2d. Free constructions
At the level of the really “new” examples now, we have basic liberation constructions, going back to the pioneering work of Wang [1], [2], and to the subsequent papers [3], [4], as well as several more recent constructions. We first have, following Wang [1]:
The following universal algebras are Woronowicz algebras,
This follows from the elementary fact that if a matrix [math]u=(u_{ij})[/math] is orthogonal or biunitary, as above, then so must be the following matrices:
Consider indeed the matrix [math]U=u^\Delta[/math]. We have then:
In the other sense the computation is similar, as follows:
The verification of the unitarity of [math]\bar{U}[/math] is similar. We first have:
In the other sense the computation is similar, as follows:
Regarding now the matrix [math]u^\varepsilon=1_N[/math], and also the matrix [math]u^S[/math], their biunitarity its clear. Thus, we can indeed define morphisms [math]\Delta,\varepsilon,S[/math] as in Definition 2.8, by using the universal properties of [math]C(O_N^+)[/math], [math]C(U_N^+)[/math], and this gives the result.
Let us study now the above quantum groups, with the techniques that we have. As a first observation, we have embeddings of compact quantum groups, as follows:
The basic properties of [math]O_N^+,U_N^+[/math] can be summarized as follows:
The quantum groups [math]O_N^+,U_N^+[/math] have the following properties:
- The closed subgroups [math]G\subset U_N^+[/math] are exactly the [math]N\times N[/math] compact quantum groups. As for the closed subgroups [math]G\subset O_N^+[/math], these are those satisfying [math]u=\bar{u}[/math].
- We have liberation embeddings [math]O_N\subset O_N^+[/math] and [math]U_N\subset U_N^+[/math], obtained by dividing the algebras [math]C(O_N^+),C(U_N^+)[/math] by their respective commutator ideals.
- We have as well embeddings [math]\widehat{L}_N\subset O_N^+[/math] and [math]\widehat{F}_N\subset U_N^+[/math], where [math]L_N[/math] is the free product of [math]N[/math] copies of [math]\mathbb Z_2[/math], and where [math]F_N[/math] is the free group on [math]N[/math] generators.
All these assertions are elementary, as follows:
(1) This is clear from definitions, and from Proposition 2.14.
(2) This follows from the Gelfand theorem, which shows that we have presentation results for [math]C(O_N),C(U_N)[/math] as follows, similar to those in Theorem 2.23:
(3) This follows from (1) and from Proposition 2.11 above, with the remark that with [math]u=diag(g_1,\ldots,g_N)[/math], the condition [math]u=\bar{u}[/math] is equivalent to [math]g_i^2=1[/math], for any [math]i[/math].
As an interesting philosophical conclusion, if we denote by [math]L_N^+,F_N^+[/math] the discrete quantum groups which are dual to [math]O_N^+,U_N^+[/math], then we have embeddings as follows:
Thus [math]F_N^+[/math] is some kind of “free free group”, and [math]L_N^+[/math] is its real counterpart. This is not surprising, since [math]F_N,L_N[/math] are not “fully free”, their group algebras being cocommutative.
The last assertion in Theorem 2.24 suggests the following construction, from [5]:
Given a closed subgroup [math]G\subset U_N^+[/math], consider its “diagonal torus”, which is the closed subgroup [math]T\subset G[/math] constructed as follows:
Since [math]u[/math] is unitary, its diagonal entries [math]g_i=u_{ii}[/math] are unitaries inside [math]C(T)[/math]. Moreover, from [math]\Delta(u_{ij})=\sum_ku_{ik}\otimes u_{kj}[/math] we obtain, when passing inside the quotient:
It follows that we have [math]C(T)=C^*(\Lambda)[/math], modulo identifying as usual the [math]C^*[/math]-completions of the various group algebras, and so that we have [math]T=\widehat{\Lambda}[/math], as claimed.
With this notion in hand, Theorem 2.24 (3) tells us that the diagonal tori of [math]O_N^+,U_N^+[/math] are the group duals [math]\widehat{L}_N,\widehat{F}_N[/math]. We will be back to this later.
