoint representation the element h ∈ sl(2, C) acts as diagonal endomor-
phism on sl(2, C), and the corresponding eigenvalues, are
0, 2, −2.
In the general case, under the adjoint representation the Cartan algebra H ⊂ L
acts in a diagonal way on L, and the corresponding eigenvalues, the roots from
the root set Φ = Φ + ∪ Φ − ,
α :H → − C
satisfy
< α1 , α2 >:= α1 (hα2 ) ∈ Z (Cartan integer),
see Proposition 7.4. The proof relies on the existence of the subalgebras
Sα ≃ sl(2, C) ⊂ L
131
and the integer weights of finite-dimensional sl(2, C)-modules.
3. Root system: The integrality of the Cartan integers proves that the root set Φ
of L is a root system, see Definition 6.2: First, the non-degenerateness of the
Killing-form κ provides an identification of the Cartan algebra H ⊂ L with its
dual space
≃
H− → H ∗ , tα 7→ α,
and introduces on H ∗ the non-degenerate bilinear form
(α, β ) := κ(tα ,tβ ),
see Definition 7.1.
Secondly, the root set Φ spans the dual space H ∗ . After choosing a basis of H ∗
formed by roots, any other root is a rational linear combination of the basis roots.
The restriction of the form (−, −) to the rational vector space
VQ := spanQ Φ
and to its real extension

V := VQ ⊗Q R
is a scalar product, see Proposition 7.4. As a consequence the root set Φ ⊂ V
satisfies all properties of a root system, see Definition 6.2, with Weyl reflections
(v, α)
σα : V →
− V, v 7→ v− < v, α > ·α, < v, α >:= 2 · = v(hα ),
(α, α)
which leave the scalar product invariant.
A highlight of the theory is the classification of root systems by their Dynkin

diagrams, see Proposition 6.27.
4. Classification: From the classification of Dynkin diagrams results the classifica-

tion of complex simple Lie algebras. There are finitely many types: The A, B,C, D-series
of the classical Lie algebras, see Section 7.2, and in addition finitely many ex-
ceptional types E, F, G. Any semisimple complex Lie algebra L is a finite direct
sum of simple Lie algebras, see Theorem 4.15.
Finite-dimensional L-modules
1. Complete reducibility: Thanks to Weyl’s theorem on complete reducibility each
finite dimensional representation splits into a finite direct sum of irreducible
representations, see Theorem 4.24.
2. Universal enveloping algebra: One obtains an irreducible sl(2, C)-module V of

arbitrary highest weight λ ∈ N by taking an (1 + λ )-dimensional vector space V
with basis (ei )i=0,...,λ and defining
• h.ei := (λ − 2i) · ei
• y.ei := (i + 1) · ei+1 , eλ +1 := 0
• x.ei := (λ − i + 1) · ei−1 , e−1 := 0,
see Theorem 5.9. Here e0 ∈ V is a primitive element.
To generalize this result to L-modules one introduces for any Lie algebra A the
universal enveloping algebra UA of A as a quotient of the tensor algebra of A,
see Definition 8.1. To obtain an irreducible UL-module V of arbitrary highest
weight λ ∈ H ∗ one takes an arbitrary non-zero vector e and sets
h.e = λ (h) · e for all h ∈ H,
and
x.e = 0 for all α ∈ Φ + and x ∈ Lα .
The 1-dimensional representation Ce of the Borel subalgebra
M
B := H ⊕ Lα ⊂ L
α∈Φ +
can be considered an UB-module. It extends to the UL-module
UL ⊗ UB Ce.
Its quotient V by the sum of its proper submodules is irreducible, as UL-module

and also as L-module, see Theorem 8.21.
3. Monoid of finite-dimensional irreducible L-modules: An irreducible L-module V

with highest weight λ ∈ H ∗ is finite-dimensional if and only if λ is integral and
non-negative.
To show that λ is integral and non-negative one uses the subalgebras Sα ≃ sl(2, C).
The opposite direction follows from the transitive action of the Weyl group of L
on the weights of V , see Theorem 8.23. As a consequence the Abelian monoid of
finite-dimensional irreducible L-modules and the zero-module is free with basis
the fundamental weights
(λi )i=1,...,r , r = rank L,
see Theorem 8.26. The fundamental weights are obtained from a base
∆ = {α1 , ..., αr }
of the root system of L by applying the Cartan matrix, see Proposition 8.25.
Chapter 5
Cartan decomposition
The first non-trivial Cartan decomposition of a complex semisimple Lie algebra is

the decomposition of sl(2, C) in Proposition 5.4.
sl(2, C) = C · h ⊕ (C · x ⊕ C · y)
with h ∈ sl(2, C) ad-semisimple and the elements x, y ∈ sl(2, C) eigenvectors of h

under the adjoint representation.
The base field in this chapter is K = C, the field of complex numbers. All Lie
algebras are complex Lie algebras unless stated otherwise.
5.1 Toral subalgebra
Consider a Lie algebra L. We recall from Definition 3.4 that an element x ∈ L is

named ad-semisimple iff the endomorphism
ad x : L →
− L, y 7→ [x, y],
is semisimple, i.e. diagonalizable.
It is well-known from Linear Algebra that a set of commuting semisimple en-

domorphisms can be simultaneously diagonalized. Therefore, starting from one ad-
semisimple of L one tries to find all pairwise commuting ad-semisimple elements
of L which also commute with the given one. A first result about a semisimple Lie
algebra L states: Any subalgebra T ⊂ L with only ad-semisimple elements is already
Abelian, see Proposition 5.3. Such a subalgebra is called a toral subalgebra.
A second result, Theorem 5.17 from Section 5.3, will show that no other elements
of L commute with a maximal toral subalgebra T ⊂ L, i.e. CL (T ) = T .
133
134 5 Cartan decomposition
Definition 5.1 (Toral subalgebra). Consider a Lie algebra L.

• A toral subalgebra of L is a subalgebra T ⊂ L with all elements x ∈ T ad-
semisimple.
• A toral subalgebra T ⊂ L is a maximal toral subalgebra iff T is not properly
contained in any other toral subalgebra of L.
We recall from Linear Algebra the following Lemma 5.2: The restriction of a
diagonalizable endomorphism to an invariant subspace stays diagonalizable.
Lemma 5.2 (Restriction of a diagonalizable endomorphism to a stable sub-

space). Consider a vector space V and a diagonalizable endomorphism
x :V →V
inducing the eigenspace decomposition

M
V= V λ (x).
λ
If W ⊂ V is a stable subspace, i.e. x(W ) ⊂ W , then also the restriction
x|W : W → W
is diagonalizable with eigenspace decomposition

M
W= (W ∩V λ (x)).
λ
Proof. By assumption V decomposes as a direct sum of eigenspaces of x

k
M
V= V λi (x)
i=1
with pairwise distinct eigenvalues λi , i = 1, ..., k. In order to prove

k
M k
M
W =W ∩ V λi (x) = (W ∩V λi (x))
i=1 i=1
we show: If
w = v1 + ... + vk ∈ W
with eigenvectors vi of x with pairwise distinct eigenvalues λi , then vi ∈ W for
all i = 1, ..., k.
The claim holds for k = 1. For the induction step k − 1 7→ k consider
w = v1 + ... + vk ∈ W
with
5.1 Toral subalgebra 135
x(w) = λ1 · v1 + ... + λk · vk ∈ W
and apply the induction assumption to
x(w) − λ1 · w = (λ2 − λ1 ) · v2 + ... + (λk − λ1 ) · vk ∈ W.
We obtain v2 , ..., vk ∈ W . The representation
w = v1 + ... + vk ∈ W
implies v1 ∈ W , q.e.d.
We prove that the abstract Jordan decomposition of a semisimple Lie algebra L,

cf. Definition 4.26, implies the existence of a maximal toral subalgebra of L.
Proposition 5.3 (Toral subalgebras). Consider a semisimple Lie algebra L ̸= {0}.
1. The Lie algebra L has a non-zero toral subalgebra, hence also a nonzero maximal
toral subalgebra.
2. Each toral subalgebra of L is Abelian.
Proof. 1. Existence of non-zero toral subalgebras: Not every element x ∈ L is ad-
nilpotent. Otherwise ad L and also L ≃ ad L were nilpotent according to Engel’s
theorem, see Theorem 3.10. But the property [L, L] = L, see Theorem 4.15, shows
that L is not nilpotent.
Choose an element x ∈ L with ad xs ̸= 0. The abstract Jordan decomposition
x = s+n
provides a non-zero ad-semisimple element s ∈ L. The 1-dimensional subalgebra
C·s ⊂ L
is a toral subalgebra.
2. Toral subalgebras are Abelian: Consider a toral subalgebra T ⊂ L. Choosing an

arbitrary but fixed x ∈ T we have to show: The restriction
adT (x) := ad(x)|T : T → T, y 7→ ad(x)(y) = [x, y],
is the zero morphism.
Assume an arbitrary element y ∈ T, y ̸= 0. Due to Lemma 5.2 semisimpleness

of ad(x) implies semisimpleness of adT (x). Hence we may assume y ∈ T as an
eigenvector of adT (x) belonging to the eigenvalue λ ∈ C, i.e.
[x, y] = λ · y.
Because the subalgebra T ⊂ L is toral, the endomorphism

ad(y) : L →
− L
is semisimple. Again due to Lemma 5.2 also the endomorphism
adT (y) : T →
− T
is semisimple. Denote by (y j ) j∈J a corresponding basis of eigenvectors of adT (y)

belonging to eigenvalues (λ j ) j∈J . In particular the element x ∈ T has a represen-
tation
x = ∑ α j · y j.
j∈J
We obtain
−λ · y = −[x, y] = [y, x] = adT (y)(x) = ∑ α j · λ j · y j.

j∈J
Assume λ ̸= 0. Then for at least one j ∈ J
α j · λ j ̸= 0.
Hence the eigenvector y ∈ T of adT (y) with eigenvalue 0 is a linear combination

of eigenvectors belonging to eigenvalues λ j ̸= 0, a contradiction. Therefore λ = 0,
which implies
adT (x)(y) = 0, q.e.d.
5.2 sl(2, C)-modules
The 3-dimensional complex Lie algebra sl(2, C) is the prototype of complex semisim-
ple Lie algebras. Also its representation theory is of fundamental importance:
• The representation theory of sl(2, C) is the means to clarify the structure of gen-
eral complex semisimple Lie algebras, see Proposition 7.3 about the Cartan de-
composition. Proposition 5.4 presents the structure of sl(2, C) in a form which
generalizes to arbitrary complex semisimple Lie algebras.
• The representation theory of sl(2, C) is paradigmatic for the representation

theory of general semisimple Lie algebras, see Chapter 8. Proposition 5.7,
Corollary 5.8 and Theorem 5.9 present the representation theory of sl(2, C)-modules
in a form which generalizes to arbitrary complex semisimple Lie algebras.
Proposition 5.4 (Structure of sl(2, C)). The Lie algebra
L := sl(2, C)
has the standard basis B := (h, x, y) with matrices

5.2 sl(2, C)-modules 137

1 0 01 00
h= ,x = ,y = ∈ sl(2, C).
0 −1 00 10
• The non-zero commutators of the elements from B are
[h, x] = 2x, [h, y] = −2y, [x, y] = h.
• With respect to B the matrices of the adjoint representation
ad : L → gl(L)
are      
0 0 0 0 01 0 −1 0
ad h = 0 2 0  , ad x = −2 0 0 , ad y = 0 0 0
0 0 −2 0 00 2 0 0
• The element h ∈ L is ad-semisimple: ad h is a diagonal matrix. It has the eigen-
values
0, α := 2, −α
with eigenspaces respectively
H := L0 = C · h, Lα = C · x, L−α = C · y.
In particular
L = H ⊕ L2 ⊕ L−2
as a direct sum of complex vector spaces.
• The Lie algebra L is simple.
• With respect to the basis B the Killing form of L, see Definition 4.2, has the
symmetric matrix with integer coefficients
 
2 0 0
4 · 0 0 1 ∈ M(3 × 3, Z).
0 1 0
The Killing form is non-degenerate.
• The Abelian subalgebra H ⊂ L is a maximal toral subalgebra of L.
• The restriction
κH := κ|H × H
of the Killing form is positive definite: κH (h, h) = 8. The scalar product κH in-
duces the isomorphism
∼
→ H ∗ , h 7→ κH (h, −) = 8 · h∗ .
H−
The element tα ∈ H with κH (tα , −) = α · h∗ = 2 · h∗ is
h
tα = .
4
It satisfies
2 · tα
h= .
κ(tα ,tα )
Proof. Only the following issues need a separate proof:
i) Simpleness: Due to the commutator relations L is not Abelian. Assume the
existence of a proper ideal I ⊂ L:
{0} ⊊ I ⊊ L.
The splitting
L = H ⊕ L2 ⊕ L−2
implies the splitting of the ideal I
I = (I ∩ H) ⊕ (I ∩ L2 ) ⊕ (I ∩ L−2 )
according to Lemma 5.2. We now use once more the fact [I, L] ⊂ I.
• First, h ∈
/ I: Otherwise 2x = [h, x] ∈ I and − 2y = [h, y] ∈ I, which implies I = L,
a contradiction.
• Secondly, x ∈
/ I: Otherwise h = [x, y] ∈ I, contradicting the first part.
• Thirdly, y ∈
/ I: Otherwise −h = [y, x] ∈ I, contradicting the first part.
Each of the three summands in the splitting of I has dimension at most = 1.
Hence I = {0}, a contradiction, proving the non-existence of I. Therefore L is
simple.
ii) To prove that H ⊂ sl(2, C) is a maximal toral subalgebra, we show CL (H) = H:
[α · h + β · x + γ · y, h] = −2β · x + 2γ · y = 0 ⇐⇒ β = γ = 0 (α, β , γ ∈ C).
Proposition 5.3 about the commutativity of toral subalgebras implies that H is

maximal toral, q.e.d.
Remark 5.5 (Basis of Pauli matrices). A different basis of sl(2, C) is the family (σ j ) j = 1, 2, 3
of Pauli matrices, see Remark 2.16: We have
σ1 + iσ2 σ1 − iσ2
h = σ3 , x = , y=
2 2
The element
h ∈ L := sl(2, C)
is ad-semisimple by definition because ad h ∈ End(L) is semisimple. Therefore h ∈ L
coincides with its semisimple component in the abstract Jordan decomposition of L.
Corollary 4.27 shows the far reaching consequences: The element h acts as semisim-
ple endomorphism on any L-module V . Hence any L-module decomposes as a direct
sum of eigenspaces with respect to the action of h.
Definition 5.6 (Weight, weightspace and primitive element). Consider an sl(2, C)-module V ,
not necessarily finite-dimensional.
1. Denote by
V λ = {v ∈ V : h.v = λ · v}, λ ∈ C,
the eigenspaces with respect to the action of h. If
V λ ̸= {0}
then V λ is named a weight space of V , its non-zero elements are named weight
vectors, and the corresponding eigenvalue λ ∈ C is a weight of V .
2. A weight vector e ∈ V λ is named a primitive element of V with weight λ

if x.e = 0 with respect to the action of the element x from the standard basis B
of sl(2, C).
For any sl(2, C)-module V not only the action of h ∈ sl(2, C), but also the action
of the two other elements of the standard basis
B = (h, x, y)
can be easily described.
Proposition 5.7 (Action of the standard basis). Consider an sl(2, C)-module V ,

not necessarily finite-dimensional. Assume the existence of a primitive element e ∈ V
with weight λ ∈ C. Then the elements
1 i
ei := · y .e, i ≥ 0, e−1 := 0,
i!
satisfy for all i ≥ 0:
1. Weight: h.ei = (λ − 2i) · ei .
2. Lowering the weight: y.ei = (i + 1) · ei+1 .

3. Raising the weight: x.ei = (λ − i + 1) · ei−1 , e−1 := 0.
4. Linear dependence or independence:

• Either the family (ei )i≥0 is linearly independent, or
• the weight λ is a non-negative integer
λ =: m ∈ N,
the family (ei )i=0,...,m is linearly independent, and ei = 0 for all i > m.
Figure 5.1 illustrates the content of Proposition 5.7.
Fig. 5.1 Raising and lowering weights in irreducible sl(2, C)-modules
Proof. ad 2) From the definition
1 1
y.ei = y.(yi .e) = (yi+1 .ei+1 ) = (i + 1) ei+1 .
i! i!
ad 1) Induction on i ∈ N and using part 2): i = 0 by definition. Induction

step i 7→ i + 1:
(i + 1) (h.ei+1 ) = h.(y.ei ) = [h, y].ei + y.(h.ei ) = −2y.ei + y.((λ − 2i)ei ) =
= (λ − 2i − 2) (y.ei ) = (λ − 2i − 2) (i + 1)ei+1 ,
hence
h.ei+1 = (λ − 2i − 2) ei+1 .
ad 3) With the convention e−1 := 0 the formula
x.ei = (λ − i + 1) · ei−1
follows by induction on i ∈ N by using the commutator formula
[x, y] = h ∈ sl(2, C)
together with the result from part 1) and part 2):
i · x.ei = x.(y.ei−1 ) = [x, y].ei−1 + y.(x.ei−1 ) = h.ei−1 + y.((λ − i + 2) · ei−2 ) =
= (λ − 2(i − 1)) · ei−1 + (i − 1)(λ − i + 2) · ei−1 = i(λ − i + 1) · ei−1

and after dividing by i
x.ei = (λ − i + 1) · ei−1 .
Applying x ∈ B raises the weight by 2.
ad 4) The non-zero elements ei have distinct weights. Hence they belong to

different eigenvalues and are linearly independent. The family (ei )i≥0 is linearly
independent when ei ̸= 0 for all i ∈ N. Otherwise there exists a largest index m ∈ N
with all elements e0 , ..., em non-zero. Then ei = 0 for all i > m. We apply the
formula from part 3) and obtain
0 = x.em+1 = (λ − m)em
which implies λ = m, q.e.d.
Corollary 5.8 (Primitive element). Consider a finite-dimensional sl(2, C)-module V .

1. Then V has a primitive element.
2. Any primitive element e ∈ V has a non-negative integer weight m ∈ Z, m ≥ 0. It

generates an irreducible sl(2, C)-submodule
V (m) := span < ei : i = 0, ...., m >⊂ V.

Proof. 1. The subalgebra
B := spanC < h, x >⊂ sl(2, C)
is solvable. According to Lie’s theorem, see Theorem 3.20, the sl(2, C)-operation
on V has a common eigenvector e ∈ V . Consider the eigenvalues λh , λx defined
by
h.e = λh · e and x.e = λx · e.
The commutator [h, x] = 2x implies
[h, x].e = h.(x.e) − x.(h.e) = 0 and 2x.e = 2λx .e,
hence λx = 0. Therefore e ∈ V is a primitive element with weight λh ∈ C.
2. Let e ∈ V be a primitive element with weight λ ∈ C. Because V is finite-

dimensional, Proposition 5.7 implies:
λ =: m ∈ N.
and successive application of y lowers the weight up to the value −m. Therefore λ ≥ 0.
The vector space
W := spanC < ei : i = 0, ..., m >⊂ V
is a submodule of V . All weight spaces W µ are 1-dimensional, generated by

the element ei with µ = m − 2i. Any non-zero submodule W ′ ⊂ W contains
at least one weight vector, hence at least one element ei . The formulas from
Proposition 5.7 imply that W ′ contains also e and a posteriori the whole sl(2, C)-module W .
Therefore W ′ = W , which proves the irreducibility of W , q.e.d.
Chapter 8 will generalize Proposition 5.7 and Corollary 5.8 from sl(2, C) to ar-
bitrary semisimple Lie algebras L. The solvable Lie algebra B will be called a Borel
subalgebra of L. The submodule generated by a primitive element will be named a
standard cyclic module, cf. Definition 8.16.
The construction of the sl(2, C)-module V (λ ) from Proposition 5.7 generates all
irreducible sl(2, C)-modules.
Theorem 5.9 (Classification of finite-dimensional irreducible modules).

1. For any λ ∈ N a finite-dimensional, irreducible sl(2, C)-module V with primitive
element e ∈ V λ exists.
Any finite-dimensional, irreducible sl(2, C)-module V with primitive element e ∈ V λ

is isomorphic to its submodule V (λ ). In particular, V splits as the direct sum
of 1-dimensional weight spaces
λ
V λ −2i .
M
V=
i=0
All weights of V are integers.
2. The map to the isomorphy classes of finite-dimensional, irreducible sl(2, C)-modules
N → {[V ] : V finite-dimensional, irreducible sl(2, C)-module}, λ 7→ [V (λ )],
is bijective.
Proof. Set L := sl(2, C).

1. Choose a vector space V of dimension λ + 1 with basis (e0 , ..., eλ ). Define
L ×V →
−V
according to the formulas from Proposition 5.7:

• h.ei := (λ − 2i) · ei
• y.ei := (i + 1) · ei+1 , eλ +1 := 0
• x.ei := (λ − i + 1) · ei−1 , e−1 := 0
and by linear extension. Due to the commutator relations of sl(2, C)
[h, x] = x, [h, y] = −2y, [x, y] = h
one has to check, that these definitions satisfy the equations

• h.(x.ei ) − x.(h.ei ) = 2x.ei
• h.(y.ei ) − y.(h.ei ) = −2y.ei
• x.(y.ei ) − y.(x.ei ) = h.ei
Accordingly, V becomes an L-module. It has the primitive element e0 ∈ V λ , and
is isomorphic to its irreducible submodule V (λ ) from Corollary 5.8.
2. According to part 1) the map from the theorem is well-defined.
Surjectivity: Consider a finite-dimensional irreducible sl(2, C)-module V , choose

a primitive element e ∈ V λ , and consider the submodule
V (λ ) ≃ span < yi .e : i ∈ N >⊂ V.
The irreducibility of V implies V ≃ V (λ ).
Injectivity: If [V (λ1 )] = [V (λ2 )] then
V (λ1 ) ≃ V (λ2 ),
in particular
1 + λ1 = dim V (λ1 ) = dim V (λ2 ) = 1 + λ2 , q.e.d.
Corollary 5.10 (Classification of finite-dimensional modules). Any finite-dimensional sl(2, C)-module V

is a finite direct sum of irreducible modules of type V (λ )
M
V= V (λ )nλ , nλ ∈ N,
λ ∈N
with nλ ̸= 0 for at most finitely many λ .

Proof. The proof follows from Weyl’s theorem on complete reducibility, see Theo-
rem 4.24 and Theorem 5.9, q.e.d.
Example 5.11 (Explicit representation of finite-dimensional irreducible modules by

homogeneous polynomials).
Set L := sl(2, C).
1. The irreducible L-module of highest weight λ = 0 is the 1-dimensional vector
space C with the trivial representation
ρ : sl(2, C) → {0} ⊂ gl(C).
Its weight space decomposition is
V (0) = V 0 ≃ C.
Any non-zero element e ∈ C is a primitive element.

space C2 with the tautological representation
→ gl(C2 ).
ρ : L = sl(2, C) ,−
Its weight space decomposition is
V (1) = V 1 ⊕V −1
with
1 1 −1 0
V = C· ,V = C ·
0 1
and primitive element
1
e= .
0

space L itself, considered as L-module with respect to the adjoint representation
ad : L → gl(L).
Proposition 5.4 shows the weight space decomposition
V (2) = L = L2 ⊕ L0 ⊕ L−2
with primitive element e = x ∈ B.
4. In general, the irreducible L-module V (λ ) of highest weight λ = n ∈ N is iso-

mophic to the complex vector space of all homogeneous polynomials
P(u, v) ∈ C[u, v]
of degree = n.
The vector space C[u, v] of polynomials in two variables u and v has a basis
of monomials (uµ · vν )µ,ν∈N . A homogeneous polynomial of degree n ∈ N is an
element
n
P(u, v) = ∑ aµ · uµ · vn−µ ∈ C[u, v], aµ ∈ C.
µ=0
Denote by
Pol n ⊂ C[u, v]
the subspace of homogeneoups polynomials of degree n. One has
dim Pol n = n + 1
because the family of monomials (un−i · vi )i=0,...,n is a base of Pol n .
When identifying the canonical basis of C2 with the two variables

1 0
u= and v =
0 1
then the tautological representation of L acts on
Pol 1 ≃ C · u ⊕ C · v
as the matrix product

a a
z. = z· , z ∈ L.
b b
We obtain
h.u = u, h.v = −v; x.u = 0, x.v = u; y.u = v, y.v = 0.

More general, we define an action of z ∈ L on Pol n by the differential operator
∂ ∂
Dz := (z.u) + (z.v) ,
∂u ∂v
notably for un−i · vi ∈ Pol n
h.(un−i ·vi ) := Dh (un−i ·vi ) = u·(n−i)·un−i−1 ·vi −i·v·un−i ·vi−1 = (n−2i)·un−i ·vi
y.(un−i · vi ) := Dy (un−i · vi = v · (n − i) · un−i−1 · vi = (n − i) · un−i−1 · vi+1

x.(un−i · vi ) := Dx (un−i · vi = u · un−i · i · vi−1 = i · un−i+1 · vi−1 .
As a consequence, the map
L × Pol n → Pol n , (z, P) 7→ Dz (P),
defines the irreducible L-module structure V (n) on Pol n : We set
e := un ∈ Pol n
and define for i = 0, ..., n

1 i 1 n−i i n
ei := · (y .e) = · n · (n − 1) · ... · (n − i + 1) · u · v = · un−i · vi .
i! i! i
We obtain
h.ei = (n − 2i) · ei

n n−i i n
y.ei = y. ·u ·v = · (n − i) · un−i−1 · vi+1 =
i i

n
= (i + 1) · · un−i−1 · vi+1 = (i + 1) · ei+1
i+1

n n−i i n
x.ei = x. ·u ·v = i· · un−i+1 · vi−1 =
i i

n
(n − i + 1) · · un−i+1 · vi−1 = (n − i + 1) · ei−1 ,
i−1
which proves Pol n ≃ V (n) with primitive element e := un ∈ Pol n .
One checks that the isomorphy of vector spaces
Pol λ = Symλ (C · u ⊕ C · v) ≃ Symλ C2
induces an isomorphy of L-modules between Pol λ and the symmetric power with
exponent λ of the tautological L-module.
5.3 Cartan subalgebra and root space decomposition 147
5.3 Cartan subalgebra and root space decomposition
In this section the Lie algebra L is always assumed non-zero.
For a semisimple Lie algebra L we choose an arbitrary, but fixed maximal toral
subalgebra T ⊂ L. According to Proposition 5.3 any toral subalgebra is Abelian.
Hence all endomorphisms
ad h : L → L, h ∈ T,
are simultaneously diagonizable, and the whole Lie algebra L splits as a direct sum
of the common eigenspaces of T . This decomposition is called the root space de-
composition of L with respect to T .
We recall from Lemma 4.1 that the Killing form of L is “associative”
κ([x, y], z) = κ(x, [y, z]), x, y, z ∈ L.
Definition 5.12 (Root space decomposition). Consider a pair (L, T ) with a semisim-
ple Lie algebra L and a maximal toral subalgebra T ⊂ L.
1. For a complex linear functional
α :T →C
set
Lα := {x ∈ L : [h, x] = α(h) · x f or all h ∈ T }.
If α ̸= 0 and Lα ̸= {0} then α is a root of (L, T ) and Lα is the corresponding root
space. Any non-zero vector v ∈ V λ is named a root vector.
2. The set of all roots of (L, T ) is denoted
Φ := {α : T → C : α ̸= 0, Lα ̸= {0}}.
3. The vector space decomposition

M
L = L0 ⊕ Lα
α∈Φ
is the root space decomposition of (L, T ).

