Definably compact groups definable in real closed fields.II
Eliana Barriga

TL;DR
This paper advances the understanding of definably compact groups in real closed fields by establishing connections with algebraic groups and their universal covers, especially focusing on abelian cases.
Contribution
It extends previous work by showing that abelian definably compact groups have universal covers isomorphic to certain open subgroups of algebraic group covers.
Findings
For abelian groups, the o-minimal universal cover is isomorphic to a subgroup of an algebraic group's cover.
The paper links definably compact groups with algebraic groups via definable maps acting as homomorphisms.
It provides a structural description of the universal cover of abelian definably compact groups.
Abstract
We continue the analysis of definably compact groups definable in a real closed field . In [3], we proved that for every definably compact definably connected semialgebraic group over there are a connected -algebraic group , a definable injective map from a generic definable neighborhood of the identity of into the group of -points of such that acts as a group homomorphism inside its domain. The above result and our study of locally definable covering homomorphisms for locally definable groups combine to prove that if such group is in addition abelian, then its o-minimal universal covering group is definably isomorphic, as a locally definable group, to a connected open locally definable subgroup of the o-minimal universal covering group of the group…
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 Topology and Set Theory · Mathematical and Theoretical Analysis · Homotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology
Definably compact groups definable in real closed fields.II
Eliana Barriga
Eliana Barriga
Universidad de los Andes, Colombia
University of Haifa, Israel
Abstract.
We continue the analysis of definably compact groups definable in a real closed field . In [3], we proved that for every definably compact definably connected semialgebraic group over there are a connected -algebraic group , a definable injective map from a generic definable neighborhood of the identity of into the group of -points of such that acts as a group homomorphism inside its domain. The above result and our study of locally definable covering homomorphisms for locally definable groups combine to prove that if such group is in addition abelian, then its o-minimal universal covering group is definably isomorphic, as a locally definable group, to a connected open locally definable subgroup of the o-minimal universal covering group of the group for some connected -algebraic group .
Key words and phrases:
O-minimality, semialgebraic groups, real closed fields, algebraic groups, locally definable groups, o-minimal universal cover
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
03C64; 20G20; 22E15; 03C68; 22B99
1. Introduction
This is the second paper of two papers studying definably compact groups definable in real closed fields.
This paper offers a description of the semialgebraically connected semialgebraic groups over a sufficiently saturated real closed field through the study of their o-minimal universal covering groups (see Def. 3.3) and of their relation with the -points of some connected -algebraic group.
We establish a connection between the o-minimal universal covering groups of an abelian definably compact definably connected group definable in and of the semialgebraically connected component of the group of -points of some connected -algebraic group . More precisely we show the following.
Theorem 7.2.
Let be a sufficiently saturated real closed field. Then, the o-minimal universal covering group of an abelian definably compact definably connected group definable in is an open locally definable subgroup of the o-minimal universal covering group of the semialgebraically connected component of the group of -points of some connected -algebraic group .
To prove this result we apply Theorem 5.1 of the first paper ([3]) and some results on locally definable covering homomorphisms of locally definable groups proved in this paper. Theorem 5.1 in [3] asserts that for every definably compact definably connected semialgebraic group over there are a connected -algebraic group and a definable local homomorphism from a generic definable neighborhood of the identity of into the group of -points of , where by a local homomorphism we mean the following.
Definition 1.1**.**
Let and be two topological groups, a neighborhood of the identity of , and a map. is called a local homomorphism if implies . We say that an injective map is a local homomorphism in both directions if and are local homomorphisms.
The strategy to prove Theorem 7.2 is to use the -algebraic group and the local homomorphism given by [3, Theorem 5.1] to define a locally definable map from some open locally definable subgroup of the o-minimal universal covering group of to such that works as the o-minimal universal covering group of .
This research is part of my PhD thesis at the Universidad de los Andes, Colombia and University of Haifa, Israel.
1.1. The structure of the paper
In Section 2 we regard the locally definable spaces, ld-spaces, and their ld-covering maps as are defined in [2]. The -definable groups in are examples of such spaces. We show that any ld-covering map between ld-spaces is closed for definable subspaces (Prop. 2.12). The o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of a connected locally definable group is introduced and studied in Section 3. Sections 4 and 5 investigate the connection between abelian definably generated groups, existence of generic definable sets, convex sets, and covers of definable groups. We prove in Proposition 4.5 the existence of a convex set inside a definable generic subset of an abelian -definable group with . This is a crucial fact in the construction of a well defined covering map in Theorem 6.1.
