1 Introduction
This paper is concerned with convexity properties associated to orbit projection.
Let us consider two Lie groups
$G\subset \tilde {G}$
with Lie algebras
$\mathfrak {g}\subset \tilde {\mathfrak {g}}$
and corresponding projection
$\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}: \tilde {\mathfrak {g}}^{*}\to \mathfrak {g}^{*}$
. A longstanding problem has been to understand how a coadjoint orbit
$\tilde {\mathcal {O}}\subset \tilde {\mathfrak {g}}^{*}$
decomposes under the projection
$\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}$
. For this purpose, we may define
When the Lie group G is compact and connected, the set
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}/G$
admits a natural identification with a Weyl chamber
$\mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
. In this context, we have the well-known convexity theorem [Reference Heckman12, Reference Atiyah1, Reference Guillemin and Sternberg10, Reference Kirwan16, Reference Hilgert, Neeb and Plank13, Reference Sjamaar35, Reference Lerman, Meinrenken, Tolman and Woodward22].
Theorem 1.1. Suppose that G is compact connected and that the projection
$\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}$
is proper when restricted to
$\tilde {\mathcal {O}}$
. Then
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {\mathcal {O}})=\{\xi \in \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}\,; \ G\xi \subset \pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}(\tilde {\mathcal {O}})\}$
is a closed convex locally polyhedral subset of
$\mathfrak {t}^{*}$
.
When the Lie group
$\tilde {G}$
is also compact and connected, we may consider
Here is another convexity theorem [Reference Horn14, Reference Klyachko17, Reference Berenstein and Sjamaar4, Reference Belkale2, Reference Belkale and Kumar3, Reference Montagard and Ressayre25, Reference Knutson and Tao19, Reference Knutson, Tao and Woodward20, Reference Ressayre36].
Theorem 1.2. Suppose that
$G\subset \tilde {G}$
are compact connected Lie groups. Then
$\Delta (\tilde {G},G)$
is a closed convex polyhedral cone and we can parametrize its facets by cohomological means (i.e., Schubert calculus).
In this article, we obtain an extension of Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 in a case where G and
$\tilde {G}$
are both noncompact real reductive Lie groups.
Let us explain what framework we are considering. Let
$\tilde {K}$
be a maximal compact subgroup of
$\tilde {G}$
. We suppose that
$\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}$
is a Hermitian symmetric space of a noncompact type. Among the elliptic coadjoint orbits of
$\tilde {G}$
, some of them are naturally Kähler
$\tilde {K}$
-manifolds. These orbits are called the holomorphic coadjoint orbits of
$\tilde {G}$
. They are the strongly elliptic coadjoint orbits closely related to the holomorphic discrete series of Harish–Chandra. These orbits intersect the Weyl chamber
$\tilde {\mathfrak {t}}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
of
$\tilde {K}$
into a subchamber
$\tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
called the holomorphic chamber. The basic fact here is that the union
$$ \begin{align*}\mathcal{C}_{\tilde{G}/\tilde{K}}^{0}:=\bigcup_{\tilde{a}\in\tilde{\mathcal{C}}_{\mathrm{hol}}} \tilde{G}\tilde{a} \end{align*} $$
is an open invariant convex cone of
$\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}^{*}$
. See §2.1 for more details.
In this article, we work in the context where
$\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}$
admits a sub-Hermitian symmetric space of a noncompact type
$G/K$
. For the convenience of the reader, we list below some examples of the pairs
$(\tilde {G},G)$
:

As the projection
$\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}: \tilde {\mathfrak {g}}^{*}\to \mathfrak {g}^{*}$
sends the convex cone
$\mathcal {C}_{\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}}^{0}$
inside the convex cone
$\mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
, it is natural to study the following object reminiscent of equation (1):
Let
$\tilde {\mu }\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. We will also give a particular attention to the intersection of
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
with the linear subspace
$\tilde {\xi }=\tilde {\mu }$
, that is to say
Consider the case where G is embedded diagonally in
$\tilde {G}:=G^{s}$
for
$s\geq 2$
. The corresponding set
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(G^{s},G)$
is called the holomorphic Horn cone, and it is defined as follows:
$$ \begin{align*}\mathrm{Horn}_{\mathrm{hol}}^{s}(G):=\Big\{(\xi_{1},\cdots,\xi_{s+1})\in \mathcal{C}_{\mathrm{hol}}^{s+1}; \ G\xi_{s+1}\,\subset \sum_{j=1}^{s} G\xi_{j}\Big\}. \end{align*} $$
The first result of this article is the following theorem.
Theorem A.
-
•
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is a closed convex cone of
$\tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\times \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. -
•
$\mathrm {Horn}_{\mathrm {hol}}^{s}(G)$
is a closed convex cone of
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}^{s+1}$
for any
$s\geq 2$
.
We obtain the following corollary which corresponds to a result of A. Weinstein [Reference Weinstein38].
Corollary. For any
$\tilde {\mu }\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm { hol}}$
,
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })$
is a closed and convex subset of
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm { hol}}$
.
A first description of the closed convex cone
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
goes as follows. The quotient
$\mathfrak {q}$
of the tangent spaces
$\textbf {T}_{e}G/K$
and
$\textbf { T}_{e}\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}$
has a natural structure of a Hermitian K-vector space. The symmetric algebra
$\mathrm {Sym}(\mathfrak {q})$
of
$\mathfrak {q}$
defines an admissible K-module. The irreducible representations of K (resp.
$\tilde {K}$
) are parametrized by a semi-group
$\wedge ^{*}_{+}$
(resp.
$\tilde {\wedge }^{*}_{+}$
). For any
$\lambda \in \wedge ^{*}_{+}$
(resp.
$\tilde {\lambda }\in \tilde {\wedge }^{*}_{+}$
), we denote by
$V_{\lambda }^{K}$
(resp.
$V_{\tilde {\lambda }}^{\tilde {K}}$
) the irreducible representation of K (resp.
$\tilde {K}$
) with highest weight
$\lambda $
(resp.
$\tilde {\lambda }$
). If E is a representation of K, we denote by
$\left [V^{K}_{\lambda } : E\right ]$
the multiplicity of
$V^{K}_{\lambda }$
in E.
Definition 1.3.
-
1.
$\Pi ^{\mathbb {Z}}_{\mathfrak {q}}(\tilde {K},K)$
is the semigroup of
$\tilde {\wedge }^{*}_{+}\times \wedge ^{*}_{+}$
defined by the conditions:
$$ \begin{align*}(\tilde{\lambda},\lambda)\in \Pi^{\mathbb{Z}}_{\mathfrak{q}}(\tilde{K},K)\quad \Longleftrightarrow \quad\Big[V^{K}_{\lambda}\,:\,V_{\tilde{\lambda}}^{\tilde{K}}\otimes \mathrm{Sym}(\mathfrak{q})\Big]\neq 0. \end{align*} $$
-
2.
$\Pi _{\mathfrak {q}}(\tilde {K},K)$
is the convex cone defined as the closure of
$\mathbb {Q}^{>0}\cdot \Pi ^{\mathbb {Z}}_{\mathfrak {q}}(\tilde {K},K)$
.
The second result of this article is the following theorem.
Theorem B. We have the equality
A natural question is the description of the facets of the convex cone
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
. In order to do that, we consider the group
$\tilde {K}$
endowed with the following
$\tilde {K}\times K$
-action:
$(\tilde {k},k)\cdot \tilde {a}=\tilde {k}\tilde {a}k^{-1}$
. The cotangent space
$\textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}$
is then a symplectic manifold equipped with a Hamiltonian action of
$\tilde {K}\times K$
. We consider now the Hamiltonian
$\tilde {K}\times K$
-manifold
$\textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q}$
, and we denote by
$\Delta (\textbf{T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q})$
the corresponding Kirwan polyhedron.
Let
$W=N(T)/T$
be the Weyl group of
$(K,T)$
, and let
$w_{0}$
be the longest Weyl group element. Define an involution
$*:\mathfrak {t}^{*}\to \mathfrak {t}^{*}$
by
$\xi ^{*}=- w_{0}\xi $
. A standard result permits to affirm that
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi )\in \Pi _{\mathfrak {q}}(\tilde {K},K)$
if and only if
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi ^{*})\in \Delta (\textbf{T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q})$
(see §4.2).
We obtain then another version of Theorem B.
Theorem B, second version. An element
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi )$
belongs to
$\Delta _{\mathrm { hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
if and only if
Thanks to the second version of Theorem B, a natural way to describe the facets of the cone
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is to exhibit those of the Kirwan polyhedron
$\Delta (\textbf{T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q})$
. In this later case, it can be done using Ressayre’s data (see §5).
The second version of Theorem B permits also the following description of the convex subsets
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })$
,
$\tilde {\mu }\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. Let
$\Delta _{K}(\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }\times \overline {\mathfrak {q}})$
be the Kirwan polyhedron associated to the Hamiltonian action of K on
$\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }\times \overline {\mathfrak {q}}$
, where
$\overline {\mathfrak {q}}$
denotes the K-module
$\mathfrak {q}$
with opposite complex structure.
Theorem C. For any
$\tilde {\mu }\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm { hol}}$
, we have
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })=\Delta _{K}(\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }\times \overline {\mathfrak {q}})$
.
Let us detail Theorem C in the case where G is embedded in
$\tilde {G}=G\times G$
diagonally. We denote by
$\mathfrak {p}$
the K-Hermitian space
$\textbf { T}_{e}G/K$
. Let
$\kappa $
be the Killing form of the Lie algebra
$\mathfrak {g}$
. The vector space
$\overline {\mathfrak {p}}$
is equipped with the symplectic
$2$
-form
$\Omega _{\bar {\mathfrak {p}}}(X,Y)=-\kappa (z,[X,Y])$
and the compatible complex structure
$-\mathrm {ad}(z)$
.
Let us denote by
$\Delta _{K}(K\mu _{1}\times K\mu _{2}\times \overline {\mathfrak {p}})$
and by
$\Delta _{K}(\overline {\mathfrak {p}})$
the Kirwan polyhedrons relative to the Hamiltonian actions of K on
$K\mu _{1}\times K\mu _{2}\times \overline {\mathfrak {p}}$
and on
$\overline {\mathfrak {p}}$
. Theorem C says that, for any
$\mu _{1},\mu _{2}\in \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
, the convex set
$\Delta _{G}(G\mu _{1}\times G\mu _{2})$
is equal to the Kirwan polyhedron
$\Delta _{K}(K\mu _{1}\times K\mu _{2}\times \overline {\mathfrak {p}})$
.
To any nonempty subset
$\mathcal {C}$
of a real vector space E, we may associate its asymptotic cone
$\mathrm {As}(\mathcal {C}) \subset E$
which is the set formed by the limits
$y=\lim _{k\to \infty } t_{k} y_{k}$
, where
$(t_{k})$
is a sequence of nonnegative reals converging to
$0$
and
$y_{k}\in \mathcal {C}$
.
We finally get the following description of the asymptotic cone of
$\Delta _{G}(G\mu _{1}\times G\mu _{2})$
.
Corollary D. For any
$\mu _{1},\mu _{2}\in \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
, the asymptotic cone of
$\Delta _{G}(G\mu _{1}\times G\mu _{2})$
is equal to
$\Delta _{K}(\overline {\mathfrak {p}})$
.
In [Reference Paradan29] §5, we explained how to describe the cone
$\Delta _{K}(\overline {\mathfrak {p}})$
in terms of strongly orthogonal roots.
Let us finish this introduction with few remarks on related works:
-
– When G is compact, equal to the maximal compact subgroup
$\tilde {K}$
of
$\tilde {G}$
, the results of Theorems B and C were already obtained by G. Deltour in his thesis [Reference Deltour6, Reference Deltour7]. He proved the equality
$\Delta _{\tilde {K}}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })=\Delta _{\tilde {K}}(\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }\times \overline {\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}})$
by showing that the coadjoint orbit
$\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu }$
admits a
$\tilde {K}$
-equivariant symplectomorphism with
$\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }\times \overline {\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}$
, thus generalizing an earlier result of D. McDuff [Reference McDuff26]. We explain in §7 a conjectural symplectomorphism that would lead to the relation
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })=\Delta _{K}(\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }\times \overline {\mathfrak {q}})$
. -
– In [Reference Eshmatov and Foth9], A. Eshmatov and P. Foth proposed a description of the set
$\Delta _{G}(G\mu _{1}\times G\mu _{2})$
. But their computations do not give the same result as ours. From their main result (Theorem 3.2), it follows that the asymptotic cone of
$\Delta _{G}(G\mu _{1}\times G\mu _{2})$
is equal to the intersection of the Kirwan polyhedron
$\Delta _{T}(\overline {\mathfrak {p}})$
with the Weyl chamber
$\mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
. But since
$\Delta _{K}(\overline {\mathfrak {p}})\neq \Delta _{T}(\overline {\mathfrak {p}})\cap \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
in general, it is in contradiction with Corollary D.
Notations
In this paper, we take the convention of A. Knapp [Reference Knapp18]: A connected real reductive Lie group G means that we have a Cartan involution
$\Theta $
on G such that the fixed point set
$K:=G^{\Theta }$
is a connected maximal compact subgroup. We have Cartan decompositions at the level of Lie algebras
$\mathfrak {g}=\mathfrak {k}\oplus \mathfrak {p}$
and at the level of the group
$G\simeq K\times \exp (\mathfrak {p})$
. We denote by b a G-invariant nondegenerate bilinear form on
$\mathfrak {g}$
that is equal to the Killing form on
$[\mathfrak {g},\mathfrak {g}]$
, and that defines a K-invariant scalar product
$(X,Y):=-b(X,\Theta (Y))$
. We will use the K-equivariant identification
$\xi \mapsto \tilde {\xi },\ \mathfrak {g}^{*}\simeq \mathfrak {g}$
defined by
$(\tilde {\xi },X):=\langle \xi ,X\rangle $
for
$\xi \in \mathfrak {g}^{*}$
and
$X\in \mathfrak {g}$
.
When a Lie group H acts on a manifold N, the stabilizer subgroup of
$n\in N$
is denoted by
$H_{n}=\{g\in G,gn=n\}$
and its Lie algebra by
$\mathfrak {h}_{n}$
. Let us define
for any subset
$\mathcal {X}\subset N$
.