In the root space decomposition the zero eigenspace L0 plays a distinguished
role. We will show
T = L0 .
By definition L0 = CL (T ). Proposition 5.3 shows that T is Abelian, hence T ⊂ CL (T ).
Therefore, the main step is the proof of the inclusion CL (T ) ⊂ T . See Theorem 5.17
for the equality
T = CL (T ).
The main steps of the proof are:
• The centralizer CL (T ) contains with each element also its ad-semisimple and
its ad-nilpotent summand. Therefore one can consider both types of elements
separately.
• The case of ad-semisimple elements is trivial due to the maximality of T with
respect to ad-semisimple elements.
• If non-zero ad-nilpotent elements of CL (T ) exist, they cannot belong to T . A
posteriori, as a subset of T the centralizer CL (T ) cannot contain any non-zero ad-
nilpotent elements because all elements of a toral subalgebra are ad-semisimple.
• Because the subalgebra CL (T ) is Abelian all its ad-nilpotent elements belong to
the null space of the Killing form restricted to CL (T ).
• The Killing form is nondegenerate on CL (T ).
The following Lemmata 5.13 and 5.15 as well as Proposition 5.16 prepare the
proof of Theorem 5.17.
Lemma 5.13 (Orthogonality of root spaces). Consider a pair (L, T ) with a semisim-
ple Lie algebra L and a maximal toral subalgebra T ⊂ L. Consider the correspond-
ing root space decomposition from Definition 5.12
M
L = L0 Lα .
α∈Φ
For two functionals α, β ∈ T ∗ :

•
[Lα , Lβ ] ⊂ Lα+β .
• If β ̸= −α then
κ(Lα , Lβ ) = 0.
Proof. i) Assume x ∈ Lα , y ∈ Lβ , h ∈ T :
[h, [x, y]] = −([x, [y, h]] + [y, [h, x]]) = [x, β (h) · y] − [y, α(h) · x]
= β (h) · [x, y] + α(h) · [x, y] = (α + β )(h) · [x, y] ∈ Lα+β .

ii) For the proof of the second claim choose an element h ∈ T with
(α + β )(h) ̸= 0.
For arbitrary elements x ∈ Lα , y ∈ Lβ :
κ([h, x], y) = −κ([x, h], y) = −κ(x, [h, y]),
α(h) · κ(x, y) = −β (h) · κ(x, y),

(α + β )(h) · κ(x, y) = 0
which implies κ(x, y) = 0. Hence κ(Lα , Lβ ) = 0, q.e.d.
Corollary 5.14 (Negative of a root). For a semisimple Lie algebra L the negative (−α)
of a root α ∈ Φ is again a root of L.
Proof. Assume on the contrary that −α is not a root. Then for all roots β ∈ Φ
α + β ̸= 0.
Lemma 5.13 implies
κ(Lα , L0 ) = 0 and κ(Lα , Lβ ) = 0.
Therefore the root space decomposition

M
L = L0 ⊕ Lβ
β ∈Φ
implies
κ(Lα , L) = 0.
Theorem 4.12 on the non-degeneratedness of the Killling form implies Lα = 0, a
contradiction, q.e.d.
Lemma 5.15 (Centralizer of a maximal toral subalgebra). Consider a pair (L, T )

with L a semisimple Lie algebra and T ⊂ L a maximal toral subalgebra.
i) The centralizer CL (T ) contains with each element x ∈ CL (T ) also the ad-

semisimple and the ad-nilpotent part
s, n ∈ CL (T )
from the abstract Jordan decomposition x = s + n.
ii) Any ad-semisimple element x ∈ CL (T ) belongs to T .

Proof. Set C := CL (T ).
i) If x ∈ C with abstract Jordan decomposition x = s + n then also s, n ∈ C: The

abstract Jordan decomposition uses the fact that
ad x = ad s + ad n ∈ End(L)
is the Jordan decomposition of the endomorphism ad x ∈ End(L). In particular
ad s = ps (ad x) and ad n = pn (ad x)
with polynomials ps (T ), pn (T ) ∈ C[T ] satisfying ps (0) = pn (0) = 0.
As a consequence: If h ∈ T with (ad x)(h) = 0 then also

(ad s)(h) = 0 and (ad n)(h) = 0.
Hence s, n ∈ C.
ii) All ad-semisimple elements x ∈ C belong to T : Any ad-semisimple element x ∈ C

commutes with all elements from T . Therefore ad x and all elements ad t, t ∈ T,
are simultaneously diagonalizable. In particular, all elements from the vector space
ad(T + C · x) ⊂ ad(L)
are diagonalizable. The maximality of T implies
T + C · x ⊂ T,
i.e. x ∈ T , q.e.d.
The strategy to prove Theorem 5.17 uses the fact that the Killing form restricted
to a maximal toral subalgebra is non-degenerate. The following Proposition 5.16
proves this result in two steps. Nevertheless, Theorem 5.17 will show a posteriori
that both steps coincide.
Proposition 5.16 (Non-degenerateness of the Killing form of a maximal toral

subalgebra). Consider a pair (L, T ) with L a semisimple Lie algebra and T ⊂ L a
maximal toral subalgebra.
The restriction of the Killing form to the centralizer of T
κC := κ|CL (T ) ×CL (T ) : CL (T ) ×CL (T ) → C,
and the restriction to T itself
κT := κ|T × T : T × T → C
are non-degenerate.
Proof. 1) Restriction to CL (T ): By definition CL (T ) = L0 . Assume x ∈ L0 with κ(x, L0 ) = 0.

According to Lemma 5.13: For any root β ∈ Φ holds κ(x, Lβ ) = 0 . Hence
κ(x, L) = 0.
Because the Killing form is non-degenerate on L according to the Cartan criterion

from Theorem 4.12, the last equation implies x = 0.
2) Restriction to T : Assume an element h ∈ T with κT (h, T ) = 0. Because T ⊂ C

and because the restricted Killing form κC is nondegenerate according to the first
part, it suffices to show
κC (h,C) = 0.
An ad-nilpotent element n ∈ C defines a nilpotent endomorphism ad n ∈ End(L).

Because [x, h] = 0 also
[ad n, ad h] = 0.
Therefore the endomorphism
(ad h) ◦ (ad n) ∈ End(L)
is nilpotent. Hence
κC (h, n) = tr((ad h) ◦ (ad n)) = 0
by Corollary 4.1. For a general element x ∈ C with abstract Jordan decomposition
x = s+n
we first have s ∈ C due to Lemma 5.15, and then s ∈ T due to the same Lemma.
Hence
κC (h, x) = κC (h, s) + κC (h, n) = κT (h, s) + κC (h, n) = 0
which implies h = 0, q.e.d.
Theorem 5.17 (A maximal toral subalgebra equals its centralizer). Consider a

semisimple Lie algebra L and a maximal toral subalgebra T ⊂ L. Then
T = CL (T ).
Proof. According to Proposition 5.3 the toral subalgebra T is Abelian. Therefore T ⊂ CL (T ).

It remains to prove the opposite inclusion
CL (T ) ⊂ T.
For the proof set C := CL (T ). Due to Lemma 5.15 the main step to be proved will
be: Any ad-nilpotent element n ∈ C belongs to T . For proving that step we will use
the non-degenerateness of the restricted Killing form, see Proposition 5.16.
i) T ∩ [C,C] = {0}: By definition of the centralizer [C, T ] = {0}. Lemma 4.1

implies
0 = κC ([T,C],C) = κC (T, [C,C]).
In particular,
0 = κC (T, T ∩ [C,C]) = κT (T, T ∩ [C,C]).
Non-degenerateness of κT according to Proposition 5.16 implies T ∩ [C,C] = {0}.
ii) The centralizer C is nilpotent: According to Engel’s theorem, see Theorem 3.10,
it suffices to show that for each element x ∈ C the endomorphism
adC x ∈ End(C)
is nilpotent. For the proof consider the abstract Jordan decomposition
x = s + n.
On one hand, Lemma 5.15 implies s ∈ T . Hence [s,C] = 0 by definition. On the

other hand, the endomorphism ad n ∈ End(L) is nilpotent, hence a posteriori also
the restriction (ad n)|C ∈ End(C). As a consequence,
adC x = adC n
is nilpotent.
iii) The centralizer C is Abelian: We argue by indirect proof. Assume on the

contrary [C,C] ̸= 0. Due to part ii) the Lie algebra C is nilpotent. We apply
Corollary 3.13 to the ideal
{0} ̸= I := [C,C] ⊂ C
and obtain an element

0 ̸= x ∈ Z(C) ∩ [C,C].
The element x is not ad-semisimple, because ad-semisimple elements from C belong
to T according to Lemma 5.15 and
T ∩ [C,C] = {0}
according to part i). Therefore n ̸= 0 in the abstract Jordan decomposition
x = s+n
and n ∈ C according to Lemma 5.15. Moreover x ∈ Z(C) implies n ∈ Z(C) according

to Theorem 1.17. The nilpotency of ad n and the property [n, y] = 0 for all y ∈ C
imply the nilpotency of
(ad n) ◦ (ad y).
As a consequence κC (n, y) = 0 according to Lemma 4.1. We obtain κC (n,C) = 0.
Proposition 5.16 implies n = 0, a contradiction.
iv) C ⊂ T : We argue by indirect proof. Assume the existence of an element x ∈ C \ T

with abstract Jordan decomposition
x = s + n.
First n ̸= 0, because otherwise x = s is semisimple and Lemma 5.15 implies x ∈ T , a

contradiction. Secondly, Lemma 5.15 implies n ∈ C. Thirdly, in order to show κC (n,C) = 0
we consider an arbitrary element y ∈ C. The endomorphism adC (n) is nilpotent.
Moreover [n, y] = 0 because C is Abelian by part iii). Hence the composition
adC (n) ◦ adC (y)

is nilpotent and
κC (n, y) = trace(adC (n) ◦ adC (y)) = 0.
Eventually, Proposition 5.16 implies n = 0, a contradiction, q.e.d.
Consider a pair (L, T ) with a complex semisimple Lie algebra L and a maximal
toral subalgebra T ∈ L. Theorem 5.17 allows to replace in the root space decom-
position of L from Definition 5.12 the eigenspace L0 = CL (T ) by T . Moreover,
Corollary 5.14 allows to choose from each pair (α, −α) of roots of L exactly one
member. The set of chosen members is denoted Φ + ⊂ Φ. How to make a canonical
choice will be explained in Chapter 6 and 7.
Definition 5.18 (Cartan decomposition). Consider (L, T ) with a semisimple Lie

algebra L and a maximal toral subalgebra T ⊂ L. Denote by Φ the root set of (L, T ).
Then the decomposition as the direct sum of eigenspaces of T
(Lα ⊕ L−α )
M M
L=T⊕ Lα = T ⊕
α∈Φ α∈Φ +
is the Cartan decomposition of L with respect to T .
Here we have applied Corollary 5.14: For any root α ∈ Φ also (−α) ∈ Φ. Hence
we may choose from each pair (α, −α) of roots of L exactly one member. The set
of chosen members is denoted by Φ + ⊂ Φ. How to make a canonical choice will be
explained in Chapter 6 and 7.
The Cartan decomposition of L with respect to T is the root space decomposition

of L from Definition 5.12 with the additional information
T = L0
from Theorem 5.17. As a consequence, a complex semisimple Lie algebra L decom-

poses as the direct sum of a maximal toral subalgebra T and the root spaces Lα of
its corresponding roots α ∈ Φ.
Definition 5.19 (Cartan subalgebra). Consider a Lie algebra L. A Cartan subalge-

bra H of L is a nilpotent subalgebra H ⊂ L equal to its normalizer, i.e. H = NL (H).
Lemma 5.20 (Cartan subalgebras of a semisimple Lie algebra). For a semisim-

ple Lie algebra L any maximal toral subalgebra T ⊂ L is a Cartan subalgebra of L.
Proof. i) According to Proposition 5.3 any toral subalgebra T ⊂ L is Abelian, in

particular nilpotent.
ii) The Cartan decomposition of L with respect to T represents an arbitrary
element x ∈ NL (T ) uniquely as
x = xT + ∑ xα , xT ∈ T, xα ∈ Lα .
α∈Φ
For all h ∈ T
[h, x] = [h, xT ] + ∑ α(h) · xα = ∑ α(h) · xα ∈ T.

α∈Φ α∈Φ
For any α ∈ Φ an element h ∈ T exists with α(h) ̸= 0. Then [h, x] ∈ T implies
xα = 0.
We obtain x = xT . Therefore NL (T ) ⊂ T . Apparently T ⊂ NL (T ). As a consequence
NL (T ) = T, q.e.d.
Remark 5.21 (Cartan subalgebras of a semisimpleLie algebra). For a semisimple

Lie algebra L the two concepts Cartan subalgebra and maximal toral subalgebra
are even equivalent, see [28, Chapter 15.3].
In the following we will employ the standard notation H for Cartan subalgebras,
and denote by the letter H a fixed toral subalgebra of a semisimple Lie algebra L,
i.e. a fixed Cartan subalgebra of L.
Chapter 6
Root systems
Our point of departure is the Cartan decomposition of a complex semisimple Lie

algebra M
L=H⊕ Lα ,
α∈Φ
see Definition 5.18.

We separate the concept of roots from the Lie algebra as its origin and study
the properties of Φ in the context of abstract root systems. Here we follow Serre’s
guide [45]. Different from many other authors Serre introduces a root system in an
axiomatic way by its set of reflections. The existence of an invariant scalar product
is then a consequence and not a prerequisite. Serre develops the properties of a root
system by focusing on the real vector space V spanned by the root system.
The base field in the present chapter is R, all vector spaces are real and finite
dimensional.
6.1 Abstract root system
The ambient space of an abstract root system is a real vector space V . One may con-
ceive of V as the vector space spanned by the root set of a semisimple Lie algebra L.
The root set is a distinguished set of linear functionals on the Cartan algebra H ⊂ L.
When following this intuition roots are conceived as linear functionals.
Definition 6.1 (Symmetry). Consider a vector space V . A symmetry of V with vec-

tor α ∈ V, α ̸= 0, is an automorphism
σα : V → V
with
155
156 6 Root systems
1. σα (α) = −α
2. The fixed space

Hα := {x ∈ V : σα (x) = x}
of elements fixed by σα is a hyperplane in V , i.e. codimV Hα = 1.
Apparently the hyperplane Hα is a complement of the real line R · α ⊂ V . And

the symmetry σα is completely determined by the choice of α and Hα .
The symmetry defines a linear functional α ∗ ∈ V ∗ such that for all x ∈ V
σα (x) = x − α ∗ (x) · α :
If
x = µ1 · α + µ2 · v, v ∈ Hα ,
then
σα (x) = −µ1 · α + µ2 · v = x − 2µ1 · α.
Hence
α ∗ (x) = −2 · µ1 .
The linear functional α ∗ satisfies α ∗ (α) = 2 and ker α ∗ = Hα .
Conversely, if 0 ̸= α ∈ V and a linear functional α ∗ ∈ V ∗ with α ∗ (α) = 2 are

given, then the definition
σα (x) := x − α ∗ (x) · α, x ∈ V,
defines a symmetry σα with fixed hyperplane Hα := ker α ∗ .
In the following we define a root system Φ. It has the decisive property that for
all α ∈ Φ the linear functional α ∗ ∈ V ∗ takes on integral values on all elements β ∈ Φ.
Definition 6.2 (Root system). A root system of a vector space V is a subset Φ ⊂ V

with the following properties:
• (R1) Finite and generating: The set Φ is finite, 0 ∈

/ Φ, and spanR Φ = V .
• (R2) Invariance under distinguished symmetries: For each α ∈ Φ a symmetry σα

of V with vector α exists which leaves Φ invariant, i.e. σα (Φ) ⊂ Φ.
6.1 Abstract root system 157
• (R3) Cartan integers: For all α, β ∈ Φ, integer values < β , α >∈ Z exist with
σα (β ) = β − < β , α > ·α.
The integers
< β , α >∈ Z, α, β ∈ Φ,
are named the Cartan integers of Φ.
• (R4) Reducedness: For each α ∈ Φ the only roots proportional to α are α itself
and −α, i.e.
(R · α) ∩ Φ = {α, −α}.
The dimension of V is the rank of the root system, the elements of Φ are the roots
of V .
In the literature condition (R4) is considered an additional requirement for a re-

duced root system. If the base field is not algebraically closed one has to distinguish
between reduced and non-reduced root systems. But in these notes we only consider
reduced root systems. Therefore we omit the attribute reduced.
Note that the Cartan integers < β , α > are linear in the first argument β but not
necessarily in the second argument α. For any α ∈ Φ:
< α, α >= 2.
Lemma 6.3 (Uniqueness of the symmetry). The symmetry σα required in Defini-

tion 6.2 part (R2) is uniquely determined by α.
Proof. Assume two symmetries of V with vector α satisfying
σi (Φ) ⊂ Φ, i = 1, 2.
Consider the automorphism of V
u := σ2 ◦ σ1 .
It satisfies
u(α) = α and u(Φ) = Φ.
Moreover, u induces the identity on the quotient V /Rα because
u(x) = σ2 (σ1 (x)) = σ2 (x − α1∗ (x) · α) = x − α2∗ (x) · α − α1∗ (x) · α + α2∗ (α1∗ (x) · α) · α
implies
u(x) ∈ x + Rα.
As a consequence, u has the single eigenvalue λ = 1. Hence the characteristic poly-
nomial pchar (T ) of u has the only root λ = 1. The minimal polynomial pmin (T )
158 6 Root systems
of u divides the characteristic polynomial pchar (T ) of u, see Theorem 1.18. Hence

also pmin (T ) has only the root λ = 1. Because u|Φ is a permutation of Φ, the re-
striction has a finite order, i.e. an exponent n ∈ N exists with
(u|Φ)n = id|Φ.
Because Φ spans V we obtain un = id, i.e. the polynomial T n − 1 annihilates u.

Therefore pmin (T ) divides the polynomial T n − 1, which has the root λ = 1 with
algebraic multiplicity one. As a consequence
pmin (T ) = T − 1
and u = id, q.e.d.
Definition 6.4 (Weyl group). The Weyl group W of a root system Φ of V is the
subgroup of GL(V ) generated by all symmetries σα , α ∈ Φ.
The Weyl group permutes the elements of the finite set Φ, hence W is a finite
group. As a consequence, one may average an arbitrary scalar product over the ele-
ments of the Weyl group, obtaining an invariant scalar product with respect to W .
Lemma 6.5 (Invariant scalar product). Let Φ be a root system of a vector space V .
Then a scalar product (−, −) exists on V which is invariant under the Weyl group W
of Φ. With respect to any invariant scalar product the Cartan integers satisfy
(β , α)
< β , α >= 2 · , α, β ∈ Φ.
(α, α)
Proof. Take an arbitrary scalar product B on V and define the bilinear form (−, −)
as
(x, y) := ∑ B(w(x), w(y)), x, y ∈ V,
w∈W
as the average over the Weyl group, which is a finite group. Apparently, (−, −)
is positive definite, hence a scalar product. By construction, the scalar product
is W -invariant. For two roots α, β ∈ Φ the corresponding Cartan integer < β , α >
is defined by the equation
σα (β ) = β − < β , α > α.
Because
σα = σα−1 , σα (α) = −α,
and due to the invariance of the scalar product:
−(α, β ) = (σα (α), β ) = (α, σα (β )) = (α, β )− < β , α > (α, α),

which proves
(α, β ) (β , α)
< β , α >= 2 · = 2· , q.e.d.
(α, α) (α, α)
Now that we have an Euclidean space (V, (−, −)) of the root system Φ, we can
define the length of a root and the angle between two roots. We choose a fixed
invariant scalar product.
Definition 6.6 (Length of roots and angle between roots). Consider a root system Φ
and the corresponding Euclidean vector space (V, (−, −)).
1. The length of a root α ∈ Φ is defined as
p
∥α∥ := (α, α).
2. The angle
0 ≤ θ := ∢(α, β ) ≤ π
included between two roots α, β ∈ Φ is defined as
(α, β )
cos(θ ) := .
∥α∥ · ∥β ∥
Lemma 6.7 (Possible angles and length ratio of two roots). Consider a root sys-
tem Φ and two non proportional roots α, β ∈ Φ. Table 6.1 displays the only possible
angles ∢(α, β ) included by α and β and their ratios of length.
The last column of the table indicates the type of the root system of rank = 2 with
base ∆ = {α, β }, see Definition 6.10 and Theorem 6.26.
No. < α, β > < β , α > ∢(α, β ) ∥β ∥2 /∥α∥2 ∆ = {α, β }

π
1 0 0 2 undef. A1 × A1
π
2 1 1 3 1
2π
3 -1 -1 3 1 A2
π
4 1 2 4 2
3π
5 -1 -2 4 2 B2
π
6 1 3 6 3
5π
7 -1 -3 6 3 G2
Table 6.1 Angles and length of roots

160 6 Root systems
Proof. Employing the Cartan integers < α, β >, < β , α > ∈ Z we have
(α, β ) (β , α)
4 > 4 · cos2 θ = 2 · 2
·2· = < α, β > · < β , α > ≥ 0.
∥β ∥ ∥α∥2
Both Cartan integers have equal sign and we may assume ∥β ∥ ≥ ∥α∥, i.e.
| < α, β > | ≤ | < β , α > |
because
∥β ∥2 < β,α > | < β,α > |
2
= = , q.e.d.
∥α∥ < α, β > | < α, β > |
The formulas from the proof of Lemma 6.7 indicate : For two non-propotional
roots α, β ∈ Φ the product of their Cartan integers determines the included angle θ = ∢(α, β ),
while the quotient of the Cartan integers determines their length ratio ∥β ∥/∥α∥.
Moreover, Table 6.1 shows that the angle determines the length ratio with the only
exception of the orthogonal case θ = π/2.
Example 6.8 (Root systems of rank ≤ 3).

• Rank = 1: The only root system is A1 .
• Rank = 2: Figure 6.1 displays all root systems of rank = 2, see also Theorem 6.26.
• Rank = 3: See the figures in [22, Chap. 8.9] as one example.

Fig. 6.1 Root systems of rank = 2
Lemma 6.9 (Roots with acute angle). If two non-proportional roots α, β ∈ Φ in-
clude an acute angle, i.e. (α, β ) > 0, then also α − β ∈ Φ.
Proof. According to Table 6.1 the assumption (α, β ) > 0 implies
< β , α >= 1 or < α, β >= 1.
In the first case σα (β ) = β − α, in the second case σβ (α) = α − β . In both

cases α − β ∈ Φ because the Weyl group leaves Φ invariant, q.e.d.
Definition 6.10 (Base of a root system, positive and negative roots). Consider a
root system Φ of a vector space V .
i) A set ∆ = {α1 , ..., αr } of roots αi ∈ Φ, i = 1, ..., r, is a base of Φ and the

elements of ∆ are named simple roots iff
• The family (αi )i=1,...,r is a basis of V .
162 6 Root systems
• Each root β ∈ Φ has a representation

r
β = ∑ ki · αi , ki ∈ Z,
i=1
with either all integer coefficients ki ≥ 0 or all all ki ≤ 0.

ii) With respect to a base ∆ a root β is
• positive, β ≻ 0, iff all ki ≥ 0
• negative, β ≺ 0, iff all ki ≤ 0.
The subset Φ + ⊂ Φ is defined as the set of all positive roots and the subset
subset Φ − ⊂ Φ as the set of all negative roots.
Theorem 6.11 (Existence of a base). Every root system Φ of a vector space V has
a base ∆ .
Proof. The construction of a candidate for ∆ is straightforward. But the proof that
the candidate is indeed a base, will take several steps.
i) Construction of ∆ : Because Φ is finite, a linear functional t ∈ V ∗ exists

with t(α) ̸= 0 for all α ∈ Φ. Set
Φt+ := {α ∈ Φ : t(α) > 0}
and call α ∈ Φ + decomposable iff
α = α1 + α2 with α1 , α2 ∈ Φt+
and indecomposable otherwise. We claim that the set
∆ := {α ⊂ Φt+ : α indecomposable}
is a base of Φ.
ii) Representation of elements from Φt+ : Each β ∈ Φt+ has the form
β= ∑ kα · α
α∈∆
with all kα ≥ 0: Otherwise consider the non-empty subset C ⊂ Φt+ of all elements
which lack such a representation.
Choose an element β ∈ C with t(β ) > 0 minimal. By construction β is decom-
posable. Hence
β = β1 + β2
with β1 , β2 ∈ Φ + and β1 ∈ C or β2 ∈ C. We get
t(β ) = t(β1 ) + t(β2 )
which implies
0 < t(β1 ),t(β2 ) < t(β ),
a contradiction to the minimality of β .
iii) Angle between elements from ∆ : We claim that two different roots α ̸= β
from ∆ are either orthogonal or include an obtuse angle, i.e. (α, β ) ≤ 0.
Otherwise (α, β ) > 0 and we obtain from Lemma 6.9 the root
γ := α − β ∈ Φ.
/ Φt+ because α indecomposable. Hence −γ ∈ Φt+

As a consequence α = β +γ and γ ∈
which implies
β = α + (−γ)
decomposable. The contradiction proves the claim.
iv) Linear independency: A finite subset A ⊂ V with all elements α, β ∈ A satis-

fying
t(α) > 0 and (α, β ) ≤ 0.
is linearly independent.
Assume the existence of a representation
0= ∑ nα · α
α∈A
with coefficients nα ∈ R for all α ∈ A. Separating summands with positive coeffi-

cients from those with negative coefficients gives an equation
∑ kα · α = ∑ kα · α =: v ∈ V
α∈A1 α∈A2
with disjoint subsets A1 , A2 ⊂ A and all kα ≥ 0. Then
(v, v) = ∑ kα · kβ · (α, β ) ≤ 0.
α∈A1 ,β ∈A2
Hence v = 0. Now
0 = t(v) = ∑ kα · t(α)
α∈A1
with t(α) > 0 for all α ∈ A1 implies kα = 0 for all α ∈ A1 . Similarly kα = 0 for
all α ∈ A2 .
The sequence of all steps i) until iv) proves the claim of the theorem, q.e.d.
164 6 Root systems
The proof of Theorem 6.11 constructs a base ∆ by starting from a certain func-
tional t ∈ V ∗ . We show that any base can be obtained in this way: Any base of a root
system Φ is the set of indecomposable elements of Φ from the positive half-space
of a suitable linear functional.
Lemma 6.12 (Base and a determining linear functional). Consider a base ∆ of a
Then a functional t ∈ V ∗ exists with t(α) ̸= 0 for all α ∈ Φ such that
Φ + = Φt+ := {α ∈ Φ : t(α) > 0}
and
∆ = {α ∈ Φt+ : α indecomposable}.
Proof. The base ∆ defines the decomposition
˙ −.
Φ = Φ + ∪Φ
Because (α)α∈∆ is a basis of the vector space V , a functional t ∈ V ∗ exists with t(α) > 0
for all α ∈ ∆ . Set
Φt+ := {α ∈ Φ : t(α) > 0}, Φt− := {α ∈ Φ : t(α) < 0}.
From
∆ ⊂ Φt+
follows
Φ + ⊂ Φt+ and Φ − ⊂ Φt− .
And the decomposition
˙ − = Φ = Φt+ ∪Φ
Φ + ∪Φ ˙ t−
implies
Φ + = Φt+ and Φ − = Φt− .
As a consequence, the indecomposable elements from both sets Φ + and Φt+ are
equal, i.e. ∆ = ∆ ′ , q.e.d.
Corollary 6.13 (Simple roots include an obtuse angle). Consider a base ∆ of a

Any two different roots α ̸= β ∈ ∆ include an obtuse angle or are orthogonal,
i.e. (α, β ) ≤ 0.
Proof. According to Lemma 6.12 a suitable functional t ∈ V ∗ exists with
∆ = {α ∈ Φ : t(α) > 0 and α indecomposable}.
Part iii) in the proof of Theorem 6.11 shows (α, β ) ≤ 0 because all elements from ∆
belong to the same half-space.
6.2 Action of the Weyl group 165
6.2 Action of the Weyl group
Our aim in the present chapter is the classification of all possible root systems. This
result derives from two facts.
The first is the integrality of the Cartan integers of a root system Φ of a real
vector space V . This fact restricts the angle and the relative length of two roots, see
Lemma 6.7. The second fact are the different group operations of the Weyl group, in
particular the transitive operation on the set of bases of a given root system. Besides
the action of the Weyl group W on Φ
W × Φ → Φ, (w, α) 7→ w(α),
we study the action of W on

• the linear functionals defined by the Cartan integers < α, β >
• on the symmetries σα : V → − V , and
• on the bases ∆ of Φ.
We will show: A root system is characterized by the matrix of its Cartan integers,
the Cartan matrix. Only finitely many types of Cartan matrices exist.
Definition 6.14 (Group action). A group G acts on a set X if a map exists
G×X →
− X, (g, x) 7→ g.x
with the following properties:
e.x = x for all x ∈ X and the neutral element e ∈ G
and
(g1 · g2 ).x = g1 .(g2 .x) for all g1 , g2 ∈ G and all x ∈ X.
The group acts transitive if for all x ∈ X the induced map
G→
− X, g 7→ g.x,
is surjective.
Lemma 6.15 (Action of the Weyl group on Cartan integers and on symmetries).
Consider a root system Φ of a vector space V with Weyl group W .
1. The Cartan integers are linear in the first argument, i.e. for all α ∈ Φ the Cartan
functional
< −, α >: V → − C
is C-linear.
166 6 Root systems
2. Denote by
A := {< −, α >∈ V ∗ : α ∈ Φ}
the set of all Cartan functionals. The map
− A, (w, < −, α >) 7→< −, α > ◦w−1 ,

W ×A →
is a group operation.
3. Denote by
B := {sα : V →
− V |α ∈ Φ}
the set of all symmetries. The map
− B, (w, σα ) 7→ w ◦ σα ◦ w−1 ,
W ×B →
is a group action.
4. Denote by
C := {∆ ⊂ Φ : ∆ a base of Φ}
the set of all bases of Φ. The map
W ×C →
− C, (w, ∆ ) 7→ {w(α) : α ∈ ∆ },
is a group action.
Proof. 1. According to Lemma 6.5 a scalar product (−, −) on V exists which is
invariant with respect to W . The formula
(−, α)
< −, α >= 2 · , α ∈ Φ,
(α, α)
shows the C-linearity of the Cartan functional.
2. For w ∈ W and α ∈ Φ consider the root β := w(α) ∈ Φ. Then
< −, α > ◦w−1 =< −, β >:
For the proof compute
(−, β ) (−, w(α)) (w−1 (−), α)

< −, β >= 2 · = 2· = 2· = < −, α > ◦w−1 .
(β , β ) (β , β ) (β , β )
Hence the map W × A → − A is well-defined. One checks that it satisfies the two
properties of a group action.
3. For w ∈ W and α ∈ Φ consider the root β := w(α) ∈ Φ. Then
sβ = w ◦ σα ◦ w−1 :
For any v ∈ V one computes the left-hand side
σβ (v) = v− < v, β > ·β = (w ◦ w−1 )(v)− < w−1 (v), α > ·w(α) =
= w w−1 (v)− < w−1 (v), α > ·α .

