Home The Leibniz algebras whose subalgebras are ideals
Article Open Access

The Leibniz algebras whose subalgebras are ideals

  • Leonid A. Kurdachenko EMAIL logo , Nikolai N. Semko and Igor Ya. Subbotin
Published/Copyright: February 22, 2017

Abstract

In this paper we obtain the description of the Leibniz algebras whose subalgebras are ideals.

MSC 2010: 17A32; 17A60; 17B30

Introduction

An algebra L over a field F is said to be a Leibniz algebra (more precisely a let Leibniz algebra) if it satisfies the Leibniz identity

[[a,b],c]=[a,[b,c]][b,[a,c]]foralla,b,cL. (LI)

Leibniz algebras are generalizations of Lie algebras. Indeed, a Leibniz algebra L is a Lie algebra if and only if [a, a] = 0 for every element aL. For this reason, we may consider Leibniz algebras as "non-anticommutative" analogs of Lie algebras.

Leibniz algebra appeared first in the papers of A.M. Bloh [13], in which he called them the D-algebras. However, that time, the real study of these algebras has not begun. Only two decades later, a real interest in these algebras raised. The impetus for this was the work of J.L. Loday [11], who introduced the term Leibniz algebras since it was Leibniz who discovered and proved the "Leibniz rule" for differentiation of functions. The Leibniz algebras appeared to be naturally related to several topics such as differential geometry, homological algebra, classical algebraic topology, algebraic K-theory, loop spaces, noncommutative geometry, and so on. They found some applications in physics (see, for example, [4, 7, 8]). Some papers concerning Leibniz algebras are devoted to the study of homological problems [5, 9, 12, 13]. The theory of Leibniz algebras has been developing quite intensively but very uneven. On one hand, some deep structural theorems were obtained as analogues of the corresponding results about Lie algebras. On the other hand, the study of Leibniz algebras does not look consistent and systematic. For any algebraic structure there are some natural questions that were not previously considered for Leibniz algebras. Thus, for example, a natural question on the structure of the cyclic subalgebras in Leibniz algebras has just recently been considered [6]. Another natural question is a question about the structure of Leibniz algebras, whose subalgebras are ideals. We note that it is not hard to prove that a Lie algebra, whose subalgebras are ideals, is abelian. But it is not true for Leibniz algebras. The following simple example justifies it. Let L be a vector space of dimension 2 over a field F,{a, b} be a basis of L. Define the operation [,] by the following rule: [a, a] = b, [b, b] = [b, a] = [a, b] = 0. A direct check shows that L becomes a Leibniz algebra. If λa + μ b is an arbitrary element of L and λ ≠ 0, then [λ a + μ b, λ a + μ b] = λ2b. By λ2 ≠ 0 we obtain that the subalgebra generated by λ a + μ b includes Fb. Since L/Fb is abelian, 〈λ a + μ b〉 is an ideal. Hence every cyclic subalgebra of L is an ideal. It follows that every subalgebra of L is an ideal. As we shall see later, any non-abelian Leibniz algebra, whose subalgebras are ideals, is built of these algebras as the bricks. Now consider more details.

If L is a Leibniz algebra and M is a subset of L, then by 〈M〉 we denote the subalgebra generated by M.

As usual, a Leibniz algebra L is called abelian if [x, y] = 0 for all elements x, yL. In an abelian Leibniz algebra every subspace is a subalgebra and an ideal.

A Leibniz algebra L is called an extraspecial algebra, if it satisfies the following condition:

“(G) is non-trivial and has dimension 1,

L / ζ(L) is abelian.

As it turned out, not in any extraspecial Leibniz algebra every subalgebra is an ideal. Now, we give an example of an extraspecial Leibniz algebra showing it. Moreover, the presence of subalgebras, which are not ideals, depend on the choice of the field.

Let F be a field, put L = FaFbFc. Define on L an operation [, ] by the following rule: c = [a, a] = [b, b] = [a, b], [c, c] = [c, a] = [c, b] = [a, c] = [b, c] = [b, a] = 0. From this definition we can see that [L, L] ≤ Fc, cζ (L), 〈c〉 = Fc. Since [x, y], [y, z], [x, z] ∈ ζ(L), the equality

[[x,y],z]=[x,[y,z]][y,[x,z]]

occurs automatically. Thus, L is a Leibniz algebra. Let x be an arbitrary element of L. Then x = λ a + μ b + vc for some λ, μ, vF. We have

[x,x]=[λa+μb+vc;λa+μb+vc]=λ2[a,a]+λμ[a,b]+λv[a,c]+λμ[b,a]+μ2[b,b]+μv[b,c]+λv[c,a]+μv[c,b]+v2[c,c]=λ2c+λμc+μ2c=(λ2+λμ+μ2)c.