2 The cone
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
: first properties
We assume here that
$G/K$
is a Hermitian symmetric space of a noncompact type, that is to say, there exists a G-invariant complex structure on the manifold
$G/K$
or, equivalently, there exists a K-invariant element
$z\in \mathfrak {k}$
such that
$\mathrm {ad}(z)\vert _{\mathfrak {p}}$
defines a complex structure on
$\mathfrak {p}$
:
$(\mathrm {ad}(z)\vert _{\mathfrak {p}})^{2}= -\mathrm {Id}_{\mathfrak {p}}$
. This condition imposes that the ranks of G and K are equal.
We are interested in the following closed invariant convex cone of
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}$
:
2.1 The holomorphic chamber
Let T be a maximal torus of K, with Lie algebra
$\mathfrak {t}$
. Its dual
$\mathfrak {t}^{*}$
can be seen as the subspace of
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}$
fixed by T. Let us denote by
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}_{e}$
the set formed by the elliptic elements: In other words,
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}_{e}:=\mathrm {Ad}^{*}(G)\cdot \mathfrak {t}^{*}$
.
Following [Reference Weinstein38], we consider the invariant open subset
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}_{se}=\{\xi \in \mathfrak {g}^{*}\,\vert \, G_{\xi } \ \mathrm {is\ compact} \}$
of strongly elliptic elements. It is nonempty since the groups G and K have the same rank.
We start with the following basic facts.
Lemma 2.1.
-
•
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}_{se}$
is contained in
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}_{e}$
. -
• The interior
$\mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
of the cone
$\mathcal {C}_{G/K}$
is contained in
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}_{se}$
.
Proof. The first point is due to the fact that every compact subgroup of G is conjugate to a subgroup of K.
Let
$\xi \in \mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
. There exists
$\epsilon>0$
so that
It implies that
$|\langle \eta ,g z\rangle | \leq \langle \xi , z\rangle $
,
$\forall g\in G_{\xi }$
and
$\forall \|\eta \|\leq \epsilon $
. In other words, the adjoint orbit
$G_{\xi }\cdot z\subset \mathfrak {g}$
is bounded. For any
$g=e^{X} k$
, with
$(X,k)\in \mathfrak {p}\times K$
, a direct computation shows that
$\|gz\|=\|e^{X} z\|\geq \|[z,X]\|=\|X\|$
. Then, there exists
$\rho>0$
such that
$\|X\|\leq \rho $
if
$e^{X} k\in G_{\xi }$
for some
$k\in K$
. It follows that the stabilizer subgroup
$G_{\xi }$
is compact.
Let
$\wedge ^{*}\subset \mathfrak {t}^{*}$
be the weight lattice: By definition,
$\alpha \in \wedge ^{*}$
if and only if
$i\alpha $
is the differential of a character of T. Let
$\mathfrak {R}\subset \wedge ^{*}$
be the set of roots for the action of T on
$\mathfrak {g}\otimes \mathbb {C}$
. We have
$\mathfrak {R}=\mathfrak {R}_{c}\cup \mathfrak {R}_{n}$
, where
$\mathfrak {R}_{c}$
and
$\mathfrak {R}_{n}$
are, respectively, the set of roots for the action of T on
$\mathfrak {k}\otimes \mathbb {C}$
and
$\mathfrak {p}\otimes \mathbb {C}$
. We fix a system of positive roots
$\mathfrak {R}^{+}_{c}$
in
$\mathfrak {R}_{c}$
, and we denote by
$\mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
the corresponding Weyl chamber.
We have
$\mathfrak {p}\otimes \mathbb {C}=\mathfrak {p}^{+}\oplus \mathfrak {p}^{-}$
, where the K-module
$\mathfrak {p}^{\pm }$
is equal to
$\ker (\mathrm {ad}(z)\mp i)$
. Let
$\mathfrak {R}^{\pm ,z}_{n}$
be the set of roots for the action of T on
$\mathfrak {p}^{\pm }$
. The union
defines then a system of positive roots in
$\mathfrak {R}$
. We notice that
$\mathfrak {R}^{+,z}_{n}$
is the set of roots
$\beta \in \mathfrak {R}$
satisfying
$\langle \beta , z\rangle =1$
. Hence,
$\mathfrak {R}^{+,z}_{n}$
is invariant relatively to the action of the Weyl group
$W=N(T)/T$
.
Let us recall the following classical fact concerning the parametrization of the G-orbits in
$\mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
via the holomorphic chamber
The elliptic coadjoint orbits of G, i.e., those contained in
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}_{e}$
, are parameterized by the Weyl chamber
$\mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
. Thus, we have a projection
$\mathrm {p}: \mathfrak {g}^{*}_{e}\to \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
, defined by the relations
$G\xi \cap \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}=\{ \mathrm {p}(\xi )\}$
, and that induces a bijection
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}_{e}/G\simeq \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
.
Proposition 2.2. The set
$\mathrm {p}(\mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0})$
is equal to
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. In other words, the map
$\mathrm {p}$
induces a bijective map between the set of G-orbits in
$\mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
and the holomorphic chamber
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
.
Proof. Let us first prove that
$\mathrm {p}(\mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0})=\mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}\cap \mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
is contained in
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. Let
$\xi \in \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}\cap \mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
: We have to check that
$(\xi ,\beta )>0$
for any
$\beta \in \mathfrak {R}^{+,z}_{n}$
. Let
$X_{\beta },Y_{\beta }\in \mathfrak {p}$
such that
$X_{\beta }+i Y_{\beta }\in (\mathfrak {p}\otimes \mathbb {C})_{\beta }$
. We choose the following normalization: The vector
$h_{\beta }:=[X_{\beta },Y_{\beta }]$
satisfies
$\langle \beta ,h_{\beta }\rangle =1$
. We see then that
$(\xi ,\beta )=\frac {1}{\|h_{\beta }\|^{2}}\langle \xi ,h_{\beta }\rangle $
for any
$\xi \in \mathfrak {g}^{*}$
. Standard computation [Reference Paneitz28] gives:
$e^{t\,\mathrm {ad}(X_{\beta })}z=z +(\mathrm {cosh}(t)-1)h_{\beta } +\mathrm {sinh}(t)Y_{\beta },\ \forall t\in \mathbb {R}$
. By definition, we must have
$\langle \xi +\eta ,e^{t\,\mathrm {ad}(X_{\beta })} z\rangle \geq 0, \forall t\in \mathbb {R}$
, for any
$\eta \in \mathfrak {t}^{*}$
small enough. It imposes that
$\langle \xi ,h_{\beta }\rangle>0$
. The first point is settled.
The other inclusion
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}\subset \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}\cap \mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
is a consequence of the next lemma.
Lemma 2.3. For any compact subset
$\mathcal {K}$
of
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
, there exists
$c_{\mathcal {K}}>0$
such that
$\langle \xi ,g z\rangle \geq c_{\mathcal {K}} \|g z\|$
,
$\forall g\in G$
,
$\forall \xi \in \mathcal {K}$
.
Proof. Let us choose some maximal strongly orthogonal system
$\Sigma \subset \mathfrak {R}^{+,z}_{n}$
. The real span
$\mathfrak {a}$
of the
$X_{\beta },\beta \in \Sigma $
is a maximal abelian subspace of
$\mathfrak {p}$
. Hence, any element
$g\in G$
can be written
$g=k e^{X(t)} k^{\prime }$
with
$X(t)=\sum _{\beta \in \Sigma }t_{\beta } X_{\beta }$
and
$k,k^{\prime }\in K$
. We get
$$ \begin{align} gz=k\left(z +\sum_{\beta\in\Sigma}(\mathrm{cosh}(t_{\beta})-1)h_{\beta} +\sum_{\beta\in\Sigma}\mathrm{sinh}(t_{\beta})Y_{\beta}\right) \end{align} $$
and
For any
$\xi \in \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
, we define
$c_{\xi } := \min _{\beta \in \mathfrak {R}^{+,z}_{n}}\langle \xi ,h_{\beta }\rangle>0$
. Let
$\pi :\mathfrak {k}^{*}\to \mathfrak {t}^{*}$
be the projection. We have
$\langle k^{-1}\xi ,z\rangle =\langle \pi (k^{-1}\xi ),z\rangle $
and
$\langle k^{-1}\xi ,h_{\beta }\rangle =\langle \pi (k^{-1}\xi ),h_{\beta }\rangle $
. The convexity theorem of Kostant tell us that
$\pi (k^{-1}\xi )$
belongs to the convex hull of
$\{w\xi , w\in W\}$
. It follows that
$\langle k^{-1}\xi ,z\rangle \geq \langle \xi ,z\rangle>0 \quad \mathrm {and}\quad \langle k^{-1}\xi ,h_{\beta }\rangle \geq c_{\xi }>0$
for any
$k\in K$
. We obtain then that
$\langle \xi ,g z\rangle \geq \frac {1}{2}\min (\langle \xi ,z\rangle , c_{\xi }) e^{\|X(t)\|}$
for any
$\xi \in \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
, where
$\|X(t)\|=\sup _{\beta } |t_{\beta }|$
. From equation (7), it is not difficult to see that there exists
$C>0$
such that
$\|gz\|\leq C e^{\|X(t)\|}$
for any
$g=k e^{X(t)} k^{\prime }\in G$
.
Let
$\mathcal {K}$
be a compact subset of
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. Take
$c_{\mathcal {K}}=\frac {1}{2C}\min (\min _{\xi \in \mathcal {K}}\langle \xi ,z\rangle , \min _{\xi \in \mathcal {K}}c_{\xi })>0$
. The previous computations show that
$\langle \xi ,g z\rangle \geq c_{\mathcal {K}} \|g z\|,\ \forall g\in G,\ \forall \xi \in \mathcal {K}$
.
The following result is needed in §4.1.
Lemma 2.4. The map
$\mathrm {p}: \mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}\to \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
is continuous.
Proof. Let
$(\xi _{n})$
be a sequence of
$\mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
converging to
$\xi _{\infty }\in \mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
. Let
$\xi ^{\prime }_{n} =\mathrm {p}(\xi _{n})$
and
$\xi ^{\prime }_{\infty } =\mathrm {p}(\xi _{\infty })$
: We have to prove that the sequence
$(\xi ^{\prime }_{n})$
converges to
$\xi ^{\prime }_{\infty }$
. We choose elements
$g_{n},g_{\infty }\in G$
such that
$\xi _{n}=g_{n}\xi ^{\prime }_{n},\forall n$
and
$\xi _{\infty }=g_{\infty }\xi ^{\prime }_{\infty }$
.
First, we notice that
$-b(\xi _{n},\xi _{n})=\|\xi ^{\prime }_{n}\|^{2}$
; hence, the sequence
$(\xi ^{\prime }_{n})$
is bounded. We will now prove that the sequence
$(g_{n})$
is bounded. Let
$\epsilon>0$
such that
$\langle \xi _{\infty }+\eta ,gz\rangle \geq 0$
,
$\forall g\in G$
,
$\forall \|\eta \|\leq \epsilon $
. If
$\|\xi -\xi _{\infty }\|\leq \epsilon /2$
, we write
$\xi =\frac {1}{2}(\xi _{\infty }+ 2(\xi -\xi _{\infty }))+\frac {1}{2}\xi _{\infty }$
, and then
Now we have
$\langle \xi ^{\prime }_{n},z\rangle =\langle \xi _{n},g_{n}z\rangle \geq \frac {1}{2}\langle \xi _{\infty },g_{n}z\rangle $
if n is large enough. This shows that the sequence
$\langle \xi _{\infty },g_{n}z\rangle $
is bounded. If we use Lemma 2.3, we can conclude that the sequence
$(g_{n})$
is bounded.
Let
$(\xi ^{\prime }_{\phi (n)})$
be a subsequence converging to
$\ell \in \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
. Since
$(g_{\phi (n)})$
is bounded, there exists a subsequence
$(g_{\phi \circ \psi (n)})$
converging to
$h\in G$
. From the relations
$\xi _{\phi \circ \psi (n)}=$
$g_{\phi \circ \psi (n)}\xi ^{\prime }_{\phi \circ \psi (n)},\forall n\in \mathbb {N}$
, we obtain
$\xi _{\infty }=h\ell $
. Then
$\ell =\mathrm {p}(\xi _{\infty })= \xi _{\infty }^{\prime }$
. Since every subsequence of
$(\xi ^{\prime }_{n})$
has a subsequential limit to
$\xi _{\infty }^{\prime }$
, then the sequence
$(\xi ^{\prime }_{n})$
converges to
$\xi ^{\prime }_{\infty }$
.
2.2 The cone
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is closed
We suppose that
$G/K$
is a complex submanifold of a Hermitian symmetric space
$\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}$
. In other words,
$\tilde {G}$
is a reductive real Lie group such that
$G\subset \tilde {G}$
is a closed connected subgroup preserved by the Cartan involution, and
$\tilde {K}$
is a maximal compact subgroup of
$\tilde {G}$
containing K. We denote by
$\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}$
and
$\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}$
the Lie algebras of
$\tilde {G}$
and
$\tilde {K}$
, respectively. We suppose that there exists a
$\tilde {K}$
-invariant element
$z\in \mathfrak {k}$
such that
$\mathrm {ad}(z)\vert _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}$
defines a complex structure on
$\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}$
:
$(\mathrm {ad}(z)\vert _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}})^{2}= -Id_{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}$
.
Let
$\mathcal {C}_{\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}}\subset \tilde {\mathfrak {g}}^{*}$
be the closed invariant cone associated to the Hermitian symmetric space
$\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}$
. We start with the following key fact.
Lemma 2.5. The projection
$\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}: \tilde {\mathfrak {g}}^{*}\to \mathfrak {g}^{*}$
sends
$\mathcal {C}_{\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}}^{0}$
into
$\mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
.
Proof. Let
$\tilde {\xi }\in \mathcal {C}_{\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}}^{0}$
and
$\xi =\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}(\tilde {\xi })$
. Then
$\langle \tilde {\xi }+\tilde {\eta },\tilde {g} z\rangle \geq 0,\ \forall \tilde {g}\in \tilde {G}$
if
$\tilde {\eta }\in \tilde {\mathfrak {g}}^{*}$
is small enough. It follows that
$\langle \xi +\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}(\tilde {\eta }),g z\rangle =\langle \tilde {\xi }+\tilde {\eta },g z\rangle \geq 0,\ \forall g\in G$
if
$\tilde {\eta }$
is small enough. Since
$\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}$
is an open map, we can conclude that
$\xi \in \mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
.
