Example: SU(2) to SO(3)

The group SU(2)

I want to talk about a particular smooth homomorphism S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) → S ⁢ O ⁢ ( 3 ) .

Definition:

S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) = { M ∈ G ⁢ L ⁢ ( 2 , 𝐂 ) : det ⁡ ( M ) = 1 , M † ⁢ M = I } is the group of 2-by-2 complex matrices which are unitary and have determinant 1 (special unitary group). Here M † = M ¯ T .

We can alternatively characterise S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) as the group of matrices ( a b - b ¯ a ¯ ) : a , b ∈ 𝐂 , | a | 2 + | b | 2 = 1 } . To see this, note that unitarity implies M † = M - 1 , so ( a ¯ c ¯ b ¯ d ¯ ) = 1 det ⁡ M ⁢ ( d - b - c a ) , and because det ⁡ ( M ) = 1 we get c = - b ¯ and d = a ¯ . The condition det ⁡ ( M ) = 1 then becomes | a | 2 + | b | 2 = 1 .

The Lie algebra su(2)

The Lie algebra is 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔲 ⁢ ( 2 ) = { X ∈ 𝔤 ⁢ 𝔩 ⁢ ( 2 , 𝐂 ) : Tr ⁢ ( X ) = 0 , X † = - X } (these conditions come from differentiating det ⁡ ( exp ⁡ ( t ⁢ X ) ) = 1 and exp ( t X ) † exp ( t X ) = I with respect to t at t = 0 as usual). We can write down a general element of this Lie algebra as follows: 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔲 ⁢ ( 2 ) = { ( i ⁢ x y + i ⁢ z - y + i ⁢ z - i ⁢ x ) : x , y , z ∈ 𝐑 } The fact that the diagonal elements are imaginary follows from X † = - X . They sum to zero because the trace is zero. The bottom-left entry is determined by the top-right by X † = - X .

Remark:

Even though S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) is a group of complex matrices, 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔲 ⁢ ( 2 ) is a real vector space, not a complex vector space. That's because S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) is cut out by a single real equation (rather than something holomorphic).

If ( v = ( x , y , z ) ∈ 𝐑 3 , let's write M v = ( i ⁢ x y + i ⁢ z - y + i ⁢ z - i ⁢ x ) . Here are some useful equations we will use.

Exercise:

[ M u , M v ] = M 2 ⁢ u × v and Tr ⁢ ( M u ⁢ M v ) = - 2 ⁢ u ⋅ v .

A homomorphism

Lemma:

If B ∈ S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) then B ⁢ M v ⁢ B - 1 ∈ 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔲 ⁢ ( 2 ) for any M v ∈ 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔲 ⁢ ( 2 ) . This means that B ⁢ M v ⁢ B - 1 = M w for some w ∈ 𝐑 3 . Moreover, w = R ⁢ ( B ) ⁢ v for some rotation R ⁢ ( B ) . In other words, we have a map R : S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) → S ⁢ O ⁢ ( 3 ) such that M R ⁢ ( B ) ⁢ v = B ⁢ M v ⁢ B - 1 (we will only check that R ⁢ ( B ) is an orthogonal matrix, not that it's a rotation).

Proof:

To see that B ⁢ M v ⁢ B - 1 ∈ 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔲 ⁢ ( 2 ) , we need to show that it is tracefree and anti-Hermitian:

  • Because trace is conjugation invariant, we have Tr ⁢ ( B ⁢ M v ⁢ B - 1 ) = Tr ⁢ ( M v ) = 0 .

  • We have ( B ⁢ M v ⁢ B - 1 ) † = ( B - 1 ) † ⁢ M v † ⁢ B † = B ⁢ ( - M v ) ⁢ B - 1 = - B ⁢ M v ⁢ B - 1 because B ∈ S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) and M v ∈ 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔲 ⁢ ( 2 ) .

Now define R ⁢ ( B ) : 𝐑 3 → 𝐑 3 implicitly by M R ⁢ ( B ) ⁢ v = B ⁢ M v ⁢ B - 1 . We want to show that R ⁢ ( B ) is an orthogonal matrix, i.e. that it preserves dot products.

Using our formula from before, we have: ( R ⁢ ( B ) ⁢ v 1 ) ⋅ ( R ⁢ ( B ) ⁢ v 2 ) = - 1 2 ⁢ Tr ⁢ ( M R ⁢ ( B ) ⁢ v 1 ⁢ M R ⁢ ( B ) ⁢ v 2 ) , which is equal to - 1 2 ⁢ Tr ⁢ ( B ⁢ M v 1 ⁢ B - 1 ⁢ B ⁢ M v 2 ⁢ B - 1 ) = Tr ⁢ ( M v 1 ⁢ M v 2 ) because the central B - 1 ⁢ B cancels and the trace is unchanged by conjugation. This is then equal to v 1 ⋅ v 2 by the formula from above.