Let F = 𝔽2. If (λ, μ) ≠ (0, 0), then λ2 + λμ + μ2 = 1, that is [x, x] = c whenever xFc. It follows that ζ(L) = Fc and 〈x〉 = FxFc. It follows that 〈x〉 is an ideal of L. Since Fc is an ideal, we obtain that every subalgebra of L is an ideal.

Let F = 𝔽5. Suppose that λ2 + λμ + μ2 = 0. It follows that (λ + 1/2μ)2 = μ2(1/4 - 1). In field 𝔽5 a solution of an equation 4x = 1 is 4, so that 1/4 - 1 = 3. But the equation x2 = 3 has no solutions in 𝔽5. This shows that the equality λ2 + λμ + μ2 = 0 is possible only if λ = μ = 0. Thus if (λ, μ) ≠ (0, 0), then [x, x] ≠ 0 and [x, x] ∈ Fc. Hence in this case, every subalgebra of L is an ideal.

If F = ℚ, then using the similar arguments we obtain again that every subalgebra of L is an ideal and the center of L is Fc.

Now consider the case when F = 𝔽3. For element x = a + b we have [a + b, a + b] = 3c = 0. It follows that 〈x〉 = Fx. But [x, a] = [a + b, a] = cFx, which shows that a cyclic subalgebra 〈x〉 is not an ideal.

The following theorem describes the structure of Leibniz algebras, in which every subalgebra is an ideal. But first, it will be useful to recall the following definitions.

A Leibniz algebra L has one specific ideal. Denote by Leib(L) the subspace generated by the elements [a, a], aL. It is not hard to prove that Leib(L) is an ideal of L. From its choice it follows that L/ Leib(L) is a Lie algebra. And conversely, if H is an ideal of L such that L/H is a Lie algebra, then Leib(L) ≤ H.

The ideal Leib(L) is called the Leibniz kernel of algebra L.

We also note the following important property of the Leibniz kernel:

[[a,a],x]=0forarbitraryelementsa,xL.

The left (respectively right) center ζleft(L) (respectively ζ right(L)) of a Leibniz algebra L is defined by the rule

ζleft(L)={xL|[x,y]=0foreachelementyL}.

(respectively

ζright(L)={xL|[y,x]=0foreachelementyL}).

It is not hard to prove that the left center of L is an ideal. Moreover, Leib(L) ≤ ζleft(L), so that L/ζleft(L) is a Lie algebra. In general, the left and the right centers are different, moreover, the left center is an ideal, but it is not true for the right center. One can find the corresponding counterexample in [10].

The center ζ(L) of L is defined by the rule

ζ(L)={xL|[x,y]=0=[y,x]foreachelementyL}.

The center is an ideal of L. In particular, we can consider the factor-algebra L/ζ(L).

Theorem A

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F, whose subalgebras are ideals. If L is non-abelian, then L = EZ where Zζ(L) and E is an extraspecial subalgebra such that [a, a] ≠ 0 for every element aζ(E).

In Section 2 we establish a relation of extraspecial Leibniz algebras L such that [a, a] ≠ 0 for every non-zero element a and the bilinear forms with no non-zero isotropic elements, which reduces the description of extraspecial Leibniz algebras to the description of these forms, and got some results on the structure of such forms. Here we present the main result of Section 2.

Let V be a vector space over a field F having countable dimension and Φ be a bilinear form on V. A basis {aj|j ∈ ℕ} is called left orthogonal, if Φ(aj, ak) = 0 whenever j > k.

Theorem B

Let V be a vector space of countable dimension over a field F and Φ be a bilinear form on V. If Φ(a, a) ≠ 0 for each element 0 ≠ aV, then V has a let orthogonal basis.

It should be noted that for the spaces of uncountable dimension a bilinear forms structure may be rather complicated. Even in the case of alternating forms there are quite exotic examples (see, for example, [14], Chapter 3).

1 On the structure of Leibniz algebras whose subalgebras are ideals

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F. If B is a subspace of L and if [L, B], [B, L] ≤ B, then we will say that B is L-invariant.