And the right-hand side
(w ◦ σα ◦ w−1 )(v) = w(σα (w−1 (v))) = w(w−1 (v)− < w−1 (v), α > ·α).
Hence the map W × B → − B is well-defined. One checks that it satisfies the two
properties of a group action.
4. The proof is obvious, q.e.d.
In accordance with Lemma 6.15 about the action on the Cartan integers one defines
the action of W on the dual space V ∗ :
W ×V ∗ → V ∗ , (w,t) 7→ w(t) := t ◦ w−1 .
Proposition 6.16 (Properties of the Weyl group). Consider a root system Φ of a

vector space V and denote by W its Weyl group. Denote by ∆ a fixed base of Φ.
Then
1. Embedding ∆ into half-spaces: For any functional t ∈ V ∗ an element w ∈ W

exists with
t(w(α)) ≥ 0
for all α ∈ ∆ .
2. Transitive action on bases: The action of W on the set of bases of Φ is transitive,

i.e. for any base ∆ ′ of Φ an element w ∈ W exists with
w(∆ ) = ∆ ′ .
3. Any root extends to a base: For any root α ∈ Φ an element w ∈ W exists with
w(α) ∈ ∆ .
4. Symmetries of roots from ∆ are generators: The Weyl group W is generated by

the symmetries σα of the roots α ∈ ∆ .
Proof. Denote by W∆ ⊂ W the subgroup generated by the symmetries σα of the

roots α ∈ ∆ .
168 6 Root systems
i) The symmetry σα of any root α ∈ ∆ leaves the set Φ + \ {α} invariant: Assume
that ∆ comprises at least two roots. Consider an element β ∈ Φ + \ {α}. It has a
representation
β = ∑ kγ · γ, kγ ≥ 0, for all γ ∈ ∆ .
γ∈∆
Because β is not proportional to α we have kγ > 0 for at least one γ ∈ ∆ \ {α}. We

get
σα (β ) = β − < β , α > α =
= ( ∑ kγ · γ)− < β , α > α = (kα − < β , α >) · α + ∑ kγ · γ.
γ∈∆ γ∈∆ \{α}
Hence also σα (β ) is not proportional to α and has at least one coefficient kγ > 0.
According to Definition 6.10, part i), all coefficients are non-negative and
σα (β ) ∈ Φ + \ {α}.
ii) Consider the distinguished element ρ ∈ V defined as half the sum of all posi-
tive roots
ρ := (1/2) · ∑ β .
β ∈Φ +
According to part i) each symmetry σα , α ∈ ∆ , permutes all positive roots different

from α and σα (α) = −α. Hence
σα (ρ) = ρ − α.
We now show that the first three claims can be satisfied already by taking ele-
ments from W∆ .
iii) Part 1) of the Proposition is satisfied even with an element w ∈ W∆ : For a

given functional t ∈ V ∗ we choose an element w ∈ W∆ with t(w(ρ)) maximal with
respect to w ∈ W∆ . For arbitrary α ∈ ∆ holds according to part ii):
α = ρ − σα (ρ)
w(α) = w(ρ) − w(σα (ρ))

t(w(α)) = t(w(ρ)) − t(w(σα (ρ))).
Because also w ◦ σα ∈ W∆ we have
t(w(ρ)) ≥ t(w(σα (ρ)))
or
t(w(α)) ≥ 0.
iv) Also part 2) of the proposition is satisfied even with an element w ∈ W∆ : First,
Lemma 6.12 characterizes the base ∆ ′ by a functional t ′ ∈ V ∗ with
t ′ (α ′ ) > 0
for all α ∈ ∆ ′ . Secondly, part 1) of the proposition transforms t ′ by a suitable

element w ∈ W∆ to the functional
t := t ′ ◦ w ∈ V ∗
such that for all α ∈ ∆

t(α) ≥ 0.
The case t(α) = 0 is excluded, because otherwise the root w(α) ∈ Φ would satisfy
t ′ (w(α)) = 0,
which is excluded because t ′ |∆ ′ > 0. Applying again Lemma 6.12 characterizes ∆

as the set of indecomposable roots in the positive half-space of the functional t.
Therefore
∆ = w(∆ ′ ) := {w(α ′ ) : α ′ ∈ ∆ ′ }.
v) Also part 3) of the Lemma is satisfied even with an element w ∈ W∆ : For
fixed α ∈ Φ we find an element t0 ∈ V ∗ with t0 (α) = 0 but t0 (β ) ̸= 0 for all roots β
not proportional to α. Because Φ is a finite set, the minimum
min{|t0 (β )| : β ∈ Φ not proportional to α}
is positive. Hence a small perturbation of t0 provides a linear functional t ∈ V ∗ and

an ε > 0 such that for all roots β not proportional to α
|t(β )| > ε
but
t(α) = ε.
Denote by ∆ (t) the base of Φ induced by t according to Lemma 6.12. By part iv)
an element w ∈ W∆ exists with
w(∆ (t)) = ∆ .
The root α ∈ Φ is contained in the positive half-space Φt+ of the functional t. It is

indecomposable because t(β ) > ε for all roots β ∈ Φt+ which are non-proportional
to α. Therefore α ∈ ∆ (t), which implies w(α) ∈ ∆ .
vi) We prove W∆ = W : Because the Weyl group is generated by all symmetries σα , α ∈ Φ,

it suffices to show that
σα ∈ W∆
170 6 Root systems
for all α ∈ Φ. We choose an arbitrary root α ∈ Φ. According to part iv) an

element w ∈ W∆ exists with
β := w(α) ∈ ∆ .
Then
σβ = σw(α) = w ◦ σα ◦ w−1
σα = w−1 ◦ σβ ◦ w ∈ W∆ , q.e.d.
Definition 6.17 (Cartan matrix). Consider a root system Φ of a vector space V and
a base ∆ = {α1 , ..., αr } of Φ.
The Cartan matrix of ∆ is the matrix of the Cartan integers of the roots from ∆
Cartan(∆ ) := (< αi , α j >1≤i, j≤r ) ∈ M(r × r, Z).
Here the index i denotes the row and the index j denotes the column.
Note that the Cartan matrix is not necessarily symmetric. All diagonal elements
of the Cartan matrix have the value
< αi , αi >= 2.
For i ̸= j only values

< αi , α j >≤ 0
are possible according to Corollary 6.13. Moreover, these values are restricted to the
set
{0, −1, −2, −3}
according to Lemma 6.7 and Corollary 6.13.
The Cartan matrix is defined with reference to a base ∆ and with reference to
a numbering of its elements. Lemma 6.18 shows that for any two bases of Φ any
numbering of the elements of the first base induces a numbering of the elements of
the second base such that the respective Cartan matrices are equal.
Lemma 6.18 (Independence of the Cartan matrix from the choosen base). Con-
sider a root system Φ of rank r = rank Φ. Any two bases ∆ , ∆ ′ of Φ have the same
Cartan matrix. More specifically:
An element w ∈ W of the Weyl group of Φ exists with w(∆ ) = ∆ ′ and
Cartan(∆ ) = (< αi , α j >1≤i, j≤r ) = Cartan(∆ ′ ) = (< w(αi ), w(α j ) >1≤i, j≤r ).
Proof. According to Proposition 6.16 an element w ∈ W exists with w(∆ ) = ∆ ′ , i.e.
∆ = {α1 , ..., αr } =⇒ ∆ ′ = {w(α1 ), ..., w(αr )}.
According to Lemma 6.15
< −, w(α j ) >=< −, α j > ◦w−1
which implies
< w(αi ), w(α j ) >=< w−1 (w(αi )), α j >=< αi , α j >, q.e.d.
The Cartan matrix encodes the full information of the root system Φ, notably the
dimension of its ambient space V :
Theorem 6.19 (The Cartan matrix characterizes the root system). Consider a
root system Φ of an Euclidean space V and a base
∆ = {α1 , ..., αr }
of Φ. Let V ′ be a second Euclidean space and
∆ ′ = {α1′ , ..., αr′ }
a base of a root system Φ ′ of V ′ . If a bijective map
f : ∆ → ∆′
exists with
Cartan(< αi , α j >1≤i, j≤r ) = Cartan(< f (αi ), f (α j ) >1≤i, j≤r ),
then a unique isomorphism of vector spaces
F : V → V′
exists with
F(Φ) = Φ ′ and F|∆ = f .
Proof. i) Determination of F: Because the elements from ∆ form a basis of the
vector space V we may define
F : V → V′
as the uniquely determined linear extension of f . And because ∆ and ∆ ′ have the
same cardinality the linear map F is an isomorphism.
ii) We show that the Weyl groups W and W ′ are conjugate via F, i.e.
W ′ = F ◦ W ◦ F −1 or W ′ ◦ F = F ◦ W :
172 6 Root systems
Consider two roots α, β ∈ ∆ and the corresponding symmetries. Then
(σ f (α) ◦ F)(β ) = σ f (α) ( f (β )) = f (β )− < f (β ), f (α) > f (α)
(F ◦ σα )(β ) = F(σα (β )) = f (β − < β , α, > α) = f (β )− < β , α, > f (α)

Hence for every root α ∈ ∆
σ f (α) ◦ F = F ◦ σα .
Moreover, for two roots α1 , α2 ∈ ∆ :
(σ f (α2 ) ◦ σ f (α1 ) ◦ F = σ f (α2 ) ◦ (σ f (α1 ) ◦ F) = σ f (α2 ) ◦ (F ◦ σα1 ) =
= (σ f (α2 ) ◦ F) ◦ σα1 = (F ◦ σα2 ) ◦ σα1 = F ◦ (σα2 ◦ σα1 ).

The Weyl groups W and W ′ are generated by the symmetries of the elements from
respectively ∆ and ∆ ′ , see Proposition 6.16. Hence
W ′ ◦F = F ◦W .
iii) We show F(Φ) ⊂ Φ ′ : Consider an arbitrary root β ∈ Φ. According to Proposi-

tion 6.16 elements α ∈ ∆ and w ∈ W exist with
β = w(α).
Due to part ii) an element w′ ∈ W ′ exists such
F(β ) = (F ◦ w)(α) = (w′ ◦ F)(α) = w′ ( f (α)) ∈ w′ (∆ ′ ) ⊂ Φ ′ , q.e.d.
6.3 Coxeter graph and Dynkin diagram
Due to Theorem 6.19 a root system Φ is completely determined by its Cartan matrix
with respect to a base ∆ of Φ. Hence the classification of root systems reduces to the
classification of possible Cartan matrices. Thanks to Lemma 6.7 and Corollary 6.13
the Cartan integers satisfy a set of restrictions. The present section shows that the
language of Cartan matrices translates to a data structure from Discrete Mathemat-
ics. The data structure is a weighted graph called the Coxeter graph of the root
system.
Therefore, we first define the Coxeter graph of ∆ , and then classify all possible
Coxeter graphs. This classification is achieved by a second language translation: We
translate the language of Coxeter graphs to the language of Euclidean vector spaces,
and apply same basic results from Linear Algebra. The result is Theorem 6.21.
6.3 Coxeter graph and Dynkin diagram 173
Recall: For a base ∆ of Φ the angle θ between two distinct roots α ̸= β ∈ ∆ is

determined by the product of their Cartan integers as
< α, β >< β , α >= 4 · cos2 θ ∈ {0, 1, 2, 3}, π/2 ≤ θ < π.
If (−, −) denotes a scalar product on V which is invariant under Φ, then
(α, β )2
< α, β >< β , α >= 4 · .
∥α∥2 · ∥β ∥2
Definition 6.20 (Coxeter graph). Consider a root system Φ of a vector space V and
a base ∆ of Φ. The Coxeter graph of Φ with repect to ∆ is the undirected weighted
graph
Coxeter(Φ) = (N, E)
with
• vertex set N := ∆
• and set E of weighted edges: A weighted edge (e, m) ∈ E is a pair with an

edge e = {α, β } joining two vertices in N iff
α ̸= β and < α, β >< β , α ≯= 0.
The corresponding weight is defined as
m :=< α, β >< β , α >∈ {1, 2, 3}.
Theorem 6.21 (Classification of connected Coxeter graphs). A connected Cox-

eter graph of a root system Φ with respect to a base ∆ belongs to exactly one of the
classes from Figure 6.2 - for a suitable numbering of the elements of ∆ :
Explication:
2π
• Series Ar , r ≥ 1: Each pair of subsequent roots include the angle 3 .
• Series Br , r ≥ 2 or Series Cr , r ≥ 3: The first r − 2 pairs of subsequent roots

include the angle 2π 3π
3 , the last two roots include the angle 4 .
2π
• Series Dr , r ≥ 4: The first r − 3 subsequent pairs of roots include the angle 3 ,
root αr−2 includes with each of the two roots αr−1 and αr the angle 2π 3 .
5π
• Exceptional type G2 : ∆ = (α1 , α2 ). The two roots include the angle 6 .
• Exceptional type F4 : ∆ = (α1 , ..., α4 ). The pairs (α1 , α2 ) and (α3 , α4 ) include
the angle 2π 3π
3 , the pair (α2 , α3 ) includes the angle 4 .
174 6 Root systems
Fig. 6.2 Connected Coxeter graphs (annotation for weight = 1 suppressed)
• Exceptional series Er , r ∈ {6, 7, 8} : ∆ = (α1 , ..., αr ). The first r − 2 pairs of sub-

sequent roots include the angle 2π 3 . In addition, the distinguished root α3 includes
2π
the angle 3 with the root αr .
The range of r ∈ N for the types Ar , Br ,Cr , Dr has been choosen to avoid dublets
with low value of r.
Note. The Coxeter graph employing the product of Cartan integers as its weights
does not encode the relative length of two roots, i.e. their length ratio. The length
ratio derives from the quotient of the Cartan integers
2
∥β ∥ < β,α >
= .
∥α∥ < α, β >
Knowing the product of the Cartan integers is not sufficient to reconstruct the Car-
tan matrix. Hence the Coxeter graph does not encode the full information about
the root system. We will see that a base of the root systems belonging to the
types Br ,Cr , G2 , F4 is made up by roots with different lengths. As a consequence,
after complementing the Coxeter graph by the information about the length ratio the
series Br and Cr of root systems will differ for r ≥ 3, see Theorem 6.26.
But in any case, the (absolute) length of a root is not defined because an invariant
scalar product of a root system is not uniquely determined.
For the proof of Theorem 6.21 we will capture the characteristic properties of
the Coxeter graph in the following definition which embeds the graph into a finite-
dimensional Euclidean space.
Definition 6.22 (Admissible graph). Consider an Euclidean space (V, (−, −)). An
undirected weighted graph (N, E) with vertex set N ⊂ V is admissible if
• its vertex set satisfies
N = {v1 , ..., vr } ⊂ V
with a linearly independent family (vi )i=1,...,r of unit vectors satisfying
(vi , v j ) ≤ 0 for 1 ≤ i ̸= j ≤ r
• and its edge set

E = {(e, m) : e = {vi , v j }}
satisfies
({vi , v j }, m) ∈ E ⇐⇒ i ̸= j and m = 4 · (vi , v j )2 ∈ {1, 2, 3}.
Proof (of Theorem 6.21). The proof will classify all connected admissible graphs (N, E)
arising from root systems Φ of rank r in an Euclidean space (V, (−, −)).
i) Any subgraph of an admissible graph obtained by removing a subset of vertices

and their incident edges is admissible.
ii) An admissible graph has less edges than vertices, i.e. |E| < |N|:
Consider the element

r
v := ∑ vi ∈ V.
i=1
Then v ̸= 0 because the family (vi )i=1,...,r is linearly independent. We obtain

r
0 < (v, v) = ∑ (vi , vi ) + 2 · ∑ (vi , v j ) = r + 2 · ∑ (vi , v j ).
i=1 1≤i< j≤r 1≤i< j≤r
For an edge {vi , v j } with weight
m := 4 · (vi , v j )2 ∈ {1, 2, 3} and (vi , v j ) ≤ 0
follows
2 · (vi , v j ) ≤ −1,
176 6 Root systems
therefore
0 < r − |E| i.e. |E| < |N|.
iii) An admissible graph has no cycles: A cycle is an admissible graph according
to part i). But for a cycle the number of vertices equalizes the number of edges, in
contradiction to part ii).
iv) For any vertex of an admissible graph the weighted sum of incident edges is at
most = 3:
Denote by
Inc(v) := {(e, m) ∈ E : e incident with v}
the set of weighted edges incident to a vertex v. We have to show
3≥ ∑ m.
(e,m)∈Inc(v)
Denote by {w1 , ..., wk } the set of vertices adjacent to v. Because an admissible graph
Fig. 6.3 Vertices adjacent to v
is cycle free due to part iii), we have
(wi , w j ) = 0
for 1 ≤ i ̸= j ≤ k, i.e. the family (wi )i=1,...,k is orthonormal in (V, (−, −)). The family
(v, w1 , ..., wk )
is linearly independent as a subfamily of the linearly independent family of all ver-

tices. Choose a vector
w0 ∈ span < v, w1 , ..., wk >
orthonormal to (wi )i=1,...,k and represent
k
v = ∑ (v, wi ) · wi .
i=0
The case (v, w0 ) = 0 is excluded, because v is linearly independent from (wi )i=1,...,k .
Hence
(v, w0 ) ̸= 0
and we obtain
k
1 = (v, v) = ∑ (v, wi )2
i=0
and
k
∑ (v, wi )2 < 1.
i=1
As a consequence
k
∑ m = ∑ 4 · (v, wi )2 < 4.
(e,m)∈Inc(v) i=1
v) Blowing down a simple path, i.e. all its edges have weight = 1, results in a new
admissible graph (N ′ , E ′ ):
Fig. 6.4 Blow-down of a simple path
Denote by C = {w1 , ..., wn } ⊂ N the vertices of the path. By assumption for i = 1, ..., n − 1
4 · (wi , wi+1 )2 = 1, i.e. 2 · (wi , wi+1 ) = −1.
The graph (N ′ , E ′ ), resulting from blowing down the original path, has
• vertex set
N ′ = (N \C) ∪ {w0 }, w0 := ∑ w,
w∈C
• and edge set

E ′ = E1′ ∪E
˙ 2′
with
178 6 Root systems
E1′ := {(e, m) ∈ E : e = {vi , v j }, vi , v j ∈ N \C}

E2′ := (e′ , m) : e′ = {v, w0 }, v ∈ (N \C) and exists (e, m) ∈ E with e = {v, wi } for i ∈ {1, ..., n} .

We show that the graph (N ′ , E ′ ) is admissible in the Euclidean subspace
V ′ := span < v1 , ..., vr , w0 >⊂ V
with the induced scalar product:
Linear independence of the vertex set N ′ is obvious. Moreover, we compute

n n
(w0 , w0 ) = ∑ (wi , w j ) = ∑ (wi , wi ) + 2 · ∑ (wi , w j ) =
1≤i, j≤n i=1 1≤i< j≤n
n−1
n + 2 · ∑ (wi , wi+1 ) = n − (n − 1) = 1.
i=1
In (N, E) any vertex w from N \ C is adjacent to at most one vertex from the path,
because an admissible graph is cycle free according to part iii). Hence
• either (w, w0 ) = 0
• or exactly one index i = 1, ..., n exists with 0 ̸= (w, wi ).
In either case holds
4 · (w, w0 )2 ∈ {0, 1, 2, 3}.
vi) A connected admissible graph does not contain any subgraph from Figure 6.5:
a) Vertex with more than 3 adjacent vertices.
b) Two edges with weight = 2.
c) One edge with weight = 2 and one vertex with three adjacent vertices.
d) Two distinct vertices, both having three adjacent edges.
In any of the subgraphs b)-d) it would be possible to blow down a path to a vertex
with weighted sum of incident edges ≥ 4, which contradicts part v) and iv).
vii) Any conncected admissible graph belongs to one of the types from Figure 6.6:
a) All edges have weight = 1, no vertex has 3 incident edges.
b) A single edge has weight = 2, all other edges have weight = 1.
c) A single edge, it has weight 3.

Fig. 6.5 Non-admissible graphs and blow-down in case b)-d)
d) All edges have weight = 1, a single vertex has 3 incident edges, each with
weight = 1.
The result follows from excluding the subgraphs from part vi).
viii) All connected admissible graphs from type vii,a) belong to series Ar . Obvious.
ix) All connected admissible graphs from type vii,b) belong to series Br or F4 :
Consider the two vectors from V

p q
u := ∑ i · ui and v := ∑ i · vi .
i=1 i=1
They are linearly independent. Using
2 · (ui , ui+1 ) = −1
we compute
p p−1
(u, u) = ∑ i · j · (ui , u j ) = ∑ i2 · (ui , ui ) + 2 · ∑ i(i + 1) · (ui , ui+1 ) =
1≤i, j≤p i=1 i=1
180 6 Root systems
Fig. 6.6 Admissible graphs

p p−1 p p−1 p−1

= ∑ i2 + 2 · ∑ (−1/2) · i(i + 1) = ∑ i2 − ∑ i2 − ∑ i =
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
= p2 − (1/2)p(p − 1) = (p/2)(p + 1).

