Bourbaki

Lemma 2

Tag 0ATM, permanent. Cite it as [Bourbaki, Tag 0ATM].

Lie Groups and Lie Algebras, chapter V, § 6. The Coxeter transformation

Assume that W is irreducible and that dim⁡V≥2\dim V \geq 2. With the preceding notation, there exist two linearly independent vectors z′,z′′z', z'' such that (i) the plane P generated by z′,z′′z', z'' is stable under s' and s''; (ii) s'|P and s''|P are orthogonal reflections with respect to Rz′Rz' and Rz′′Rz''; (iii) z′,z′′∈C‾z', z'' \in \overline{C}, and P∩CP \cap C is the set of linear combinations of z′,z′′z', z'' with coefficients > 0.

Let (e1,…,el)(e^1, \ldots, e^l) be the basis of V such that (ei∣ej)=δij(e^i|e_j) = \delta_{ij}. Then C is the open simplicial cone determined by the eie^i (§ 3, no. 9, Prop. 7). It is clear that V′V' is generated by er+1,…,ele^{r+1}, \ldots, e^l and V′′V'' by e1,…,ere^1, \ldots, e^r. Let q be the endomorphism of V such that q(e1)=e1,…,q(el)=elq(e^1) = e_1, \ldots, q(e^l) = e_l. Its matrix with respect to (e1,…,el)(e^1, \ldots, e^l) is Q=((ei∣ej))Q = ((e_i|e_j)). We have (ei∣ej)≤0(e_i|e_j) \leq 0 for i≠ji \neq j (§ 3, no. 4, Prop. 3). Since W is irreducible, there does not exist any partition {1,2,…,l}=I1∪I2\{1, 2, \ldots, l\} = I_1 \cup I_2 such that (ei∣ej)=0(e_i|e_j) = 0 for i∈I1i \in I_1 and j∈I2j \in I_2. Thus (§ 3, no. 5, Lemma 4) Q has an eigenvector (a1,…,al)(a_1, \ldots, a_l) all of whose coordinates are > 0; let a be the corresponding eigenvalue. Put

z=a1e1+⋯+alel, z = a_1 e^1 + \cdots + a_l e^l,
z′′=a1e1+⋯+arer∈V′′∩C‾, z'' = a_1 e^1 + \cdots + a_r e^r \in V'' \cap \overline{C},
z′=ar+1er+1+⋯+alel∈V′∩C‾, z' = a_{r+1} e^{r+1} + \cdots + a_l e^l \in V' \cap \overline{C},

and let PP be the plane generated by z′z' and z′′z''. Then P∩CP \cap C is the set of linear combinations of z′z' and z′′z'' with coefficients >0> 0. The relation q(z)=azq(z) = az gives ∑j=1lajej=∑j=1laajej\sum_{j=1}^l a_j e_j = \sum_{j=1}^l aa_j e^j; scalar multiplying by eke_k (where k≤rk \leq r) gives

ak+∑j=r+1laj(ej∣ek)=aak; thus a_k + \sum_{j=r+1}^l a_j (e_j|e_k) = aa_k; \text{ thus}
(a−1)z′′=∑k=1r(∑j=r+1laj(ej∣ek))ek (a-1)z'' = \sum_{k=1}^r \left( \sum_{j=r+1}^l a_j (e_j|e_k) \right) e^k
=∑j=r+1laj(∑k=1r(ej∣ek)ek) = \sum_{j=r+1}^l a_j \left( \sum_{k=1}^r (e_j|e_k) e^k \right)
=∑j=r+1laj(−ej+∑k=1l(ej∣ek)ek) = \sum_{j=r+1}^l a_j \left( -e^j + \sum_{k=1}^l (e_j|e_k) e^k \right)
=−z′+∑j=r+1lajej. = -z' + \sum_{j=r+1}^l a_j e_j.

Thus, (a−1)z′′+z′(a-1)z'' + z' is orthogonal to e1,…,ere^1, \ldots, e^r, that is, to V′′V''. Hence, s′′s'' leaves stable the plane generated by z′′z'' and (a−1)z′′+z′(a-1)z'' + z', that is, PP. Similarly, s′s' leaves PP stable. Since z′∈P∩V′z' \in P \cap V' and z′′∈P∩V′′z'' \in P \cap V'', s′∣Ps'|P and s′′∣Ps''|P are the reflections with respect to Rz′Rz' and Rz′′Rz''.

Bourbaki puts the proof directly after the statement, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.

Cited by

Nothing.

Cites

Transcribed from the printed volume. Not translated.