Let
$\tilde {T}$
be a maximal torus of
$\tilde {K}$
, with Lie algebra
$\tilde {\mathfrak {t}}$
. The
$\tilde {G}$
-orbits in the interior of
$\mathcal {C}_{\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}}$
are parametrized by the holomorphic chamber
$\tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\subset \tilde {\mathfrak {t}}^{*}$
. The previous lemma says that the projection
$\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}(\tilde {\mathcal {O}})$
of any
$\tilde {G}$
-orbit
$\tilde {\mathcal {O}}\subset \mathcal {C}_{\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}}^{0}$
is the union of G-orbits
$\mathcal {O}\subset \mathcal {C}^{0}_{G/K}$
. So it is natural to study the following object:
Here is a first result.
Proposition 2.6.
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is a closed cone of
$\tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\times \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
.
Proof. Suppose that a sequence
$(\tilde {\xi }_{n},\xi _{n})\in \Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
converges to
$(\tilde {\xi }_{\infty },\xi _{\infty })\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\times \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. By definition, there exists a sequence
$(\tilde {g}_{n},g_{n})\in \tilde {G}\times G$
such that
$g_{n} \xi _{n}=\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}(\tilde {g}_{n}\tilde {\xi }_{n})$
. Let
$\tilde {h}_{n}:=g_{n}^{-1}\tilde {g}_{n}$
so that
$\xi _{n}=\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}(\tilde {h}_{n}\tilde {\xi }_{n})$
and
$\langle \tilde {h}_{n}\tilde {\xi }_{n}, z\rangle =\langle \xi _{n}, z\rangle $
. We use now that the sequence
$\langle \xi _{n}, z\rangle $
is bounded and that the sequence
$\tilde {\xi }_{n}$
belongs to a compact subset of
$\tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. Thanks to Lemma 2.3, these facts imply that
$\|\tilde {h}_{n}^{-1}z\|$
is a bounded sequence. Hence,
$\tilde {h}_{n}$
admits a subsequence converging to
$\tilde {h}_{\infty }$
. So we get
$\xi _{\infty }=\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}(\tilde {h}_{\infty }\tilde {\xi }_{\infty })$
, and that proves that
$(\tilde {\xi }_{\infty },\xi _{\infty })\in \Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
.
2.3 Rational and weakly regular points
Let
$(M,\Omega )$
be a symplectic manifold. We suppose that there exists a line bundle
$\mathcal {L}$
with connection
$\nabla $
that prequantizes the
$2$
-form
$\Omega $
: In other words,
$\nabla ^{2}=- i\, \Omega $
. Let K be a compact connected Lie group acting on
$\mathcal {L}\to M$
, and leaving the connection invariant. Let
$\Phi _{K}:M\to \mathfrak {k}^{*}$
be the moment map defined by Kostant’s relations
Here
$L_{X}$
is the Lie derivative acting on the sections of
$\mathcal {L}\to M$
.
Remark that relations (9) imply, via the equivariant Bianchi formula, the relations
where
$X_{M}(m) :=\frac {d}{dt}\vert _{t=0}e^{-tX}m$
is the vector field on M generated by
$X\in \mathfrak {k}$
.
Definition 2.7. Let
$\dim _{K}(M):=\min _{m\in M}\dim \mathfrak {k}_{m}$
. An element
$\xi \in \mathfrak {k}^{*}$
is a weakly regular value of
$\Phi _{K}$
if for all
$m\in \Phi _{K}^{-1}(\xi )$
we have
$\dim \mathfrak {k}_{m}=\dim _{K}(M)$
.
When
$\xi \in \mathfrak {k}^{*}$
is a weakly regular value of
$\Phi _{K}$
, the constant rank theorem tells us that
$\Phi _{K}^{-1}(\xi )$
is a submanifold of M stable under the action of the stabilizer subgroup
$K_{\xi }$
. We see then that the reduced space
is a symplectic orbifold.
Let
$T\subset K$
be a maximal torus with Lie algebra
$\mathfrak {t}$
. We consider the lattice
$\wedge :=\frac {1}{2\pi }\ker (\exp :\mathfrak {t}\to T)$
and the dual lattice
$\wedge ^{*}\subset \mathfrak {t}^{*}$
defined by
$\wedge ^{*}=\hom (\wedge ,\mathbb {Z})$
. We remark that
$i\eta $
is a differential of a character of T if and only if
$\eta \in \wedge ^{*}$
. The
$\mathbb {Q}$
-vector space generated by the lattice
$\wedge ^{*}$
is denoted by
$\mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\mathbb {Q}}$
: The vectors belonging to
$\mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\mathbb {Q}}$
are designed as rational. An affine subspace
$V\subset \mathfrak {t}^{*}$
is called rational if it is affinely generated by its rational points.
We also fix a closed positive Weyl chamber
$\mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
. For each relatively open face
$\sigma \subset \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
, the stabilizer
$K_{\xi }$
of points
$\xi \in \sigma $
under the coadjoint action does not depend on
$\xi $
and will be denoted by
$K_{\sigma }$
. The Lie algebra
$\mathfrak {k}_{\sigma }$
decomposes into its semisimple and central parts
$\mathfrak {k}_{\sigma }=[\mathfrak {k}_{\sigma },\mathfrak {k}_{\sigma }]\oplus \mathfrak {z}_{\sigma }$
. The subspace
$\mathfrak {z}_{\sigma }^{*}$
is defined to be the annihilator of
$[\mathfrak {k}_{\sigma },\mathfrak {k}_{\sigma }]$
or, equivalently, the fixed point set of the coadjoint
$K_{\sigma }$
action. Notice that
$\mathfrak {z}_{\sigma }^{*}$
is a rational subspace of
$\mathfrak {t}^{*}$
and that the face
$\sigma $
is an open cone of
$\mathfrak {z}_{\sigma }^{*}$
,
We suppose that the moment map
$\Phi _{K}$
is proper. The convexity theorem [Reference Atiyah1, Reference Guillemin and Sternberg10, Reference Kirwan16, Reference Sjamaar35, Reference Lerman, Meinrenken, Tolman and Woodward22] tells us that
$\Delta _{K}(M):=\mathrm {Image}(\Phi _{K})\, \bigcap \, \mathfrak {t}_{\geq 0}^{*}$
is a closed, convex, locally polyhedral set.
Definition 2.8. We denote by
$\Delta _{K}(M)^{0}$
the subset of
$\Delta _{K}(M)$
formed by the weakly regular values of the moment map
$\Phi _{K}$
contained in
$\Delta _{K}(M)$
.
We will use the following remark in the next sections.
Lemma 2.9. The subset
$\Delta _{K}(M)^{0}\cap \mathfrak {t}_{\mathbb {Q}}^{*}$
is dense in
$\Delta _{K}(M)$
.
Proof. Let us first explain why
$\Delta _{K}(M)^{0}$
is a dense open subset of
$\Delta _{K}(M)$
. There exists a unique open face
$\tau $
of the Weyl chamber
$\mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
such as
$\Delta _{K}(M)\cap \tau $
is dense in
$\Delta _{K}(M)$
:
$\tau $
is called the principal face in [Reference Lerman, Meinrenken, Tolman and Woodward22]. The principal-cross-section theorem [Reference Lerman, Meinrenken, Tolman and Woodward22] tells us that
$Y_{\tau } :=\Phi ^{-1}(\tau )$
is a symplectic
$K_{\tau }$
-manifold, with a trivial action of
$[K_{\tau },K_{\tau }]$
. The line bundle
$\mathcal {L}_{\tau }:=\mathcal {L}\vert _{Y_{\tau }}$
prequantizes the symplectic structure on
$Y_{\tau }$
, and relations (10) show that
$[K_{\tau },K_{\tau }]$
acts trivially on
$\mathcal {L}_{\tau }$
. Moreover, the restriction of
$\Phi _{K}$
on
$Y_{\tau }$
is the moment map
$\Phi _{\tau }: Y_{\tau }\to \mathfrak {z}_{\tau }^{*}$
associated to the action of the torus
$Z_{\tau }=\exp (\mathfrak {z}_{\tau })$
on
$\mathcal {L}_{\tau }$
.
Let
$I\subset \mathfrak {z}_{\tau }^{*}$
be the smallest affine subspace containing
$\Delta _{K}(M)$
. Let
$\mathfrak {z}_{I}\subset \mathfrak {z}_{\tau }$
be the annihilator of the subspace parallel to I: Relations (10) show that
$\mathfrak {z}_{I}$
is the generic infinitesimal stabilizer of the
$\mathfrak {z}_{\tau }$
-action on
$Y_{\tau }$
. Hence,
$\mathfrak {z}_{I}$
is the Lie algebra of the torus
$Z_{I}:=\exp (\mathfrak {z}_{I})$
.
We see then that any regular value of
$\Phi _{\tau }: Y_{\tau }\to I$
, viewed as a map with codomain I, is a weakly regular value of the moment map
$\Phi _{K}$
. It explains why
$\Delta _{K}(M)^{0}$
is a dense open subset of
$\Delta _{K}(M)$
.
As the convex set
$\Delta _{K}(M)\cap \tau $
is equal to
$\Delta _{Z_{\tau }}(Y_{\tau }):=\mathrm {Image}(\Phi _{\tau })$
, it is sufficient to check that
$\Delta _{Z_{\tau }}(Y_{\tau })^{0}\cap \mathfrak {t}_{\mathbb {Q}}^{*}$
is dense in
$\Delta _{Z_{\tau }}(Y_{\tau })$
. The subtorus
$Z_{I}\subset Z_{\tau }$
acts trivially on
$Y_{\tau }$
, and it acts on the line bundle
$\mathcal {L}_{\tau }$
through a character
$\chi $
. Let
$\eta \in \wedge ^{*}\cap \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\tau }$
such that
$d\chi =i\eta \vert _{\mathfrak {z}_{I}}$
. The affine subspace I which is equal to
$\eta +(\mathfrak {z}_{I})^{\perp }$
is rational. Since the open subset
$\Delta _{Z_{\tau }}(Y_{\tau })^{0}$
generates the rational affine subspace I, we can conclude that
$\Delta _{Z_{\tau }}(Y_{\tau })^{0}\cap \mathfrak {t}_{\mathbb {Q}}^{*}$
is dense in
$\Delta _{Z_{\tau }}(Y_{\tau })$
.
2.4 Weinstein’s theorem
Let
$\tilde {a}\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. Consider the Hamiltonian action of the group G on the coadjoint orbit
$\tilde {G}\tilde {a}$
. The moment map
$\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {a}}:\tilde {G}\tilde {a}\to \mathfrak {g}^{*}$
corresponds to the restriction of the projection
$\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}$
to
$\tilde {G}\tilde {a}$
. In this setting, the following conditions holds:
-
1. The action of G on
$\tilde {G}\tilde {a}$
is proper. -
2. The moment map
$\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {a}}$
is a proper map since the map
$\langle \Phi _{G}^{\tilde {a}},z\rangle $
is proper (see Lemma 2.3).
Conditions 1 and 2 impose that the image of
$\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {a}}$
is contained in the open subset
$\mathfrak {g}^{*}_{se}$
of strongly elliptic elements [Reference Paradan31]. Thus, the G-orbits contained in the image of
$\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {a}}$
are parametrized by the following subset of the holomorphic chamber
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
:
We notice that
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)=\bigcup _{\tilde {a}\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}}\{\tilde {a}\}\times \Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {a})$
.
Like in Definition 2.7, an element
$\xi \in \mathfrak {g}^{*}$
is a weakly regular value of
$\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {a}}$
if for all
$m\in (\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {a}})^{-1}(\xi )$
we have
$\dim \mathfrak {g}_{m}=\min _{x\in \tilde {G}\tilde {a}}\dim (\mathfrak {g}_{x})$
. We denote by
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {a})^{0}$
the set of elements
$\xi \in \Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {a})$
that are weakly regular for
$\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {a}}$
.
Theorem 2.10 (Weinstein). For any
$\tilde {a}\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
,
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {a})$
is a closed convex subset contained in
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
.
Proof. We recall briefly the arguments of the proof (see [Reference Weinstein38] or [Reference Paradan31][§2]). Under Conditions 1 and 2, one checks easily that
$Y_{\tilde {a}}:=(\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {a}})^{-1}(\mathfrak {k}^{*})$
is a smooth K-invariant symplectic submanifold of
$\tilde {G}\tilde {a}$
such that
The moment map
$\Phi _{K}^{\tilde {a}}:Y_{\tilde {a}}\to \mathfrak {k}^{*}$
, which corresponds to the restriction of the map
$\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {a}}$
to
$Y_{\tilde {a}}$
, is a proper map. Hence, the convexity theorem tells us that
$\Delta _{K}(Y_{\tilde {a}}):=\mathrm {Image}(\Phi _{K}^{\tilde {a}})\bigcap \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
is a closed, convex, locally polyhedral set. Thanks to the isomorphism (12), we see that
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {a})$
coincides with the closed convex subset
$\Delta _{K}(Y_{\tilde {a}})$
. The proof is completed.
The next lemma is used in §4.1.
Lemma 2.11. Let
$\tilde {a}\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
be a rational element. Then
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {a})^{0}\cap \mathfrak {t}_{\mathbb {Q}}^{*}$
is dense in
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {a})$
.
Proof. Thanks to equation (12), we know that
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {a})=\Delta _{K}(Y_{\tilde {a}})$
. Relation (12) shows also that
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {a})^{0}=\Delta _{K}(Y_{\tilde {a}})^{0}$
. Let
$N\geq 1$
such that
$\tilde {\mu }=N\tilde {a}\in \wedge ^{*}\cap \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. The stabilizer subgroup
$\tilde {G}_{\tilde {\mu }}$
is compact, equal to
$\tilde {K}_{\tilde {\mu }}$
. Let us denote by
$\mathbb {C}_{\tilde {\mu }}$
the one-dimensional representation of
$\tilde {K}_{\tilde {\mu }}$
associated to
$\tilde {\mu }$
. The convex set
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {a})$
is equal to
$\frac {1}{N}\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })$
, so it is sufficient to check that
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })^{0}\cap \mathfrak {t}_{\mathbb {Q}}^{*}=\Delta _{K}(Y_{\tilde {\mu }})^{0}\cap \mathfrak {t}_{\mathbb {Q}}^{*}$
is dense in
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })=\Delta _{K}(Y_{\tilde {\mu }})$
. The coadjoint orbit
$\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu }$
is prequantized by the line bundle
$\tilde {G}\times _{K_{\tilde {\mu }}}\mathbb {C}_{\tilde {\mu }}$
, and the symplectic slice
$Y_{\tilde {\mu }}$
is prequantized by the line bundle
$\mathcal {L}_{\tilde {\mu }}:=\tilde {G}\times _{K_{\tilde {\mu }}}\mathbb {C}_{\tilde {\mu }}\vert _{Y_{\tilde {\mu }}}$
. Thanks to Lemma 2.9, we know that
$\Delta _{K}(Y_{\tilde {\mu }})^{0}\cap \mathfrak {t}_{\mathbb {Q}}^{*}$
is dense in
$\Delta _{K}(Y_{\tilde {\mu }})$
: The proof is complete.