Analogously
(v, v) = (q/2)(q + 1).
Because
4 · (u p , vq )2 = 2
we obtain
(u, v)2 = (p · u p , q · vq )2 = p2 · q2 · (u p , vq )2 = (1/2)· p2 · q2 .
Employing the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality
(u, v)2 < (u, u) · (v, v)
with u and v linearly independent gives
(1/2)· p2 q2 < (p/2)(p + 1) · (q/2)(q + 1).
Multiplying both sides by 2 implies
p2 · q2 < (1/2)p(p + 1)q(q + 1) = (1/2)pq(p + 1)(q + 1)
pq < (1/2)(p + 1)(q + 1) = (1/2)pq + (1/2)(p + q + 1)

pq < (p + q + 1)
(p − 1)(q − 1) − 2 < 0
and eventually
(p − 1)(q − 1) < 2.
This restriction allows only the possibilities
(p, q) = (1, ≥ 2), (p, q) = (≥ 2, 1), (p, q) = (2, 2), (p, q) = (1, 1).
The first two give the same Coxeter graph. It has type Br , r ≥ 3, equal to type Cr .
The third possibility gives F4 . The fourth possibility is type B2 .
x) The only connected admissible graph containing an edge with weight = 3 is

the graph G2 : This result follows from part iv).
xi) All connected admissible graphs having type vii,d) belong to series Dr , r ≥ 4,
or series Er , r ∈ {6, 7, 8}:
As in the proof of part ix) we define the vectors from V

182 6 Root systems
r−1 p−1 q−1

u := ∑ i · ui , v := ∑ i · vi and w := ∑ i · wi .
i=1 i=1 i=1
Note r, p, q, ≥ 2. The three vectors (u, v, w) are pairwise orthogonal and the four vec-
tors (u, v, w, x) are linearly independent. Denote by θ1 , θ2 , θ3 the respective angles
between the vectors x and u, v, w. Similar to the proof of part iv) we obtain
3
1 > ∑ cos2 θi .
i=1
Analogously to the proof of part x) we have
(u, u) = (r/2)(r − 1), (v, v) = (p/2)(p − 1), (w, w) = (q/2)(q − 1).
Using in addition 4 · (x, ur−1 )2 = 1 we obtain
(x, u)2 (r − 1)2 · (x, ur−1) )2 (r − 1)2 · 2 · (1/4)

cos2 θ1 = = = = (1/2)(1−(1/r))
∥x∥2 · ∥u∥2 ∥u∥2 r(r − 1)
and analogously for cos2 θ2 and cos2 θ3 . Hence

3
1 > ∑ cos2 θi = (1/2)[(1 − (1/r) + 1 − (1/p) + 1 − (1/q)]
i=1
or
1/r + 1/p + 1/q > 1.
W.l.o.g we may assume
q≤ p≤r
and q ≥ 2 because q = 1 reproduces type An . Hence
1 < 1/r + 1/p + 1/q ≤ 3/q
which implies
3 > q ≥ 2, i.e. q = 2.
We obtain
1 < 1/r + 1/p + 1/2, i.e. 1/2 < 1/r + 1/p,
and
1/2 < 2/p,
hence
2 ≤ p < 4.
In case p = 3 we have r < 6. In case p = 2 the parameter r may have any value ≥ 2.
Summing up: When r ≥ p ≥ q then the only possibilities for (r, p, q) are
(5, 3, 2), (4, 3, 2), (3, 3, 2), (≥ 2, 2, 2).
These possibilities refer to the series E8 , E7 , E6 or to the series Dr , r ≥ 4, q.e.d.
Definition 6.23 (Irreducible root system). Consider a root system Φ of a vector

space V and denote by (−, −) a scalar product on V invariant with respect to the
Weyl group W of Φ.
1. The root system Φ is reducible iff it decomposes into two non-empty subsets
which are orthogonal, i.e. iff a decomposition
˙ 2 , Φ1 ̸= 0,
Φ = Φ1 ∪Φ / Φ2 ̸= 0,
/
exists with
(Φ1 , Φ2 ) = 0.
Otherwise Φ is irreducible.
2. Analogously defined are the terms reducible and irreducible for a base ∆ of Φ.
Proposition 6.24 (Irreducibility and connectedness of the Coxeter graph). Con-

sider a root system Φ of a vector space V and a base ∆ of Φ.
i) Φ is irreducible if and only if ∆ is irreducible.
ii) Φ is irreducible if and only if its Coxeter graph is connected.
Proof. i) Suppose Φ reducible with decomposition
˙ 2 ; Φ1 ̸= 0,
Φ = Φ1 ∪Φ / Φ2 ̸= 0.
/
Define ∆i := Φi ∩ ∆ , i = 1, 2. Then
˙ 2
∆ = ∆1 ∪∆
and (∆1 , ∆2 ) = 0.
/ Then ∆ = ∆2 ⊂ Φ2 which implies

Assume ∆1 = 0.
(Φ1 , ∆2 ) ⊂ (Φ1 , Φ2 ) = 0.
Because V = span ∆ = span ∆2 we even get
(Φ1 ,V ) = (Φ1 , ∆2 ) = 0.
Therefore
184 6 Root systems
Φ1 = 0,
which is excluded. As a consequence:
∆1 ̸= 0/ and similarly ∆2 ̸= 0.
/
The decomposition
˙ 2
∆ = ∆1 ∪∆
proves the reducibility of ∆ .
For the opposite direction suppose ∆ reducible with decomposition
˙ 2.
∆ = ∆1 ∪∆
Denote by W the Weyl group of Φ. Define
Φi := W (∆i ), i = 1, 2.
According to Lemma 6.16 any root β ∈ Φ has the form β = w(α) for suitable w ∈ W
and α ∈ ∆ . Therefore
Φ = Φ1 ∪ Φ2 .
The Weyl group is generated by the symmetries σα , α ∈ ∆ . Explicit calculation
shows:
• The orthogonality (∆1 , ∆2 ) = 0 implies that for two roots αi ∈ ∆i , i = 1, 2, the
corresponding symmetries σα1 and σα2 commute.
• If α1 ∈ ∆1 then for a root α ∈ span ∆1 also σα1 (α) ∈ span ∆1 .
• If α2 ∈ ∆2 then σα2 (α) = α for any root α ∈ span ∆1 .
As a consequence W (∆1 ) ⊂ span ∆1 and similarly W (∆2 ) ⊂ span ∆2 . The orthog-
onality (∆1 , ∆2 ) = 0 implies the orthogonality
(Φ1 , Φ2 ) = 0, notably Φ1 ∩ Φ2 = 0.
/
Because ∆ ̸= 0/ and id ∈ W also Φi ̸= 0/ i = 1, 2. Therefore Φ is reducible with

decomposition
Φ = Φ1 ∪Φ ˙ 2.
ii) The statement from part ii) is obvious, q.e.d.
The Dynkin diagram of a root system complements the Coxeter graph by the
information about the length ratio of the elements from a base. This information can
be encoded by an orientation of the edges pointing from the long root to the short
root in case two non-orthogonal roots have different length.
Definition 6.25 (Dynkin diagram of a root system). Consider a root system Φ and
its Coxeter graph Coxeter(Φ) = (N, E). The Dynkin diagram of Φ is the directed
weighted graph
Dynkin(Φ) := (N, ED )
with
• Vertex set: N = ∆ .
• Edge set: Edge (e, m) ∈ ED iff e = (α, β ) with
∥α∥2 < α, β >

< α, β >< β , α ≯= 0 and 2
= ≥ 1.
∥β ∥ < β,α >
In this case m :=< α, β >< β , α > satisfies m ∈ {1, 2, 3}.
Note: The Coxeter graph and the Dynkin diagram of a root system have the same
set of vertices. In the Dynkin diagram an oriented edge
e = (α, β )
is an ordered pair; the edge is considered oriented from the long root α to the short
root β , ∥α∥ ≥ ∥β ∥. If both roots have the same length, then also the edge with
the inverse orientation belongs to the Dynkin diagram. In this case the two ori-
ented edges from the Dynkin diagram are equivalent to the corresponding single
undirected edge from the Coxeter graph. Therefore, often the figure of the Dynkin
diagram suppresses the arrows of two opposite orientations.
Theorem 6.26 (Classification of connected Dynkin diagrams).

1. Consider an irreducible root system Φ. Then its Dynkin diagram belongs to one
the following types, see Figure 6.3:
• Series Ar , r ≥ 1
• Series Br , r ≥ 2
• Series Cr , r ≥ 3
• Series Dr , r ≥ 4
• Exceptional type G2
• Exceptional type F4
• Exceptional series Er , r ∈ {6, 7, 8}

186 6 Root systems
Notably, the two types Br and Cr are distinguished by the length ratio of their
roots.
2. If one dismisses the restriction of the rank r then one has the following repetitions
of low rank:
C1 = B1 = A1 and C2 = B2 and D3 = A3 .
Fig. 6.7 The Dynkin diagrams of irreducible root systems
Proof. The statement follows from the classification of Coxeter graphs according
to Theorem 6.21 and the restriction of the length ratio of two roots from a base
according to Lemma 6.7: A weighted edge (e, m) from the Coxeter graph links two
roots with length ratio ̸= 1 if and only if m ∈ {2, 3}. Therefore the Dynkin diagrams
distinguish between the two series Br and Cr , q.e.d.
The Dynkin diagrams of an irreducible root system complements the Coxeter

graph by the length ratio of the roots from a base. The Dynkin diagram contains the
full information of the Cartan matrix of the root system. Therefore from the Dynkin
diagram of a root system Φ one can reconstruct a base ∆ and the Cartan matrix of Φ
by the algorithm from Proposition 6.27.
Proposition 6.27 (Characterisation of a root system by its Dynkin diagram).

Consider a root system Φ of rank = r and its Dynkin diagram
Dynkin(Φ) = (N, ED ).
A base ∆ of Φ and the Cartan matrix of Φ with respect to a numbering of the

elements from ∆
Cartan(∆ ) = (< αi , α j >1≤i, j≤r )
can be recovered from the Dynkin diagram by the following algorithm:
1. Set ∆ := N.
2. For any vertex α ∈ N, i = 1, ..., r, set
< α, α >:= 2.
3. For a pair of vertices α, β ∈ N, α ̸= β , not joined by an edge (e, m) ∈ ED set
< α, β >:= 0.
4. For any edge (e, m) ∈ ED oriented from α to β set
< α, β >:= −m, < β , α >:= −1
Remember that an edge without orientation from the figure of a Dynkin diagram
replaces two oriented edges of the diagram.
Proof. The proof evaluates for each pair of roots the relation between the included
angle and the length ratio of the roots, see Lemma 6.7, q.e.d.
Chapter 7
Classification
The objective of the present chapter is to classify complex semisimple Lie algebras
by their Dynkin diagram, more precisely the Dynkin diagram of its root system.
The result is one of the highlights of Lie algebra theory. It completely encodes the
structure of these Lie algebras by a certain finite graph, a data structure from discrete
mathematics.
We consider a fixed pair (L, H) with a complex semisimple Lie algebra L and a
Cartan subalgebra H ⊂ L. We denote by Φ the root set corresponding to the Cartan
decomposition of (L, H) M
L=H⊕ Lα .
α∈Φ
From the Cartan criterion we know that a complex Lie algebra L is semisimple if
and only if its Killing form is non-degenerate. We even know from Proposition 5.16:
Also the restriction of the Killing form to a Cartan subalgebra H
κH := κ|H × H → C
is non-degenerate.
In this chapter L denotes a complex semisimple Lie algebra and H ⊂ L a Cartan

subalgebra, if not stated otherwise.
7.1 The root system of a complex semisimple Lie algebra
Roots are linear functionals on H. Therefore we first translate properties of H into

properties of its dual space H ∗ . This transfer is achieved by the non-degenerate
Killing form κH :
Each linear functional λ : H → C is uniquely represented by an element tλ ∈ H

with λ = κH (tλ , −), i.e.
189
190 7 Classification
λ (h) = κH (tλ , h) f or all h ∈ H.
The map
∼
→ H ∗ ,tλ 7→ λ ,
H−
is a linear isomorphism of complex vector spaces. In particular, for each root α ∈ Φ ⊂ H ∗
of L its inverse image under this isomorphism is denoted tα ∈ H, i.e.
α = κH (tα , −).
This formula relates roots α ∈ Φ, being elements from the dual space H ∗ , to ele-
ments tα ∈ H of the Cartan subalgebra.
Next we transfer the Killing form from a Cartan subalgebra H to a nondegenerate

bilinear form on the dual space H ∗
Definition 7.1 (Bilinear form on H ∗ ). For the pair (L, H) the nondegenerate Killing
form κH on H induces a nondegenerate symmetric bilinear form on the dual space H ∗
(−, −) : H ∗ × H ∗ → C, (λ , µ) := κH (tλ ,tµ ).
Combining the definition of (λ , µ) with the definition of tµ and tλ results in the

following formula
(λ , µ) = κH (tλ ,tµ ) = λ (tµ ) = µ(tλ ).
The objective of this section is to show that the root set Φ of (L, H) satisfies the
axioms for a root system of a real vector space V in the sense of Definition 6.2. We
consider the real vector space
V := spanR Φ.
We will show that the root set Φ of (L, H) has the following properties:
/ Φ, dimR V = dimC H ∗ .
• (R1) Finite and generating: |Φ| < ∞, 0 ∈
• (R2) Invariance under distinguished symmetries: Each α ∈ Φ defines a symme-

try
σα : V → V
with vector α ∈ V and σα (Φ) ⊂ Φ.
• (R3) Cartan integers: The coefficients < β , α >, α, β ∈ Φ, from the representa-
tion
σα (β ) = β − < β , α > ·α
are integers, i.e. < β , α >∈ Z.
7.1 The root system of a complex semisimple Lie algebra 191
• (R4) Reducedness: For each α ∈ Φ holds Φ ∩ R · α = {±α}.
To motivate the separate steps in deriving the root system of the Lie algebra L we
first consider the example of sl(3, C).
Example 7.2 (The root system of sl(3, C)).
Set L := sl(3, C).
i) Cartan subalgebra: The subalgebra
H := span < h1 := E11 − E22 , h2 := E22 − E33 >⊂ L
is a Cartan subalgebra with dim H = 2.

ii) Cartan decomposition: The Cartan decomposition of (L, H) is
(Lα ⊕ L−α ).
M
L=H⊕
α∈{α1 ,α2 ,α3 }
All root spaces are 1-dimensional. The root set Φ = {±α1 , ±α2 , ±α3 } satisfies:
• Lα1 = span < x1 := E12 >, L−α 1 = span < y1 := E21 >
α1 : H → C, α1 (h1 ) = 2, α1 (h2 ) = −1
α2 : H → C, α2 (h1 ) = −1, α2 (h2 ) = 2
α3 : H → C, α3 (h1 ) = 1, α3 (h2 ) = 1
Therefore α3 = α1 + α2 .
iii) Killing form: To compute the Killing form κ and its restriction
κH : H × H → C
one can use the formula
κ(z1 , z2 ) = 2n · tr(z1 ◦ z2 ), z1 , z2 ∈ sl(n, C),
with n = 3, see [28, Chapter 6, Ex. 7]. E.g.,
tr(h1 ◦ h2 ) = tr((E11 − E22 ) ◦ (E22 − E33 )) = tr(−E22 ◦ E22 ) = −tr(E22 ) = −1.
Therefore
2 −1
(κH (hi , h j )1≤i, j≤2 ) = 6 · .
−1 2
iv) Bilinear form on H ∗ : With respect to the isomorphy

∼
→ H ∗ ,tλ 7→ λ ,
H−
we get
tα1 = (1/6) · h1 ,tα2 = (1/6) · h2 .
The family (α1 , α2 ) is linearly independent and a basis of H ∗ . According to
Definition 7.1, on H ∗ the induced bilinear form
(−, −) : H ∗ × H ∗ → C
with respect to the basis (α1 , α2 ) of V has the matrix

2 −1
((αi , α j )1≤i, j≤2 ) = (αi (tα j )1≤i, j≤2 ) = (1/6) · .
−1 2
In particular, all roots αi , i = 1, 2, 3, have the same lenght:
(αi , αi ) = 2 · (1/6) = 1/3.
We define the real vector space
V := spanR < α1 , α2 > .
Apparently
dimC V = dimC H ∗ = 2.
The restriction of the bilinear form (−, −) to V is a real positive definite form, hence
a scalar product. We now prove by explicit computation: The root set Φ of (L, H) is
a root system of the real vector space V in the sense of Definition 6.2.
v) Distinguished symmetries: Consider the Euclidean space (V, (−, −)). For
for i = 1, 2, 3 define the maps
σi : V → V, x 7→ x − 6 · (x, αi ) · αi .
Here the factor 6 has been choosen in order to get
σi (αi ) = −αi .
Moreover
σ1 (α2 ) = α3 , σ1 (α3 ) = σ1 (α1 ) + σ1 (α2 ) = −α1 + α2 + α1 = α2
σ2 (α1 ) = α3 , σ2 (α3 ) = α1
σ3 (α1 ) = α1 − 6 · (α1 , α3 ) · α3 = α1 − (α1 + α2 ) = −α2 ,

σ3 (α2 ) = α2 − (α1 + α2 ) = −α1 .
For i = 1, 2, 3 we define the symmetries
σαi := σi and σ−αi := −σαi ,
then σαi (α) ⊂ Φ for all α ∈ Φ.
Each symmetry leaves the scalar product invariant, because for α ∈ Φ, x, y ∈ V,
(σα (x), σα (y)) = (x − 6(x, α) · α, y − 6(y, α) · α) =
(x, y) − 6(y, α)(x, α) − 6(x, α)(α, y) + 36(x, α)(y, α)(α, α) = (x, y)

using (α, α) = 1/3.
vi) Cartan integers: From the symmetries of part v) one reads off the Cartan
numbers
< αi , αi >= 2, i = 1, 2, and < α1 , α2 >=< α2 , α1 >= −1
which are integers indeed.
vii) Reducedness: Apparently for each α ∈ Φ the only roots proportional to α

are ±α.
viii) Base: Apparently the set ∆ := {α1 , α2 } is a base of Φ. The Cartan matrix with
respect to ∆ and the given numbering is

2 −1
Cartan(∆ ) = .
−1 2
According to Lemma 6.7 both roots from ∆ have the same lenght and include the
angle (2/3)π. Therefore Coxeter graph and Dynkin diagram of Φ contain the same
information. According to the classification from Theorem 6.26 the root system
of sl(3, C) has type A2 . The scalar product (−, −) induced from the Killing form is
invariant with respect to the Weyl group W = span < σα1 , σα2 >.
The following two propositions collect the main properties of the root set Φ of a
semisimple complex Lie algebra L. They generalize the result from Proposition 5.4
about the structure of sl(2, C).
Proposition 7.3 considers the complex linear structure of L and its canonical
subalgebras sl(2, C) ⊂ L. While Proposition 7.4 considers the integrality proper-
ties of the root set Φ with respect to the bilinear form induced by the Killing form,
see Definition 7.1. These properties assure that Φ is a root system in the sense of
Definition 6.2. They allow to apply the classification of respectively Coxeter graphs
from Theorem 6.21 and Dynkin diagrams from Theorem 6.26 to obtain the classifi-
cation of complex semisimple Lie algebras in Proposition 7.7 - 7.10 and Section 7.3.
Recall from Corollary 5.14 that for any root α ∈ Φ of L also the negative −α is
a root of L.
Proposition 7.3 (Semisimple Lie algebras as sl(2, C)-modules). Consider a pair (L, H)
with L a complex semisimple Lie algebra and H ⊂ L a Cartan subalgebra. Denote
by (−, −) the nondegenerate bilinear form on H ∗ derived from the restricted Killing
form κH on H according to Definition 7.1. The root set Φ of the Cartan decomposi-
tion M
L=H⊕ Lα
α∈Φ
has the following properties:

1. Generating: spanC Φ = H ∗ .
2. Duality of root spaces: For each α ∈ Φ the vector spaces Lα and L−α are dual
with respect to the Killing form, i.e. the bilinear map
Lα × L−α → C, (x, y) 7→ κ(x, y),
is non-degenerate. The distinguished element tα ∈ H satisfies the equation
[x, y] = κ(x, y) · tα
for any x ∈ Lα , y ∈ L−α . In particular,
[Lα , L−α ] = C · tα .
3. Subalgebras sl(2, C): Consider an arbitrary but fixed α ∈ Φ. The map
α : [Lα , L−α ] →
− C, [x, y] 7→ κ(x, y),
is an isomorphism. If hα ∈ [Lα , L−α ] denotes the uniquely determined element

with α(hα ) = 2 then
2
hα = · tα .
(α, α)
For each non-zero element xα ∈ Lα a unique element yα ∈ L−α exists with
[xα , yα ] = hα .
The remaining commutators are
[hα , xα ] = 2 · xα , [hα , yα ] = −2 · yα .
As a consequence, the subalgebra
Sα := spanC < hα , xα , yα >⊂ L
is isomorphic to sl(2, C) via the Lie algebra morphism

∼
Sα −→ sl(2, C)

1 0 01 00
hα →
7 , xα 7→ , yα 7→ .
0 −1 00 10
The Lie algebra L is an Sα -module with respect to the module multiplication
Sα × L → L, (z, u) 7→ ad(z)(u) = [z, u]
which results from the adjoint representation of L.

∼
Proof. ad 1) The Killing form defines an isomorphism H −→ H ∗ . Assume on the
∗ ∗
contrary that Φ does not span H . Then span Φ ⫋ H is a proper subspace. A non-
zero linear functional
h ∈ (H ∗ )∗ ≃ H
exists which vanishes on this subspace, i.e.
h ̸= 0 and α(h) = 0
for all α ∈ Φ. We obtain [h, Lα ] = 0 for all α ∈ Φ. In addition [h, H] = 0 because the
Cartan subalgebra H is Abelian, see Proposition 5.3. As a consequence [h, L] = 0,
i.e.
h ∈ Z(L).
We obtain h = 0 because the center of the semisimple Lie algebra L is trivial. This
contradiction proves span Φ = H ∗ .
In order to prove the remaining issues we recall from Lemma 5.13 for two linear
functionals λ , µ ∈ H ∗ with λ + µ ̸= 0 the orthogonality
κ(Lλ , Lµ ) = 0.
As a consequence, for two roots α, β with β ̸= −α, i.e. α + β ̸= 0, holds
κ(Lα , H) = 0 and κ(Lα , Lβ ) = 0.
ad 2)
• If x ∈ Lα satisfies κ(x, L−α ) = 0 then also κ(x, L) = 0, which implies x = 0.

Hence the canonical map
Lα → (L−α )∗ , x 7→ κ(x, −),

is injective. Interchanging the role of the two roots α and −α and using (Lα )∗∗ ≃ Lα
shows that the map is also surjective.
• We have
[Lα , L−α ] ⊂ L0 = H
according to Lemma 5.13. The Killing form is associative according to Lemma 4.1.
Hence for all h ∈ H, x ∈ Lα , y ∈ L−α
κ(h, [x, y]) = κ([h, x], y) = κ(α(h)x, y) = α(h)κ(x, y) = κ(tα , h) · κ(x, y) =
= κ(h,tα ) · κ(x, y) = κ(h, κ(x, y) · tα ).

This equation is satisfied also by the restriced Killing form: For all h ∈ H, x ∈ Lα , y ∈ L−α
κH (h, [x, y]) = κH (h, κ(x, y) · tα ).
Non-degenerateness of the restricted Killing form κH implies
[x, y] = κ(x, y) · tα .
The duality between Lα and L−α provides for each element xα ∈ Lα , xα ̸= 0, an

element yα ∈ L−α such that
κ(xα , yα ) ̸= 0
proving in particular
[Lα , L−α ] = C · tα .
ad 3)
• For an arbitrary but fixed x ∈ Lα , x ̸= 0, one can choose an element y ∈ L−α
with κ(x, y) ̸= 0 because Lα and L−α are dual according to part 2). If z := [x, y]
then
z = κ(x, y) · tα ̸= 0
according to the formula from part 3).
We claim α(z) ̸= 0: Assume on the contrary α(z) = 0. Then define the

subalgebra
S :=< x, y, z >⊂ L.
Its Lie bracket satisfies
[z, x] = α(z)x = 0, [z, y] = −α(z)y = 0, [x, y] = z.
Apparently the Lie algebra S is nilpotent, in particular solvable. Semisimplicity

of L implies that the adjoint representation
→ gl(L)
ad : L ,−
embeds L and it subalgebra S into the matrix Lie algebra gl(L):

S ≃ ad(S) ⊂ gl(L).
According to Lie’s theorem, see Theorem 3.21, the solvable subalgebra ad(S)
embeds into the subalgebra of upper triangular matrices. The element
ad(z) = ad[x, y],
being a commutator, is even a strict upper triangular matrix. Therefore ad(z) is a

nilpotent endomorphism, i.e. z ∈ L is ad-nilpotent. Because H is a Cartan
subalgebra, the element z ∈ H is also ad-semisimple, hence z = 0. This
contradiction proves the claim.
Therefore the linear map
α : [Lα , L−α ] → C, h 7→ α(h),
between 1-dimensional vector spaces is an isomorphism. By definition
α(tα ) = (α, α) and α(hα ) = 2.
Hence
2
hα = · tα .
(α, α)
• For an arbitrary element xα ∈ Lα , xα ̸= 0, according to part 2) a unique
element yα ∈ L−α exists with
[xα , yα ] = hα .
We obtain
[hα , xα ] = α(hα ) · xα = 2 · xα
[h, yα ] = −α(hα ) · yα = −2 · yα
[xα , yα ] = hα .
Therefore the subalgebra Sα :=< xα , yα , hα > is isomorphic to sl(2, C), q.e.d.
Because L is a sl(2, C)-module with respect to each subalgebra Sα the results

from section 5.2 about the structure of irreducible sl(2, C)-module apply. They im-
ply a series of integrality and rationality properties of L, see Proposition 7.4. For
two roots α, β ∈ Φ we will often employ the formula
2 · β (tα ) 2 · κH (tβ ,tα ) 2 · (β , α)

β (hα ) = = = .
(α, α) (α, α) (α, α)
It derives from the relation between hα and tα from Proposition 7.3 and from the
defining relation κH (tβ , −) = β . The numbers β (hα ) will turn out as the Cartan
integers < β , α > of the root system. Notably they are integers.
Proposition 7.4 (Integrality and rationality properties of the root set). Consider
a pair (L, H) with L a complex semisimple Lie algebra and H ⊂ L a Cartan subal-
gebra. The root set Φ from the Cartan decomposition
M
L=H⊕ Lα
α∈Φ
has the following properties:

1. Root spaces are 1-dimensional: dim Lα = 1 for each root α ∈ Φ.
2. Integrality: For each pair α, β ∈ Φ
β (hα ) ∈ Z and β − β (hα ) · α ∈ Φ.
3. Rationality and scalar product: Consider a basis B = (α1 , ..., αr ) of the complex
vector space H ∗ made up from roots αi ∈ Φ, i = 1, ..., r. Then any root β ∈ Φ is
a rational combination of elements from B, i.e.
Φ ⊂ VQ := spanQ {α1 , ..., αr }
and
dimQ VQ = dimC H.
The bilinear form (−, −) restricts from H ∗ to a rational form on the subspace VQ ⊂ H ∗
and its restriction
(−, −)Q : VQ ×VQ → Q
is positive definite, i.e. a scalar product.
4. Symmetries: Extending scalars from Q to R defines the real vector space
V := R ⊗ QVQ = spanR Φ ⊂ H ∗
and the scalar product (−, −)R on V . For each root α ∈ Φ the map
2 · (β , α)R
σα : V → V, β 7→ σα (β ) := β − · α,
(α, α)R
is a symmetry of V with vector α and Cartan integers
< β , α >= β (hα ) ∈ Z, β ∈ Φ.
It satisfies σα (Φ) ⊂ Φ. In addition: Each symmetry σα leaves invariant the

scalar product (−, −)R .
5. Proportional roots: If α ∈ Φ then the only roots proportional to α are ±α.

6. α-string through β : For each pair of non-proportional roots α, β ∈ Φ let p, q ∈ N

be the largest numbers such that
β − p · α ∈ Φ and β + q · α ∈ Φ.
Then all functionals from the string
β + k · α ∈ H ∗ , −p ≤ k ≤ q,
are roots.
Moreover, for two roots α ∈ Φ, β ∈ Φ with α + β ∈ Φ
[Lα , Lβ ] = Lα+β .
Fig. 7.1 α-string through β
Proof. ad 1) According to Proposition 7.3, part 2) the root spaces Lα and L−α are
dual with respect to the Killing form κ.
In order to show dim Lα = 1 we assume on the contrary
dim Lα = dim L−α > 1.
Consider an element xα ∈ Lα , x ̸= 0, and the correponding subalgebra Sα from

Proposition 7.3, part 3). An element hα ∈ Sα exists with [hα , xα ] = 2 · xα , i.e.
α(hα ) = 2.
The linear functional κ(xα , −) on L−α is non-zero. Because dim L−α > 1 the func-
tional has a non-trivial kernel, i.e. an element y ∈ L−α , y ̸= 0, exists with κ(xα , y) = 0.
The latter formula implies [xα , y] = 0, see Proposition 7.3, part 2). As a consequence y ∈ L
is a primitive element of an irreducible Sα -submodule of L with weight
(−α)(hα ) = −2 < 0.
The latter property contradicts the fact that all irreducible sl(2, C)-modules have a
non-negative highest weight, see Theorem 5.9.
ad 2) Consider an element 0 ̸= y ∈ Lβ . Considered as an element of the root

space Lβ it satisfies
[hα , y] = β (hα ) · y.
When considered as an element of the Sα -module L the element y ∈ L has weight β (hα ).
Theorem 5.9 implies
β (hα ) ∈ Z
We set p := β (hα ) and
z := yαp .y ∈ L if p ≥ 0 and z := xα−p .y ∈ L if p ≤ 0.
Theorem 5.9 implies z ̸= 0. Because
z ∈ Lβ −p·α
we get β − β (hα ) · α ∈ Φ.
ad 3)
• Each root β ∈ Φ has a unique representation

r
β = ∑ ci · αi
i=1
with complex coefficients ci ∈ C, i = 1, ..., r. We claim that the coefficients are

even rational, i.e. ci ∈ Q for i = 1, ..., r.
Multiplying the representation of β successively for j = 1, ..., r by
2
(α j , α j )
and applying the bilinear form (−, α j ) to the resulting equation gives a linear
system of equations
b = A·c
for the vector of indeterminates c := (c1 , ..., cr )⊤ . The left-hand side is the vector
⊤
2 · (β , α j
b=
(α j , α j )
and the coefficient matrix is

2 · (αi , α j )

A= , row index j, column index i.
(α j , α j )
The system is defined over the ring Z because for two roots γ, δ ∈ Φ
(γ, δ )
2· = γ(hδ ) ∈ Z
(δ , δ )
according to part 2). The coefficient matrix
A ∈ M(r × r, Z)
is invertible as an element from GL(r, Q): It originates by multiplying for j = 1, ..., r

the row with index j of the matrix
(αi , α j )1≤i, j≤r ∈ GL(r, C)
by the non-zero scalar 2/(α j , α j ). And the latter matrix defines the bilinear
form (−, −) on H ∗ , which is non-degenerate because it corresponds to the
Killing form κH (−, −) on H. As a consequence, the solution of the linear system
of equations is unique and is already defined over the base field Q, i.e.
c j ∈ Q for all j = 1, ..., r.
• We claim that the bilinear form (−, −)Q is rational, i.e. it is defined over the
field Q, and positive definite. For any two roots α, β ∈ Φ we have to show
(α, β ) ∈ Q and (α, α) > 0.
For two linear functionals λ , µ ∈ H ∗ we compute
(λ , µ) = κH (tλ ,tµ ) = tr(ad tλ ◦ ad tµ ).
In order to evaluate the trace we employ the defining property of a root space: If
z ∈ Lγ then
(ad tµ )(z) = γ(tµ ) · z
and
(ad tλ ◦ ad tµ )(z) = γ(tλ ) · γ(tµ ) · z.
Using the Cartan decomposition
M
L=H⊕ Lγ
γ∈Φ
and observing [H, H] = 0 we obtain
(λ , µ) = tr(ad tλ ◦ ad tµ ) = ∑ γ(tλ ) · γ(tµ ).