Lemma 1.1

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F, aL. Suppose that every subalgebra of L is an ideal of L. If A is an abelian subalgebra of L, then every subspace of A is L-invariant. Moreover for every element xL there are elements ax, βxF, which depend only of x, such that [a, x] = αxa, [x, a] = βxa for any element aA.

Proof

Let B be a subspace of A, bB. Since A is abelian, [b, b] = 0, so that subspace Fb is a subalgebra. Then it is an ideal. It follows that [x, b], [b, x] ∈ FbB, so that B is L-invariant.

Let a, cA, xL, then by above proved [a, x] = αa, [c, x] = γ c for some elements α, γF. We have [a - c, x] = [a, x] - [c, x] = αa - γc. On the other hand, a - cA, so that F (a - c) must be L-invariant, i.e. [a - c, x] = η(a - c) = η a - η c. It follows that α a - γ c = η a - η c, and hence α = η = γ. For [x, a] the arguments are similar. □

Lemma 1.2

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F, whose subalgebras are ideals. If a is an element of L such that [a, a] ≠ 0, thena〉 = FaF[a, a] and [a, [a, a]] = [[a, a], a] = 0.

Proof

Put b = [a, a]. If bFa, then [a, a] = γa for some 0 ≠ γF. In this case we have 0 = [[a, a], a] = [γa, a] = γ[a, a], which implies that [a, a] = 0, and we obtain a contradiction. This contradiction shows that the elements a, b are linearly independent. We have b = [a, a] ∈ Leib(L) ≤ ζleft(L). Since the left center is an abelian ideal, Lemma 1.2 shows that [a, b] = αb for some element αF. Suppose that α ∈ 0 and consider an element d = a - α−1b. By such a choice dFb, so that FdFb = 〈0〉. We have

[d,d]=[aα1b,aα1b]=[a,a][a,α1b]=bα1[a,b]=bb=0.

It follows that 〈d〉 = Fd. On the other hand, [d, a] = [a, a] = b ∉ 〈d〉. It shows that a subalgebra 〈d〉 is not an ideal, and we obtain a contradiction. This contradiction shows that α = 0, that is [a, b] = 0. □

Lemma 1.3

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F, whose subalgebras are ideals. Then factor-algebra L/Leib(L) is abelian.

Proof

Indeed, L/Leib(L) is a Lie algebra, and, moreover, it is a Lie algebra, whose subalgebras are ideals. So it is abelian. □

Corollary 1.4

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F, whose subalgebras are ideals. Then a factor-algebra L/ζleft(L) is abelian.

Lemma 1.5

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F, whose subalgebras are ideals, C = ζleft(L). If A is a maximal abelian ideal including C, then A = C.

Proof

Let aA and x be an arbitrary element of L. If c is a non-zero element of C, then [c, x] = 0 = 0c. Lemma 1.1 shows that [a, x] = 0a = 0. It follows that aC, that is A = C. □

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F, M be a non-empty subset of L and H be a subalgebra of L. Put

AnnHleft(M)={aH|[a,M]=0},AnnHright(M)={aH|[M,a]=0}.

The subset AnnHleft(M) is called the left annihilator or let centralizer of M in subalgebra H; the subset AnnHright(M) is called the right annihilator or right centralizer of M in subalgebra H. The intersection

AnnH(M)=AnnHleft(M)AnnHright(M)={aH|[a,M]= 0 =[M,a]}

is called annihilator or centralizer of M in subalgebra H.

It is not hard to see that all these subsets are subalgebras of L. Moreover, if M is a left ideal of L, then AnnLleft(M) is an ideal of L. Indeed, let x be an arbitrary element of L, aAnnHleft(M), bM. Then

[[a,x],b]=[a,[x,b]][x,[a,b]]=0[x,0]=0and[[x,a],b]=[x,[a,b]][a,[x,b]]=[x,0]0=0.

If M is an ideal of L, then AnnL(M) is an ideal of L. Indeed, let x be an arbitrary element of L, aAnnH(M), bM. Using the above arguments, we obtain that [[a, x], b] = [[x, a], b] = 0. Further

[b,[a,x]]=[[b,a],x]]+[a,[b,x]]]=[0,x]+0=0and[b,[x,a]]=[[b,x],a]+[x,[b,a]]]=0+[x,0]=0.

