Dimension Data, Local and Global Conjugacy in Reductive Groups
Song Wang

TL;DR
This paper investigates the extent to which dimension data determines subgroup conjugacy in reductive groups, providing counterexamples where non-conjugate subgroups share identical dimension data, thus challenging previous assumptions.
Contribution
It demonstrates that for certain types of simple subgroups, dimension data does not guarantee conjugacy, revealing limitations in the strong rigidity results for reductive groups.
Findings
Existence of non-conjugate subgroups with identical dimension data in SO(2N)
Counterexamples for simple groups of specific types (A_{4n}, B_{2n}, etc.)
Local conjugacy does not imply global conjugacy in these cases.
Abstract
Let G be a connected reductive group (over ) and H a connected semisimple subgroup. The dimension data of H (realative to its given embedding in G) is the collection of the numbers , where V runs over all the finite dimensional representations of G. By a Theorem of Larsen-Pink ([L-P90]), the dimension data determines H up to isomorphism, and if G = GL (n) even up to conjugacy. Professor Langlands raised the question as to whether the strong (conjugacy) result holds for arbitrary G. In this paper We provided the following (negative) answer: If H is simple of type A_{4 n}, , , E_{6}, E_{8}, F_{4} and G_{2}, then there exist (for suitable ) pairs of embeddings i and i' of H into such that there image i (H) and i' (H) have the same dimension data but are not conjugate. In fact we have shown that i (H)…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Algebra and Geometry · Algebraic Geometry and Number Theory · Geometry and complex manifolds