γ∈Φ
We apply this formula to the computation of (α, α) using
2 · (γ, α) γ(tα )
= 2· = γ(hα ) =:< γ, α >∈ Z
(α, α) (α, α)
according to part 2). As a consequence
4 · γ(tα )2 = (α, α)2 · < γ, α >2 .
We obtain
(α, α) = ∑ γ(tα )2 = (1/4) · (α, α)2 · ∑ < γ, α >2

γ∈Φ γ∈Φ
and because of (α, α) ̸= 0
1 = (1/4) · (α, α) · ∑ < γ, α >2 .

γ∈Φ
In particular
(α, α) = 4 · ( ∑ < γ, α >2 )−1 ∈ Q and (α, α) > 0

γ∈Φ
and
(β , α) = (1/2)(α, α)· < β , α >∈ Q.
ad 4) Due to the characterization α(hα ) = 2 from Proposition 7.3 the map σα is a
symmetry of V with vector α. Due to part 2) its Cartan numbers are integers
2 · (β , α)
< β , α >= = β (hα ) ∈ Z.
(α, α)
The inclusion σα (Φ) ⊂ Φ has been proven in part 2). In order to prove the
invariance of the scalar product with respect to the Weyl group it suffices to
consider three roots α, β , γ ∈ Φ:
(σα (β ), σα (γ)) = (β − β (hα )α, γ − γ(hα ) · α) =
= (β , γ) − β (hα )(α, γ) − γ(hα )(β , α) + β (hα )γ(hα )(α, α)

After using
(α, γ) = (1/2)(α, α)γ(hα ) and (α, β ) = (1/2)(α, α)β (hα )
we obtain
(σα (β ), σα (γ)) = (β , γ).
ad 5) Assume on the contrary the existence of a pair of proportional roots different
from ±α. W.l.o.g. we may assume α ∈ Φ and β = t · α ∈ Φ, 0 < t < 1,t ∈ R.
From β (hα ) ∈ Z and
β (hα ) · α = σα (β ) − β = t · (σα (α) − α) = −2t · α
follows
2t ∈ Z.
Hence the two roots from any pair of proportional roots belong to a set
{±α, ±(1/2)α}, α ∈ Φ.
We may now assume α ∈ Φ and check whether the linear functional 2α ∈ H ∗

belongs to Φ: Consider an element z ∈ L2α . Then
[hα , z] = 2α(hα ) · z = 4 · z.
Because 3α ∈
/ Φ we have xα .z = 0.
With respect to the sl(2, C)-module structure of L induced from the action of
Sα =< xα , yα , hα >,
see Proposition 7.3, part 3), we have

• hα .z = 2 · 2 · z, because z ∈ L2α .
• xα .z ∈ L3α . But 3α ∈
/ Φ, hence xα .z = 0.
• yα .(xα .z) ∈ Lα , hence yα .(xα .z) ∈ Cxα .

As a consequence
4z = hα .z = [xα , yα ].z = xα .(yα .z) − yα .(xα .z) = yα (xα .z) ∈ C · xα ∈ L2α ∩ Lα
which implies z = 0. The conclusion L2α = 0 implies 2α ∈

/ Φ.
ad 6) Consider the Sα -module

q
Lβ +kα .
M
M :=
k=−p
Non-zero elements from Lβ +kα have - with respect to Sα - the weight
(β + kα)(hα ) = β (hα ) + 2k.
The functional β + kα is a root of L if and only if Lβ +kα ̸= 0. Then Lβ +kα

is 1-dimensional according to part 1). Proposition 5.7 implies that M is an
irreducible Sα -module of dimension
m + 1 = p + q + 1.
In particular, for every −p ≤ k ≤ q the number β (hα ) + 2k is a weight of M and

every functional β + kα is a root of L.
In addition, Proposition 5.7 implies that the shift of weight spaces of M
xα : Lβ → Lβ +α , v 7→ xα .v,
is an isomorphism, q.e.d.
Theorem 7.5 (Root system of a complex simple Lie algebra). Consider a pair (L, H)
with L a complex semisimple Lie algebra and H ⊂ L a Cartan subalgebra.
The root set Φ from the Cartan decomposition

M
L=H⊕ Lα
α∈Φ
is a root system in the sense of Definition 6.2 of the real vector space
V := spanR Φ ⊂ (H ∗ )R .
It is named the root system of the Lie algebra L. The root system attaches to
each α ∈ Φ the symmetry
σα : V → V, β 7→ β − β (hα ) · α
with Cartan integers

< β , α >= β (hα ) ∈ Z.
The bilinear form (−, −) on V , defined as
(α, β ) := κ(tα ,tβ ), α, β ∈ Φ,
is an invariant scalar product with respect to the Weyl group of Φ.
Proof. The proof collects the results from Proposition 7.4, q.e.d.
7.2 Root systems of the A, B,C, D-series
We will show in the present section that the root systems of type Ar , Br ,Cr , Dr are
the root systems of the complex Lie algebras belonging to the classical groups of
the correponding types, see Proposition 2.13. We show the simpleness of these Lie
algebras as a consequence of their Cartan decomposition. We follow [22, Chap. 7.7]
and [25, Chap. X, §3].
The Lie algebras of the classical groups are subalgebras of the Lie algebra gl(n, C).
We introduce the following notation for the elements of the canonical basis of the
vector space M(n × n, C):
7.2 Root systems of the A, B,C, D-series 205
Ei, j ∈ M(n × n, C)
is the matrix with entry = 1 at place (i, j) and entry = 0 for all other places. Our
matrix computations are based on the formulas
Ei, j · Ek,l = δ j,k · Ei,l , 1 ≤ i, j, k, l ≤ n.
The family
(Ei,i )1≤i≤n
is a basis of the subspace of diagonal matrices d(n, C). Denote the elements of the
dual base by
ε̂i := Ei,i ∗ ∈ d(n, C)∗ , i = 1, ..., n.
First we show, that the classical Lie algebras are semisimple.

Proposition 7.6 (Semisimpleness of the Lie algebras of type Ar , Br ,Cr , Dr ). The
complex Lie algebras of type Ar , Br ,Cr , Dr are semisimple.
Note. We already know from Proposition 4.7 that the Lie algebras of type Ar are
semi-simple. The following proof is a refined form of the proof from Proposition 4.7
and holds for all classical Lie algebras of the above types.
Proof. Denote by L ∈ M(n × n, C) a complex Lie algebra from one of the above
types. Due to the definition of the Lie algebra L all matrices of L are traceless, i.e.
L ⊂ sl(n, C).
We have to show rad(L) = {0}. Due to its definition the Lie algebra L contains with
any matrix also its transpose:
A ∈ L =⇒ A⊤ ∈ L.
Because the radical is solvable we may assume according to Theorem 3.21
rad(L) ⊂ t(n, C) ∩ L.
Because
rad(L)⊤ := {A⊤ : A ∈ rad(L)}
is also solvable and rad(L) is maximal solvable, we have
rad(L)⊤ ⊂ rad(L),
and after transposition also
rad(L) ⊂ rad(L)⊤ .
As a consequence
rad(L) = rad(L)⊤
is also contained in the set of lower triangular matrices. Therefore rad(L) is con-
tained in the diagonal matrices
rad(L) ⊂ d(n, C) ∩ L.
Because rad(L) ⊂ L is an ideal, each

n
A = ∑ ai · Ei,i ∈ rad(L), ai ∈ C for 1 ≤ i ≤ n,
i=1
satisfies for all B ∈ L

[A, B] ∈ rad(L) ⊂ d(n, C) ∩ L.
For each arbitrary, but fixed pair of indices
( j0 , k0 ), 1 ≤ j0 ̸= k0 ≤ n,
we choose an element
n
B= ∑ b j,k · E j,k ∈ L, b j,k ∈ C for 1 ≤ j, k ≤ n,
j,k=1
with b j0 ,k0 ̸= 0. Such choice is possible, cf. the normal forms of the matrices from L
in [28, Ch. I.2]. Then
n n
[A, B] = ∑ ai · b j,k · [Ei,i , E j,k ] = ∑ (a j − ak )b j,k · E j,k ∈ d(n, C) ∩ L.
i, j,k=1 j,k=1
As a consequence
(a j0 − ak0 )b j0 ,k0 = 0
and a j0 = ak0 . Varying now the indices j0 ̸= k0 we obtain
a1 = ... = an
i.e. for a suitable a ∈ C

A = a · 1.
Because tr A = 0 we get A = 0, which finishes the proof, q.e.d.
Fig. 7.2 The Dynkin diagram of the root system of type Ar

Proposition 7.7 (Typ Ar ). The Lie algebra L := sl(r +1, C), r ≥ 1, has the following
characteristics:
1. dim L = (r + 1)2 − 1.
2. The subalgebra
H := d(r + 1, C) ∩ L
is a Cartan subalgebra with dim H = r.
3. The family (hi )i=1,...,r with
hi := Ei,i − Ei+1,i+1
is a basis of H.
4. Define the functionals
εi := (ε̂i |H) ∈ H ∗ , i = 1, ..., r + 1.
Then the root system Φ of L has the elements
εi − ε j , 1 ≤ i ̸= j ≤ r + 1.
The corresponding root spaces are 1-dimensional, generated by the elements
Ei j , 1 ≤ i ̸= j ≤ r + 1.
A base of Φ is the set ∆ := {αi : 1 ≤ i ≤ r} with
αi := εi − εi+1 .
The positive roots are the elements of Φ + = {εi − ε j : i < j}. They have the
representation
j−1
εi − ε j = ∑ αk ∈ Φ + .
k=i
5. For each positive root α := εi − ε j ∈ Φ + the subalgebra
Sα ≃ sl(2, C)
is generated by the three elements
hα := Ei,i − E j, j , xα := Ei, j , yα := E j,i .
6. The Cartan matrix of Φ referring to the base ∆ is

 
2 −1 0 . . . 0
−1 2 −1 . . . 0 
 
Cartan(∆ ) = 
 .. .. ..  ∈ M((r + 1) × (r + 1), Z).

 . . . 
 0 . . . −1 2 −1
0 . . . 0 −1 2
All roots α ∈ ∆ have the same length. The only pairs of roots from ∆ , which are
not orthogonal, are
(αi , αi+1 ), i = 1, ..., r − 1.
2π
Each pair includes the angle . In particular the Dynkin diagram of the root
3
system Φ has type Ar from Theorem 6.26, see Figure 7.2.
Proof. 4) For i ̸= j elements h ∈ H act on Ei, j according to
[h, Ei, j ] = h ◦ Ei, j − Ei, j ◦ h = εi (h) · Ei, j − ε j (h) · Ei, j = (εi (h) − ε j (h)) · Ei, j
5) According to part 4) the commutators are
[hα , xα ] = [hα , Ei, j ] = (εi (hα ) − ε j (hα ))Ei, j = 2 · Ei, j = 2 · xα
[hα , yα ] = [hα , E j,i ] = (ε j (hα ) − εi (hα ))E j,i = −2 · Ei, j = −2 · yα

[xα , yα ] = [Ei, j , E j,i ] = Ei,i − E j, j = hα .
6) The Cartan matrix has the entries β (hα ), α, β ∈ ∆ . We have to consider
• βk = εk − εk+1 , 1 ≤ k ≤ r and
• α j = ε j − ε j+1 , 1 ≤ j ≤ r, with corresponding elements h j = E j, j − E j+1, j+1 .
βk (hα j ) = (εk − εk+1 )(E j, j − E j+1, j+1 ) = (ε̂k − ε̂k+1 )(E j, j − E j+1, j+1 ) =
= δk j − δk, j+1 − δk+1, j + δk+1, j+1 = 2δk j − δk, j+1 − δk+1, j =

 2, if k = j

= −1, if |k − j| = 1

0, if |k − j| ≥ 2

If α ̸= β and < α, β >, < β , α ≯= 0 then the symmetry of the Cartan matrix implies
< β , α, > ∥β ∥2
1= =
< α, β > ∥α∥2
Hence all simple roots have the same length. The angles between two simple roots
can be read off from the Cartan matrix. Hence the root system Φ has the Dynkin
diagram Ar from Theorem 6.26, q.e.d.
In dealing with the Lie algebra sp(2r, C) we note that X ∈ sp(2r, C) iff
σ · X⊤ · σ = X
with
0 1

σ := and σ −1 = −σ .
−1 0
This condition is equivalent to

A B
X=
C −A⊤
with symmetric matrices B = B⊤ and C = C⊤ . The following proposition will refer

to this type of decomposition.
Fig. 7.3 The Dynkin diagram of the root system of type Cr
Proposition 7.8 (Typ Cr ). The Lie algebra L := sp(2r, C), r ≥ 3, has the following
characteristics:
1. dim L = r(2r + 1).
2. The subalgebra
D 0
H := ∈ L : D ∈ d(r, C)
0 −D
3. The family
(hi := Ei,i − Er+i,r+i )1≤i≤r
is a basis of H.
4. Define the functionals
εi := ε̂i |H ∈ H ∗ , i = 1, ..., 2r.
Then the elements
Ei, j − Er+ j,r+i , 1 ≤ i ̸= j ≤ r, (Matrix o f type A),

Ei,r+ j + E j,r+i , 1 ≤ i, j ≤ r, (Matrix o f type B),

Er+i, j + Er+ j,i , 1 ≤ i, j ≤ r, (Matrix o f type C),
generate the 1-dimensional root spaces belonging to the respective root

 εi − ε j type A

α= εi + ε j type B

−εi − ε j type C

The root system Φ is
Φ = {εi − ε j : 1 ≤ i ̸= j ≤ r} ∪ {±(εi + ε j ) : 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r} ∪ {±2 · εi : 1 ≤ i ≤ r}
A base of Φ is the set

∆ := {α1 , ..., αr }
with - note the different form of the last root αr -
• α j := ε j − ε j+1 , 1 ≤ j ≤ r − 1,
• αr = 2 · εr
The set of positive roots is
Φ + = {εi ± ε j : 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r} ∪ {2 · ε j : 1 ≤ i ≤ r}.
5. For each positive root α ∈ Φ + the subalgebra
Sα =< hα , xα , yα >≃ sl(2, C)
has the generators:

• Typ A: If α := εi − ε j ∈ Φ + , 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r, then
hα := Ei,i − E j, j , xα := Ei, j − Er+ j,r+i , yα := E j,i − Er+i,r+ j .
• Typ B: If α := εi + ε j ∈ Φ + , 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r, then
hα := Ei,i + E j, j , xα := Ei,r+ j + E j,r+i , yα := Er+i, j + Er+ j,i .
• Typ A: If α := 2εi ∈ Φ, 1 ≤ i ≤ r, then
hα := Ei,i − Er+i,r+i , xα := Ei,r+i , yα := Er+i,i .
6. The Cartan matrix of the root system Φ referring to the basis ∆ is

 
2 −1 0 . . . 0
−1 2 −1 . . . 0
 
 . . .
.. .. .. 
Cartan(∆ ) =   ∈ M(r × r, Z),
 
 0 . . . −1 2 −1 0 
 
 0 . . . 0 −1 2 −1
0 ... 0 −2 2
entry < αi , α j > at position (row, column) = ( j, i). Note the distinguished entry −2
in the last row: The Cartan matrix is not symmetric.
All roots α j ∈ ∆ , 1 ≤ j ≤ r − 1 have equal length, they are the short roots. The
root αr is the long root:
√ ∥αr ∥
2= , 1 ≤ j ≤ r − 1.
∥α j ∥
The only pairs of simple roots with are not orthogonal are
(αi , αi+1 ), i = 1, ..., r − 1.
2π
For i = 1, ..., r − 2 these pairs include the angle , while the pair (αr−1 , αr )
3
3π
inludes the angle . In particular the Dynkin diagram of the root system Φ has
4
type Cr according to Theorem 6.26, see Figure 7.2.
Proof. 1) Using the representation

A B
X= ∈ sp(2r, C)
C −A⊤
with symmetric matrices B = B⊤ and C = C⊤ we obtain from the number of free

parameters for A, B,C
r2 − r
dim L = r2 + 2 · ( + r) = 2r2 + r = r(2r + 1).
2
4) Note εi (h) = −εr+i (h) for all h ∈ H. For h ∈ H the commutators are:
[h, Ei, j − Er+ j,r+i ] = h · (Ei, j − Er+ j,r+i ) − (Ei, j − Er+ j,r+i ) · h =
= εi (h)Ei, j − εr+ j (h)Er+ j,r+i − ε j (h)Ei, j + εr+i (h)Er+ j,r+i =
= (εi (h) − ε j (h))Ei, j − εr+ j − εr+i )Er+ j,r+i =
= (εi (h) − ε j (h))Ei, j + ε j (h) − εi (h))Er+ j,r+i =
(εi (h) − ε j (h))(Ei, j − Er+ j,r+i )
[h, Ei,r+ j + E j,r+i ] = εi (h)Ei,r+ j + ε j (h)E j,r+i − εr+ j (h)Ei,r+ j − εr+i (h)E j,r+i =
(εi (h) − εr+ j (h))Ei,r+ j + (ε j (h) − εr+i (h))E j,r+i =

= (εi (h) + ε j (h))Ei,r+ j + (ε j (h) + εi (h))E j,r+i =
(εi (h) + ε j (h))(Ei,r+ j + E j,r+i )
[h, Er+i, j + Er+ j,i ] = εr+i (h)Er+i, j + εr+ j (h)Er+ j,i − ε j (h)Er+i, j − εi (h)Er+ j,i =
= (εr+i (h) − ε j (h))Er+i, j + (εr+ j (h) − εi (h))Er+ j,i =

= (−εi (h) − ε j (h))Er+i, j + (ε j − εi (h))Er+ j,i =
= (−εi (h) − ε j (h))(Er+i, j + Er+ j,i )
The positive roots have the base representation
j−1
εi − ε j = ∑ αk , 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r.
k=i
r−1
2 · εi = αr + ∑ 2 · αk , 1 ≤ i ≤ r − 1.
k=i
Part 6) The Cartan matrix has the entries β (hα ), α, β ∈ ∆ . We have to consider the
roots
• βk = εk − εk+1 , 1 ≤ k ≤ r − 1, and
• βr = 2εr
and the roots
• α j = ε j − ε j+1 , 1 ≤ j ≤ r − 1, with elements hα j = h j − h j+1 and
• αr = 2εr with element hαr = hr .
Accordingly, we calculate the cases:
• For 1 ≤ j, k ≤ r − 1:
βk (hα j ) = (εk − εk+1 )(E j, j − E j+1, j+1 ) = δk, j − δk, j+1 − δk+1, j + δk+1, j+1 =
= 2 · δk, j − δk, j+1 − δk, j−1

• For 1 ≤ j ≤ r − 1, k = r:
βr (hα j ) = 2 · εr (E j, j − E j+1, j+1 ) = 2(δr, j − δr, j+1 ) = −2δr, j+1
• For 1 ≤ k ≤ r − 1, j = r:
βk (hαr ) = (εk − εk+1 )(Er,r ) = δk,r − δk+1,r = −δk+1,r

• For j = k = r:
βr (hαr ) = 2 · εr (Er,r ) = 2.
If α ̸= β and < α, β >, < β , α ≯= 0 then
β (hα ) ∥α∥2
=
α(hβ ) ∥β ∥2
Hence
− 2 αr (hαr−1 ) ∥αr−1 ∥2
2= = = , q.e.d.
−1 αr−1 (hαr ) ∥αr ∥2
In dealing with the Lie algebra so(2r, C) it is useful to consider a matrix M ∈ so(2r, C)
as a scheme having 2×2-matrices as entries. Hence we introduce the non-commutative
ring
R := M(2 × 2, C)
and consider the matrices
M = ((a jk )1≤ j,k≤r ) ∈ M(r × r, R) ≃ M(2r × 2r, C)
with entries
a jk ∈ R, 1 ≤ j, k ≤ r.
For each 1 ≤ j, k ≤ r we introduce the matrix
E j,k ∈ M(r × r, R)
with onyl one nonzero entry, namely 1 ∈ R at place ( j, k). We distinguish the fol-
lowing elements from R, which can be expressed by using the Pauli matrices, see
Remark 2.16:
0 −i
h := σ2 =
i 0

1 i −1 1 i 1
s := = (1/2) · (iσ3 − σ1 ), t := ) = (1/2) · (iσ3 + σ1 )
2 −1 −i 2 1 −i

1 i 1 1 i −1
u := = (1/2) · (σ0 − iσ2 ) v := = (1/2) · i(σ0 − σ2 )
2 −1 i 2 1 i
satisfying
• s = s⊤ , h · s = s, s · h = −s
• t = t ⊤ , h · t = −t,t · h = t
• u⊤ = v, h · u = u · h = u
• v⊤ = u, h · v = v · h = −v
• [s,t] = −h
• u2 − v2 = −h
E.g. the matrix h · Ei,i ∈ M(r × r, R) is the block matrix with the single block h ∈ R
at the diagonal place with index (i, i).
Fig. 7.4 The Dynkin diagram of the root system of type Dr
Proposition 7.9 (Typ Dr ). The Lie algebra L := so(2r, C), r ≥ 4, has the following
characteristics:
1. dim L = r(2r − 1).
2. The subalgebra
H := spanC < h · E j, j : 1 ≤ j ≤ r > ⊂ d(r, R) ∩ L
3. For any pair 1 ≤ j < k ≤ r each of the four elements
s · (E j,k − Ek, j ),t · (E j,k − Ek, j ), u · E j,k − v · Ek, j , v · E j,k − u · Ek, j
generates the 1-dimensional root space belonging to the respective root



 ε j + εk

−ε − ε
j k
α=


 ε j − εk
−ε j + εk

Here ε j := (h · E j, j )∗ ⊂ H ∗ , 1 ≤ j ≤ r are the dual functionals.

4. The root system Φ of L has the elements
−εk − εn , εk + εn , −εk + εn , εk − εn , 1 ≤ k < n ≤ r,
for short
Φ = {±εk ± εn : 1 ≤ k < n ≤ r} (each combination o f signs).
A base of Φ is the set

∆ := {α1 , ..., αr }
with - note the different form of the last root αr -
• α j := ε j − ε j+1 , 1 ≤ j ≤ r − 1,
• αr = εr−1 + εr
The set of positive roots is Φ + = {εk ± εn : 1 ≤ k < n ≤ r}.
5. For each positive root α := ε j + εk ∈ Φ + , 1 ≤ j < k ≤ r, the subalgebra
Sα ≃ sl(2, C)
hα := h · (E j, j + Ek,k ), xα := s · (E j,k − Ek, j ), yα := t · (E j,k − Ek, j ).
For each positive root α := ε j − εk ∈ Φ + , 1 ≤ j < k ≤ r, the subalgebra
Sα ≃ sl(2, C)
hα := h · (E j, j − Ek,k ), xα := u · E j,k − v · Ek, j , yα := v · E j,k − u · Ek, j .
6. The Cartan matrix of the root system Φ referring to the basis ∆ is

 
2 −1 0 . . . 0
−1 2 −1 . . . 0
 
 . . .
.. .. .. 
Cartan(∆ ) =   ∈ M(r × r, Z).
 
 0 . . . −1 2 −1 −1
 
 0 . . . 0 −1 2 0 
0 −1 0 2
Note the distinguished entries in the last row and in the last column.
All roots α ∈ ∆ have the same length. The only pairs of simple roots with are not
orthogonal are
(αi , αi+1 ), i = 1, ..., r − 2, and (αr−2 , αr ).