Let L be a Lie algebra. Define the lower central series of L

L=γ1(L)γ2(L)γα(L)γα+1(L)γδ(L)

by the following rule: γ1(L) = L, γ2(L) = [L, L], and recursively γα+1(L) = [L, γα(L)] for all ordinals α, and γλ(L) = ∩μ<λ γμ(L) for the limit ordinals λ. The last term γδ(L) is called the lower hypocenter of L. We have γδ(L) = [L, γδ(L)].

If α = k is a positive integer, then γk(L) = [L, [L, [L, …, L] … L] is aleft normed product of k copies of L.

Consider the factor γk(L)/γk+1(L), k ∈ ℕ. By definition, [L, γk(L)] = γk+1(L), and also [γk(L), L] = [γk(L), γ1(L)] ≤ γk+1(L) (see, for example, [10], Proposition 2.2).

As usual, we say that a Leibniz algebra L is nilpotent, if there exists a positive integer k such that γk(L) = 〈0〉. More precisely, L is said to be nilpotent of nilpotency class c if γc+1(L) = 〈0〉, but γc(L) ≠ 〈0〉. We denote by ncl(L) the nilpotency class of L.

Lemma 1.6

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F, whose subalgebras are ideals, C = ζleft(L). Then A = AnnLleft(C) = AnnL(C) is a nilpotent ideal, ncl(A) ≤ 2, codimF(A) ≤ 1.

Proof

As we noted above, C is an ideal of L, so that A is an ideal of L. Let a be an arbitrary element of A, then [a, c] = 0 for each element cC. On the other hand, [c, a] = 0 by the choice of c. It follows that Cζ(A). By Corollary 1.4, a factor-algebra L/C is abelian, so that [A, A] ≤ C and A is nilpotent of nilpotency class at most 2.

Let xL. Lemma 1.1 shows that there exists an element αxF such that [x, c] = αx c for every element cC. Consider now the mapping f : LF, defined by the rule f(x) = αx for each element xL. If yL, then

αx+yc=[x+y,c]=[x,c]+[y,c]=αxc+αyc=(αx+αy)cforeverycC.

This shows that f(x + y) = αx+y = αx + αy = f(x) + f(y). Furthermore, if βF, then

αβxc=[βx,c]=β[x,c]=β(αxc)=(βαx)cforeverycC,

which shows that f(βx) = βαx = βf(x). It follows that mapping f is linear. Finally, Ker(f) = {xL|αx = 0}. In other words, xKer(f) is equivalent to [x, c] = 0 for each cC. This proves that Ker(f) = AnnLleft(C) = A. Hence if LA, then dimF(L/A) = 1. □

Define now the upper central series

0=ζ0(L)ζ1(L)ζ2(L)ζα(L)ζα+1(L)ζγ(L)=ζ(L)

of a Leibniz algebra L by the following rule: ζ1(L) = ζ(L) is the center of L, and recursively ζα+1(L)/ζα(L)= ζ(L/ζα(L)) for all ordinals α, and ζλ(L) = ∪μ<λ ζμ(L) for the limit ordinals λ. By the definition each term of this series is an ideal of L. The last term ζ(L) of this series is called the upper hypercenter of L. Denote by zl(L) the length of upper central series of L.

If L = ζ(L), then L is said to be hypercentral Leibniz algebra.

Lemma 1.7

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F and A be a non-zero ideal of L. If Aζ(L), then Aζ(L) ≠ 〈0〉.

Proof

Suppose that Aζ(L) = 〈0〉. Since Aζ(L), there is an ordinal α such that Aζα(L) ≠ 〈0〉. We choose the least ordinal λ with this property. Clearly λ is a non-limit ordinal, so that C = Aζλ(L) ≠ 〈0〉, but 〈0〉 = Aζλ−1(L). The inclusion Cζλ(L) implies that [L, C], [C, L] ≤ ζλ−1(L). On the other hand, A is an ideal of L, and therefore [L, C], [C, L] ≤ A. We obtain the inclusion [L, C], [C, L] ≤ Aζλ−1(L) = 〈0〉. It follows that 〈0〉 ≠ Cζ(L) and we obtain a contradiction. This contradiction proves a result. □

Corollary 1.8

Let L be a hypercentral Leibniz algebra over a field F and A be a non-zero ideal of L. Then Aζ(L) ≠ 〈0〉.