3 Holomorphic discrete series
3.1 Definition
We return to the framework of §2.1. We recall the notion of holomorphic discrete series representations associated to a Hermitian symmetric spaces
$G/K$
. Let us introduce
where
$2\rho _{n}=\sum _{\beta \in \mathfrak {R}_{n}^{+,z}}\beta $
is W-invariant.
Lemma 3.1.
-
1. We have
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}^{\rho }\subset \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. -
2. For any
$\xi \in \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
, there exists
$N\geq 1$
such that
$N\xi \in \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}^{\rho }$
.
Proof. The first point is due to the fact that
$(\beta _{0},\beta _{1})\geq 0$
for any
$\beta _{0},\beta _{1}\in \mathfrak {R}_{n}^{+,z}$
. The second point is obvious.
We will be interested in the following subset of dominant weights:
Let
$\mathrm {Sym}(\mathfrak {p})$
be the symmetric algebra of the complex K-module
$(\mathfrak {p},\mathrm {ad}(z))$
.
Theorem 3.2 (Harish–Chandra). For any
$\lambda \in \widehat {G}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
, there exists an irreducible unitary representation of G, denoted by
$V^{G}_{\lambda }$
, such that the vector space of K-finite vectors is
$V^{G}_{\lambda }\vert _{K}:=V_{\lambda }^{K}\otimes \mathrm {Sym}(\mathfrak {p})$
.
The set
$V^{G}_{\lambda },\lambda \in \widehat {G}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
corresponds to the holomorphic discrete series representations associated to the complex structure
$\mathrm {ad}(z)$
.
3.2 Restriction
We come back to the framework of §2.2. We consider two compatible Hermitian symmetric spaces
$G/K\subset \tilde {G}/\tilde {K}$
, and we look after the restriction of holomorphic discrete series representations of
$\tilde {G}$
to the subgroup G.
Let
$\tilde {\lambda }\in \widehat {\tilde {G}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. Since the representation
$V^{\tilde {G}}_{\tilde {\lambda }}$
is discretely admissible relatively to the circle group
$\exp (\mathbb {R} z)$
, it is also discretely admissible relatively to G. We can be more precise [Reference Jakobsen and Vergne15, Reference Martens24, Reference Kobayashi21]:
Proposition 3.3. We have an Hilbertian direct sum
$$ \begin{align*}V^{\tilde{G}}_{\tilde{\lambda}}\vert_{G}=\bigoplus_{\lambda\in \widehat{G}_{\mathrm{hol}}} m_{\tilde{\lambda}}^{\lambda} \ V^{G}_{\lambda}, \end{align*} $$
where the multiplicity
$m_{\tilde {\lambda }}^{\lambda } :=[V^{G}_{\lambda }:V^{\tilde {G}}_{\tilde {\lambda }}]$
is finite for any
$\lambda $
.
The Hermitian
$\tilde {K}$
-vector space
$\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}$
, when restricted to the K-action, admits an orthogonal decomposition
$\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}=\mathfrak {p}\oplus \mathfrak {q}$
. Notice that the symmetric algebra
$\mathrm {Sym}(\mathfrak {q})$
is an admissible K-module.
In [Reference Jakobsen and Vergne15], H. P. Jakobsen and M. Vergne obtained the following nice characterization of the multiplicities
$[V^{G}_{\lambda }:V^{\tilde {G}}_{\tilde {\lambda }}]$
. Another proof is given in [Reference Paradan31], §4.4.
Theorem 3.4 (Jakobsen–Vergne). Let
$(\tilde {\lambda },\lambda )\in \widehat {\tilde {G}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\times \widehat {G}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. The multiplicity
$[V^{G}_{\lambda }:V^{\tilde {G}}_{\tilde {\lambda }}]$
is equal to the multiplicity of the representation
$V^{K}_{\lambda }$
in
$\mathrm {Sym}(\mathfrak {q})\otimes V^{\tilde {K}}_{\tilde {\lambda }}\vert _{K} $
.
3.3 Discrete analogues of
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
We define the following discrete analogues of the cone
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
:
and
We have the following key fact.
Proposition 3.5.
${}$
-
•
$\Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Z}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is a subset of
$ \tilde {\wedge }^{*} \times \wedge ^{*}$
stable under the addition. -
•
$\Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is a
$\mathbb {Q}$
-convex cone of the
$\mathbb {Q}$
-vector space
$\tilde {\mathfrak {t}}^{*}_{\mathbb {Q}} \times \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\mathbb {Q}}$
.
Proof. Suppose that
$a_{1}:=(\tilde {\lambda }_{1},\lambda _{1})$
and
$a_{2}:=(\tilde {\lambda }_{2}, \lambda _{2})$
belongs to
$\Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Z}}(\tilde {G},G)$
. Thanks to Theorem 3.4, we know that the K-modules
$\mathrm {Sym}(\mathfrak {q})\otimes (V^{K}_{\lambda _{j}})^{*}\otimes V^{\tilde {K}}_{\tilde {\lambda }_{j}}\vert _{K}$
possess a nonzero invariant vector
$\phi _{j}$
, for
$j=1,2$
.
Let
$\mathbb {X}:=\overline {K/T}\times \tilde {K}/\tilde {T}$
be the product of flag manifolds. The complex structure is normalized so that
$\textbf { T}_{([e],[\tilde {e}])}\mathbb {X}\simeq \mathfrak {n}_{-}\oplus \tilde {\mathfrak {n}}_{+}$
, where
$\mathfrak {n}_{-}=\sum _{\alpha <0}(\mathfrak {k}_{\mathbb {C}})_{\alpha }$
and
$\tilde {\mathfrak {n}}_{+}=\sum _{\tilde {\alpha }>0}(\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}_{\mathbb {C}})_{\tilde {\alpha }}$
. We associate to each data
$a_{j}$
, the holomorphic line bundle
$\mathcal {L}_{j}:=K\times _{T} \mathbb {C}_{-\lambda _{j}}\boxtimes \tilde {K}\times _{\tilde {T}} \mathbb {C}_{-\tilde {\lambda }_{j}}$
on
$\mathbb {X}$
. Let
$H^{0}(\mathbb {X},\mathcal {L}_{j})$
be the space of holomorphic sections of the line bundle
$\mathcal {L}_{j}$
. The Borel–Weil theorem tells us that
$H^{0}(\mathbb {X},\mathcal {L}_{j})\simeq (V^{K}_{\lambda _{j}})^{*}\otimes V^{\tilde {K}}_{\tilde {\lambda }_{j}}\vert _{K}$
,
$\forall j\in \{1,2\}$
.
We have
$\phi _{j}\in \left [\mathrm {Sym}(\mathfrak {q})\otimes H^{0}(\mathbb {X},\mathcal {L}_{j})\right ]^{K}$
,
$\forall j$
, and then
$\phi _{1}\phi _{2}\in \mathrm {Sym}(\mathfrak {q})\otimes H^{0}(\mathbb {X},\mathcal {L}_{1}\otimes \mathcal {L}_{2})$
is a nonzero invariant vector. Hence,
$[\mathrm {Sym}(\mathfrak {q})\otimes (V^{K}_{\lambda _{1}+\lambda _{2}})^{*}\otimes V^{\tilde {K}}_{\tilde {\lambda }_{1}+\tilde {\lambda }_{2}}\vert _{K}]^{K}\neq 0$
. Thanks to Theorem 3.4, we can conclude that
$a_{1}+a_{2}=(\tilde {\lambda }_{1}+\tilde {\lambda }_{2},\lambda _{1}+\lambda _{2})$
belongs to
$\Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Z}}(\tilde {G},G)$
. The first point is proved. From the first point, one checks easily that
-
-
$\Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is stable under addition, -
-
$\Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is stable by expansion by a nonnegative rational number.
The second point is settled.
3.4 Riemann–Roch numbers
We come back to the framework of §2.3.
We associate to a dominant weight
$\mu \in \wedge ^{*}_{+}$
the (possibly singular) symplectic reduced space
$M_{\mu }:=\Phi _{K}^{-1}(\mu )/K_{\mu }$
and the (possibly singular) line bundle over
$M_{\mu }$
:
$\underline {\mbox {Suppose first that }\mu \mbox { is a weakly regular value of }\Phi _{K}.}$
Then
$M_{\mu }$
is an orbifold equipped with a symplectic structure
$\Omega _{\mu }$
, and
$\mathcal {L}_{\mu }$
is a line orbi-bundle over
$M_{\mu }$
that prequantizes the symplectic structure. By choosing an almost complex structure on
$M_{\mu }$
compatible with
$\Omega _{\mu }$
, we get a decomposition
$\wedge \textbf { T}^{*} M_{\mu }\otimes \mathbb {C} = \oplus _{i,j}\wedge ^{i,j} \textbf { T}^{*} M_{\mu }$
of the bundle of differential forms. Using Hermitian structures in the tangent bundle
$\textbf { T} M_{\mu }$
of
$M_{\mu }$
and in the fibers of
$\mathcal {L}_{\mu }$
, we define a Dolbeaut–Dirac operator
where
$\mathcal {A}^{i,j}(M_{\mu },\mathcal {L}_{\mu })=\Gamma (M_{\mu },\wedge ^{i,j} \textbf { T}^{*} M_{\mu }\otimes \mathcal {L}_{\mu })$
.
Definition 3.6. Let
$\mu \in \wedge ^{*}_{+}$
be a weakly regular value of the moment map
$\Phi _{K}$
. The Riemann–Roch number
$RR(M_{\mu },\mathcal {L}_{\mu })\in \mathbb {Z}$
is defined as the index of the elliptic operator
$D^{+}_{\mu }$
:
$RR(M_{\mu },\mathcal {L}_{\mu })= \dim (ker(D^{+}_{\mu })) -\dim (coker(D^{+}_{\mu }))$
.
$\underline {\mbox {Suppose that }\mu \notin \Delta _{K}(M).}$
Then
$M_{\mu }=\emptyset $
, and we take
$RR(M_{\mu },\mathcal {L}_{\mu })=0$
.
$\underline {\mbox {Suppose now that }\mu \in \Delta _{K}(M)\mbox { is not (necessarily) a weakly regular value of }\Phi _{K}.}$
Take a small element
$\epsilon \in \mathfrak {t}^{*}$
such that
$\mu +\epsilon $
is a weakly regular value of
$\Phi _{K}$
belonging to
$\Delta _{K}(M)$
. We consider the symplectic orbifold
$M_{\mu +\epsilon }$
: If
$\epsilon $
is small enough,
is a line orbi-bundle over
$M_{\mu +\epsilon }$
.
We have the following important result (see §3.4.3 in [Reference Paradan and Vergne34]).
Proposition 3.7. Let
$\mu \in \Delta _{K}(M)\cap \wedge ^{*}$
. The Riemann–Roch number
$RR(M_{\mu +\epsilon },\mathcal {L}_{\mu ,\epsilon })$
do not depend on the choice of
$\epsilon $
small enough so that
$\mu +\epsilon \in \Delta _{K}(M)$
is a weakly regular value of
$\Phi _{K}$
.
We can now introduce the following definition.
Definition 3.8. Let
$\mu \in \wedge ^{*}_{+}$
. We define
$$ \begin{align*}\mathcal{Q}(M_{\mu},\Omega_{\mu})= \begin{cases} 0 \hspace{26.5mm} \mathrm{if }\quad \mu\notin \Delta_{K}(M),\\ RR(M_{\mu+\epsilon},\mathcal{L}_{\mu,\epsilon})\hspace{4mm} \mathrm{if }\quad \mu\in \Delta_{K}(M). \end{cases} \end{align*} $$
Above,
$\epsilon $
is chosen small enough so that
$\mu +\epsilon \in \Delta _{K}(M)$
is a weakly regular value of
$\Phi _{K}$
.
Let
$n\geq 1$
. The manifold M, equipped with the symplectic structure
$n\Omega $
, is prequantized by the line bundle
$\mathcal {L}^{\otimes n}$
: The corresponding moment map is
$n\Phi _{K}$
. For any dominant weight
$\mu \in \wedge ^{*}_{+}$
, the symplectic reduction of
$(M,n\Omega )$
relatively to the weight
$n\mu $
is
$(M_{\mu },n\Omega _{\mu })$
. Like in Definition 3.8, we consider the following Riemann–Roch numbers
$$ \begin{align*}\mathcal{Q}(M_{\mu},n\Omega_{\mu})= \begin{cases} 0 \hspace{33.4mm} \mathrm{if }\quad \mu\notin \Delta_{K}(M),\\ RR(M_{\mu+\epsilon},(\mathcal{L}_{\mu,\epsilon})^{\otimes n})\hspace{4mm} \mathrm{if }\quad \mu\in \Delta_{K}(M)\ \mathrm{and} \ \|\epsilon\|<<1. \end{cases} \end{align*} $$
The Kawasaki–Riemann–Roch formula shows that
$n\geq 1\mapsto \mathcal {Q}(M_{\mu },n\Omega _{\mu })$
is a quasi-polynomial map [Reference Vergne37, Reference Loizides23]. When
$\mu $
is a weakly regular value of
$\Phi _{K}$
, we denote by
$\mathrm {vol}(M_{\mu }):=\frac {1}{d_{\mu }}\int _{M_{\mu }}(\frac {\Omega _{\mu }}{2\pi })^{\frac {\dim M_{\mu }}{2}}$
the symplectic volume of the symplectic orbifold
$(M_{\mu },\Omega _{\mu })$
. Here,
$d_{\mu }$
is the generic value of the map
$m\in \Phi _{K}^{-1}(\mu )\mapsto \mathrm {cardinal}(K_{m}/K^{0}_{m})$
.