2π
These pairs include the angle . In particular the Dynkin diagram of the root
3
system Φ has type Dr from Theorem 6.26, see Figure 7.2.
Proof. 3) It suffices to consider only pairs of indices (k, l) with k < l because the
generators belonging to (k, l) and (l, k) differ only by sign.
The general element of H has the form

r
z= ∑ aν · h · Eν,ν , aν ∈ C.
ν=1
H acts on s · (E j,k − Ek, j ) according to
[z, s·(E j,k −Ek, j )] = ε j (z)·hs·E j,k −εk (z)·hs·Ek, j −εk (z)·sh·E j,k +ε j (z)·sh·Ek, j =
ε j (z) · s · E j,k − εk (z) · s · Ek, j + εk (z) · s · E j,k − ε j (z) · s · Ek, j =

= (ε j (z) + εk (z)) · s · (E j,k − Ek, j )
H acts on t · (E j,k − Ek, j ) according to
[z,t · (E j,k − Ek, j )] = ε j (z) · ht · E j,k − εk (z) · ht · Ek, j − εk (z) ·th · E j,k + ε j (z) ·th · Ek, j =
−ε j (z) · t · E j,k + εk (z) · t · Ek, j − εk (z) · t · E j,k + ε j (z) · t · Ek, j =

= (−ε j (z) − εk (z)) · t · (E j,k − Ek, j )
H acts on u · E j,k − v · Ek, j according to
[z, u·E j,k −v·Ek, j ] = ε j (z)·hu·E j,k −εk (z)·hv·Ek, j −εk (z)·uh·E j,k +ε j (z)·vh·Ek, j =
ε j (z) · u · E j,k + εk (z) · v · Ek, j − εk (z) · u · E j,k − ε j (z) · v · Ek, j =

= (ε j (z) − εk (z)) · (u · E j,k − v · Ek, j )
H acts on v · E j,k − u · Ek, j according to
[z, v·E j,k −u·Ek, j ] = ε j (z)·hv·E j,k −εk (z)·hu·Ek, j −εk (z)·vh·E j,k +ε j (z)·uh·Ek, j =
−ε j (z) · u · E j,k − εk (z) · u · Ek, j + εk (z) · v · E j,k + ε j (z) · u · Ek, j =

= (−ε j (z) − εk (z)) · (v · E j,k − u · Ek, j ).
The positive roots have the base representation
j−1
εi − ε j = ∑ αk , 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r,
k=i
r−2 r
εi + ε j = ∑ αk + ∑ αk , 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r.
k=i k= j
5) For α := ε j + εk ∈ Φ + , 1 ≤ j < k ≤ r, the commutators are
[hα , xα ] = [h·(E j, j +Ek,k ), s·(E j,k −Ek, j )] = hs·(E j, j +Ek,k )(E j,k −Ek, j )−sh·(E j,k −Ek, j )(E j, j +Ek,k ) =
= s · (E j,k − Ek, j ) + s · (E j,k − Ek, j ) = 2 · xα

[hα , yα ] = [h·(E j, j +Ek,k ),t ·(E j,k −Ek, j )] = −t ·(E j,k −Ek, j )−t ·(E j,k −Ek, j ) = −2·yα
[xα , yα ] = [s·(E j,k −Ek, j ),t(E j,k −Ek, j )] = [s,t]·(E j,k −Ek, j )2 = (−h)·(−E j, j −Ek,k ) = hα
For α := ε j − εk ∈ Φ + , 1 ≤ j < k ≤ r, the commutators are
[hα , xα ] = [h·(E j, j −Ek,k ), u·E j,k −v·Ek, j ) = hu·E j,k +hv·Ek, j +uh·E j,k +vh·Ek, j =
u · E j,k − v · Ek, j + u · E j,k − v · Ek, j = 2u · E j,k − 2v · Ek, j = 2 · xα

[hα , yα ] = [h·(E j, j −Ek,k ), v·E j,k −u·Ek, j ] = hv·E j,k +hu·Ek, j +vh·E j,k +uh·Ek, j =
−v · E j,k + u · Ek, j − v · E j,k + u · Ek, j = 2u · Ek, j − 2v · E j,k = −2 · yα
[xα , yα ] = [u · E j,k − v · Ek, j , v · E j,k − u · Ek, j ] = − u2 E j, j − v2 Ek,k + v2 E j, j + u2 Ek,k =
= (v2 − u2 ) · E j, j + (u2 − v2 ) · Ek,k = h · (E j, j − Ek,k ) = hα
6) The Cartan matrix has the entries β (hα ), α, β ∈ ∆ . We have to consider
• α j = ε j − ε j+1 , 1 ≤ j ≤ r − 1 with elements hα j = h · (E j, j − E j+1, j+1 ) and
• αr = εr−1 + εr with element hαr = h · (Er−1,r−1 + Er,r )
and
• βk = εk − εk+1 , 1 ≤ k ≤ r − 1 and
• βr = εr−1 + εr .
If 1 ≤ j, k ≤ r − 1 then
(εk −εk+1 )(h·(E j, j −E j+1, j+1 )) = δk j −δk, j+1 −δk+1, j +δk+1, j+1 = 2δk j −δk, j+1 −δk+1, j =

 2, if i = j

= −1, if |i − j| = 1

0, if |i − j| ≥ 2

If k = r and 1 ≤ j ≤ r − 1 then
(εr−1 + εr )(h · (E j, j − E j+1, j+1 )) = δr−1, j − δr−1, j+1 + δr, j − δr, j+1 = −δr, j+2
(
−1, if j = r − 2
=
0, if j ̸= r − 2
If 1 ≤ k ≤ r − 1 and j = r then
(εk − εk+1 )(h · (Er−1,r−1 + Er,r )) = δk,r−1 + δk,r − δk+1,r−1 − δk+1,r = −δk,r−2
(
−1, if k = r − 2
=
0, if k ̸= r − 2
If k = r = 2 then
(εr−1 + εr )(h · (Er−1,r−1 − Er,r )) = δr−1,r−1 + δr,r = 2.
If α ̸= β and < α, β >, < β , α ≯= 0 then
< α, β > ∥β ∥2
= , q.e.d.
< β , α > ∥α∥2
In order to investigate the Lie algebra L := so(2r + 1, C) we use the same no-
tations and employ matrices similar to those introduced to study so(2r, C). More
specific: For 1 ≤ j, k ≤ r we extend the matrix
E j,k ∈ M(r × r, R) ≃ M(2r × 2r, C)
by zero in the last row and the last column to the matrix
Ẽ j,k ∈ M((2r + 1) × (2r + 1), C).
Like E j,k the matrix Ẽ j,k has non-zero entries only at the two places (2 j − 1, 2k − 1)
and (2 j, 2k), both entries with value = 1.
Fig. 7.5 The Dynkin diagram of the root system of type Br
Proposition 7.10 (Typ Br ). The Lie algebra L := so(2r + 1, C), r ≥ 2, has the fol-
lowing characteristics:
1. dim L = r(2r + 1).
2. The subalgebra
H := spanC < h · Ẽ j, j : 1 ≤ j ≤ r > ⊂ d(2r + 1, C) ∩ L

3. For 1 ≤ j ≤ r denote by
ε j := (h · Ẽ j, j )∗ ⊂ H ∗
the dual functionals. For any pair 1 ≤ j < k ≤ r each of the four elements
s · (Ẽ j,k − Ẽk, j ),t · (Ẽ j,k − Ẽk, j ), u · Ẽ j,k − v · Ẽk, j , v · Ẽ j,k − u · Ẽk, j
generates the 1-dimensional root space belonging to the respective root



 ε j + εk

 −ε − ε
j k
α=


 ε j − ε k
−ε j + εk

In addition, for each index j = 1, ..., r a 1-dimensional root space is generated

by the matrix
X j ∈ so(2r + 1, C)
with exactly four non-zero entries: The vector

i
B1 := ∈ M(2 × 1, C)
1
at places (2 j −1, 2r +1) and (2 j, 2r +1) and the vector B⊤

1 at places (2r + 1, 2 j − 1)
and (2r + 1, 2 j).
And in addition, for each index j = 1, ..., r a 1-dimensional root space is gener-
ated by the matrix
Y j ∈ so(2r + 1, C)
with exactly four non-zero entries: The vector

i
B2 := ∈ M(2 × 1, C)
−1
at places (2 j −1, 2r +1) and (2 j, 2r +1) and the vector B⊤

2 at places (2r + 1, 2 j − 1)
and (2r + 1, 2 j).
For j = 1, ..., r the respective roots belonging to X j and Y j are
α = ±ε j .
4. The root system Φ of L is
Φ = {±εk ± εn : 1 ≤ k < n ≤ r} ∪ {±ε j : j = 1, ..., r}.
A base of φ is the set

∆ = {α1 , ..., αr }
with - note the different form of the last root -
• α j := ε j − ε j+1 , 1 ≤ j ≤ r − 1,
• αr := εr .
The set of positive roots is
Φ + = {εi ± ε j : 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r} ∪ {ε j : 1 ≤ j ≤ r}.
5. For a positive root α ∈ Φ + the subalgebra
Sα =< hα , xα , yα >≃ sl(2, C)
has the generators:

• If α = ε j + εk , 1 ≤ j < k ≤ r, then
hα := h · (E j, j + Ek,k ), xα := s · (E j,k − Ek, j ), yα := t · (E j,k − Ek, j ).
• If α = ε j − εk , 1 ≤ j < k ≤ r, then
hα := h · (E j, j − Ek,k ), xα := u · E j,k − v · Ek, j , yα := v · E j,k − u · Ek, j .
• If α = ε j , 1 ≤ j ≤ r, then
hα := 2h · E j, j , xα = X j , yα = Y j .
6. The Cartan matrix of the root system Φ referring to the base ∆ is

 
2 −1 0 . . . 0
−1 2 −1 . . . 0
 
Cartan(∆ ) = 
 .. .. .. 
∈ M(r × r, Z).
 . . . 0 
 0 ... 0 −1 2 −2 
0 0 −1 2
Note the distinguished entries in the last row and the last column.
The roots α j , j = 1, ..., r − 1, have equal length; they are the long roots. The
root αr is the single short root. The length ratio is
∥α j ∥ √
= 2, j = 1, ..., r − 1.
∥αr ∥
The non-orthogonal pairs of roots from ∆ are
(α j , α j+1 ), j = 1, ..., r − 1.
2π
Each pair (α j , α j+1 ), j = 1, ..., r − 2, encloses the angle , while the last
3
3π
pair (αr−1 , αr ) encloses the angle . The Dynkin diagram of Φ has type Br
4
from Theorem 6.26, see Figure 7.2.
Proof. The canonical embedding
→ so(2l + 1, C)
so(2l, C) ,−
extends a matrix X ∈ so(2l, C) by adding a zero-column as last column and a zero-

row as last row. Therefore most part of the proof follows from the corresponding
statements in Proposition 7.9. In addition:
3) The general element of H has the form

r
z= ∑ aν · h · Eν,ν , aν ∈ C.
ν=1
In addition to the action of H on the root space elements from Proposition 7.9 one
has the action on the additional elements X j and Y j : For 1 ≤ j ≤ r the element z ∈ H
acts according to
[z, X j ] = ε j (z) · X j , [z,Y j ] = −ε j (z) ·Y j .
4) The positive roots have the base representation:
r
εj = ∑ αk , 1 ≤ j ≤ r,
k= j
j−1
εi − ε j = ∑ αk , 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r.
k=i
5) Note:
B1 · B⊤ ⊤
2 − B2 · B1 = 2 · h ∈ M(2 × 2, C).
6) The computation of the Cartan matrix is similar to the computation in the

proof of Proposition 7.9, q.e.d.
Theorem 7.11 (The classical complex Lie algebras are simple). The Lie algebras
of the complex classical groups belonging to types
Ar , r ≥ 1; Br , r ≥ 2;Cr , r ≥ 3; Dr , r ≥ 4,
are simple.
Proof. We know from Proposition 7.6 that any classical Lie algebra L is semisimple.
According to Theorem 4.15 the semisimple Lie algebra L splits into a direct sum of
simple Lie algebras. Elements from different summands commute pairwise. There-
fore the direct sum reduces to one single summand, because the Dynkin diagram of
L is connected. Hence L is simple, q.e.d.
Remark 7.12 (Semisimplicity of the classical Lie algebras). Apparently, one can for-
mulate the content of Proposition 7.7 until Proposition 7.10 without using that the
classical Lie algebras L are semisimple. Then these propositions give a second proof
for the semisimplicity of L, besides Proposition 7.6. One needs the decomposition
of L as a direct sum of H and 1-dimensional eigenspaces Lα
M
L=H⊕ Lα ,
α∈Φ
the existence of the subalgebras
Sα ≃ sl(2, C) ⊂ L
and the result

spanC < Φ >= H ∗ :
The radical
R := rad(L) ⊂ L
is an ideal. Therefore the subspace R ⊂ L is ad(H)-invariant. According to Lemma 5.2
the eigenspace decomposition of L
M
L=H⊕ Lα
α∈Φ
into eigenspaces of ad(H) induces the vector space decomposition

M
R = (R ∩ H) ⊕ (R ∩ Lα ).
α∈Φ
Assume R ̸= {0}, then:
i) Claim R ̸⊂ H: Assume on the contrary R ⊂ H. Then a non-zero element
h∈R⊂H
exists. Because Φ spans the dual space H ∗ , an element α ∈ Φ exists with
α(h) ̸= 0.
Consider a non-zero element x ∈ Lα . From h ∈ H follows
[h, x] = α(h) · x.
And from h ∈ R and R ⊂ L being an ideal follows
[h, x] = −[x, h] ∈ R ⊂ H
which implies x ∈ H. But H ∩ Lα = {0}, a contradiction.
ii) According to part i) a non-zero element x ∈ R \ H exists of the form
x = h+ ∑ xα
α∈Φ
satisfying for all α ∈ Φ

xα ∈ R ∩ Lα .
As a consequence for at least one α ∈ Φ:
xα ̸= 0.
The root space Lα is 1-dimensional.

• If α ∈ Φ + then we consider the subalgebra
spanC < xα , yα , hα >≃ sl(2, C) ⊂ L.
We use that R ⊂ L is an ideal. From xα ∈ R ∩ Lα follows
hα = [xα , yα ] ∈ R
and
yα = −(1/2) · [hα , yα ] ∈ R.
Therefore
sl(2, C) ≃ spanC < xα , yα , hα >⊂ R,
a contradition, because R is solvable but sl(2, C) is not.
• If α ∈ Φ − then we consider the subalgebra
spanC < x−α , y−α , h−α >≃ sl(2, C) ⊂ L
and start with yα ∈ R. In an analogous way we obtain
sl(2, C) ≃ spanC < x−α , y−α , h−α >⊂ R,
a contradiction.
Both cases i) and ii) lead to a contradition. This fact shows R = {0} and proves
that L is semisimple, q.e.d.
Remark 7.13 (Real simple Lie algebras). Also the Lie algebras of the real classical
groups belonging to types
Ar , r ≥ 1; Br , r ≥ 2;Cr , r ≥ 3; Dr , r ≥ 4;
are simple.
7.3 Outlook
According to Theorem 7.5 the root set of any complex semisimple Lie alge-
bra is a root system. The previous section shows that all Dynkin diagrams from
the A, B,C, D-series, see Theorem 6.26, are realized by the root system of a simple
Lie algebra.
At least the following related issues remain:
• Show that also the exceptional Dynkin diagrams of type F4 , G2 , Er with r = 6, 7, 8
result from root systems, see [28, Chap. 12.1].
• Show that also the exceptional root systems can be obtained from simple Lie
algebras.
• Show that a semisimple Lie algebra is uniquely determined by its root system.
Chapter 8
Irreducible Representations
Representation theory of complex semisimple Lie algebras L rests on the following

results from the general theory:
• The Cartan decomposition of L and the corresponding root system.
• Weyl’s theorem on complete reducibility of finite dimensional L-modules.
• Representation theory of the particular Lie algebra sl(2, C).
• The universal enveloping algebra of a Lie algebra.
8.1 The universal enveloping algebra
In the present section L denotes an arbitrary K-Lie algebra, not necessaritly semisim-
ple. The Lie algebra and the vector spaces may have infinite dimension if not stated
otherwise.
Before studying the structure of L-modules we make a disgression from Lie al-
gebras to associative algebras. We assume that all associative algebras A have a unit
element 1 ∈ A and all morphism ρ between associative algebras respect the unit
element.
We introduce the universal enveloping algebra UL of a Lie algebra L.
Any associative K-algebra A defines a K-Lie algebra with Lie bracket
[x, y] := x · y − y · x, x, y ∈ A.
225
226 8 Irreducible Representations
Conversely any Lie algebra L embedds into an associative algebra UL by a universal

construction. Even for finite-dimensional L the universal enveloping algebra UL is
not necessarily finite dimensional.
Definition 8.1 (Tensor algebra, symmetric algebra and universal enveloping al-
gebra).
1. Consider a K-vector space M. The tensor algebra T M of M is the pair (T M, j)
with
• the associative K-algebra
T k M, T k M := M ⊗k ,
M
T M :=
k∈N
with M 0 = K, unit 1 ∈ K, and the algebra multiplication induced by the canon-

ical map
T m M × T n M → T m+n M, (u, v) 7→ u ⊗ v,
• and the canonical K-linear injection
j : M = T 1 M ,→ T M.
2. For a K-vector space M denote by
I := span < m1 ⊗ m2 − m2 ⊗ m1 : m1 , m2 ∈ M >⊂ T M
the two sided ideal generated by all symmetric tensors. Set
SM := T M/I
and denote by
pSM : T M →
− SM
the canonical projection. The pair
(SM, pSM ◦ j)
is named the symmetric algebra of M.
3. Consider a K-Lie algebra L. The universal enveloping algebra of L is the

pair (UL, i) with
• The associative algebra UL obtained from the tensor algebra T L as the quo-
tient
UL := T L/J
with J ⊂ T L defined as the two-sided ideal generated by all elements
j([a, b]) − ( j(a) ⊗ j(b) − j(b) ⊗ j(a)), a, b ∈ L,

8.1 The universal enveloping algebra 227
• and the K-linear map
i : L → UL, x 7→ pUL ( j(x)),
with
pUL : T L → UL
the canonical projection.
The associative product in UL is denoted
xy ∈ UL or x · y ∈ UL for x, y ∈ UL.
Moreover we consider the map j : L ,−→ T L as an identification. The restriction
on K = T 0 L
pUL |T 0 L : T 0 L →
− UL
is injective, because
L⊗m .
M
I⊂
m≥1
A deeper fact states that also the map
i:L→
− UL
embeds L into UL, see Proposition 8.9, part 2).
In the specific case of an Abelian Lie algebra L the ideal I ⊂ T L is generated by

all elements of the form
u ⊗ v − v ⊗ u with u, v ∈ T M,
and the universal enveloping algebra UL equals the symmetric algebra
SL := T L/span < u ⊗ v − v ⊗ u : u, v ∈ L > .
For a finite-dimensional Lie algebra L the symmetric algebra is isomorphic to the

polynomial algebra
UL ≃ K[X1 , ..., Xn ], n = dim L.
The name universal enveloping algebra indicates that the pair (UL, i) has a uni-
versal property:
Lemma 8.2 (Universal property). Consider a K-Lie algebra L. For any associative K-algebra A
and any K-linear morphism ρ : L → A satisfying
ρ([a, b]) = ρ(a) · ρ(b) − ρ(b) · ρ(a)
exists a unique morphism of K-algebras

ρUL : UL → A
such that the following diagram commutes:
UL
i
L ρUL
ρ
A
Proof. Define ρUL : UL →

− A by
ρUL (pUL (x1 ⊗ ...xn )) := ρ(x1 ) · ... · ρ(xn ), q.e.d.
Often the study of an associative algebra A can be facilitated by choosing a filtra-

tion, i.e. a suitable exhaustion of the algebra by subspaces, such that the successive
quotients make up a graded algebra GA. The latter algebra can often be investi-
gated more easily than the original algebra A. The graded algebra GA is similar to a
polynomial algebra, which splits as a direct sum of the subspaces of homogeneous
polynomials of fixed degree. The Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt Theorem 8.8 provides an
example for the case of the universal enveloping algebra A = UL of a Lie algebra L.
For a fixed Lie algebra L we use the shorthand
T := T L, T ⊗m := T Lm , S := SL, U := UL.
Definition 8.3 (Filtration and graded algebra of the universal enveloping alge-
bra). Consider an arbitrary but fixed K-Lie algebra L with universal enveloping
algebra U.
1. For m ∈ N denote by
FmU := spanK < x1 · ... · xi ∈ L : 1 ≤ i ≤ m >⊂ U
the K-subspace of the universal enveloping algebra formed by all products with
at most m factors from L. In particular,
F0U = K and F1U = K + L.
Then
FU := (FmU)m∈N
is a filtration of the universal enveloping algebra U:
K = F0U ⊂ F1U ⊂ ... ⊂ FmU ⊂ ...

satisfying
FnU · FmU ⊂ Fn+mU.
2. The successive quotient vector spaces of the filtration
GmU := FmU/Fm+1U, m ∈ N,
define the commutative associative algebra

M
GU := Gm U
m∈N
with multiplication on the summands defined as follows: Set
GnU := FnU/Fn−1U, GmU := FmU/Fm−1U, Gn+mU := Fn+mU/Fn+m−1U.
Then
GnU × GmU → Gn+mU, (x + Fn−1U) · (y + Fm−1U) := x · y + Fn+m−1U.
There is a canonical morphism of algebras
pU,GU : U →
− GU
defined as follows: For a non-zero element x ∈ U choose the minimal index m ∈ N

satisfying
x ∈ FmU
and define
pU,GU (x) := x + Fm−1U ∈ GmU.
The pair (GU, pU,GU ) is named the graded algebra of the universal enveloping
algebra of L.
3. In general the Lie algebra L is not Abelian. For non-Abelian L the ideal
J := span < [a, b] − (a ⊗ b − b ⊗ a) : a, b ∈ L >⊂ T
is not homogeneous. As a consequence the grading of the tensor algebra T does

not induce a grading of the quotient U = T /J by homogeneous elements. Never-
theless, the filtration (Tm )m∈N of T induces a filtration
(F mU := pU (Tm ))m∈N
of U. Taking the associated filtration defines the graded algebra

M
GU := Gm U
m∈N
and a canonical morphism

pU,GU : U →
− GU.
4. The notation FmU denotes the filtration by lower indices, while the notation GmU
denotes the graduation by upper indices.
Remark 8.4 (Graded universal enveloping algebra and symmetric algebra).

1. Multiplication: The multiplication of the graded algebra GU from Definition 8.3
is well-defined because for x ∈ Fn−1U or y ∈ Fm−1U
x · y ∈ Fn+m−1U.
2. Commutativity and relation to symmetric algebra: The graded algebra GU is

commutative: Consider the composition
pGU := [pU,GU : U →
− GU] ◦ [pU : T →
− U] : T →
− GU
and the ideal
I := span < v1 ⊗ v2 − v2 ⊗ v1 : v1 , v2 ∈ L >⊂ T.
On has for all v1 , v2 ∈ L
pU (v1 ⊗ v2 − v2 ⊗ v1 ) = pU ([v1 , v2 ]) ∈ F1U.
Hence
pGU (I) ⊂ {0} = F1U/F1U ⊂ F2U/F1U.
The inclusion I ⊂ ker pGU implies the existence of a morphism
φ : SL →
− GU
such that the following diagram commutes
pGU
T GU
pS φ
S
Surjectivity of implies that φ is surjective. The commutativity of S implies the

commutativity of
GU = φ (S).
The main theorem about the universal enveloping algebra UL is due to Poincaré-
Birkhoff-Witt, see Theorem 8.8. It states that φ is an isomorphism of associative
algebras. Hence the graded algebra GUL of the universal enveloping algebra UL
is the algebra of polynomials in finitely many variables, a well-understood alge-
braic object. The proof of the injectivity of φ in requires some preparations, see
Notation 8.5, Proposition 8.6 and Lemma 8.7.
Notation 8.5. Denote by L a K-Lie algebra and by SL its symmetric algebra. We

assume a basis of L
{xλ : λ ∈ Ω }
with an ordered index set Ω . For any λ ∈ Ω we denote by zλ a corresponding
indeterminate for the polynomial algebra
SL ≃ K[(zλ )λ ∈Ω ].
For any m ∈ N we denote the subspace of homogeneous polynomials of degree m by
Sm L := spanK < zλ1 · ... · zλm >⊂ SL.
These subspaces define the graded algebra

G
SL = Sm L.
m∈N
It results from the filtration
Sm L := S0 L ⊕ ... ⊕ Sm L ⊂ SL, m ∈ N,
by the subspaces of polynomials of degree ≤ m. For a sequence
Σ = (λ1 , ..., λm )
we set
xΣ := xλ1 ⊗ ... ⊗ xλm ∈ T m L
and
zΣ := zλ1 · ... · zλm ∈ Sm L.
If λ1 ≤ ... ≤ λm then the sequence Σ is increasing.
Proposition 8.6 (SL as L-module). Consider a K-Lie algebra L with symmetric

algebra SL. Then a unique morphism of Lie algebras exists
ρ :L→
− gl(SL)
satisfying for all λ ≤ Σ ,

ρ(xλ )zΣ = zλ · zΣ ,
and for all m ∈ N and all Σ of length m
ρ(xλ )zΣ ≡ zλ · zΣ mod Sm .L
The algebraic proof of the proposition follows a standard scheme, see [28, § 17.4],
[32, Ch. II.6], [46, Part I, Ch. III, No. 4] .
Proof. Because the K-algebra SL is Abelian we may assume all m-tuples in the
proof
Σ = (λ1 , ..., λm )
as increasing.
i) The existence of the representation ρ is equivalent to the existence of a linear

map
f : L ⊗ SL →
− SL,
which satisfies for all z1 , z2 ∈ L and all v ∈ SL
f ([z1 , z2 ] ⊗ v) = f (z1 ⊗ f (z2 ⊗ v)) − f (z2 ⊗ f (z1 ⊗ v)).
Due to the filtration of SL the existence of the linear map f is equivalent to a com-
patible family ( fm )m∈N of linear maps
fm : L ⊗ Sm L →
− GS,
which satisfy for all m-tuples Σ the following properties:

1. Am : For all λ ≤ Σ and all zΣ ∈ Sm L
fm (xλ ⊗ zΣ ) = zλ · zΣ ∈ Sm+1 L
2. Bm : For all λ ∈ Ω , for all k ≤ m and for all zΣ ∈ Sk L
fm (xλ ⊗ zΣ ) ≡ zλ · zΣ mod Sk L
3. Cm : For all λ , µ ∈ Ω , for all m − 1-tuples T and for all zT ∈ Sm−1 L
fm ([xλ , xµ ] ⊗ zT ) = fm (xλ ⊗ fm (xµ ⊗ zT )) − fm (xµ ⊗ fm (xλ ⊗ zT )).
Here condition Am considers for given Σ only indices λ ∈ Ω less or equal than
each index from Σ . Condition Bm considers arbitrary indices λ and allows a correc-
tion term of lower order in comparison to the result from Am . While condition Cm
captures the requirement for commutators from L.
ii) We construct the family f := ( fm )m∈N by induction on m.
Induction start m = 0: The only sequence to consider is the empty sequence Σ = 0/

with zΣ = 1. Moreover
S0 L = S0 L = K.
We define for all λ ∈ Ω
f0 : L ⊗ S0 L →
− SG, f0 (xλ ⊗ 1) := zλ ∈ S1 L.
Apparently f0 is the only linear map which satisfies condition A0 . It also satisfies
condition B0 and C0 .
Induction step m − 1 7→ m: We have to extend fm−1 , defined on L ⊗ Sm−1 L, to a

linear map fm defined on L ⊗ Sm L. Therefore we have to define
fm (xλ ⊗ zΣ ) ∈ SL
for an increasing sequence Σ of lenght = m.
If λ ≤ Σ then property Am requires the definition
fm (xλ ⊗ zΣ ) := zλ · zΣ .
Otherwise, Σ = (λ1 , ..., λm ) satisfies
λ > µ := λ1 .
We set Σ = (µ, T ) with the increasing (m − 1)-tuple T = (λ2 , ..., λm ).

Because µ ≤ T , the induction hypothesis Am−1 implies
fm−1 (xµ ⊗ zT ) = zµ · zT = zΣ .
The requirement of compatibility between fm and fm−1 requires the definition
fm (xµ ⊗ zT ) := fm−1 (xµ ⊗ zT ) = zΣ .
As a consequence, condition Cm requires
fm ([xλ , xµ ] ⊗ zT ) = fm (xλ ⊗ zΣ ) − fm (xµ ⊗ fm (xλ ⊗ zT ))
or
fm (xλ ⊗ zΣ ) = fm (xµ ⊗ fm (xλ ⊗ zT )) + fm ([xλ , xµ ] ⊗ zT ).
Concerning the terms on the right-hand side of the last equation:
• First term: The compatibility of fm with fm−1 and the induction
hypothesis Bm−1 imply
fm (xλ ⊗ zT ) = fm−1 (xλ ⊗ zT ) ≡ zλ · zT mod Sm−1 L
or
fm (xλ ⊗ zT ) = zλ · zT + y,
with
y = fm−1 (xλ ⊗ zT ) − zλ · zT ∈ Sm−1 L.
• Second term: The compatibility of fm with fm−1 implies
fm ([xλ , xµ ] ⊗ zT ) = fm−1 ([xλ , xµ ] ⊗ zT ).
The compatibility of fm with fm−1 and condition Am imply
fm (xµ ⊗ fm (xλ ⊗ zT )) = fm (xµ ⊗ zλ · zT ) + fm (xµ ⊗ y) =
= fm (xµ ⊗ zλ · zT ) + fm−1 (xµ ⊗ y) = zµ · zλ · zT + fm−1 (xµ ⊗ y).