In the last two sections we develop some results on local homomorphisms and their extensions to locally definable homomorphisms. Finally, in Section 7, by means of Theorems 7.1 and [3, Theorem 5.1], we prove the main result of this paper: Theorem 7.2.
Notation**.**
Our notation and any undefined term that we use from model theory, topology, or algebraic geometry are generally standard. For a group whose group operation is written multiplicatively, we use the following notation , and for any .
2. Ld-spaces and ld-covering maps
From now until the end of this paper, unless stated otherwise, we work over a sufficiently saturated o-minimal expansion of a real closed field , where by a sufficiently saturated structure we mean a -saturated structure for some sufficiently large cardinal .
In [2] Baro and Otero introduced the locally definable category, which extends the locally semialgebraic one introduced by Delfs and Knebusch in [6] and is more flexible than the -definable group category. -definable groups are examples of locally definable spaces and their locally definable covering homomorphisms are locally definable covering maps of locally definable spaces. Following, we will introduce some definitions of the locally definable category from [2], and then we will prove some results on locally definable covering maps that will be applied later in the study of the locally definable covering homomorphisms of locally definable groups.
2.1. Ld-spaces and ld-maps
Definition 2.1**.**
Let be a set. A locally definable space is a triple where
- (i)
, , and is a bijection between and a definable set for every , 2. (ii)
is a definable relative open subset of and the transition maps are definable for every .
The dimension of is . If and are definable over for all , we say that is a locally definable space over .
Note that every definable space ([19, Chapter 10]) is a locally definable space with .
Every locally definable space has a unique topology on such that each is open and is a homeomorphism for all ; more precisely, is open if and only if is relatively open in for every . Throughout this subsection any topological property of locally definable spaces refers to this topology.
Definition 2.2**.**
Let be an ld-space.
- (i)
An ld-space is a Hausdorff locally definable space. 2. (ii)
A subset is called a definable subspace of if there is a finite such that and is definable for all . 3. (iii)
A subset is called an compatible subspace of if is definable for every , or equivalently, is a definable subspace of for every definable subspace of .
By Theorem 3.9 of [2], every -definable group with its -topology (see [14, Lemma 7.5]) is an ld-space of finite dimension, and any definable subset of is a definable subspace of .
We recall that any compatible subspace of an ld-space inherits a natural structure of ld-space [2, Remark 2.3] given by . And if is a definable subspace then it inherits the structure of a definable space. Note that the only compatible subspaces of a definable space are the definable ones.
Now, we will introduce the maps between ld-spaces as in [2]. For this we note that given two ld-spaces and we can endow with the structure that makes it into an ld-space, and as it is defined in [19], a map between definable spaces is a definable map if its graph is a definable subspace of .
Definition 2.3**.**
A map between ld-spaces (locally definable spaces) and is called an ld-map (locally definable map) if is a definable subspace of and is definable for every .
2.2. Some topological notions in ld-spaces
Definition 2.4**.**
Let be an ld-space.
- (i)
is connected if has no compatible nonempty proper clopen subspace. 2. (ii)
An ld-path in is a continuous ld-map . 3. (iii)
is path connected if for every there is an ld-path such that and . 4. (iv)
The path connected component of a point is the set of all such that there is an ld-path from to .
By Remarks 4.1 and 4.3, and Fact 4.2 of [2], (i) an ld-space is connected if and only if is path connected if and only if every ld-map from to a discrete ld-space is constant, and (ii) every path connected component of an ld-space is a clopen compatible subspace.
Claim 2.5**.**
Let be an ld-space such that is a collection of connected compatible subspaces of and . Then is connected.
Proof.
Let be a compatible nonempty clopen in . Since , there is such that . Since and are compatible in , so is , and in particular is a clopen compatible set in . By the connectedness of , .
As , for every , then , and as above we conclude that for every . Therefore, . Then has no clopen proper nonempty compatible subset.
∎
Corollary 2.6**.**
Let be two connected ld-spaces. Then the product ld-space is connected.
Proof.
Fix . For , let . Since , Claim 2.5 implies that is connected. Finally, as , again Claim 2.5 implies that is connected. ∎
Proposition 2.7**.**
Let be a locally definable group and a connected definable set such that the identity element . Then the definable generated group is a connected locally definable group.