The following proposition is a direct consequence of the Kawasaki–Riemann–Roch formula (see [Reference Loizides23] or §1.3.4 in [Reference Paradan30]).
Proposition 3.9. Let
$\mu \in \Delta _{K}(M)\cap \wedge ^{*}_{+}$
be a weakly regular value of
$\Phi _{K}$
. Then we have
$\mathcal {Q}(M_{\mu },n\Omega _{\mu })\ \sim \ \mathrm {vol}(M_{\mu }) \,n^{\frac {\dim M_{\mu }}{2}}$
when
$n\to \infty $
. In particular, the map
$n\geq 1\mapsto \mathcal {Q}(M_{\mu },n\Omega _{\mu })$
is nonzero.
3.5 Quantization commutes with reduction
Let us explain the “quantization commutes with reduction” theorem proved in [Reference Paradan31].
We fix
$\tilde {\lambda }\in \widehat {\tilde {G}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. The coadjoint orbit
$\tilde {G}\tilde {\lambda }$
is prequantized by the line bundle
$\tilde {G}\times _{K_{\tilde {\lambda }}}\mathbb {C}_{\tilde {\lambda }}$
, and the moment map
$\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {\lambda }}:\tilde {G}\tilde {\lambda }\to \mathfrak {g}^{*}$
corresponding to the G-action on
$\tilde {G}\times _{K_{\tilde {\lambda }}}\mathbb {C}_{\tilde {\lambda }}$
is equal to the restriction of the map
$\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}$
to
$\tilde {G}\tilde {\lambda }$
.
The symplectic slice
$Y_{\tilde {\lambda }}=(\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {\lambda }})^{-1}(\mathfrak {k}^{*})$
is prequantized by the line bundle
$\mathcal {L}_{\tilde {\lambda }}:=\tilde {G}\times _{K_{\tilde {\lambda }}}\mathbb {C}_{\tilde {\lambda }}\vert _{Y_{\tilde {\lambda }}}$
. The moment map
$\Phi _{K}^{\tilde {\lambda }}:Y_{\tilde {\lambda }}\to \mathfrak {k}^{*}$
corresponding to the K-action is equal to the restriction of
$\Phi _{G}^{\tilde {\lambda }}$
to
$Y_{\tilde {\lambda }}$
.
For any
$\lambda \in \widehat {G}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
, we consider the (possibly singular) symplectic reduced space
equipped with the reduced symplectic form
$\Omega _{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda }$
, and the (possibly singular) line bundle
Thanks to Definition 3.8, the geometric quantization
$\mathcal {Q}(\mathbb {X}_{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda },\Omega _{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda })\in \mathbb {Z}$
of those compact symplectic spaces
$(\mathbb {X}_{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda },\Omega _{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda })$
are well-defined even if they are singular. In particular,
$\mathcal {Q}(\mathbb {X}_{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda },\Omega _{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda })=0$
when
$\mathbb {X}_{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda }=\emptyset $
.
The following theorem is proved in [Reference Paradan31].
Theorem 3.10. Let
$\tilde {\lambda }\in \widehat {\tilde {G}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. We have an Hilbertian direct sum
$$ \begin{align*}V^{\tilde{G}}_{\tilde{\lambda}}\vert_{G}=\bigoplus_{\lambda\in \widehat{G}_{\mathrm{hol}}} \mathcal{Q}(\mathbb{X}_{\tilde{\lambda},\lambda},\Omega_{\tilde{\lambda},\lambda}) \ V^{G}_{\lambda}. \end{align*} $$
It means that, for any
$\lambda \in \widehat {G}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
, the multiplicity of the representation
$V^{G}_{\lambda }$
in the restriction
$V^{\tilde {G}}_{\tilde {\lambda }}\vert _{G}$
is equal to the geometric quantization
$\mathcal {Q}(\mathbb {X}_{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda },\Omega _{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda })$
of the (compact) reduced space
$\mathbb {X}_{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda }$
.
Remark 3.11. Let
$({\tilde {\lambda },\lambda })\in \widehat {\tilde {G}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\times \widehat {G}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. Theorem 3.10. shows that
for any
$n\geq 1$
.
4 Proofs of the main results
We come back to the setting of §2.2:
$G/K$
is a complex submanifold of a Hermitian symmetric space
$\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}$
. It means that there exits a
$\tilde {K}$
-invariant element
$z\in \mathfrak {k}$
such that
$\mathrm {ad}(z)$
defines complex structures on
$\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}$
and
$\mathfrak {p}$
. We consider the orthogonal decomposition
$\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}=\mathfrak {p}\oplus \mathfrak {q}$
, and we denote by
$\mathrm {Sym}(\mathfrak {q})$
the symmetric algebra of the complex K-module
$(\mathfrak {q},\mathrm {ad}(z))$
.
4.1 Proof of Theorem A
The set
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is equal to
$\bigcup _{\tilde {a}\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}}\{\tilde {a}\}\times \Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {a})$
. We define
$$ \begin{align*}\Delta_{\mathrm{hol}}(\tilde{G},G)^{0}:=\bigcup_{\tilde{a}\in \tilde{\mathcal{C}}_{\mathrm{hol}}} \{\tilde{a}\} \times \Delta_{G}(\tilde{G}\tilde{a})^{0}. \end{align*} $$
We start with the following result.
Lemma 4.1. The set
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)^{0}\bigcap \tilde {\mathfrak {t}}^{*}_{\mathbb {Q}} \times \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\mathbb {Q}}$
is dense in
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
.
Proof. Let
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi )\in \Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
: take
$\tilde {g}\in \tilde {G}$
such that
$\xi =\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}(\tilde {g}\tilde {\xi })$
. We consider a sequence
$\tilde {\xi }_{n}\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\cap \tilde {\mathfrak {t}}^{*}_{\mathbb {Q}}$
converging to
$\tilde {\xi }$
. Then
$\xi _{n}:=\pi _{\mathfrak {g},\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}}(\tilde {g}\tilde {\xi }_{n})$
is a sequence of
$\mathcal {C}^{0}_{G/K}$
converging to
$\xi \in \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. Since the map
$\mathrm {p}: \mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}\to \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
is continuous (see Lemma 2.4), the sequence
$\eta _{n}:=\mathrm{p}(\xi _{n})$
converges to
$\mathrm {p}(\xi )=\xi $
. By definition, we have
$\eta _{n}\in \Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\,\tilde {\xi }_{n})$
for any
$n\in \mathbb {N}$
. Since
$\tilde {\xi }_{n}$
are rational, each subset
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\xi }_{n})^{0}\cap \mathfrak {t}_{\mathbb {Q}}^{*}$
is dense in
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\xi }_{n})$
(see Lemma 2.11). Hence,
$\forall n\in \mathbb {N}$
, there exists
$\zeta _{n}\in \Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\,\tilde {\xi }_{n})^{0}\cap \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\mathbb {Q}}$
such that
$\|\zeta _{n}-\eta _{n}\|\leq 2^{-n}$
. Finally, we see that
$(\tilde {\xi }_{n},\zeta _{n})$
is a sequence of rational elements of
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)^{0}$
converging to
$(\xi ,\tilde {\xi })$
.
The main purpose of this section is the proof of the following theorem.
Theorem 4.2. For any rational element
$(\tilde {\mu },\mu )$
of the holomorphic chamber
$\tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\times \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
, the following statements hold:
-
• If
$\mu \in \Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })^{0}$
, then
$(\tilde {\mu },\mu )\in \Pi ^{\mathbb {Q}}_{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
. -
• If
$(\tilde {\mu },\mu )\in \Pi ^{\mathbb {Q}}_{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
, then
$\mu \in \Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })$
.
In other words, we have the following inclusions:
Lemma 4.1 and Theorem 4.2 gives the important corollary.
Corollary 4.3.
$\Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is dense in
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
.
Proof of Theorem 4.2
Let
$(\tilde {\mu },\mu )\in \Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {G},G)$
: There exists
$N\geq 1$
such that
$(N\tilde {\mu },N\mu )\in \Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Z}}(\tilde {G},G)$
. The multiplicity
$[V^{G}_{N\mu }:V^{\tilde {G}}_{N\tilde {\mu }}]$
is nonzero, and thanks to Theorem 3.10, it implies that the reduced space
$\mathbb {X}_{N\tilde {\mu },N\mu }$
is nonempty. In other words,
$(N\tilde {\mu },N\mu )\in \Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
. The inclusion
$(2)$
is proven.
Let
$(\tilde {\mu },\mu )\in \Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)^{0}\bigcap \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\mathbb {Q}}\times \tilde {\mathfrak {t}}^{*}_{\mathbb {Q}}$
. There exists
$N_{o}\geq 1$
such that
$\lambda :=N_{o}\mu \in \widehat {G}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
,
$\tilde {\lambda }:=N_{o}\tilde {\mu }\in \widehat {\tilde {G}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
and
$\lambda \in \Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\lambda })^{0}$
: The element
$\lambda $
is a weakly regular value of the moment map
$\tilde {G}\tilde {\lambda }\to \mathfrak {g}^{*}$
. Theorem 3.10 tells us that, for any
$n\geq 1$
, the multiplicity
$[V^{G}_{n\lambda }:V^{\tilde {G}}_{n\tilde {\lambda }}]$
is equal to Riemann–Roch number
$\mathcal {Q}(\mathbb {X}_{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda }, n\Omega _{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda })$
. Since the map
$n\mapsto \mathcal {Q}(\mathbb {X}_{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda }, n\Omega _{\tilde {\lambda },\lambda })$
is nonzero (see Proposition 3.9), we can conclude that there exists
$n_{o}\geq 1$
such that
$[V^{G}_{n_{o}\lambda }:V^{\tilde {G}}_{n_{o}\tilde {\lambda }}]\neq 0$
. In other words, we obtain
$n_{o}N_{o}(\tilde {\mu },\mu )\in \Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Z}}(\tilde {G},G)$
and so
$(\tilde {\mu },\mu )\in \Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {G},G)$
. The inclusion
$(1)$
is settled.
Now we can terminate the proof of Theorem A.
Thanks to Proposition 3.5, we know that
$\Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is a
$\mathbb {Q}$
-convex cone. Since
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is a closed subset of
$\tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\times \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
(see Proposition 2.6), we can conclude, by a density argument, that
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is a closed convex cone of
$\tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\times \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
.
4.2 The affine variety
$\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}\times \mathfrak {q}$
Let
$\tilde {\kappa }$
be the Killing form on the Lie algebra
$\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}$
. We consider the
$\tilde {K}$
-invariant symplectic structures
$\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}$
on
$\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}$
, defined by the relation
We notice that the complex structure
$\mathrm {ad}(z)$
is adapted to
$\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}$
:
$\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}(\tilde {Y},\mathrm {ad}(z)\tilde {Y})>0$
if
$\tilde {Y}\neq 0$
.
We denote by
$\Omega _{\mathfrak {q}}$
the restriction of
$\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}$
on the symplectic subspace
$\mathfrak {q}$
. The moment map
$\Phi _{\mathfrak {q}}$
associated to the K-action on
$(\mathfrak {q}, \Omega _{\mathfrak {q}})$
is defined by the relations
$\langle \Phi _{\mathfrak {q}}(Y),X\rangle = \frac {-1}{2}\tilde {\kappa }([X,Y],[z,Y])$
,
$\forall (X,Y) \in \mathfrak {p}\times \mathfrak {q}$
. In particular,
$\langle \Phi _{\mathfrak {q}}(Y),z\rangle = \frac {-1}{2}\|Y\|^{2}$
,
$\forall Y \in \mathfrak {q}$
, so the map
$\langle \Phi _{\mathfrak {q}},z\rangle $
is proper.
The complex reductive group
$\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}$
is equipped with the following action of
$\tilde {K}\times K$
:
$(\tilde {k},k)\cdot a= \tilde {k} a k^{-1}$
. It has a canonical structure of a smooth affine variety. There is a diffeomorphism of the cotangent bundle
$\textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}$
with
$\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}$
defined as follows. We identify
$\textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}$
with
$\tilde {K}\times \tilde {\mathfrak {k}}^{*}$
by means of left-translation and then with
$\tilde {K}\times \tilde {\mathfrak {k}}$
by means of an invariant inner product on
$\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}$
. The map
$\varphi :\tilde {K}\times \tilde {\mathfrak {k}}\to \tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}$
given by
$\varphi (a,X)=a e^{iX}$
is a diffeomorphism. If we use
$\varphi $
to transport the complex structure of
$\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}$
to
$\textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}$
, then the resulting complex structure on
$\textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}$
is compatible with the symplectic structure on
$\textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}$
so that
$\textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}$
becomes a Kähler Hamiltonian
$\tilde {K}\times K$
-manifold (see [Reference Hall11], §3). The moment map relative to the
$\tilde {K}\times K$
-action is the proper map
$\Phi _{\tilde {K}} \oplus \Phi _{K} : \textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K} \to \tilde {\mathfrak {k}}^{*}\oplus \mathfrak {k}^{*}$
defined by
$\Phi _{\tilde {K}}(\tilde {a},\tilde {\eta })=-\tilde {a}\tilde {\eta }$
and
$\Phi _{K}(\tilde {a},\tilde {\eta })=\pi _{\mathfrak {k},\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}}(\tilde {\eta })$
. Here
$\pi _{\mathfrak {k},\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}}: \tilde {\mathfrak {k}}^{*} \to \mathfrak {k}^{*}$
is the projection dual to the inclusion
$\mathfrak {k} \hookrightarrow \tilde {\mathfrak {k}}$
of Lie algebras.
Finally, we consider the Kähler Hamiltonian
$\tilde {K}\times K$
-manifold
$\textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q}$
, where
$\mathfrak {q}$
is equipped with the symplectic structure
$\Omega _{\mathfrak {q}}$
. Let us denote by
$\Phi : \textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q}\to \tilde {\mathfrak {k}}^{*}\oplus \mathfrak {k}^{*}$
the moment map relative to the
$\tilde {K}\times K$
-action:
Since
$\Phi $
is proper map, the convexity theorem tells us that
is a closed convex locally polyhedral set.