We have therefore defined a map R : S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) → O ⁢ ( 3 ) . This turns out to be a homomorphism. Let's compute R * . We know that R ⁢ ( exp ⁡ ( t ⁢ M u ) ) = exp ⁡ ( t ⁢ R * ⁢ ( M u ) ) , so R * ⁢ ( M u ) = d d ⁢ t | t = 0 ⁢ R ⁢ ( exp ⁡ ( t ⁢ M u ) ) .

We have M R ⁢ ( B ) ⁢ v = B ⁢ M v ⁢ B - 1 , so if B = exp ⁡ ( t ⁢ M u ) then we get M R ⁢ ( exp ⁡ ( t ⁢ M u ) ⁢ v ) = exp ⁡ ( t ⁢ M u ) ⁢ M v ⁢ exp ⁡ ( - t ⁢ M u ) . Differentiating with respect to t gives M R * ⁢ ( M u ) ⁢ v = d d ⁢ t | t = 0 = M u ⁢ M v - M v ⁢ M u by the product rule. Therefore M R * ⁢ ( M u ) ⁢ v = [ M u , M v ] = M 2 ⁢ u × v , so R * ⁢ ( M u ) ⁢ v = 2 ⁢ u × v .

Therefore R * ⁢ ( M u ) is the map which sends v to 2 ⁢ u × v . If we write u = ( u 1 , u 2 , u 3 ) and v = ( v 1 , v 2 , v 3 ) , note that ( 0 - u 3 u 2 u 3 0 - u 1 - u 2 u 1 0 ) ⁢ ( v 1 v 2 v 3 ) = ( u 2 ⁢ v 3 - u 3 ⁢ v 2 u 3 ⁢ v 1 - u 1 ⁢ v 3 u 1 ⁢ v 2 - u 2 ⁢ v 1 ) = u × v , so we have R * ⁢ ( i ⁢ x y + i ⁢ z - y + i ⁢ z - i ⁢ x ) = ( 0 - 2 ⁢ z 2 ⁢ y 2 ⁢ z 0 - 2 ⁢ x - 2 ⁢ y 2 ⁢ x 0 ) .

This is a nontrivial example of a Lie algebra homomorphism 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔲 ⁢ ( 2 ) → 𝔬 ⁢ ( 3 ) . Even though it's nontrivial, it is easy to write down: it's linear in x , y , and z .

Concluding remarks

Remark:

We have this homomorphism R : S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) → O ⁢ ( 3 ) . This is not an isomorphism. For a start, it only hits the rotations, i.e. the orthogonal transformations with determinant 1 ( S ⁢ O ⁢ ( 3 ) ⊂ O ⁢ ( 3 ) ). Even if you think of it as a map S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) → S ⁢ O ⁢ ( 3 ) , it's still not an isomorphism: it is 2-to-1. For example, B and - B both map to the same rotation: B ⁢ M v ⁢ B - 1 = ( - B ) ⁢ M v ⁢ ( - B ) - 1 .

At the level of Lie algebras, R * : 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔲 ⁢ ( 2 ) → 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔬 ⁢ ( 3 ) is an isomorphism: from ( 0 - 2 ⁢ z 2 ⁢ y 2 ⁢ z 0 - 2 ⁢ x - 2 ⁢ y 2 ⁢ x 0 ) we can figure out x , y and z by dividing by 2 , so we know which matrix ( i ⁢ x y + i ⁢ z - y + i ⁢ z - i ⁢ x ) to write down. That is, we have an inverse ( R * ) - 1 : 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔬 ⁢ ( 3 ) → 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔲 ⁢ ( 2 ) . However, it doesn't correspond to a Lie group homomorphism S ⁢ O ⁢ ( 3 ) → S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) . This is OK because Lie's theorem about exponentiating homomorphisms only applies when the domain is simply-connected, and the group S ⁢ O ⁢ ( 3 ) is not simply-connected.

Pre-class exercises

Exercise:

We constructed a homomorphism R : S ⁢ U ⁢ ( 2 ) → O ⁢ ( 3 ) . Can you see why R lands in the subset S ⁢ O ⁢ ( 3 ) of matrices with determinant 1?

Exercise:

Can you prove that 𝔰 ⁢ 𝔲 ⁢ ( 2 ) is the set of 2-by-2 matrices X such that X T = - X and Tr ⁢ ( X ) = 0 ?