Here is now a more subtle result on [math]O_N^+,U_N^+[/math], having no classical counterpart:
Consider the quantum groups [math]O_N^+,U_N^+[/math], with the corresponding fundamental corepresentations denoted [math]v,u[/math], and let [math]z=id\in C(\mathbb T)[/math].
- We have a morphism [math]C(U_N^+)\to C(\mathbb T)*C(O_N^+)[/math], given by [math]u=zv[/math].
- In other words, we have a quantum group embedding [math]\widetilde{O_N^+}\subset U_N^+[/math].
- This embedding is an isomorphism at the level of the diagonal tori.
The first two assertions follow from Proposition 2.19, or simply from the fact that [math]u=zv[/math] is biunitary. As for the third assertion, the idea here is that we have a similar model for the free group [math]F_N[/math], which is well-known to be faithful, [math]F_N\subset\mathbb Z*L_N[/math].
We will be back to the above morphism later on, with a proof of its faithfulness, after performing a suitable GNS construction, with respect to the Haar functionals.
Let us construct now some more examples of compact quantum groups. Following [6], [7], [5], [8], we can introduce some intermediate liberations, as follows:
We have intermediate quantum groups as follows,
This is similar to the proof of Theorem 2.23, by using the elementary fact that if the entries of [math]u=(u_{ij})[/math] half-commute, then so do the entries of [math]u^\Delta[/math], [math]u^\varepsilon[/math], [math]u^S[/math].
In the same spirit, we have as well intermediate spheres as follows, with the symbol [math]*[/math] standing for the fact that [math]x_i,x_i^*[/math] must satisfy the relations [math]abc=cba[/math]:
At the level of the diagonal tori, we have the following result:
The tori of the basic spheres and quantum groups are as follows,
The idea here is as follows:
(1) The result on the left is well-known.
(2) The result on the right follows from Theorem 2.24 (3).
(3) The middle result follows as well, by imposing the relations [math]abc=cba[/math].
Let us discuss now the relation with the noncommutative spheres. Having the things started here is a bit tricky, and as a main source of inspiration, we have:
Given an algebraic manifold [math]X\subset S^{N-1}_\mathbb C[/math], the formula
The fact that [math]G(X)[/math] as defined above is indeed a group is clear, its compactness is clear as well, and finally the last assertion is clear as well. In fact, all this works for any closed subset [math]X\subset\mathbb C^N[/math], but we are not interested here in such general spaces.
We have the following quantum analogue of the above construction:
Given an algebraic manifold [math]X\subset S^{N-1}_{\mathbb C,+}[/math], the category of the closed subgroups [math]G\subset U_N^+[/math] acting affinely on [math]X[/math], in the sense that the formula
defines a morphism of [math]C^*[/math]-algebras as follows,
Observe first that in the case where [math]\Phi[/math] as above exists, this morphism is automatically a coaction, in the sense that it satisfies the following conditions:
In order to prove now the result, assume that [math]X\subset S^{N-1}_{\mathbb C,+}[/math] comes as follows:
Consider now the following variables:
Our claim is that [math]G=G^+(X)[/math] in the statement appears as follows:
In order to prove this claim, we have to clarify how the relations [math]f_\alpha(X_1,\ldots,X_N)=0[/math] are interpreted inside [math]C(U_N^+)[/math], and then show that [math]G[/math] is indeed a quantum group. So, pick one of the defining polynomials, [math]f=f_\alpha[/math], and write it as follows:
With [math]X_i=\sum_jx_j\otimes u_{ji}[/math] as above, we have the following formula:
Since the variables on the right span a certain finite dimensional space, the relations [math]f(X_1,\ldots,X_N)=0[/math] correspond to certain relations between the variables [math]u_{ij}[/math]. Thus, we have indeed a closed subspace [math]G\subset U_N^+[/math], coming with a universal map:
In order to show now that [math]G[/math] is a quantum group, consider the following elements:
Consider as well the following associated elements, with [math]\gamma\in\{\Delta,\varepsilon,S\}[/math]:
From the relations [math]f(X_1,\ldots,X_N)=0[/math] we deduce that we have:
But this shows that for any exponent [math]\gamma\in\{\Delta,\varepsilon,S\}[/math] we can map [math]u_{ij}\to u_{ij}^\gamma[/math], and it follows that [math]G[/math] is indeed a compact quantum group, and we are done.