Proof.
By Corollary 2.6, is a connected definable space for every . Since the ld-map
[TABLE]
is continuous (with respect to their topologies of locally definable groups) and the image of a connected ld-space by a continuous ld-map is connected, then is connected.
Finally, as , then is connected by Claim 2.5. ∎
Definition 2.8**.**
Let be an ld-space and . Let be two ld-paths. A continuous ld-map is a homotopy between and if and . In this case, and are called homotopic, denoted .
Let be the set of all ld-paths that start and end at the element . Note that being homotopic is an equivalence relation on . We define the o-minimal fundamental group . Observe that is a group with the operation given by the class of the concatenation of its representatives; i.e., . In case is a connected locally definable group, is an abelian group ([7, Prop. 4.1]).
is called simply connected if is path connected and is the trivial group.
2.3. Covering maps for ld-spaces
The next definition of covering map for ld-spaces is taken from [2].
Definition 2.9**.**
Let and be ld-spaces. A surjective continuous ld-map is called an ld-covering map if there is a family of open definable subspaces of such that
- (i)
, 2. (ii)
the cover of every admits a finite subcover, and 3. (iii)
for every and each connected component of , the restriction is a definable homeomorphism (so in particular both and are definable).
We call a -admissible family of definable neighborhoods.
Remark 2.10**.**
Let and be ld-spaces, and let be a surjective continuous ld-map. Then it is easy to prove that is an ld-covering map if and only if there is a family of open definable subspaces of such that
- (i)
, 2. (ii)
the cover of every admits a finite subcover, and 3. (iii)
for every , is a disjoint union of open definable subspaces of such that for every the restriction is a definable homeomorphism (so in particular both and are definable).
Now, we will prove that any ld-covering map between ld-spaces is closed for definable subspaces; notice that such a map is always open.
Remark 2.11**.**
Let be an ld-space and a definable space. If , then there is a definable map , for some , such that .
Proof.
Since is a definable subspace of , then there is a finite such that . As , then for some . Also, since , there is such that . Since is open in and , then .
Because the definable spaces of an ld-space are closed under finite intersections, then is a definable set in . As , then , then, by [16, Thm. 4.8], there is a definable map such that . Because is a homeomorphism between and , is a definable map such that . ∎
Proposition 2.12**.**
Let , be ld-spaces, a definable subspace closed in , and an ld-covering map. Then is a definable subspace closed in .
Proof.
We will show that if , then . As the image of a definable space by an ld-map is a definable space, is a definable space. Because , Remark 2.11 yields the existence of a definable map such that .
Now, since is an ld-covering map, there is an open definable subspace such that , , and each is an open definable subspace in homeomorphic to by .
Since and is an open neighborhood of , there is such that and . Without loss of generality, we can assume that .
Let . Since and is definable, then saturation implies that for some . As , then . Since is a definable homeomorphism for every , any path in can be lifted through to a path in . Therefore, in particular, for each , is a definable path in . Hence, .
By o-minimality, there are and a positive such that . Let . Since , then the lifting . So, . But is closed in , so ; namely, . Then the image by of any definable closed subspace of is closed in . This ends the proof of Proposition 2.12. ∎
With the previous proposition we can prove the existence of a homeomorphism between simply connected definable spaces as a restriction of a given ld-covering map as we see in the following proposition.
Proposition 2.13**.**
Let , be ld-spaces and an ld-covering map. Let be a compatible subspace in , then is an ld-covering map of ld-spaces. If, moreover, is definable, , and , then there is a definable subspace open in such that and the following hold.
- (i)
* is a definable covering map of ld-spaces.* 2. (ii)
If in addition is simply connected, then is a homeomorphism of definable spaces where is the connected component of in .
Proof.
Since the preimage of a compatible subspace by an ld-map is a compatible subspace, is a compatible subset of . As is a continuous surjection, it only remains to show the existence of a -admissible family of definable neighborhoods. Let be a -admissible family of definable neighborhoods such that and is ld-homeomorphic to by for any , . Then it is easy to see that is a -admissible family of definable neighborhoods.
Now, assume that is also a definable space. Following, we will prove (i). Let be the above -admissible family of definable neighborhoods for . Hence, the definability of and the saturation of the model imply that there is such that . For each fix an arbitrary finite nonempty subset such that if , then there is such that . Let , which is open in . Then is a -admissible family of definable neighborhoods. So is a definable covering map of ld-spaces.