We consider now the action of
$\tilde {K}\times K$
on the affine variety
$\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}\times \mathfrak {q}$
. The set of highest weights of
$\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}\times \mathfrak {q}$
is the semigroup
$\Pi ^{\mathbb {Z}}(\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}\times \mathfrak {q})\subset \tilde {\wedge }^{*}_{+}\times \wedge ^{*}_{+}$
consisting of all dominant weights
$(\tilde {\lambda },\lambda )$
such that the irreducible
$\tilde {K}\times K$
-representation
$V_{\tilde {\lambda }}^{\tilde {K}}\otimes V_{\lambda }^{K}$
occurs in the coordinate ring
$\mathbb {C}[\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}\times \mathfrak {q}]$
. We denote by
$\Pi ^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}\times \mathfrak {q})$
the
$\mathbb {Q}$
-convex cone generated by the semigroup
$\Pi ^{\mathbb {Z}}(\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}\times \mathfrak {q})$
:
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi )\in \Pi ^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}\times \mathfrak {q})$
if and only if
$\exists N\geq 1$
,
$N(\tilde {\xi },\xi )\in \Pi ^{\mathbb {Z}}(\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}\times \mathfrak {q})$
.
The following important fact is classical (see Theorem 4.9 in [Reference Sjamaar35]).
Proposition 4.4. The Kirwan polyhedron
$\Delta (\textbf{T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q})$
is equal to the closure of the
$\mathbb {Q}$
-convex cone
$\Pi ^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}\times \mathfrak {q})$
.
A direct application of the Peter–Weyl theorem gives the following characterization:
$$ \begin{align} (\tilde{\lambda},\lambda)\in\Pi^{\mathbb{Z}}(\tilde{K}_{\mathbb{C}}\times \mathfrak{q})&\Longleftrightarrow \left[ V^{\tilde{K}}_{\tilde{\lambda}}\vert_{K}\otimes V^{K}_{\lambda}\otimes \mathrm{Sym}(\mathfrak{q}) \right]^{K}\neq 0\\ &\Longleftrightarrow \left[ V^{K}_{\lambda^{*}} : V^{\tilde{K}}_{\tilde{\lambda}}\vert_{K}\otimes \mathrm{Sym}(\mathfrak{q}) \right]\neq 0\nonumber\\ &\Longleftrightarrow (\tilde{\lambda},\lambda^{*})\in \Pi^{\mathbb{Z}}_{\mathfrak{q}}(\tilde{K},K).\nonumber \end{align} $$
4.3 Proof of Theorem B
Consider the semigroup
$\Pi ^{\mathbb {Z}}_{\mathfrak {q}}(\tilde {K},K)$
of
$\tilde {\wedge }^{*}_{+} \times \wedge ^{*}_{+}$
(see Definition 1.3) and the
$\mathbb {Q}$
-convex cone
$\Pi ^{\mathbb {Q}}_{\mathfrak {q}}(\tilde {K},K):=\{(\tilde {\xi },\xi )\in \tilde {\mathfrak {t}}^{*}_{\geq 0}\times \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0} \; \ \exists N\geq 1, N(\tilde {\xi },\xi )\in \Pi ^{\mathbb {Z}}_{\mathfrak {q}}(\tilde {K},K)\}$
.
The Jakobsen–Vergne theorem says that
$\Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Z}}(\tilde {G},G)=\Pi ^{\mathbb {Z}}_{\mathfrak {q}}(\tilde {K},K)\,\bigcap \, \widehat {\tilde {G}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\times \widehat {G}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. Hence, the convex cone
$\Pi _{\mathrm {hol}}^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {G},G)$
is equal to
$\Pi ^{\mathbb {Q}}_{\mathfrak {q}}(\tilde {K},K)\cap \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\times \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. Thanks to equation (16), we know that
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi )\in \Pi ^{\mathbb {Q}}_{\mathfrak {q}}(\tilde {K},K)$
if and only if
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi ^{*})\in \Pi ^{\mathbb {Q}}(\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}\times \mathfrak {q})$
. The density results obtained in Proposition 4.4 and Corollary 4.3 gives finally Theorem B.
4.4 Proof of Theorem C
We denote by
$\bar {\mathfrak {q}}$
the K-vector space
$\mathfrak {q}$
equipped with the opposite symplectic form
$-\Omega _{\mathfrak {q}}$
and opposite complex structure
$-\mathrm {ad}(z)$
. The moment map relative to the K-action on
$\bar {\mathfrak {q}}$
is denoted by
$\Phi _{\bar {\mathfrak {q}}}=-\Phi _{\mathfrak {q}}$
.
Lemma 4.5. Any element
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi )\in \tilde {\mathfrak {t}}^{*}_{\geq 0}\times \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
satisfies the equivalence
Proof. Thanks to equation (15), we see immediatly that
$\exists (\tilde {a},\tilde {\eta },Y)\in \textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q}$
such that
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi ^{*})=\Phi (\tilde {a},\tilde {\eta },Y)$
if and only if
$\exists (\tilde {b},Z)\in \tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q}$
such that
$\xi =\pi _{\mathfrak {k},\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}}(\tilde {b}\tilde {\xi })+\Phi _{\bar {\mathfrak {q}}}(Z)$
.
At this stage, we know that
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })=\Delta _{K}(\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }\times \overline {\mathfrak {q}})\cap \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. Hence, Theorem C will follow from the next result.
Proposition 4.6. For any
$\tilde {\mu }\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
, the Kirwan polyhedron
$\Delta _{K}(\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }\times \overline {\mathfrak {q}})$
is contained in
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
.
Proof. By definition
$\mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}=\mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}\cap \mathfrak {t}^{*}_{\geq 0}$
, so we have to prove that
$\pi _{\mathfrak {k},\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}}(\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu })+ \mathrm {Image}( \Phi _{\bar {\mathfrak {q}}})$
is contained in
$\mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
. By definition
$\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }\subset \mathcal {C}_{\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}}^{0}$
, and then
$\pi _{\mathfrak {k},\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}}(\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu })\subset \mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
. Since
$\mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0} +\mathcal {C}_{G/K}\subset \mathcal {C}_{G/K}^{0}$
, it is sufficient to check that
$\mathrm {Image}( \Phi _{\bar {\mathfrak {q}}})\subset \mathcal {C}_{G/K}$
. Let
$\Phi _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}$
be the moment map relative to the action of
$\tilde {K}$
on
$(\tilde {\mathfrak {p}},\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}})$
. As
$\mathrm {Image}( \Phi _{\bar {\mathfrak {q}}})\subset \pi _{\mathfrak {k},\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}}\left (\mathrm {Image}( -\Phi _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}})\right )$
, the following lemma will terminate the proof of Proposition 4.6.
Lemma 4.7. The image of the moment map
$-\Phi _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}$
is contained in
$\mathcal {C}_{\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}}$
.
Proof. Let
$z^{*}\in \tilde {\mathfrak {t}}^{*}$
such that
$\langle z^{*},\tilde {X}\rangle = -\tilde {\kappa }(z,\tilde {X})$
,
$\forall \tilde {X}\in \tilde {\mathfrak {g}}$
. Consider the coadjoint orbit
$\tilde {\mathcal {O}}=\tilde {G} z^{*}$
equipped with its canonical symplectic structure
$\Omega _{\tilde {\mathcal {O}}}$
: The symplectic vector space
$\textbf { T}_{z^{*}}\tilde {\mathcal {O}}$
is canonically isomorphic to
$(\tilde {\mathfrak {p}},-\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}})$
. In [Reference McDuff26], McDuff proved that
$(\tilde {\mathcal {O}},\Omega _{\tilde {\mathcal {O}}})$
is diffeomorphic, as a
$\tilde {K}$
-symplectic manifold, to the symplectic vector space
$(\tilde {\mathfrak {p}},-\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}})$
(see [Reference Deltour6, Reference Deltour8] for a generalization of this fact). McDuff’s results show in particular that
$\mathrm {Image}(-\Phi _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}})=\pi _{\tilde {\mathfrak {g}},\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}}(\tilde {\mathcal {O}})$
. Our proof is completed if we check that
$\pi _{\tilde {\mathfrak {g}},\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}}(\tilde {\mathcal {O}})\subset \mathcal {C}_{\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}}$
: In other words, if
$\langle \pi _{\tilde {\mathfrak {g}},\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}}(\tilde {g}_{0}\, z^{*}),\tilde {g}_{1}z\rangle \geq 0$
,
$\forall \tilde {g}_{0},\tilde {g}_{1}\in \tilde {G}$
. But
$$ \begin{align*} 2\langle\pi_{\tilde{\mathfrak{g}},\tilde{\mathfrak{k}}}(\tilde{g}_{0}\, z^{*}),\tilde{g}_{1}\,z\rangle &= \langle\tilde{g}_{0}\, z^{*},\tilde{g}_{1}z+\Theta(\tilde{g}_{1})z\rangle\\ &= -\tilde{\kappa}(z,\tilde{g}_{0}^{-1}\tilde{g}_{1}\, z)-\tilde{\kappa}(z,\tilde{g}_{0}^{-1}\Theta(\tilde{g}_{1})z). \end{align*} $$
With equation (7) in hand, it is not difficult to see that
$-\tilde {\kappa }(z,\tilde {g}\, z)\geq 0$
for every
$\tilde {g}\in \tilde {G}$
. We thus verified that
$\pi _{\tilde {\mathfrak {g}},\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}}(\tilde {\mathcal {O}})\subset \mathcal {C}_{\tilde {G}/\tilde {K}}$
.
5 Inequalities characterizing the cones
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
We come back to the framework of §4.2. We consider the Kähler Hamiltonian
$\tilde {K}\times K$
-manifold
$\textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q}$
. The moment map,
$\Phi : \textbf { T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q}\to \tilde {\mathfrak {k}}^{*}\oplus \mathfrak {k}^{*}$
, relative to the
$\tilde {K}\times K$
-action, is defined by equation (15).
In this section, we adapt to our case the result of §6 of [Reference Paradan32] concerning the parametrization of the facets of Kirwan polyhedrons in terms of Ressayre’s data.
5.1 Admissible elements
We choose maximal tori
$\tilde {T}\subset \tilde {K}$
and
$T\subset K$
such that
$T\subset \tilde {T}$
. Let
$\mathfrak {R}_{o}$
and
$\mathfrak {R}$
be, respectively, the set of roots for the action of T on
$(\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}/\mathfrak {g})\otimes \mathbb {C}$
and
$\mathfrak {g}\otimes \mathbb {C}$
. Let
$\tilde {\mathfrak {R}}$
be the set of roots for the action of
$\tilde {T}$
on
$\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}\otimes \mathbb {C}$
. Let
$\mathfrak {R}^{+}\subset \mathfrak {R}$
and
$\tilde {\mathfrak {R}}^{+}\subset \tilde {\mathfrak {R}}$
be the systems of positive roots defined in equation (6). Let
$W,\tilde {W}$
be the Weyl groups of
$(T,K)$
and
$(\tilde {T},\tilde {K})$
. Let
$w_{o}\in W$
be the longest element.
We start by introducing the notion of admissible elements. The group
$\hom (U(1),T)$
admits a natural identification with the lattice
$\wedge :=\frac {1}{2\pi }\ker (\exp :\mathfrak {t}\to T)$
. A vector
$\gamma \in \mathfrak {t}$
is called rational if it belongs to the
$\mathbb {Q}$
-vector space
$\mathfrak {t}_{\mathbb {Q}}$
generated by
$\wedge $
.
We consider the
$\tilde {K}\times K$
-action on
$N:=\textbf { T}^{*} \tilde {K} \times \mathfrak {q}$
. We associate to any subset
$\mathcal {X}\subset N$
, the integer
$\dim _{\tilde {K}\times K}(\mathcal {X})$
(see equation (5)).
Definition 5.1. A nonzero element
$(\tilde {\gamma },\gamma )\in \tilde {\mathfrak {t}}\times \mathfrak {t}$
is called admissible if the elements
$\tilde {\gamma }$
and
$\gamma $
are rational and if
$\dim _{\tilde {K}\times K}(N^{(\tilde {\gamma },\gamma )})-\dim _{\tilde {K}\times K}(N)\in \{0,1\}$
.
If
$\gamma \in \mathfrak {t}$
, we denote by
$\mathfrak {R}_{o}\cap \gamma ^{\perp }$
the subsets of weight vanishing against
$\gamma $
. We start with the following lemma whose proof is left to the reader (see §6.1.1 of [Reference Paradan32]).
Lemma 5.2.
-
1.
$N^{(\tilde {\gamma },\gamma )}\neq \emptyset $
if and only if
$\tilde {\gamma }\in \tilde {W}\gamma $
. -
2.
$\dim _{\tilde {K}\times K}(N)=\dim _{T}(\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}/\mathfrak {g})=\dim (\mathfrak {t})-\dim (\mathrm {Vect}(\mathfrak {R}_{o}))$
. -
3. For any
$\tilde {w}\in \tilde {W}$
,
$\dim _{\tilde {K}\times K}(N^{(\tilde {w}\gamma ,\gamma )})= \dim _{T}(\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}^{\gamma }/\mathfrak {g}^{\gamma })=\dim (\mathfrak {t})-\dim (\mathrm {Vect}(\mathfrak {R}_{o}\cap \gamma ^{\perp }))$
.
The next result is a direct consequence of the previous lemma.
Lemma 5.3. The admissible elements relative to the
$\tilde {K}\times K$
-action on
$\textbf { T}^{*} \tilde {K} \times \mathfrak {q}$
are of the form
$(\tilde {w}\gamma ,\gamma )$
, where
$\tilde {w}\in \tilde {W}$
and
$\gamma $
is a nonzero rational element satisfying
$\mathrm {Vect}(\mathfrak {R}_{o})\cap \gamma ^{\perp }=\mathrm {Vect}(\mathfrak {R}_{o}\cap \gamma ^{\perp })$
.
5.2 Ressayre’s data
Definition 5.4.
-
1. Consider the linear action
$\rho : G\to \mathrm {GL}_{\mathbb {C}}(V)$
of a compact Lie group on a complex vector space V. For any
$(\eta ,a)\in \mathfrak {g}\times \mathbb {R}$
, we define the vector subspace
$V^{\eta =a}=\{v\in V, d\rho (\eta )v=i av\}$
. Thus, for any
$\eta \in \mathfrak {g}$
, we have the decomposition
$V=V^{\eta>0}\oplus V^{\eta =0}\oplus V^{\eta <0}$
, where
$V^{\eta>0}=\sum _{a>0}V^{\eta =a}$
, and
$V^{\eta <0}=\sum _{a<0}V^{\eta =a}$
. -
2. The real number
$\operatorname {Tr}_{\eta }(V^{\eta>0})$
is defined as the sum
$\sum _{a>0}a\,\dim (V^{\eta =a})$
.