Summing up: We must define
fm (xλ ⊗ zΣ ) := zµ · zλ · zT + fm−1 (xµ ⊗ y).
After having now defined as extension of fm−1 the linear map
fm : L ⊗ Sm L →
− Sm+1 L
in accordance with condition Am and Bm , it remains to show that fm satisfies

condition Cm . Hence consider arbitrary but fixed
λ , µ and an increasing (m − 1)-index tuple T.
Condition Cm has already been verified if
µ < λ and µ ≤ T.
Condition Cm also holds for the reverse case
λ < µ and λ ≤ T
because
[xµ , xλ ] = −[xλ , xµ ].
Apparently, condition Cm holds for λ = µ. Hence we are left with the case:
neither λ ≤ T nor µ ≤ T.
Because we now fix m, we introduce the shorthand (dot on the line)
x.z := fm (x ⊗ z)
Decomposing T = (ν,Ψ ) with lenght Ψ = m − 2. Then
λ > ν and µ > ν.
We obtain
xµ .zT = xµ .(zν · zΨ )
using condition Am−2 for the last equality. Condition Cm−1 applied with the
indices µ and ν implies
xµ .(xν .zΨ ) = xν .(xµ .zΨ ) + [xµ , xν ].zΨ ,
hence
xµ .zT = xν .(xµ .zΨ ) + [xµ , xν ].zΨ .
Condition Bm−2 , a consequence of Bm−1 , implies the existence of a
suitable w ∈ Sm−2 L such that
xµ .zΨ = zµ · zΨ + w.
Hence
xµ .zT = xν .(zµ · zΨ ) + xν .w + [xµ , xn u].zΨ .
We apply xλ to both sides of the equation:
xλ .(xµ .zT ) = xλ .(xν .(zµ · zΨ )) + xλ .(xν .w) + xλ .([xµ , xn u].zΨ .)
The trick of the proof is now to apply the induction assumption and the part of
condition Cm , which has already been proven, to each of the three summands
separately. And afterwards to add the results and to remove the intermediate term w
from the result. Using the shorthand T1 , T2 , T3 for the three summands on the
right-hand side of the equation, we transform each of the summands as
• T1 : Condition Cm applies because ν ≤ (µ,Ψ ), hence
xλ .(xν .(zµ · zΨ )) = xν .(xλ .(zµ · zΨ )) + [xλ , xν ].(zµ · zΨ ).
• T2 : Condition Cm−1 applies, hence
xλ .(xν .w) = xν .(xλ .w) + [xλ , xν ].w
• T3 : Condition Cm−1 applies, hence
xλ .([xµ , xν ].zΨ ) = [xµ , xν ].(xλ .zΨ ) + [xλ , [xµ , xν ]].zΨ
Summing up the three summands and combining the corresponding terms of T1

and T2 as
xν .(xλ .(zµ · zΨ )) + xν .(xλ .w) = xν .(xλ .(xµ .zΨ ))
[xλ , xν ].(zµ · zΨ ) + [xλ , xν ].w = [xλ , xν ].(xµ .zΨ )
we obtain as a first equation
xλ .(xµ .zT ) = xν .(xλ .(xµ .zΨ ))+[xλ , xν ].(xµ .zΨ )+[xµ , xν ].(xλ .zΨ )+[xλ , [xµ , xν ]].zΨ
We now interchange the role of λ and µ and subtract the resulting equation from
the first equation. Due to the symmetry the underlined terms from both equations
cancel. The result completes the induction step:
xλ .(xµ .zT ) − xµ .(xλ .zT ) =
= xν .(xλ .(xµ .zΨ )) − xν .(xµ .(xλ .zΨ )) + [xλ , [xµ , xν ]].zΨ − [xµ , [xλ , xν ]].zΨ =
= xν .([xλ , xµ ].zΨ ) + [xλ , [xµ , xν ]].zΨ + [xµ , [xν , xλ ]].zΨ =
= [xλ , xµ ].(xν .zΨ ) + [xν , [xλ , xµ ]].zΨ + [xλ , [xµ , xν ]].zΨ + [xµ , [xν , xλ ]].zΨ =
= [xλ , xµ ].zT + ([xν , [xλ , xµ ]] + [xλ , [xµ , xν ]] + [xµ , [xν , xλ ]]).zΨ =
= [xλ , xµ ].zT
Here the last equality is due to the Jacobi identity. The end of the induction step
finishes the proof of the Proposition, q.e.d.
Lemma 8.7 (Commutator versus symmetric element). Denote by L a Lie algebra

with universal enveloping algebra UL and set
I := ker [pSL : T L →
− SL], J := ker [pUL : T L →
− UL].
Then for any element

t ∈ T mL ∩ J
of degree at most = m the homogeneous component of degree = m belongs to I
tm ∈ T m L ∩ I.
The meaning of Lemma 8.7 can be easily seen in the case m = 2 by the element
t = v1 ⊗ v2 − v2 ⊗ v1 − [v1 , v2 ] ∈ T 2 L ∩ J :
Apparently its homogeneous part of degree = 2 is symmetric
t2 = v1 ⊗ v2 − v2 ⊗ v1 ∈ I.
Proof. i) The morphism of Lie algebras
ρ :L→
− gl(SL)
from Proposition 8.6 can be considered as a linear map
ρ :L→
− End(SL)
satisfying
ρ([x, y]) = ρ(x) ◦ ρ(y) − ρ(y) ◦ ρ(x).
Due to the universal property of the universal enveloping algebra UL we obtain a
unique morphism of associative algebras
ρUL : UL →
− End(SL)
such that the following diagram commutes
L
ρ
j
TL End(SL)
pUL
ρUL
UL
We consider the morphism of associative algebras
ρ := ρUL ◦ pUL : T L →
− End(SL)
satisfying ρ(1) = 1. Apparently J ⊂ ker ρ.
ii) For t ∈ T m L the endomorphism
ρ(t) ∈ End (SL)
maps the unit to the element

ρ(t)(1) ∈ SL.
Consider an orderded basis (xλ )λ ∈Ω of L. For each sequence Σ = (λ1 , ..., λk )
with xΣ a summand of t we apply Proposition 8.6 successively for λk , ..., λ1 and
obtain
ρ(xΣ )(1) = zΣ · 1 mod Sk−1 L = zΣ mod Sk−1 L.
Hence
ρ(t)(1) = ∑ zΣ mod Sm−1 L.
Σ
If also t ∈ J, then its homogeneous component of highest degree is a symmetric

tensor:
tm = ∑ xΣ
length Σ =m
or
tm ∈ I ∩ T m L, q.e.d.
For an Abelian Lie algebra L holds
SL ≃ UL.
The following Theorem 8.8 shows how to generalize this fact to arbitrary Lie
algebras.
Theorem 8.8 (Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt). For any K-Lie algebra L the canonical

morphism
φ : SL → GUL
from the symmetric algebra of L to the graded algebra GUL of the universal en-
veloping algebra UL is an isomorphism of associative K-algebras.
Proof. 1. Surjectivity. The morphism pGUL : T L →

− GUL is surjective, because for
each m ∈ N the map
L⊗m →
− FmU/Fm−1U
is surjective. Hence the induced map φ is surjective.
2. Injectivity: We set
I := ker pSL ⊂ T L
in the commutative diagram
pGUL
TL GUL
pSL φ
SL
Moreover we recall the canonical map
pUL : T L →
− UL
and set
J := ker pUL .
We show for any m ∈ N: If t ∈ T m L satisfies
pGUL (t) = 0
i.e.
pUL (t) ∈ Fm−1UL
then t ∈ I, hence pSL (t) = 0. The particular case m = 1 proves the injectivity of φ .
Consider a homogeneous element t ∈ T m L of degree = m with pUL (t) ∈ Fm−1UL.

Then an element t ′ ∈ Tm−1 L of degree at most = m − 1 exists with
pUL (t) = pUL (t ′ )

i.e.
pUL (t − t ′ ) = 0 or t − t ′ ∈ J.
Lemma 8.7, applied to the element
t − t ′ ∈ T mL ∩ J
with t its homogeneous component of degree = m, implies t ∈ I, q.e.d.
The following Proposition 8.9 follows from Theorem 8.8. It states in particular
that any Lie algebra L embeds into its universal enveloping algebra UL.
Proposition 8.9 (Basis of the universal enveloping algebra). Consider a finite-
dimensional Lie algebra L with tensor algebra T , symmetric algebra S, universal
enveloping algebra U, and graded universal enveloping algebra GU.
1. If W ⊂ T m is a subspace which under the restriction of the canonical map
pS : T →
− S
is mapped isomorphically to Sm , then
pU (W ) ⊂ FmU
is a complement to the subspace Fm−1U ⊂ FmU.
2. The canonical K-linear map
i = pU ◦ j : L →
−U
is injective.
3. Consider a basis (xk )k=1,...,n of L. Then the family of elements
xk1 · ... · xkm := pU ( j(xk1 ) ⊗ ... ⊗ j(xkm )) ∈ U, m ∈ N and k1 ≤ ... ≤ km ,
together with the element 1 is a basis of U. Note that the factors are arranged
according to increasing indices of the basis elements.
4. Consider a subalgebra H ⊂ L. Extend a basis BH of H to a basis
˙ L/H , BL/H = (xk )k=1,...,n ,

BL = BH ∪B
of L. Hereby all elements from BH are to be placed before the elements from BL/H .
Then the injection H ,→ L induces an injection
UH ,→ UL,
and UL is a free UH-module with basis

xk1 · ... · xkm , m ∈ N and k1 ≤ ... ≤ km ,
together with the element 1.

Proof. 1. In the commutative diagram
pU
T U
pU,GU
φ
S GU
the map φ is an isomorphism due to theorem 8.8. The diagram induces by re-
striction for each index m ∈ N the commutative diagram
Tm FmU
≃
Sm Gm U
By assumption the composition
→ Tm →
W ,− − Sm →
− GmU
is an isomorphism. Hence also the composition
→ Tm →
W ,− − Gm U
− FmU →
is an isomorphism, which implies
pU (W )/(pU (W ) ∩ Fm−1U) = pU,GU (W ) ≃ GmU = FmU/Fm−1U.
Because
pU (W ) ∩ Fm−1U = {0}
we obtain
pU (W ) ≃ FmU/Fm−1U
or
FmU ≃ pU (W ) ⊕ Fm−1U.
2. We apply the result from part 1) with index m := 1 and W := j(L). Then
pU ( j(L)) ⊕ F0U ≃ F1U = L ⊕ K
which implies
i(L) = pU ( j(L)) ≃ L.
3. We apply the result of part 1) for a given index m ∈ N and the subspace
W := span xk1 ⊗ ... ⊗ xkm : k1 ≤ ... ≤ km ⊂ T m .

We obtain that pU (W ) ⊂ FmU is a complement of Fm−1U ⊂ FmU i.e.
FmU = Fm−1U ⊕ pU (W ).
By induction on m ∈ N we build the basis of U.
4. According to part 3) the basis representation with coefficients from K of an ele-

ment z ∈ UL by the basis derived from BL can be considered a basis representa-
tion of x with coefficients from UH by the basis derived from BL/H , q.e.d.
All statements from Proposition 8.9 hold also for Lie algebras with a countable
infinite dimension. The proof goes through along the same lines.
Example 8.10 (Basis of the universal enveloping algebra). Consider the Lie algebra
L = sl(2, C).
The family (1, h, x, y) induces the basis of UL with the elements
hi x j yk , i, j, k ∈ N.
The following table shows the product formulas which allow to compute inductively
the product of two basis elements. The entries of the table show the product with an
element from the left column with an element from the upper row.
h x y
h h2 hx hy
x hx − 2x x2 xy
y hy + 2y xy − h y2
A consequence of Lemma 8.2 is the following Proposition 8.11.

Proposition 8.11 (The categories of associative algebras and Lie algebras re-
spectively). The functor
Lie : Ass →
− Lie
from the category Ass of associative K-algebras to the category Lie of K-Lie alge-
bras has a left-adjoint functor
U : Lie →
− Ass,
i.e. for any pair of a K-Lie algebra L and an associative K-algebra A there is a
natural isomophism of K-vector spaces
HomLie (L, Lie(A)) →

− HomAss (UL, A).
Corollary 8.12 (Equivalence of categories). For any Lie algebra L the category L-mod
of L-modules and the category UL-mod of UL-modules are equivalent.
8.2 General weight theory
The present section generalizes the representation theory of the Lie algebra sl(2, C)
from Chapter 5.2 to the representation theory of an arbitrary complex semisimple
Lie algebra L. The L-modules M under consideration are not necessarily finite di-
mensional.
We fix
• a pair (L, H) with a semisimple complex Lie algebra L and a Cartan subalgebra H ⊂ L,
• and a base
∆ = {α1 , ..., αr }
of the roots Φ of (L, H).
Concerning the corresponding root system Φ we denote

• the decomposition into respectively positive and negative roots by
˙ Φ −,
Φ = Φ+ ∪
• half the sum of the positive roots by
δ = (1/2) · ∑ α,
α∈Φ +
• and the Weyl group of Φ by W .
We recall the Cartan decomposition of L from Definition 5.18
(Lα ⊕ L−α ).
M M
L=H⊕ Lα = H ⊕
α∈Φ α∈Φ +
8.2 General weight theory 243
The subalgebra of L M
B := H ⊕ Lα
α∈Φ +
which comprises besides H only the root spaces of positive roots, is named the
corresponding Borel subalgebra. Moreover we consider the subalgebras of L of
root spaces belonging to respectively positive and negative roots
N + := Lα , N − :=
M M
Lα .
α∈Φ + α∈Φ −
According to Proposition 7.3 we choose for each positive root α ∈ Φ + a set of

distinguished elements
xα ∈ Lα , yα ∈ L−α , hα = [xα , yα ] ∈ H
satisfying
spanC < hα , xα , yα >≃ sl(2, C).
Proposition 8.13 (Solvability of Borel subalgebras). Consider a semisimple Lie

algebra L with Cartan subalgebra H. Then the corresponding Borel subalgebra
B ⊂ L is solvable, and the subalgebras N + , N − ⊂ L are nilpotent.
Proof. The algebra N + is nilpotent because its descending central series converges
to zero: One uses the formula
[Lα1 , Lα2 ] ⊂ Lα1 +α2 .
The same argument shows the nilpotency of N − .
The Borel algebra B is solvable because its commutator algebra
Lα = N +
M
[B, B] ⊂
α∈Φ +
is nilpotent, q.e.d.
Both, the terms in Definition 5.6 from the representation theory of sl(2, C)-modules
and the terms in Definition 5.12 for the adjoint representation of semisimple com-
plex Lie algebras generalize to representations of arbitray semisimple complex Lie
algebras.
Definition 8.14 (Weight and weight space). Consider a semisimple Lie algebra L
and an L-module V .
1. For a linear functional µ ∈ H ∗ denote by
V µ := {v ∈ V : h.v = µ(h) · v f or all h ∈ H}
the eigenspace with respect to the action of H. If V µ ̸= {0} then V µ is named a

weight space of V , the corresponding linear functional µ ∈ H ∗ is a weight of V ,
and the non-zero elements of V µ are named weight vectors.
2. A weight µ ∈ H ∗ is integral iff for all α ∈ ∆
µ(hα ) ∈ Z,
it is non-negative iff for all α ∈ ∆
µ(hα ) ≥ 0.
Lemma 8.15 (Action of the root spaces). Consider a semisimple Lie algebra L and
an L-module V .
1. For any root α of L and any weight µ of V we have
Lα .V µ ⊂ V α+µ .
2. The sum
V ′ := ∑ Vµ
µ weight
is direct, i.e.
V′ =
M
V µ.
µ weight
It is a submodule of V .
Proof. 1. The proof is analogous to the proof of Lemma 5.13.
2. Elements of the Cartan subalgebra H ⊂ L act as semi-simple endomorphims of

V which pairwise commute. The claim follows from the fact that eigenvectors
belonging to different eigenvalues are linearly independent. The Cartan decom-
position of L shows that V ′ ⊂ V is a submodule, q.e.d.
Consider a vector space V . Then Lemma 8.2 applies to the associative algebra A = gl(V ):
Any representation
ρ : L → gl(V )
extends uniquely to a morphism of associative algebras
ρUL : UL → gl(V ).
Analogously to Definition 4.16, we often use the shorthand
u.v := ρUL (u)(v)
for u ∈ UL and v ∈ V.
Any L-module V with L a complex semisimple Liealgebra is in particular a mod-

ule over the solvable Borel subalgebra B ⊂ L. If L is finite-dimensional, then Lie’s
theorem applies: The action of B on V has a common eigenvector. Such an eigen-
vector is called a primitive element of V .
Definition 8.16 (Primitive element and standard cyclic module). Consider a

complex semisimple Lie algebra L with Borel subalgebra B ⊂ L, and an L-module V .
1. A weight vector e ∈ V λ is named a primitive element or maximal vector of V if
b.e = λ (b) · e for all b ∈ B.
2. An L-module V is standard cyclic if it has a primitive element e ∈ V which

generates V via the action of UL, i.e. if
V = UL.e
Lemma 8.17 (Existence of primitive elements). Any finite-dimensional L-module V ̸= {0}

has a primitive element e.
Proof. The Borel algebra B ⊂ L is solvable due to Proposition 8.13. According to
Theorem 3.20 a non-zero element e ∈ V exists such that for all x ∈ B
x.e = λ (x) · e.
If α ∈ Φ + and
xα ∈ L α ⊂ N +
we consider
Sα := span < hα , xα , yα >≃ sl(2, C).
Then
2xα .e = [hα , xα ].e = λ (hα ) · λ (xα ) · e − λ (xα ) · λ (hα ) · e = 0.
Hence
N + .e = 0
and e is a primitive element, q.e.d.
The following Proposition 8.18 clarifies the structure of standard cyclic modules;
compare also Proposition 5.7.
Proposition 8.18 (Standard cyclic module). Consider a semisimple Lie algebra L

with basis
∆ = {α1 , ..., αr }
of its root system Φ, and a standard cyclic L-module V with primitive element e ∈ V λ .
Then:
1. Generation by UN − :
V = UN − .e
2. All weights of V have the form
r
µ = λ − ∑ mi · αi , mi ∈ N f or all i = 1, ..., r;
i=1
hence the weight λ is named the highest weight of V .
3. Finite dimensionality of weight spaces: For each weight µ of V the weight space
is finite-dimensional, i.e.
dim V µ < ∞.
In particular
dim V λ = 1.
4. The L-module V does not decompose as a direct sum of proper L-submodules,
i.e. there is no representation
V = V1 ⊕V2
with non-zero L-modules V1 , V2 .
Proof. Note that V is not necessarily finite dimensional: In general there is no lower
bound for the weights µ.
1. Proposition 8.9, part 4) applied to the vector space decomposition
L = N− ⊕ B
shows: Extending the basis of N −
BN − = (yα )α∈Φ +
by the basis of B
BB = (hα )α∈∆ ∪ (xα )α∈Φ +
to a basis of L represents UL as a free UN − -module with basis BB . Therefore
UL.e = (UN − ·UB).e = UN − .e
2. The claim follows from part 1):

Lα .V µ ⊂ V µ+α
and the fact, that any negative root α ∈ Φ − is a linear combination of elements
from ∆ with negative integer coefficients.
3. According to Proposition 8.9, part 3) the family

j(1) j(r)
yα1 · ... · yαr
j(1),..., j(r)∈N
of monomials is a basis of UN − . For fixed weight

r
µ := λ − ∑ mi · αi
i=1
only finitely many of these monomials satisfy

j(1) j(r)
yα1 · ... · yαr .e ∈ V µ .
Hence dim V µ < ∞.
The only monomial generator with

j(1) j(r)
yα1 · ... · yαr .e ∈ V λ
is
1 = y0α1 · ... · y0αr ,
hence dim V λ = 1.
4. If V = V1 ⊕V2 then the weight space of V λ decomposes as
V λ = V1 λ ⊕V2 λ .
According to part 3) we have dim V λ = 1, hence w.l.o.g.
dim V1 λ = 1 and dim V2 λ = 0.
Therefore e ∈ V1 . Because e generates V we conclude V ⊂ V1 , i.e. V = V1

and V2 = 0, q.e.d.
It is a consequence of Proposition 8.18, that an irreducible L-module with a prim-

itive element is standard cyclic. Hence its structure is well-known. Thanks to Weyl’s
theorem on complete reducibility also the structure of arbitrary finite-dimensional L-modules
is determined.
Corollary 8.19 (Structure of irreducible standard cyclic modules). Consider a

semisimple Lie algebra L and an irreducible L-module V with a primitive element e ∈ V λ .
Then:
1. The module V is standard cyclic. In particular, all weights of V have the form
r
µ = λ − ∑ mi · αi , mi ∈ N f or all i = 1, ..., r.
i=1
Each weight space is finite dimensional; in particular dim V λ = 1. Moreover V

splits as a direct sum of its weight spaces
M
V= V µ.
µ weight
2. Up to scalar multiplication e is the only primitive element of V .
3. Two irreducible L-modules Vi with highest weight
λi , i = 1, 2,
are isomorphic iff λ1 = λ2 .

Proof. 1. The standard cyclic submodule E ⊂ V λ generated by the primitive ele-
ment e ∈ V equals V because the latter is irreducible. Hence Proposition 8.18
proves the claim.
2. Assume a second primitive element e′ ∈ V . According to part 1) its weight λ ′ has

the form
r
λ ′ = λ − ∑ mi · αi , mi ∈ N,
i=1
Exchanging the roles of e and e′ shows

r
λ = λ ′ − ∑ mi ′ · αi , mi ′ ∈ N,
i=1
Hence mi = mi ′ for all i = 1, ..., r and λ = λ ′ . Because
dim V λ = 1
according to part 1), the two primitive elements e and e′ are scalar multiples.
3. i) Consider two irreducible L-modules V1 and V2 with the same heighest weight λ .
We choose primitive elements e1 ∈ V1 and e2 ∈ V2 and define the L-module
V := V1 ⊕V2
with canonical L-linear projections

pi : V → Vi , i = 1, 2.
Then V has a primitive element e = e1 + e2 . It generates a submodule E ⊂ V .

We have e1 ∈/ E because all primitive elements of E are scalar multiples of e
according to Proposition 8.18. Analogously, e2 ∈
/ E.
We have p2 (e) = e2 . Because e2 generates V2 we conclude that
p2 |E : E →
− V2
is surjective. Its kernel N2 := ker (p2 |E) has the form
N2 = E ∩V1 .
As a submodule of the irreducible module V1 the module N2 is either zero or

equal to V1 . The latter equality is impossible because e1 ∈
/ N2 . Hence p2 |E is
injective, and therefore an isomorphism
≃
p2 : E −
→ V2 .
A similar consideration shows that
p1 : E →
− V1
is an isomorphism. Therefore V1 ≃ V2 .
ii) Consider an isomorphism

≃
φ : V1 −
→ V2
between two irreducible L-modules. According to part 1) each of the two L-modules
has a uniquely determined 1-dimensional subspace of primitive elements
ei ∈ Viλi , i = 1, 2.
We may assume φ (e1 ) = e2 . For arbitrary elements h ∈ H from the Cartan sub-
algebra H ⊂ L we have
λ2 (h) · e2 = h.e2 = h.φ (e1 ) = φ (h.e1 ) = φ (λ1 (h) · e1 ) = λ1 (h) · φ (e1 ) = λ1 (h) · e2 ,
hence λ1 (h) = λ2 (h). As a consequence
λ1 = λ2 ∈ H ∗ , q.e.d.
Not any irreducible L-module has a primitive element as the following example
shows.
Example 8.20 (An irreducible sl(2, C)-module without primitive elements). Con-
sider the Lie algebra
L := sl(2, C) = spanC < h, x, y >
with the commutators
[h, x] = 2x, [h, y] = −2y, [x, y] = h.
Similarly to Proposition 5.7 we consider the infinite-dimensional vector space
V := spanC < en : n ∈ 2Z >
with the basis (en )n∈2Z . We define the following action of L using x as raising oper-
ator and y as lowering operator:
h.en := n · en
x.en := an · en+2
y.en := bn · en−2 .
i) The sequences (an )n∈N , (bn )n∈N have to be choosen in a suitable way: Three
conditions have to be satisfied, in order that these definitions determine an L-module
structure on V . The first two conditions are fulfilled for any choice: First,
[h, x].en := h.(x.en ) − x.(h.en ) = 2 · an · en+2
and
2x.en = 2 · an · en+2 .
Secondly
[h, y].en := h.(y.en ) − y.(h.en ) = 2 · bn · en−2
and
2y.en = 2 · bn · en−2 .
The third condition, the equality of
[x, y].en = x.(y.en ) − y.(x.en ) = x.(bn · en−2 ) − y.(an · en+2 ) = (an−2 · bn − an · bn+2 )en
and
h.en = n · en ,
requires for all n ∈ 2Z
n = an−2 · bn − an · bn+2 .
That condition can be satisfied by choosing the two sequences (an )n∈N , (bn )n∈N as
being linear in the indeterminate n. We choose
µ +n µ −n
an := , bn :=
2 2
with an arbitrary µ ∈ C \ Z.
ii) The choice of µ assures that V contains no proper L-submodule, i.e. that V
is irreducible: Assume the existence of a non-zero submodule W ⊂ V and choose a
non-zero vector w ∈ W . The vector w is a linear combination of finitely many weight
vectors of V . Hence w is contained in a finite direct sum V ′ of weight spaces. As a
consequence
w ∈ W ∩V ′ ,
and W ∩ V ′ is a non-zero, h-stable, and finite dimensional vector space. Hence the
endomorphism induced by the action of h has an eigenvector. In particular, W ∩V ′
and a posteriori W contains a weight vector of V . Then W = V due to the definition
of V .
iii) Apparently, V has no maximal weight.
The Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt Theorem 8.8 allows to construct irreducible L-modules

with arbitrary linear functionals
λ :H →
− C
as maximal weight. In general the resulting L-modules have infinite dimension.

Therefore the next Section 8.3 will state necessary and sufficient conditions for finite
dimensionality.
Theorem 8.21 (Existence of irreducible modules). Consider a semisimple Lie al-

gebra L. For any linear functional λ ∈ H ∗ exists a unique irreducible L-module V
with a primitive element of weight λ .
Note that λ is not required to satisfy any condition with respect to integrality or
positivity. The proof of the theorem relies heavily on the existence and the properties
of the universal enveloping algebra of L.
Proof. We first define a representation of the Borel-algebra B ⊂ L: We choose
a 1-dimensional vector space
V λ := C · eB
and define
h.eB := λ (h) · eB for all h ∈ H and x.eB := 0 for all x ∈ N + .
Secondly, according to the universal property of UB the representation of B can be

also considered a representation of UB. By ring extension we define an UL-module
Vλ := UL ⊗UB V λ .
Here UL acts on the first component of the elementary tensors. Then Vλ is generated
by the element
e := 1 ⊗ eB ∈ Vλ .
The latter element is not-zero because UL is a free UB-module having a basis which
extends the unit 1 ∈ UL, see Proposition 8.9, part 4). The UL-module Vλ , sometimes
named Verma module, can be considered also as an L-module.
In general the L-module Vλ is not irreducible. Therefore, the final step will factor
out the proper L-submodules of Vλ : Consider a proper submodule
V ′ ⊊ Vλ .
Being an L-module, V ′ is in particular stable under H, hence we have the weight

space decomposition
V′ = (V ′ ) ⊂
µ
∑ ∑ (Vλ )µ
µ weight of V ′ µ weight of Vλ
We claim that λ is not a weight of V ′ . Otherwise e ∈ V ′ which implies
V ′ = Vλ ,
a contradiction to V ′ being a proper submodule of Vλ . Therefore
V′ ⊂ ∑ (Vλ )µ
µ weight of Vλ
µ̸=λ
Define Nλ as the sum of all proper submodules of Vλ . Because e ∈

/ Nλ the submodule Nλ ⊊ Vλ
is proper, and the quotient
V := Vλ /Nλ
is an irreducible L-module with heighest weight λ , q.e.d.
8.3 Finite-dimensional irreducible representations
We now investigate irreducible L-modules V with respect to finite dimensionality.