For (ii), first we will prove that is a definable covering map of ld-spaces, this is the next claim.
Claim 2.14**.**
Let be the connected component of in . Then
- (i)
* is surjective.* 2. (ii)
There is a -admissible family of definable neighborhoods.
Therefore, is a definable covering map of ld-spaces.
Proof.
(i) By Fact 4.2 of [2], is a clopen definable subset of . By Proposition 2.12, is a definable space clopen in , but is connected, so ; i.e., is surjective.
(ii) The same -admissible family of definable neighborhoods works for because if is a connected component of in , then is either entirely contained in or is disjoint from . Therefore, is homeomorphic by with .
From (i) and (ii), is a definable covering map of ld-spaces.
∎
Since is simply connected, [10, Remark 3.8] implies that there is an ld-covering map such that , then is a definable homeomorphism.
∎
3. The o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of a locally definable group
This section is devoted to introduce the notion and properties of locally definable covering homomorphism and o-minimal universal covering homomorphism.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let , be locally definable groups. An ld-covering map that is also a homomorphism is called a locally definable covering homomorphism. As before, is called a -admissible family of definable neighborhoods.
Two locally definable covering homomorphisms , are called equivalent if there are locally definable covering homomorphisms and such that and , so the following diagram commutes.
[TABLE]
In general, in our diagrams the regular arrows are maps whose existence is assumed, and the dashed arrows are maps whose existence is asserted. The inclusion map is denoted by .
Fact 3.2**.**
[7, Theorem 3.6]** Let be a surjective locally definable homomorphism between locally definable groups. If has dimension zero, then is a locally definable covering homomorphism.
Definition 3.3**.**
Let be a connected locally definable group. A locally definable covering homomorphism with connected is called an o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of if for every locally definable covering homomorphism with connected, there exists a locally definable covering homomorphism such that . In this case is called an o-minimal universal covering group of .
Note that if there are two o-minimal universal covering homomorphisms and of a connected locally definable group , then there exist locally definable covering homomorphisms and such that and . Therefore, if has an o-minimal universal covering homomorphism, then it is unique up to equivalent locally definable covering homomorphisms. Thus, we can say “the” o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of , and sometimes we denote the o-minimal universal covering group of by .
In [9] Edmundo and Eleftheriou constructed a locally definable covering homomorphism for a given connected locally definable group that satisfies the definition of an o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of (Def. 3.3) (so the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of exists), and they showed the following.
Fact 3.4**.**
[9, Thm. 3.11]** For a connected locally definable group , the kernel of its o-minimal universal covering homomorphism is isomorphic, as abstract groups, to the o-minimal fundamental group .
Fact 3.5**.**
[10, Remark 3.8]** A locally definable covering homomorphism between connected locally definable groups and is the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of if and only if .
Remark 3.6**.**
Let , be connected locally definable groups, and a locally definable covering homomorphism. Then
- (i)
is abelian if and only if is abelian. 2. (ii)
Assume that is abelian. Then is divisible if and only if is divisible.
Proof.
(i) Clearly, if is abelian, by the surjectiveness of , is abelian. Now, assume that is abelian, and let be the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of . Then there is a locally definable covering homomorphism such that . Since is abelian, so is , then, by going through , is also abelian.
(ii) It is clear that if is divisible, by the surjectiveness of , is divisible. The another implication needs the abelianness of the groups, and it is [5, Proposition 5.13].
∎
Fact 3.7**.**
[5, Proposition 5.14]** The o-minimal universal covering group of a connected abelian divisible locally definable group is divisible and torsion free.
Claim 3.8**.**
Let be a connected locally definable group covering an abelian connected definable group . If is torsion free, then is simply connected.
Proof.
Since is an abelian (definably) connected definable group, then is divisible (see, e.g., the proof of [11, Theorem 2.1]). Then is also abelian and divisible, by Remark 3.6. So the map is a bijective locally definable homomorphism for any , so in particular is a locally definable covering homomorphism. Thus, by [2, Corollary 6.12] or [7, Proposition 4.6], the induced map is an injective homomorphism; therefore, the -torsion group of satisfies that . Then, for every , thus is a divisible group.
Now, let be a locally definable covering homomorphism, and its induced injective homomorphism, so is a divisible subgroup of . By [11, Theorem 2.1], there is such that , then the only possible divisible subgroup of is the trivial one, so .