We consider an admissible element
$(\tilde {w}\gamma ,\gamma )$
. The submanifold of
$N\simeq \tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}} \times \mathfrak {q}$
fixed by
$(\tilde {w}\gamma ,\gamma )$
is
$N^{(\tilde {w}\gamma ,\gamma )}= \tilde {w} \tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}^{\gamma } \times \mathfrak {q}^{\gamma }$
. There is a canonical isomorphism between the manifold
$N^{(\tilde {w}\gamma ,\gamma )}$
equipped with the action of
$\tilde {w}\tilde {K}^{\gamma } \tilde {w}^{-1}\times K^{\gamma }$
with the manifold
$\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}^{\gamma } \times \mathfrak {q}^{\gamma }$
equipped with the action of
$\tilde {K}^{\gamma } \times K^{\gamma }$
. The tangent bundle
$(\textbf { T} N\vert _{N^{(\tilde {w}\gamma ,\gamma )}})^{(\tilde {w}\gamma ,\gamma )>0}$
is isomorphic to
$N^{\gamma _{w}}\times \tilde {\mathfrak {k}}_{\mathbb {C}}^{\gamma>0}\times \mathfrak {q}^{\gamma >0}$
.
The choice of positive roots
$\mathfrak {R}^{+}$
(resp.
$\tilde {\mathfrak {R}}^{+}$
) induces a decomposition
$\mathfrak {k}_{\mathbb {C}}=\mathfrak {n}\oplus \mathfrak {t}_{\mathbb {C}}\oplus \overline {\mathfrak {n}}$
(resp.
$\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}_{\mathbb {C}}=\tilde {\mathfrak {n}}\oplus \tilde {\mathfrak {t}}_{\mathbb {C}}\oplus \overline {\tilde {\mathfrak {n}}}$
), where
$\mathfrak {n}=\sum _{\alpha \in \mathfrak {R}^{+}}(\mathfrak {k}\otimes \mathbb {C})_{\alpha }$
(resp.
$\tilde {\mathfrak {n}}=\sum _{\tilde {\alpha }\in \tilde {\mathfrak {R}}^{+}}(\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}\otimes \mathbb {C})_{\tilde {\alpha }}$
). We consider the map
defined by the relation
for any
$(\tilde {x},v)\in \tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}^{\gamma } \times \mathfrak {q}^{\gamma }$
.
Definition 5.5.
$(\gamma ,\tilde {w})\in \mathfrak {t}\times \tilde {W}$
is a Ressayre’s datum if
-
1.
$(\tilde {w}\gamma ,\gamma )$
is admissible, -
2.
$\exists (\tilde {x},v)$
such that
$\rho ^{\tilde {w},\gamma }(\tilde {x},v)$
is bijective.
Remark 5.6. In [Reference Paradan32], the Ressayre’s data were called regular infinitesimal B-Ressayre’s pairs.
Since the linear map
$\rho ^{\tilde {w},\gamma }(\tilde {x},v)$
commutes with the
$\gamma $
-actions, we obtain the following necessary conditions.
Lemma 5.7. If
$(\gamma ,\tilde {w})\in \mathfrak {t}\times \tilde {W}$
is a Ressayre’s datum, then
-
• Relation (A):
$\dim (\tilde {\mathfrak {n}}^{\tilde {w}\gamma>0})+\dim (\mathfrak {n}^{\gamma >0})=\dim (\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}_{\mathbb {C}}^{\gamma >0})+\dim (\mathfrak {q}^{\gamma >0})$
. -
• Relation (B):
$\operatorname {Tr}_{\tilde {w}\gamma }(\tilde {\mathfrak {n}}^{\tilde {w}\gamma>0})+\operatorname {Tr}_{\gamma }(\mathfrak {n}^{\gamma >0})= \operatorname {Tr}_{\gamma }(\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}_{\mathbb {C}}^{\gamma >0})+\operatorname {Tr}_{\gamma }(\mathfrak {q}^{\gamma >0})$
.
Lemma 5.8. Relation (B) is equivalent to
$$ \begin{align} \sum_{\stackrel{\alpha\in\mathfrak{R}^{+}}{\langle\alpha,\gamma\rangle> 0}}\langle\alpha,\gamma\rangle= \sum_{\stackrel{\tilde{\alpha}\in\tilde{\mathfrak{R}}^{+}}{\langle\tilde{\alpha},\tilde{w}_{0}\tilde{w}\gamma\rangle> 0}}\langle\tilde{\alpha},\tilde{w}_{0}\tilde{w}\gamma\rangle. \end{align} $$
Proof. First, one sees that
$\operatorname {Tr}_{\gamma }(\mathfrak {q}^{\gamma>0})=\operatorname {Tr}_{\gamma }(\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}^{\gamma >0})-\operatorname {Tr}_{\gamma }(\mathfrak {p}^{\gamma >0})= \sum _{\stackrel {\tilde {\alpha }\in \tilde {\mathfrak {R}}^{+}_{n}}{\langle \tilde {\alpha },\gamma \rangle >0}}\langle \tilde {\alpha },\gamma \rangle -\sum _{\stackrel {\alpha \in \mathfrak {R}^{+}_{n}}{\langle \alpha ,\gamma \rangle >0}}\langle \alpha ,\gamma \rangle $
, and
$\operatorname {Tr}_{\gamma }(\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}_{\mathbb {C}}^{\gamma>0})=\operatorname {Tr}_{\tilde {w}\gamma }(\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}_{\mathbb {C}}^{\tilde {w}\gamma >0})=\operatorname {Tr}_{\tilde {w}\gamma }(\tilde {\mathfrak {n}}^{\tilde {w}\gamma >0})+ \sum _{\stackrel {\tilde {\alpha }\in \tilde {\mathfrak {R}}^{+}_{c}}{\langle \tilde {\alpha },\tilde {w}_{0}\tilde {w}\gamma \rangle >0}}\langle \tilde {\alpha },\tilde {w}_{0}\tilde {w}\gamma \rangle $
. Relation
$(B)$
is equivalent to
$$ \begin{align} \operatorname{Tr}_{\gamma}(\mathfrak{n}^{\gamma>0})+\sum_{\stackrel{\alpha\in \mathfrak{R}^{+}_{n}}{\langle\alpha,\gamma\rangle>0}}\langle\alpha,\gamma\rangle= \sum_{\stackrel{\tilde{\alpha}\in \tilde{\mathfrak{R}}^{+}_{n}}{\langle\tilde{\alpha},\gamma\rangle>0}}\langle\tilde{\alpha},\gamma\rangle +\sum_{\stackrel{\tilde{\alpha}\in \tilde{\mathfrak{R}}^{+}_{c}}{\langle\tilde{\alpha},\tilde{w}_{0}\tilde{w}\gamma\rangle>0}}\langle\tilde{\alpha},\tilde{w}_{0}\tilde{w}\gamma\rangle. \end{align} $$
Since
$\tilde {\mathfrak {R}}^{+}_{n}$
is invariant under the action of the Weyl group
$\tilde {W}$
, the right-hand side of equation (18) is equal to
$\sum _{\stackrel {\tilde {\alpha }\in \tilde {\mathfrak {R}}^{+}}{\langle \tilde {\alpha },\tilde {w}_{0}\tilde {w}\gamma \rangle>0}}\langle \tilde {\alpha },\tilde {w}_{0}\tilde {w}\gamma \rangle $
. Since the left-hand side of equation (18) is equal to
$\sum _{\stackrel {\alpha \in \mathfrak {R}^{+}}{\langle \alpha ,\gamma \rangle>0}}\langle \alpha ,\gamma \rangle $
, the proof of the lemma is complete.
5.3 Cohomological characterization of Ressayre’s data
Let
$\gamma \in \mathfrak {t}$
be a nonzero rational element. We denote by
$B\subset K_{\mathbb {C}}$
and by
$\tilde {B}\subset \tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}$
the Borel subgroups with Lie algebra
$\mathfrak {b}=\mathfrak {t}_{\mathbb {C}}\oplus \mathfrak {n}$
and
$\tilde {\mathfrak {b}}=\tilde {\mathfrak {t}}_{\mathbb {C}}\oplus \tilde {\mathfrak {n}}$
. Consider the parabolic subgroup
$P_{\gamma }\subset K_{\mathbb {C}}$
defined by
Similarly, one defines a parabolic subgroup
$\tilde {P}_{\gamma }\subset \tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}$
.
We work with the projective varieties
$\mathcal {F}_{\gamma }:=K_{\mathbb {C}}/P_{\gamma }$
,
$\tilde {\mathcal {F}}_{\gamma }:=\tilde {K}_{\mathbb {C}}/\tilde {P}_{\gamma }$
and the canonical embedding
$\iota : \mathcal {F}_{\gamma }\to \tilde {\mathcal {F}}_{\gamma }$
. We associate to any
$\tilde {w}\in \tilde {W}$
, the Schubert cell
and the Schubert variety
$\tilde {\mathfrak {X}}_{\tilde {w},\gamma }:=\overline {\tilde {\mathfrak {X}}^{o}_{\tilde {w},\gamma }}$
. If
$\tilde {W}^{\gamma }$
denotes the subgroup of
$\tilde {W}$
that fixes
$\gamma $
, we see that the Schubert cell
$\tilde {\mathfrak {X}}^{o}_{\tilde {w},\gamma }$
and the Schubert variety
$\tilde {\mathfrak {X}}_{\tilde {w},\gamma }$
depend only of the class of
$\tilde {w}$
in
$\tilde {W}/\tilde {W}^{\gamma }$
.
On the variety
$\mathcal {F}_{\gamma }$
, we consider the Schubert cell
$\mathfrak {X}^{o}_{\gamma }:= B[e]$
and the Schubert variety
$\mathfrak {X}_{\gamma }:=\overline {\mathfrak {X}^{o}_{\gamma }}$
.
We consider the cohomologyFootnote
1
ring
$H^{*}(\tilde {\mathcal {F}}_{\gamma },\mathbb {Z})$
of
$\tilde {\mathcal {F}}_{\gamma }$
. If Y is an irreducible closed subvariety of
$\tilde {\mathcal {F}}_{\gamma }$
, we denote by
$[Y]\in H^{2n_{Y}}(\tilde {\mathcal {F}}_{\gamma },\mathbb {Z})$
its cycle class in cohomology: Here
$n_{Y}=\mathrm {codim}_{\mathbb {C}}(Y)$
. Let
$\iota ^{*}:H^{*}(\tilde {\mathcal {F}}_{\gamma },\mathbb {Z})\to H^{*}(\mathcal {F}_{\gamma },\mathbb {Z})$
be the pull-back map in cohomology. Recall that the cohomology class
$[pt]$
associated to a singleton
$Y=\{pt\}\subset \mathcal {F}_{\gamma }$
is a basis of
$H^{\mathrm {max}}(\mathcal {F}_{\gamma },\mathbb {Z})$
.
To an oriented real vector bundle
$\mathcal {E}\to N$
of rank r, we can associate its Euler class
$\mathrm {Eul}(\mathcal {E})\in H^{2r}(N,\mathbb {Z})$
. When
$\mathcal {V}\to N$
is a complex vector bundle, then
$\mathrm {Eul}(\mathcal {V}_{\mathbb {R}})$
corresponds to the top Chern class
$c_{p}(\mathcal {V})$
, where p is the complex rank of
$\mathcal {V}$
, and
$\mathcal {V}_{\mathbb {R}}$
means
$\mathcal {V}$
viewed as a real vector bundle oriented by its complex structure (see [Reference Bott and Tu5], §21).
The isomorphism
$\mathfrak {q}^{\gamma>0}\simeq \mathfrak {q}/ \mathfrak {q}^{\gamma \leq 0}$
shows that
$\mathfrak {q}^{\gamma>0}$
can be viewed as a
$P_{\gamma }$
-module. Let
$[\mathfrak {q}^{\gamma>0}]= K_{\mathbb {C}}\times _{P_{\gamma }}\mathfrak {q}^{\gamma >0}$
be the corresponding complex vector bundle on
$\mathcal {F}_{\gamma }$
. We denote simply by
$\mathrm {Eul}(\mathfrak {q}^{\gamma>0})$
the Euler class
$\mathrm {Eul}([\mathfrak {q}^{\gamma>0}]_{\mathbb {R}})\in H^{*}(\mathcal {F}_{\gamma },\mathbb {Z})$
.
The following characterization of Ressayre’s data was obtained in [Reference Paradan32], §6. Recall that
$\mathfrak {R}_{o}$
denotes the set of weights relative to the T-action on
$(\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}/\mathfrak {g})\otimes \mathbb {C}$
.
Proposition 5.9. An element
$(\gamma ,\tilde {w})\in \mathfrak {t}\times \tilde {W}$
is a Ressayre’s datum if and only if the following conditions hold:
-
•
$\gamma $
is nonzero and rational. -
•
$\mathrm {Vect}(\mathfrak {R}_{o}\cap \gamma ^{\perp })=\mathrm {Vect}(\mathfrak {R}_{o})\cap \gamma ^{\perp }$
. -
•
$[\mathfrak {X}_{\gamma }]\cdot \iota ^{*}([\tilde {\mathfrak {X}}_{\tilde {w},\gamma }])\cdot \mathrm {Eul}(\mathfrak {q}^{\gamma>0})= k[pt],\ k\geq 1$
in
$H^{*}(\mathcal {F}_{\gamma },\mathbb {Z})$
. -
•
$\sum _{\stackrel {\alpha \in \mathfrak {R}^{+}}{\langle \alpha ,\gamma \rangle> 0}}\langle \alpha ,\gamma \rangle = \sum _{\stackrel {\tilde {\alpha }\in \tilde {\mathfrak {R}}^{+}}{\langle \tilde {\alpha },\tilde {w}_{0}\tilde {w}\gamma \rangle > 0}}\langle \tilde {\alpha },\tilde {w}_{0}\tilde {w}\gamma \rangle $
.
5.4 Parametrization of the facets
We can finally describe the Kirwan polyhedron
$\Delta (\textbf{T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q})$
(see [Reference Paradan32], § 6).