Finite dimensionality can be characterized by the integrality of the weights of V :
• On one hand, integrality of the weights is a necessary condition for finite dimen-
sionality due to Theorem 8.22.
• And on the other hand, Theorem 8.23 implies: If V has an integral and non-
negative highest weight, then V is finite-dimensional.
We continue using the notation which has been fixed in the beginning of Section 8.2.
All Lie algebras are assumed finite-dimensional.
8.3 Finite-dimensional irreducible representations 253
Theorem 8.22 (Finite-dimensional module: Integrality). Consider a complex semisim-

ple Lie algebra L and a finite-dimensional L-module V . Then
1. The L-module V has the weight space decomposition
M
V= V µ,
µ weight
and any weight µ ∈ H ∗ of V is integral.
2. If V ̸= {0} then V has a primitive element.
3. If V is standard cyclic then V is irreducible.
Proof. 1. Lemma 8.15 implies the direct sum decomposition of V .
For an arbitrary but fixed positive root α ∈ Φ + the vector space V is a finite-dimensional sl(2, C)-module
with respect to
sl(2, C) ≃ spanC < hα , xα , yα >⊂ L.
According to Theorem 5.9 the numbers µ(hα ) are integers.
2. According to Theorem 3.20 the action of the Borel subalgebra B ⊂ L on the finite-
dimensional vector space V has a common eigenvector. The latter is a primitive
element due to Lemma 8.17.
3. According to Proposition 8.18 the standard cyclic L-module V does not split as
the direct sum of distinct L-modules. Thanks to Weyl’s theorem on complete
reducibility, Theorem 4.24, the module V is irreducible, q.e.d.
Theorem 8.23 (Finite-dimensional module: Positivity). Consider a complex semisim-

ple Lie algebra L and an irreducible L-module V with highest weight λ . Then V is
finite-dimensional iff for all α ∈ Φ +
λ (hα ) ∈ Z and λ (hα ) ≥ 0.
Proof. 1) Assume that V is finite-dimensional. For any positive root α ∈ Φ + we

consider V as a sl(2, C)-module with respect to the Lie algebra
sl(2, C) ≃ spanC < hα , xα , yα >⊂ L.
According to Corollary 5.8 the value λ (hα ) is a non-negative integer.

2) Assume V ̸= {0} and λ integral and non-negative. According to Theorem 8.22 a
primitive element e ∈ V exists. Corollary 8.19 implies: All weights µ of V satisfy
µ(hα ) ∈ Z, α ∈ Φ +
because the Cartan integers are
hαi (α j ) =< αi , α j >∈ Z.
i) The L-module V as sum of sl(2, C)-modules: We choose an arbitrary but fixed

root α ∈ Φ + and set
Sα := spanC < xα , yα , hα >≃ sl(2, C).
Set
mα := λ (hα ).
Ba assumption mα ∈ Z and mα ≥ 0. Consider the Sα -submodule of V generated by
the operation of Sα on a primitive element e ∈ V λ of the L-module V , and in
particular the distinguished element
α +1
eα := ym
α .e ∈ V.
On one hand, for any β ∈ ∆ , β ̸= α, the commutator satisfies
[xα , yβ ] = 0
which implies
α +1 α +1
xβ .eα = xβ .(ym
α .e) = ym
α .(xβ .e) = 0,
because e is a primitive element. On the other hand, the formulas from
Proposition 5.7 concerning the generated sl(2, C)-module show
xα .eα = 0.
In case eα ̸= 0, also eα is a primitive element of V . It has the weight
λ − (mα + 1)α.
But according to Corollary 8.19 it must have the same weight λ as the primitive
element e. Therefore eα = 0. Then the vector space
spanC < yα i .e : 0 ≤ i ≤ mα >⊂ V
is a finite-dimensional Sα -module.
We denote by Tα the set of finite-dimensional Sα -submodules contained in V and

by V (α) their sum. We just proved that Tα is not empty. We claim that V (α) is
stable under the operation of L:
If F ∈ Tα is a finite-dimensional vector space then also L.F is finite-dimensional. It
remains to show that L.F is an Sα -module, i.e.
Sα .(L.F) ⊂ L.F,
or for any zα ∈ Sα and z ∈ L holds
zα .(z.F) ⊂ L.F
Considering zα and z as endomorphisms of V we have
zα .z = z.zα + [zα , z]
hence
zα .(z.F) ⊂ z.(zα .F) + [zα , z].F ⊂ L.F
because zα .F ⊂ F by assumption. As a consequence, also L.F is a
finite-dimensional Sα -module, i.e.
L.F ∈ Tα .
Therefore V (α) ⊂ V is a non-zero L-module. The irreducibility of the L-module V

implies
V (α) = V,
i.e. V is a sum of finite-dimensional Sα -modules.
ii) The Weyl group acts on the weight set: We show that the Weyl group permutes
the weights of V . Consider a weight µ and a non-zero element v ∈ V µ . According
to part i) for any positive root α ∈ Φ + exists a finite-dimensional Sα -module Vα
with v ∈ Vα . Consider the integer
pα := µ(hα ) ∈ Z,
and set  pα
(yα ) .v
 if pα ≥ 0
x :=
(xα )−pα .v

if pα ≤ 0

According to Proposition 5.7 also x ̸= 0 and x ∈ Vα . The element x ∈ V has the

weight
µ − pα · α = µ− < µ, α > α = σα (µ).
Hence also the functional σα (µ), the image under the Weyl reflection σα , is a
weight of V . The claim follows because the Weyl group is generated by all Weyl
reflections.
iii) Finite weight set: To show that the weight set of V is finite consider an arbitrary
but fixed weight µ. According to Corollary 8.19 it has the form
µ =λ− ∑ pα · α, pα ∈ N for all α ∈ ∆ .

α∈∆
We shall show that the coefficients pα , α ∈ ∆ , are bounded; hence there are only
finitely many.
Also the set

−∆ := {−α : α ∈ ∆ }
is a base of the root set Φ. According to Proposition 6.16 the Weyl group W acts
transitively on the bases of Φ. Hence a Weyl reflection w ∈ W exists with
w(∆ ) = −∆ .
According to part ii) also w(µ) is a weight of V . Using again Corollary 8.19 the
weight has the form
w(µ) = λ − ∑ qα · α, qα ∈ N for all α ∈ ∆ .

α∈∆
Then
µ = w−1 (w(µ)) = w−1 (λ ) − ∑ qα · w−1 (α) =
α∈∆
= w−1 (λ ) + ∑ rα · α, rα ∈ N for all α ∈ ∆ .

α∈∆
The latter equality with the change of the sign is due to
w−1 (∆ ) = −∆ .
Note that
{qα : α ∈ ∆ } = {rα : α ∈ ∆ },
but for α ∈ ∆ possibly qα ̸= rα because not necessarily w(α) = −α. We obtain
! !
λ − w−1 (λ ) = µ+ ∑ pα · α − µ− ∑ rα · α = ∑ (pα + rα ) · α.
α∈∆ α∈∆ α∈∆
The linear functional λ − w−1 (λ ) ∈ H ∗ is independent from the choice of the

weight µ. It has the basis representation
λ − w−1 (λ ) = ∑ cα · α
α∈∆
with coefficients
cα := pα + rα with pα , rα ∈ N.
We obtain
0 ≤ pα = cα − rα ≤ cα .
The estimate shows: All coefficients (pα )α∈∆ of the weight µ are bounded by the
constant
max{cα : α ∈ ∆ }
which is independent from µ. Hence there exist only finitely many weights.
iv) Weight space decomposition: The module V decomposes into finitely many
weight spaces according to part iii). Each weight space is finite-dimensional due to
Proposition 8.18. Hence V is finite-dimensional, q.e.d.
Definition 8.24 (Fundamental weights, dominant weights, and fundamental rep-

resentations). Consider a complex semisimple Lie algebra L. With respect to the
base ∆ of its roots denote by
(hα )α∈∆
the corresponding basis of H.
1. The elements of the dual basis of H ∗
(λα )α∈∆
are the fundamental weights of L with respect to (H, ∆ ). The uniquely de-
termined irreducible L-modules Vα with highest weight λα , α ∈ ∆ , are the
fundamental L-modules or fundamental representations of L.
2. The dominant weights are the linear combinations of the fundamental weights
with non-negative integer coefficents
λ= ∑ nα · λα
α∈∆
with nα ∈ Z, nα ≥ 0, for allα ∈ ∆ .
Proposition 8.25 (Fundamental weights and Cartan matrix). Consider a semisim-

ple complex Lie algebra L of rank = r and the base
∆ = {α1 , ..., αr }
of its roots. Then the Cartan matrix of L relates the elements of ∆ and the funda-
mental weights according to
(α1 , ..., αr )⊤ = Cartan(∆ ) · (λ1 , ..., λr )⊤ .
Proof. In order to prove the claim one has to show for i = 1, ..., r, the equality of
linear functionals on H
r
αi = ∑ < αi , α j > ·λ j .
j=1
Evaluating both sides on the basis elements hk ∈ H, k = 1, ..., r, shows

• Left-hand side: According to Proposition 7.4, part 4)
αi (hk ) =< αi , αk >
• Right-hand side:
!
r
∑ < αi , α j > ·λ j (hk ) =< αi , αk >, q.e.d.
j=1
Because all entries of the Cartan matrix of a semisimple Lie algebra L are inte-
gers, Proposition 8.25 shows: The r-dimensional root lattice Λroot of L is a sublattice
of the lattice Λ with basis the fundamental weights.
The dominant weights are the highest weights of the finite-dimensional, irre-
ducible L-modules. Hence the dominant weights characterize the finite-dimensional
irreducible L-modules. The result is a direct consequence of Theorem 8.23.
Theorem 8.26 (Classification of finite-dimensional irreducible modules). Con-

sider a complex semisimple Lie algebra L of rank = r. Denote by (λα )α∈∆ the fun-
damental weights of L with respect to (H, ∆ ).
1. An irreducible L-module V with heighest weight λ is finite-dimensional iff λ is
integral and non-negative.
2. Mapping a finite-dimensional irreducible L-module V to its highest weight λ

defines a bijective map from the set of finite-dimensional irreducible L-modules
and the zero-module to the free Abelian monoid
( )
r
Λ + := ∑ nα · λα ∈ Λ : nα ∈ N for all α ∈ ∆
α∈∆
with basis the set of fundamental weights.
3. All weights of an irreducible finite-dimensional L-module have the form
µ= ∑ nα · λα ∈ Λ , nα ∈ Z for all α ∈ ∆ .
α∈∆
Proof. 1. See Theorem 8.23.
2. According to Theorem 8.21 for any linear functional λ ∈ H ∗ an irreducible L-module

with highest weight λ exists. The weight λ has a basis representation
λ= ∑ nα · λα , nα ∈ C.
α∈∆
The L-module has finite dimension if and only if for all α ∈ ∆
λ (hα ) = nα ∈ N
due to part 1).
3. According to Theorem 8.22 all weights µ of a finite-dimensional irreducible-

module are integral, i.e. satisfy for all α ∈ ∆
µ(hα ) ∈ Z, q.e.d.
Hence
µ= ∑ µ(hα ) · λα , q.e.d.
α∈∆
Generalizing the notation for irreducible sl(2, C)-modules from Theorem 5.9 we
introduce the notation:
Notation 8.27 (Parametrization of irreducible L-modules). Consider a complex

semisimple Lie algebra L of rank = r. Denote by (λ j ) j=1,...,r the fundamental
weights of L with respect to (H, ∆ ). The irreducible finite-dimensional L-module
of highest weight
r
λ = ∑ n i · λi
i=1
is denoted
V (n1 , ..., nr ).
Example 8.28 (Fundamental weights of sl(r + 1, C)). Set L = sl(r + 1, C).
i) According to Proposition 7.7 we may choose for L

• the Cartan subalgebra of traceless diagonal matrices
H := {h ∈ d(r + 1, C) : tr h = 0},
• and the base of the roots

∆ = {α1 , ..., αr }
with
αi := (εi − εi+1 )|H, i = 1, ...r,
and (ε j ) j=1,...,r+1 the dual basis of the basis (E j, j ) j=1,...,r+1 of d(r + 1, C).
Then we have
• the positive roots

j
Φ + = {εi − ε j = ∑ αi : 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r + 1}
k=i
with distinguished elements for α ∈ Φ +
xα = Ei, j , yα = E j,i , hα = Ei,i − E j, j .
• the basis of H
(hi := hαi := Ei,i − Ei+1,i+1 )i=1,...,r
• and its dual basis (λi )i=1,...,r of fundamental weights
λi = ε1 + ... + εi , i = 1, ..., r.
ii) In the specific case r = 2, i.e. L = sl(3, C), Lemma ?? implies
α1 = 2λ1 − λ2 , α2 = −λ1 + 2λ2
or
λ1 = (1/3)(2α1 + α2 ), λ2 = (1/3)(α1 + 2α2 ),
see Figure 8.1.
Fig. 8.1 Lattice of fundamental weights of sl(3, C), monoid of dominant weights shaded
List of results
Chapter 1. Matrix functions

Operator norm (Def. 1.2)
Power series of matrices (Lem. 1.5)
Eigenspace and generalized eigenspace (Def. 1.8)
Jordan decomposition (Theor. 1.17)
Cayleigh-Hamilton theorem (Theor. 1.18)
Exponential of matrices (Def. 1.19)
Exponential of commuting matrices (Theor. 1.21)
Logarithm and geometric series of matrices (Def. 1.23)
Logarithm and exponential as locally inverse maps (Prop. 1.25)
Surjectivity of the exponential map of matrices (Theor. 1.27)
Chapter 2. Fundamentals of Lie algebra theory

Lie algebra (Def. 2.2)
Specific matrix Lie algebras (Def. 2.3)
Representation of a Lie algebra (Def. 2.5)
1-parameter subgroup and its infinitesimal generator (Def. 2.10)
263
264 List of results
Classical matrix groups and their Lie algebras (Prop. 2.13)
Topology of some classical matrix groups (Prop. 2.17)
Universal covering projection of the Lorentz group (Pro. 2.20)
Chapter 3. Nilpotent Lie algebras and solvable Lie algebras

Annihilation of a common eigenvector (Theor. 3.5)
Engel’s theorem (Theor. 3.10)
Exact sequence of Lie algebra morphisms (Def. 3.11)
...
FINIS
References
The main references for these notes are

• Lie algebra: Hall [22], Humphreys [28] and Serre [45]
• Lie group: Hall [22], Serre [46].
In addition,
• References with focus on mathematics:
[4], [5], [7], [25], [26], [27], [28], [50], [51]
• References with focus on physics:
[1], [3], [17], [20], [21], [24], [37], [42]
• References with focus on both mathematics and physics:
[2], [18], [21], [47]
1. Alex, Arne; Kalus, Matthias; Huckleberry, Alan; von Delft, Jan: A numerical algorithm
for the explicit calculation of SU(N) and SL(N, C) Clebsch–Gordan coefficients. Journal of
Mathematical Physics 52, 023507 (2011)
2. Böhm, Manfred: Lie-Gruppen und Lie-Algebren in der Physik. Eine Einführung in die math-
ematischen Grundlagen. Springer, Berlin (2011)
3. Born, Max, Jordan, Pascual: Zur Quantenmechanik. Zeitschrift für Physik 34, 858-888 (1925)
4. Bourbaki, Nicolas: Éléments de mathématique. Groupes et Algèbres de Lie. Chapitre I. Dif-
fusion C.C.L.S., Paris (without year)
5. Bourbaki, Nicolas: Éléments de mathématique. Groupes et Algèbres de Lie. Chapitre VII,
VIII. Algèbres de Lie. Diffusion C.C.L.S., Paris (without year)
6. Bourbaki, Nicolas: Éléments de mathématique. Groupes et Algèbres de Lie. Chapitre II, III.
Algèbres de Lie. Diffusion C.C.L.S., Paris (without year)
7. Bourbaki, Nicolas: Elements of Mathematics. Algebra II. Chapters 4-7. Springer, Berlin
(2003)
8. Bourbaki, Nicolas: Elements of Mathematics. General Topology. Chapters 1-4. Springer,
Berlin (1989)
9. Bröcker, Theodor; tom Dieck, Tammo: Representations of Compact Lie groups. Springer,
New York (1985)
10. Dugundji, James: Topology. Allyn and Bacon, Boston (1966)
11. Duistermaat, Johannes J.; Kolk, Johan A.C.: Lie Groups. Springer (2013)
12. Fischer, Gerd: Lineare Algebra. Eine Einführung für Studienanfänger. Springer Spektrum,
16. Aufl. (2008)
265
266 References
13. Forster, Otto: Analysis 1. Differential- und Integralrechnung einer Veränderlichen. Vieweg,
Reinbek bei Hamburg (1976)
14. Forster, Otto: Komplexe Analysis. Universität Regensburg. Regensburg (1973)
15. Forster, Otto: Riemannsche Flächen. Springer, Berlin (1977)
16. Gasiorowicz, Stephen: Elementary Particle Physics. John Wiley & Sons, New York (1966)
17. Georgi, Howard: Lie Algebras in Particle Physics. Westview, 2nd ed. (1999)
18. Gilmore, Robert: Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, and some of their Applications. Dover Publica-
tions, Mineola (2005)
19. Gunning, Robert; Rossi, Hugo: Analytic Functions of Several Complex Variables. Prentice-
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. (1965)
20. Grawert, Gerald: Quantenmechanik. Akademische Verlagsanstalt, Wiesbaden (1977)
21. Hall, Brian: Quantum Theory for Mathematicians. Springer, New York (2013)
22. Hall, Brian: Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, and Representations. An Elementary Introduction.
Springer, Heidelberg (2ed 2015)
23. Hatcher, Allen: Algebraic Topology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2002). Down-
load https://www.math.cornell.edu/ hatcher/AT/AT.pdf
24. Heisenberg, Werner: Die Kopenhagener Deutung der Quantentheorie. In ders.: Physik und
Philosophie. Ullstein, Frankfurt/Main (1959)
https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/heisenb3.htm
Download 6.6.2018
25. Helgason, Sigurdur: Differential Geometry, Lie Groups and Symmetric Spaces. Academic
Press, New York (1978)
26. Hilgert, Joachim, Neeb, Karl-Hermann: Lie Gruppen und Lie Algebren. Braunschweig (1991)
27. Hilgert, Joachim, Neeb, Karl-Hermann: Structure and Geometry of Lie Groups. New York
(2012)
28. Humphreys, James E.: Introduction to Lie Algebras and Representation Theory. Springer,
New York (1972)
29. Iachello, Francesco: Lie Algebras and Application. Lecture Notes in Physics 708, Springer,
Berlin (2006)
30. Ireland, Kenneth, Rosen, Michael: A Classical Introduction to Modern Number Theory.
Springer, New York (1982)
31. Kac, Victor, in Introduction to Lie Algebras, http://math.mit.edu/classes/18.745/index.html
Cited 17 September 2018
32. Knapp, Anthony: Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, and Cohomology. Princeton University Press,
Princeton (1988)
33. Knapp, Anthony: Lie Groups Beyond an Introduction. Birkhäuser, Boston 2nd ed. (2005)
34. Lang, Serge: Algebra. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1965)
35. Lang, Serge: SL(2,R). Springer, New York (1985)
36. Lipkin, Harry J.: Lie Groups for Pedestrians (Deutsch: Anwendung von Lieschen Gruppen in
der Physik). North-Holland Publishing. Amsterdam. 2nd ed. (1966)
37. Messiah, Albert: Quantum Mechanics. Volume 1. North-Holland Publishing Company, Am-
sterdam (1970)
38. Montgomery, Deane; Zippin, Leo: Topological Transformation Groups. Interscience Publish-
ers, New York (1955)
39. Narasimhan, Raghavan: Several Complex Variables. The University of Chicago Press,
Chicago (1971)
40. Neukirch, Jürgen: Algebraische Zahlentheorie. Springer, Berlin (1992)
41. Rollnik, Horst: Teilchenphysik II. Innere Symmetrien der Teilchen. Bibliographisches Insti-
tut. Mannheim (1971)
42. Roman, Paul: Advanced Quantum Theory. An outline of the fundamental ideas. Addison-
Wesley, Reading Mass. (1965)
43. Rim, Donsub: An elementary proof that symplectic matrices have determinant one.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.04240} Download 9.5.2018
44. Scharlau, Winfried; Opolka Hans: Von Fermat bis Minkowski. Eine Vorlesung über Zahlen-
theorie. Springer, Berlin (1980)
References 267
45. Serre, Jean-Pierre: Complex Semisimple Lie Algebras. Reprint 1987 edition, Springer, Berlin
(2001)
46. Serre, Jean-Pierre: Lie Algebras and Lie Groups. 1964 Lectures given at Harvard University.
2nd edition, Springer, Berlin (2006)
47. Schottenloher, Martin: Geometrie und Symmetrie in der Physik. Leitmotiv der Mathematis-
chen Physik. Vieweg, Braunschweig (1995)
48. Stöcker, Ralph; Zieschang, Heiner: Algebraische Topologie. Eine Einführung. Teubner,
Stuttgart (1988)
49. Spanier, Edward: Algebraic Topology. Tata McGraw-Hill, New Delhi (Repr. 1976)
50. Varadarajan, Veeravalli S.: Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, and their Representations. Springer,
New York (1984)
51. Weibel, Charles A.: An Introduction to Homological Algebra. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge (1994)
Index
1-parameter group, 45 filtration, 228

flag, 13
Abelian, 41 fundamental weight, 257
ad-nilpotent, 71
ad-semisimple, 73 generalized eigenspace, 13
algebraic multiplicity, 14 geometric series, 29
graded algebra of the universal enveloping
Banach algebra, 8 algebra, 229
Borel subalgebra, 243 Heisenberg picture, 95
highest weight, 246, 248
Cartan criterion
semisimplicity, 106 ideal, 40
solvability, 100 infinitesimal generator, 45
Cartan decomposition, 153 integral weight, 244
Cartan integer, 157 irreducible, 112
Cartan matrix, 170
Cartan subalgebra, 153 Jacobi identity, 40
Casimir element, 116 Jordan decomposition
center, 41 abstract, 126
centralizer, 41 Jordan decomposition
commutator algebra, 41 concrete, 16
Coxeter graph, 173 of adjoint representation, 72
Killing form, 98
derivation, 44
derivation L-module, 43
inner, 45 Lie algebra
outer, 45 definition, 39
derived algebra, 41 nilpotent, 77
derived series, 82 of skew-Hermitian matrices, 48
descending central series, 77 of skew-symmetric matrices, 47
direct sum decomposition, 107 of traceless matrices, 47
dominant weight, 257 semisimple, 102
dynamical Lie algebra of quantum mechanics, simple, 102
93 solvable, 82
logarithm, 28
eigenspace, 13
exponential, 26 matrix
269
270 Index
diagonal, 42 Weyl group, 158

strictly upper triangular, 41 root vector, 147
upper triangular, 14, 42
matrix algebra, 41 semidirect product, 89
matrix group, 45 set of roots, 147
simply connected, 55
nilpotent, 14 solvable ideal, 82
non-degenerate symmetric bilinear form, 105 special linear group, 47
non-negative weight, 244 special orthogonal group, 47
normalizer, 40 special unitary group, 48
nullspace, 105 standard cyclic module, 245
subalgebra, 40
operator norm, 6 submodule, 112
orthogonal space, 105 symmetric algebra, 227
symplectic group, 47
Pauli matrix, 53
Planck’s constant, 91
tensor algebra, 226
Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt theorem, 238
Theorem of
positive root, 153
Engel, 79
primitive element, 139, 245
Lie, 87
Weyl, 119
radical, 83
toral subalgebra
real form, 52
reducible, 112 definition, 134
representation maximal, 134
adjoint, 43 trace form
definition, 43 definition, 98
faithful, 43
root, 147, 157 universal enveloping algebra, 226
root
simple, 161 Verma module, 252
root space, 147
root space decomposition, 147 weight, 139
root system weight space, 139
base, 161 weight vector, 139, 244
definition, 156 Weyl group, 158

Lie Algebras Script

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lie Algebras Script

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Joachim Wehler

© Joachim Wehler, 2017 - 2022

Please report any errors or typos to

Part I General Lie Algebra Theory

2 Fundamentals of Lie algebra theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

3 Nilpotent Lie algebras and solvable Lie algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

4 Killing form and semisimple Lie algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

Part II Complex Semisimple Lie Algebras

5 Cartan decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

6 Root systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

6.3 Coxeter graph and Dynkin diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172

8 Irreducible Representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225

List of results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263

1.1 Power series of matrices

At high school every student learns the equation

exp(x) · exp(y) = exp(x + y)

Example 1.1 (Exponential of strictly upper triangular matrices). We denote by

i) To test the functional equation we compute on one hand

On the other hand we compute

For the computation of matrix products it is often helpful to introduce the

Apparently, in general the functional equation is not satisfied:

exp(P + Q) ̸= exp(P) · exp(Q).

PQ = pE12 · qE23 = pq · E13 and QP = q · E23 · E13 = 0

exp : n(3, K) → GL(3, K).

It satisfies the functional equation in the generalized form: For A, B ∈ n(3 × 3, K)

exp(A) · exp(B) = exp(A + B + (1/2)[A, B])

Definition 1.2 (Operator norm). We consider the K-vector space Kn , n ∈ N, with

For matrices A ∈ M(n × n, K) we define the operator norm

∥A∥ := sup{∥Ax∥ : x ∈ Kn and ∥x∥ ≤ 1}

as the supremum on the unit ball of Kn of the linear map represented by A.

Note that ∥A∥ < ∞ due to compactness of the unit ball

The K-vector space M(n × n, K) of all matrices with components from K is an

5. ∥1∥ = 1 with 1 ∈ M(n × n, K) the unit matrix.

6. For a matrix A = (ai, j )i, j ∈ M(n × n, K) holds

∥A∥sup ≤ ∥A∥ ≤ n · ∥A∥sup

with the supremum norm of the matrix components

∥A∥sup := sup{|ai j | : 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n}.

| < x, y > |2 ≤ ∥x∥2 · ∥y∥2

implies for all x ∈ Kn , in particular for |x| ≤ 1

Remark 1.4 (Equivalence of norms).

and a matrix A ∈ M(n × n, K):

• lim ∥Aν − A∥ = 0, i.e. lim Aν = A (norm convergence).

• The sequence (Aν )ν∈N converges to A component-by-component.

(M(n × n, K), ∥∥)

is complete, i.e. it is a Banach algebra.

3. The vector space M(n × n, K) is finite dimensional, its dimension is n2 . Hence

∥[A, B]∥ = ∥AB − BA∥ ≤ ∥AB∥ + ∥BA∥ ≤ 2∥A∥∥B∥.

We recall the fundamental properties of a complex power series

with radius of convergence R > 0. Set

∆ (R) := {z ∈ C : |z| < R}.

• The series is infinitely often differentiable in ∆ (R), its derivation is obtained by

Lemma 1.5 (Power series of matrices). Consider a power series

with coefficients cν ∈ K, ν ∈ N, and radius of convergence R > 0. Let

B(R) := {A ∈ M(n × n, K) : ∥A∥ < R}

is convergent, absolutely convergent and compact convergent in B(R).

• The series f (A) satisfies [ f (A), A] = 0 with the commutator

[ f (A), A] := f (A) · A − A · f (A).

Proof. i) We apply the Cauchy criterion: For N > M holds

If r := ∥A∥ < R then ∑∞

and the limit !

and the corresponding properties of complex power series.

iii) Continuity of f is a consequence of the compact convergence. ⊔

Definition 1.6 (Derivation of matrix functions). Let I ⊂ R be an open interval. A

Lemma 1.7 (Derivation of power series of matrices depending on a parameter).