Following [9] and related papers, we can now formulate:
The quantum isometry groups of the basic spheres are
Let us first construct an action [math]U_N^+\curvearrowright S^{N-1}_{\mathbb C,+}[/math]. We must prove here that the variables [math]X_i=\sum_jx_j\otimes u_{ji}[/math] satisfy the defining relations for [math]S^{N-1}_{\mathbb C,+}[/math], namely:
But this follows from the biunitarity of [math]u[/math]. We have indeed:
In the other sense the computation is similar, as follows:
Regarding now [math]O_N^+\curvearrowright S^{N-1}_{\mathbb R,+}[/math], here we must check the extra relations [math]X_i=X_i^*[/math], and these are clear from [math]u_{ia}=u_{ia}^*[/math]. Finally, regarding the remaining actions, the verifications are clear as well, because if the coordinates [math]u_{ia}[/math] and [math]x_a[/math] are subject to commutation relations of type [math]ab=ba[/math], or of type [math]abc=cba[/math], then so are the variables [math]X_i=\sum_jx_j\otimes u_{ji}[/math].
We must prove now that all these actions are universal:
\underline{[math]S^{N-1}_{\mathbb R,+},S^{N-1}_{\mathbb C,+}[/math].} The universality of [math]U_N^+\curvearrowright S^{N-1}_{\mathbb C,+}[/math] is trivial by definition. As for the universality of [math]O_N^+\curvearrowright S^{N-1}_{\mathbb R,+}[/math], this comes from the fact that [math]X_i=X_i^*[/math], with [math]X_i=\sum_jx_j\otimes u_{ji}[/math] as above, gives [math]u_{ia}=u_{ia}^*[/math]. Thus [math]G\curvearrowright S^{N-1}_{\mathbb R,+}[/math] implies [math]G\subset O_N^+[/math], as desired.
\underline{[math]S^{N-1}_\mathbb R,S^{N-1}_\mathbb C[/math].} We use here a trick from Bhowmick-Goswami [10]. Assuming first that we have an action [math]G\curvearrowright S^{N-1}_\mathbb R[/math], consider the following variables:
In terms of these variables, which can be thought of as being projective coordinates, the corresponding projective coaction map is given by:
We have the following formulae:
By comparing these two formulae, and then by using the linear independence of the variables [math]p_{kl}=x_kx_l[/math] with [math]k\leq l[/math], we conclude that we must have:
Let us apply the antipode to this formula. For this purpose, observe that we have:
Thus by applying the antipode we obtain:
By relabelling the indices, we obtain from this:
Now by comparing with the original relation, we obtain:
But, recalling that we have [math]w_{kl,ij}=u_{ki}u_{lj}[/math], this formula reads:
We therefore conclude we have [math]G\subset O_N[/math], as claimed. The proof of the universality of the action [math]U_N\curvearrowright S^{N-1}_\mathbb C[/math] is similar.
\underline{[math]S^{N-1}_{\mathbb R,*},S^{N-1}_{\mathbb C,*}[/math].} Assume that we have an action [math]G\curvearrowright S^{N-1}_{\mathbb C,*}[/math]. From [math]\Phi(x_a)=\sum_ix_i\otimes u_{ia}[/math] we obtain then that, with [math]p_{ab}=z_a\bar{z}_b[/math], we have:
By multiplying these two formulae, we obtain:
The left terms being equal, and the first terms on the right being equal too, we deduce that, with [math][a,b,c]=abc-cba[/math], we must have the following equality:
Since the variables [math]p_{ij}p_{kl}=z_i\bar{z}_jz_k\bar{z}_l[/math] depend only on [math]|\{i,k\}|,|\{j,l\}|\in\{1,2\}[/math], and this dependence produces the only relations between them, we are led to [math]4[/math] equations:
(1) [math]u_{ia}[u_{jb}^*,u_{ka},u_{lb}^*]=0[/math], [math]\forall a,b[/math].