Theorem 5.10. An element
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi )\in \tilde {\mathfrak {t}}_{\geq 0}^{*}\times \mathfrak {t}_{\geq 0}^{*}$
belongs to
$\Delta (\textbf{T}^{*}\tilde {K}\times \mathfrak {q})$
if and only if
for any Ressayre’s datum
$(\gamma ,\tilde {w})\in \mathfrak {t}\times \tilde {W}$
.
Theorem 5.10 and Theorem B permit us to give the following description of the convex cone
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
.
Theorem 5.11. An element
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi )$
belongs to
$\Delta _{\mathrm {hol}}(\tilde {G},G)$
if and only if
$(\tilde {\xi },\xi )\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}\times \mathcal {C}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
and
for any
$(\gamma ,\tilde {w})\in \mathfrak {t}\times \tilde {W}$
satisfying the following conditions:
-
•
$\gamma $
is nonzero and rational. -
•
$\mathrm {Vect}(\mathfrak {R}_{o}\cap \gamma ^{\perp })=\mathrm {Vect}(\mathfrak {R}_{o})\cap \gamma ^{\perp }$
. -
•
$[\mathfrak {X}_{\gamma }]\cdot \iota ^{*}([\tilde {\mathfrak {X}}_{\tilde {w},\gamma }])\cdot \mathrm {Eul}(\mathfrak {q}^{\gamma>0})= k[pt],\ k\geq 1$
in
$H^{*}(\mathcal {F}_{\gamma },\mathbb {Z})$
. -
•
$\sum _{\stackrel {\alpha \in \mathfrak {R}^{+}}{\langle \alpha ,\gamma \rangle> 0}}\langle \alpha ,\gamma \rangle = \sum _{\stackrel {\tilde {\alpha }\in \tilde {\mathfrak {R}}^{+}}{\langle \tilde {\alpha },\tilde {w}_{0}\tilde {w}\gamma \rangle > 0}}\langle \tilde {\alpha },\tilde {w}_{0}\tilde {w}\gamma \rangle $
.
6 Example: the holomorphic Horn cone
$\mathrm {Horn}_{\mathrm {hol}}(p,q)$
Let
$p\geq q\geq 1$
. We consider the pseudo-unitary group
$G=U(p,q)\subset GL_{p+q}(\mathbb {C})$
defined by the relation:
$g\in U(p,q)$
if and only if
$g\mathrm {Id}_{p,q}g^{*}=\mathrm {Id}_{p,q}$
, where
$\mathrm {Id}_{p,q}$
is the diagonal matrix
$\mathrm {Diag}(\mathrm {Id}_{p},-\mathrm {Id}_{q})$
.
We work with the maximal compact subgroup
$K=U(p)\times U(q)\subset G$
. We have the Cartan decomposition
$\mathfrak {g}=\mathfrak {k}\oplus \mathfrak {p}$
, where
$\mathfrak {p}$
is identified with the vector space
$M_{p,q}$
of
$p\times q$
matrices through the map
$$ \begin{align*}X\in M_{p,q}\longmapsto\left(\begin{array}{@{}cc@{}} 0 & X \\ X^{*} & 0\\\end{array}\right). \end{align*} $$
We work with the element
$z_{p,q}=\frac {i}{2}\mathrm {Id}_{p,q}$
which belongs to the center of
$\mathfrak {k}$
. The adjoint action of
$z_{p,q}$
on
$\mathfrak {p}$
corresponds to the standard complex structure on
$M_{p,q}$
.
The trace on
$\mathfrak {gl}_{p+q}(\mathbb {C})$
defines an identification
$\mathfrak {g}\simeq \mathfrak {g}^{*}=\hom (\mathfrak {g},\mathbb {R})$
: To
$X\in \mathfrak {g}$
we associate
$\xi _{X}\in \mathfrak {g}^{*}$
defined by
$\langle \xi _{X},Y\rangle =-\mathrm {Tr}(XY)$
. Thus, the G-invariant cone
$\mathcal {C}_{G/K}$
defined by
$z_{p,q}$
can be viewed as the following cone of
$\mathfrak {g}$
:
Let
$T\subset U(p)\times U(q)$
be the maximal torus formed by the diagonal matrices. The Lie algebra
$\mathfrak {t}$
is identified with
$\mathbb {R}^{p}\times \mathbb {R}^{q}$
through the map
$\mathbf {d}:\mathbb {R}^{p}\times \mathbb {R}^{q}\to \mathfrak {u}(p)\times \mathfrak {u}(q)$
:
$\mathbf {d}_{x}=\mathrm {Diag}(ix_{1},\cdots ,ix_{p},i x_{p+1},\cdots , i x_{p+q})$
. The Weyl chamber is
Proposition 2.2 tells us that the
$U(p,q)$
adjoint orbits in the interior of
$\mathcal {C}(p,q)$
are parametrized by the holomorphic chamber
Definition 6.1. The holomorphic Horn cone
$\mathrm {Horn}_{\mathrm {hol}}(p,q):=\mathrm {Horn}_{\mathrm {hol}}^{2}(U(p,q))$
is defined by the relations
Let us detail the description given of
$\mathrm {Horn}_{\mathrm {hol}}(p,q)$
by Theorem B. For any
$n\geq 1$
, we consider the semigroup
$\wedge _{n}^{+}=\{(\lambda _{1}\geq \cdots \geq \lambda _{n})\}\subset \mathbb {Z}^{n}$
. If
$\lambda =(\lambda ^{\prime },\lambda ^{\prime \prime })\in \wedge _{p}^{+}\times \wedge _{q}^{+}$
, then
$V_{\lambda }:=V^{U(p)}_{\lambda ^{\prime }}\otimes V^{U(q)}_{\lambda ^{\prime \prime }}$
denotes the irreducible representation of
$U(p)\times U(q)$
with highest weight
$\lambda $
. We denote by
$\mathrm {Sym}(M_{p,q})$
the symmetric algebra of
$M_{p,q}$
.
Definition 6.2.
-
1.
$\mathrm { Horn}^{\mathbb {Z}}(p,q)$
is the semigroup of
$(\wedge _{p}^{+}\times \wedge _{q}^{+})^{3}$
defined by the conditions:
$$ \begin{align*}(\lambda,\mu,\nu)\in \mathrm{ Horn}^{\mathbb{Z}}(p,q)\Longleftrightarrow \left[V_{\nu}\,:\,V_{\lambda}\otimes V_{\mu}\otimes \mathrm{Sym}(M_{p,q})\right]\neq 0. \end{align*} $$
-
2.
$\mathrm { Horn}(p,q)$
is the convex cone of
$(\mathfrak {t}_{\geq 0})^{3}$
defined as the closure of
$\mathbb {Q}^{>0}\cdot \mathrm { Horn}^{\mathbb {Z}}(p,q)$
.
Theorem B asserts that
In another article [Reference Paradan33], we obtained a recursive description of the cones
$\mathrm { Horn}(p,q)$
. This allows us to give the following description of the holomorphic Horn cone
$\mathrm {Horn}_{\mathrm {hol}}(2,2)$
.
Example 6.3. An element
$(A,B,C)\in (\mathbb {R}^{4})^{3}$
belongs to
$\mathrm {Horn}_{\mathrm {hol}}(2,2)$
if and only if the following conditions hold:
$$ \begin{align*} \boxed{ \begin{array}{rcl} a_{1} \geq a_{2} &> & a_{3} \geq a_{4}\\ b_{1} \geq b_{2} & > & b_{3} \geq b_{4}\\ c_{1} \geq c_{2} & > & c_{3} \geq c_{4} \end{array} } \end{align*} $$
$$ \begin{align*} \boxed{ \begin{array}{rcl} a_{2}+b_{2}&\leq & c_{2}\\ a_{2}+b_{1}&\leq & c_{1}\\ a_{1}+b_{2}&\leq & c_{1} \end{array} } \end{align*} $$
$$ \begin{align*} \boxed{ \begin{array}{rcl} a_{3}+b_{3} &\geq & c_{3}\\ a_{3}+b_{4} &\geq & c_{4}\\ a_{4}+b_{3} &\geq & c_{4} \end{array} } \end{align*} $$
$$ \begin{align*} \boxed{ \begin{array}{rcl} a_{2}+a_{4}+b_{2}+b_{4} &\leq & c_{1}+c_{4} \\ a_{2}+a_{4}+b_{2}+b_{4} &\leq & c_{2}+c_{3}\\ a_{2}+a_{4}+b_{1}+b_{4} &\leq & c_{1}+c_{3}\\ a_{1}+a_{4}+b_{2}+b_{4} &\leq & c_{1}+c_{3}\\ a_{2}+a_{4}+b_{2}+b_{3} &\leq & c_{1}+c_{3}\\ a_{2}+a_{3}+b_{2}+b_{4} &\leq & c_{1}+c_{3} \end{array} } \end{align*} $$
7 A conjectural symplectomorphism
Let
$\tilde {\mu }\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
. In this section, we are interested in the geometry of the coadjoint orbit
$\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu }$
viewed as a Hamiltonian G-manifold with proper moment map
$\Phi ^{\tilde {\mu }}_{G}: \tilde {G}\tilde {\mu }\to \mathfrak {g}^{*}$
.
We start with a decomposition that we have already used. The pullback
$Y_{\tilde {\mu }}=(\Phi ^{\tilde {\mu }}_{G})^{-1}(\mathfrak {k}^{*})$
is a symplectic submanifold of
$\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu }$
which is stable under the K-action: Let
$\Omega _{\tilde {\mu }}$
be the corresponding two form on
$Y_{\tilde {\mu }}$
. The action of K on
$(Y_{\tilde {\mu }},\Omega _{\tilde {\mu }})$
is Hamiltonian, with a proper moment map
$\Phi ^{\tilde {\mu }}_{K}: Y_{\tilde {\mu }}\to \mathfrak {k}^{*}$
equal to the restriction of
$\Phi ^{\tilde {\mu }}_{G}$
to
$Y_{\tilde {\mu }}$
.
The map
$[g,x]\mapsto gx$
defines a symplectomorphism
so that
$\Phi ^{\tilde {\mu }}_{G}([g,x])=g\cdot \Phi ^{\tilde {\mu }}_{K}(x)$
[Reference Paradan31]. This allows us to see that the Kirwan polytope
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })$
relative to the G-action on
$\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu }$
is equal to the Kirwan polytope
$\Delta _{K}(Y_{\tilde {\mu }})$
relative to the K-action on
$Y_{\tilde {\mu }}$
.
We consider the orthogonal decomposition
$\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}=\mathfrak {p}\oplus \mathfrak {q}$
. Mostow’s decomposition theorem [Reference Mostow27] says that the map
$\psi :\mathfrak {p}\times \mathfrak {q}\times \tilde {K}\to \tilde {G}$
,
$(X,Y,\tilde {k})\mapsto e^{X} e^{Y}\tilde {k}$
is a diffeomorphism. This leads to the following result.
Lemma 7.1. We have the following G-equivariant diffeomorphisms:
$$ \begin{align*} \psi_{o}: G\times_{K}\left( \mathfrak{q}\times \tilde{K}\right)&\longrightarrow \tilde{G}\\ \left[ g; Y,\tilde{k} \right] &\longmapsto g e^{Y} \tilde{k}, \end{align*} $$
$$ \begin{align*} \psi_{\tilde{\mu}}: G\times_{K}\left(\mathfrak{q}\times \tilde{K}\tilde{\mu}\right)&\longrightarrow \tilde{G}\tilde{\mu}\\ \left[ g; Y,\xi \right] &\longmapsto g e^{Y} \xi. \end{align*} $$
We obtain the following geometric information on the K-manifold
$Y_{\tilde {\mu }}$
.
Corollary 7.2. There exists a K-equivariant diffeomorphism
$\mathfrak {q} \times \tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }\simeq Y_{\tilde {\mu }}$
.
Proof. Thanks to the diffeomorphisms (21) and
$\psi _{\tilde {\mu }}$
, we know that the manifolds
$G\times _{K} Y_{\tilde {\mu }}$
and
$G\times _{K}(\mathfrak {q}\times \tilde {K}\tilde {\mu })$
admit a G-equivariant diffeomorphism. Our result follows from this.
Let
$\tilde {\kappa }$
be the Killing form on the Lie algebra
$\tilde {\mathfrak {g}}$
. We consider the
$\tilde {K}$
-invariant symplectic structures
$\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}$
on
$\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}$
, defined by the relation
$\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}(\tilde {Y},\tilde {Y}^{\prime })=\tilde {\kappa }(z,[\tilde {Y},\tilde {Y}^{\prime }]),\ \forall \tilde {Y},\tilde {Y}^{\prime }\in \tilde {\mathfrak {p}}$
. We denote by
$\Omega _{\mathfrak {q}}$
the restriction of
$\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}$
on the symplectic subspace
$\mathfrak {q}$
.
We consider the following symplectic structure
$-\Omega _{\mathfrak {q}}\times \Omega _{\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }}$
on
$\mathfrak {q} \times \tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }$
. Knowing that
$\Delta _{G}(\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu })=\Delta _{K}(Y_{\tilde {\mu }})$
, the following conjectural result would give another proof of Theorem C.
Conjecture 7.3. There exists a K-equivariant symplectomorphism between
$(Y_{\tilde {\mu }},\Omega _{\tilde {\mu }})$
and
$(\mathfrak {q} \times \tilde {K}\tilde {\mu },-\Omega _{\mathfrak {q}}\times \Omega _{\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }})$
.
This conjecture generalizes some results obtained when
$G=\tilde {K}$
:
-
1. In [Reference McDuff26], McDuff showed that
$\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu }\simeq \tilde {G}/\tilde {K}$
admit a
$\tilde {K}$
-equivariant symplectomorphism with
$(\tilde {\mathfrak {p}},-\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}})$
when
$\tilde {\mu }$
is a central element of
$\tilde {\mathfrak {k}}^{*}$
. -
2. In [Reference Deltour8], Deltour extended the result of McDuff by showing that
$\tilde {G}\tilde {\mu }$
admits a
$\tilde {K}$
-equivariant symplectomorphism with
$(\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}\times \tilde {K}\tilde {\mu },-\Omega _{\tilde {\mathfrak {p}}}\times \Omega _{\tilde {K}\tilde {\mu }})$
for any
$\tilde {\mu }\in \tilde {\mathcal {C}}_{\mathrm {hol}}$
.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to the anonymous referee for her/his suggestions that allowed me to improve the quality of the article.
Competing Interests
None.