∎
From Fact 3.7 and Claim 3.8, we have that if is a connected abelian definable group, is torsion free if and only if is simply connected.
Corollary 3.9**.**
Let be a connected torsion free locally definable group, an abelian connected definable group, and a locally definable covering homomorphism. Then is the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of .
Proof.
By [10, Remark 3.8] and Claim 3.8, is simply connected. So, by Fact 3.5, is the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of . ∎
4. Abelian definably generated groups, convex sets, and covers of definable groups
In this section we present some properties of the abelian -definable groups in relation to their smallest type-definable subgroup of index smaller than , if it exists, and to some generic subsets and convex sets.
Note that if is a connected -definable group with , then has a definable left-generic set, thus, by Fact 2.3 in [12], is definably generated, and hence locally definable.
In the first part of this section, we point out some central facts about the existence of for an abelian definably generated group as well as necessary and sufficient conditions for being a cover of a definable group. The first of these facts gathers Proposition 3.5 and Theorem 3.9 of Peterzil and Eleftheriou’s work in [12].
Fact 4.1**.**
[12]** Let be a connected abelian definably generated group of dimension . Then:
- (i)
* covers a definable group if and only if the subgroup exists if and only if contains a definable generic set.* 2. (ii)
If exists, then is torsion free, and are divisible, and is a Lie group isomorphic, as a topological group, to for some with , where is the circle group.
Definition 4.2**.**
[5, Def. 5.3] Let be an abelian group and .
- (i)
is called convex if for every and , not both null, contains every solution of the equation . 2. (ii)
The convex hull of is the set of all such that for some and some not necessarily distinct. 3. (iii)
A locally definable abelian group has definably bounded convex hulls if for all definable , there is a definable such that .
If is a divisible torsion free abelian group, then it is easy to prove that is convex if and only if for every .
Fact 4.3**.**
[5, Theorem 5.6]** Let be a connected abelian definably generated group. The following are equivalent:
- (i)
* covers a definable group.* 2. (ii)
For every definable , there is a definable such that for all . 3. (iii)
* is divisible and has definably bounded convex hulls.*
The second part of this section is devoted to prove Proposition 4.5.
Claim 4.4**.**
Let be a topological group isomorphic, as a topological group, to for some , where is the circle group. Let be a compact neighbourhood of the identity element of . Then there is an increasing sequence such that for every , and .
Proof.
First, note that in every compact neighbourhood of the identity element of , there is a neighbourhood of such that and . Therefore, as and are isomorphic as a topological groups, then there is a neighbourhood of such that , and for every .
Let us define the sequence inductively as follows.
Let . Let us assume that is defined for . Since is compact, is compact, so yields the existence of finitely many natural numbers such that . As for every , then where .
Finally, by the definition of the ’s and , it follows directly that for every , and . ∎
Proposition 4.5**.**
Let be a connected abelian -definable group such that exists. Let be a definable set such that and a definable set. Then
- (i)
. 2. (ii)
There is such that . 3. (iii)
There is such that the convex hull of is contained in . If, moreover, is torsion free, then .
Proof.
Let denote the group , let be the quotient homomorphism, and consider as the locally compact topological space given by the logic topology (see [14, Lemma 7.5]). By [12, Thm. 3.9], is isomorphic, as a topological group, to for some .
As , saturation yields the existence of a definable such that . Thus, by [12, Fact 2.3(2)], generates . Furthermore, is an open neighbourhood of the identity element of . Therefore, is a compact connected neighbourhood of in and generates .
Claim 4.4 yields the existence of an increasing sequence such that for every and . Hence,
[TABLE]
This gives us (i).
Since is a compact set in and , there are such that . As , then where . Therefore,
[TABLE]
By (i) and saturation, if is a definable set, then there are such that , then where , which yields (ii).
Finally, let us prove (iii). By Lemma 3.7 in [12], exists if and only if covers a definable group, and by Theorem 5.6 in [5], if and only if has definably bounded convex hulls; i.e., for every definable there is a definable containing the convex hull of . Then, there is a definable set such that , and (ii) yields the existence of such that , then . Since exists, Proposition 3.5 in [12] implies that is divisible. If in addition is torsion free, then the map is a group isomorphism for every , so if , then . ∎
5. Local homomorphisms and generic sets: some technical propositions
Below we prove some technical results that will be applied in the proofs of Theorems 6.1, and 7.1.