(2) [math]u_{ia}[u_{jb}^*,u_{ka},u_{ld}^*]+u_{ia}[u_{jd}^*,u_{ka},u_{lb}^*]=0[/math], [math]\forall a[/math], [math]\forall b\neq d[/math].
(3) [math]u_{ia}[u_{jb}^*,u_{kc},u_{lb}^*]+u_{ic}[u_{jb}^*,u_{ka},u_{lb}^*]=0[/math], [math]\forall a\neq c[/math], [math]\forall b[/math].
(4) [math]u_{ia}([u_{jb}^*,u_{kc},u_{ld}^*]+[u_{jd}^*,u_{kc},u_{lb}^*])+u_{ic}([u_{jb}^*,u_{ka},u_{ld}^*]+[u_{jd}^*,u_{ka},u_{lb}^*])=0,\forall a\neq c,b\neq d[/math].
From (1,2) we conclude that (2) holds with no restriction on the indices. By multiplying now this formula to the left by [math]u_{ia}^*[/math], and then summing over [math]i[/math], we obtain:
By applying now the antipode, then the involution, and finally by suitably relabelling all the indices, we successively obtain from this formula:
Now by comparing with the original relation, above, we conclude that we have:
Thus we have reached to the formulae defining [math]U_N^*[/math], and we are done. Finally, in what regards the universality of the action [math]O_N^*\curvearrowright S^{N-1}_{\mathbb R,*}[/math], this follows from the universality of the actions [math]U_N^*\curvearrowright S^{N-1}_{\mathbb C,*}[/math] and of [math]O_N^+\curvearrowright S^{N-1}_{\mathbb R,+}[/math], and from [math]U_N^*\cap O_N^+=O_N^*[/math].
As a conclusion to all this, we have now a simple and reliable definition for the compact quantum groups, in the Lie case, namely [math]G\subset U_N^+[/math], covering all the compact Lie groups, [math]G\subset U_N[/math], covering as well all the duals [math]\widehat{\Gamma}[/math] of the finitely generated groups, [math]F_N\to\Gamma[/math], and allowing the construction of several interesting examples, such as [math]O_N^+,U_N^+[/math].
With respect to the noncommutative geometry questions raised in chapter 1 above, we certainly have here some advances. In order to further advance, however, we would need now representation theory results, in the spirit of Weyl [11], for our quantum isometry groups. We will develop all this in what follows, in the next few chapters.
General references
Banica, Teo (2024). "Introduction to quantum groups". arXiv:1909.08152 [math.CO].
References
- 1.0 1.1 S. Wang, Free products of compact quantum groups, Comm. Math. Phys. 167 (1995), 671--692.
- S. Wang, Quantum symmetry groups of finite spaces, Comm. Math. Phys. 195 (1998), 195--211.
- T. Banica, The free unitary compact quantum group, Comm. Math. Phys. 190 (1997), 143--172.
- T. Banica, Symmetries of a generic coaction, Math. Ann. 314 (1999), 763--780.
- 5.0 5.1 T. Banica and R. Vergnioux, Invariants of the half-liberated orthogonal group, Ann. Inst. Fourier 60 (2010), 2137--2164.
- T. Banica, S. Curran and R. Speicher, Classification results for easy quantum groups, Pacific J. Math. 247 (2010), 1--26.
- T. Banica and R. Speicher, Liberation of orthogonal Lie groups, Adv. Math. 222 (2009), 1461--1501.
- J. Bichon and M. Dubois-Violette, Half-commutative orthogonal Hopf algebras, Pacific J. Math. 263 (2013), 13--28.
- T. Banica and D. Goswami, Quantum isometries and noncommutative spheres, Comm. Math. Phys. 298 (2010), 343--356.
- J. Bhowmick and D. Goswami, Quantum isometry groups: examples and computations, Comm. Math. Phys. 285 (2009), 421--444.
- H. Weyl, The classical groups: their invariants and representations, Princeton (1939).