Proposition 5.1**.**
Let and be locally definable groups such that exists. Let be a definable set such that , and be a definable local homomorphism. Then
- (i)
there is a definable symmetric set such that and is generic in . 2. (ii)
* is a type-definable subgroup of of index less than , and hence .*
Proof.
(i) As , saturation implies that there is a definable symmetric such that . Since is generic in and the structure is -saturated (with ), then for some .
Let , and . If with , then , thus . Therefore,
[TABLE]
and for . Hence, is covered by by group translates. It implies that is a definable generic subset in .
(ii) We will see that is a type-definable subgroup of of index less than . By saturation, is a type-definable set. Now, as , with . Let . Then, if and with , , then , so . Thus,
[TABLE]
In addition, by (i), for some . Then,
[TABLE]
Hence, .
Note that since is a type-definable subgroup of of index , then exists (see [14, Prop. 7.4]), and thus . ∎
Proposition 5.2**.**
Let , be locally definable groups with identities and , respectively, and a locally definable covering homomorphism. Let be a definable simply connected set, and a connected definable set such that and , then there is a definable set such that , is a definable homeomorphism and a local homomorphism in both directions.
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Proposition 2.13, there is a definable open in such that and is a definable homeomorphism, where is the identity component of . Let , then , then .
In addition, if and ; otherwise, if there are such that , then , but is injective in , then , so , which is a contradiction since . Then is a definable covering map of ld-spaces and .
Therefore, from the connectedness of and , we get . Thus, [3, Remark 2.12] implies that the homeomorphism is a local homomorphism in both directions. ∎
6. Extension of a definable local homomorphism from a torsion free abelian locally definable group
Theorem 6.1**.**
Let be a connected abelian torsion free locally definable group such that exists, and let be an abelian locally definable group. Let be a definable set such that . Assume that is a definable local homomorphism.
Then there exists a unique locally definable homomorphism extending .
If in addition is connected, exists, , is injective and is a local homomorphism, then is the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of .
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Proposition 5.1, there is a definable symmetric such that , and is generic in . Now, note that since exists, by [12, Proposition 3.5], is divisible, then the map is a group isomorphism. By Proposition 4.5(iii), there is such that the convex hull of is contained in .
Let , so there are and such that . Let
[TABLE]
Claim 6.2**.**
The map defined as above satisfies the following.
- (i)
* is a well defined map.* 2. (ii)
* is a locally definable homomorphism.* 3. (iii)
* is the unique extension of that is a locally definable homomorphism from to .* 4. (iv)
If, moreover, is connected, exists, , is injective and is a local homomorphism, then and is the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of .
Proof.
(i) As , then for every with and we have that:
[TABLE]
And since is a locally homomorphism, then for every
[TABLE]
Now, we will see that is well defined.
Let , and suppose that
[TABLE]
for some , and . Additionally, assume, without loss of generality, that .
[TABLE]
Therefore, is well defined.
(ii) Since is a definable map for every , then the restriction of to a definable subset of is a definable map. And by definition of , is clearly a group homomorphism.
(iii) First, we will see that .
By definition of the convex hull (Def. 4.2) and the divisibility of , an element in is of the form for some and . Thus,
[TABLE]
Then and agree on .
Now, we will verify uniqueness. Let be a locally definable homomorphism that is an extension of , then in particular and agree on . Let . Then and is an open locally definable subgroup of . By [7, Lemma 2.12], is a compatible subset of . But is connected, then ; i.e., .
Then, . And hence, ; i.e., is also an extension of .
(iv) First, note that . Now, by Proposition 4.5(ii), there is such that , then . By the hypothesis on , is a type-definable subgroup of ; moreover, by [12, Proposition 3.5], is divisible, so is an abelian torsion free divisible subgroup of . Henceforth, implies that , thus , it follows that . Then, is surjective.
On the other hand, notice that if and only if . Since and are generic in and , respectively, then and ; finally, follows from the injectivity of , so is a locally definable covering homomorphism by [7, Theorem 3.6].
Since is abelian, connected, and exists, then covers an abelian definable group ([12, Thm. 3.9]). Thus Claim 3.8 yields is simply connected. Therefore, by [10, Remark 3.8], is the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of . ∎
This concludes the proof of Theorem 6.1. ∎
7. Universal covers of locally homomorphic abelian locally definable groups
Theorem 7.1**.**
Let , be abelian connected locally definable groups such that exists and is an intersection of -many simply connected definable subsets of . Let be a definable set with , and a definable homeomorphism and a local homomorphism. Assume that is the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of .
Then,
- (i)
there are a connected locally definable subgroup of and a locally definable homomorphism that is the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of , and 2. (ii)
there is a connected symmetric definable with such that is the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of .
If in addition is simply connected, then is a subgroup of the o-minimal universal covering group of .
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since is an intersection of -many simply connected definable subsets of , then and saturation imply that there are simply connected definable sets and such that . Thus, by [3, Remark 2.12], is a local homomorphism in both directions.
Moreover, the connected definable set is such that where and the identity of belongs to . So Proposition 5.2 yields the existence of a connected definable such that the identity of is in and is a definable homeomorphism and a local homomorphism in both directions, hence so is .
By saturation, , and Proposition 5.1, then there is a connected symmetric definable such that (i) , (ii) is generic in , exists, and , and (iii) is generic in , exists, and . Note that is connected by Proposition 2.7.
By Theorem 6.1, there are locally definable homomorphisms and that are the o-minimal universal covering homomorphisms of and , respectively. Moreover, and are the unique extensions of and , respectively, that are locally definable homomorphisms. Since , then . If in addition is simply connected, then the o-minimal universal covering group of exists, and is a closed subgroup of .
∎
7.1. The o-minimal universal covering group of an abelian connected definably compact semialgebraic group
Applying the main results obtained so far, we present below one of the key results of this work.
Theorem 7.2**.**
Let be an abelian connected definably compact group definable in a sufficiently saturated real closed field . Then there are a connected -algebraic group , an open connected locally definable subgroup of the o-minimal universal covering group of , and a locally definable homomorphism that is the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of .
Proof.
By [3, Theorem 5.1], there are a connected -algebraic group such that , a definable set such that , and a definable homeomorphism that is also a local homomorphism.
By [4, Thm. 2.2], is an intersection of -many simply connected definable subsets of . Thus, by Theorem 7.1, there are a connected locally definable subgroup and a locally definable homomorphism that is the o-minimal universal covering homomorphism of , and since , is also open in . ∎
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my gratitude to the Universidad de los Andes, Colombia and the University of Haifa, Israel for supporting and funding my research as well as for their stimulating hospitality. I would also like to thank warmly to my advisors: Alf Onshuus and Kobi Peterzil for their support, generous ideas, and kindness during this work.
I want to express my gratitude to Anand Pillay for suggesting to Kobi Peterzil the problem discussed in this work: the study of semialgebraic groups over a real closed field. Also, thanks to the Israel-US Binational Science Foundation for their support.
The main results of this paper have been presented on the winter of 2016 at the Logic Seminar of the Institut Camille Jordan, Université Claude Bernard - Lyon 1 (Lyon) and at the Oberseminar Modelltheorie of the Universität Konstanz (Konstanz).
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Elías Baro and Mário J. Edmundo. Corrigendum to: “Locally definable groups in o-minimal structures” [J. Algebra 301 (2006), no. 1, 194–223; mr 2230327] by Edmundo. J. Algebra , 320(7):3079–3080, 2008.
- 2[2] Elías Baro and Margarita Otero. Locally definable homotopy. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic , 161(4):488–503, 2010.
- 3[3] Eliana Barriga. Definably compact groups definable in real closed fields. I. ar Xiv:1703.08606 v 2 [math.LO] , pages 1–25, 2017.
- 4[4] Alessandro Berarducci. Cohomology of groups in o-minimal structures: acyclicity of the infinitesimal subgroup. J. Symbolic Logic , 74(3):891–900, 2009.
- 5[5] Alessandro Berarducci, Mário Edmundo, and Marcello Mamino. Discrete subgroups of locally definable groups. Selecta Math. (N.S.) , 19(3):719–736, 2013.
- 6[6] Hans Delfs and Manfred Knebusch. Locally semialgebraic spaces , volume 1173 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics . Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985.
- 7[7] Mário J. Edmundo. Covers of groups definable in o-minimal structures. Illinois J. Math. , 49(1):99–120 (electronic), 2005.
- 8[8] Mário J. Edmundo. Erratum to: “Covers of groups definable in o-minimal structures” [Illinois J. Math. 49 (2005), no. 1, 99–120]. Illinois J. Math. , 51(3):1037–1038, 2007.