Lemma 1.9

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F, whose subalgebras are ideals. Suppose that L is nilpotent and ncl(L) = 2. If a is an element of L such that [a, a] = 0, then aζ(L).

Proof

The equality [a, a] = 0 implies that 〈a〉 = Fa, so that dimF(〈a〉) = 1. Since 〈a〉 is an ideal, Corollary 1.8 implies that 〈0〉 ≠ 〈a〉 ∩ ζ(L). It follows that 〈a〉 = 〈a〉 ∩ ζ(L), i.e. aζ(L). □

Lemma 1.10

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F, whose subalgebras are ideals. Suppose that L is nilpotent and ncl(L) = 2. If aζ(L), then codimF(AnnLleft(〈a〉)) = 1 = codimF(AnnLright(〈a〉)).

Proof

Put c = [a, a]. Since aζ(L), Lemma 1.9 shows that c ≠ 0. Then by Lemma 1.2 we obtain that A = 〈a〉 = FaFc. Furthermore, cζ(L), so that [a, c] = [c, a] = 0.

Let xL. Since L/ζ(L) is abelian, [x, a] ∈ ζ(L). On the other hand, A is an ideal, so that [x, a] ∈ A, that is [x, a] ∈ Aζ(L) = Fc. It follows that [x, a] = αxc for some element αxF. Consider the mapping f : LF defined by the rule f(x) = αx for each element xL. If yL, then

αx+yc=[x+y,a]=[x,a]+[y,a]=αxc+αyc=(αx+αy)c.

This shows that f(x + y) = αx + y = αx + αy = f(x)+f(y). Furthermore, if βF, then

αβxc=[βx,a]=β[x,a]=β(αxc)=(βαx)c,

which shows that f(β x) = βαx = β f(x). It follows that mapping fis linear. Finally, Ker(f) = {xL|αx = 0}. In other words, xKer(f) is equivalent to [x, a] = 0. This proves that Ker(f) = AnnLleft(a). It is not hard to see that AnnLleft(a) = AnnLleft(A). The choice of a shows that AnnLleft(a) ≠ L. It follows that dimF(L/AnnLleft(A)) = 1. □

Lemma 1.11

Let L be an extraspecial Leibniz algebra overafield F. Then every subalgebra of L is an ideal if and only if [a, a] ≠ 0 for every element aζ(L).

Proof

Suppose that every subalgebra of L is an ideal and a is a non-zero element of L such that [a, a] = 0. Then Lemma 1.9 shows that aζ(L).

Conversely, assume that L is an extraspecial algebra such that [a, a] ≠ 0 for every element aζ(L). Let x be an arbitrary element of L. If xζ(L), then 〈x〉 = Fx, and a cyclic subalgebra 〈x〉 is an ideal. If xζ(L), then y = [x, x] ∈ ζ(L). It follows that [x, [x, x]] = [[x, x], x] = 0, and 〈x〉 = FxF[x, x]. Since [x, x] ≠ 0, F[x, x] = ζ(L). Hence every cyclic subalgebra includes the center of L. Since L/ζ(L) is abelian, every cyclic subalgebra of L is an ideal. It follows that every subalgebra of L is an ideal. □

Lemma 1.12

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F and suppose that L is nilpotent and ncl(L) = 2. If a, bζ(L) anda〉 ∩ 〈b〉 = 〈0〉, then L includes a subalgebra, which is not an ideal.

Proof

Suppose the contrary. Let every subalgebra of L be an ideal. If we assume that [a, a] = 0, then as in Lemma 1.9 we obtain that aζ(L) . But this contradicts the choice of a. This contradiction proves that [a, a] = c ≠ 0. Since a is nilpotent of class 2, cζ(L), which implies that [a, c] = [c, a] = 0. In a similar way, [b, b] = d ≠ 0 and [b, d] = [d, b] = 0. The subalgebras 〈a〉 and 〈b〉 are ideals, and therefore [a, b], [b, a] ∈ 〈a〉 ∩ 〈b〉 = 〈0〉. It follows that [a, b] = [b, a] = 0. Let x = a + b, then

[x,x]=[a+b,a+b]=[a,a]+[b,b]=c+d.

As above 〈x〉 = FxF[x, x] and 〈x〉 ∩ ζ(L) = F(c + d). On the other hand, [x, a] = c, [x, b] = d. It follows that an ideal, generated by x, must contain FcFd, and we obtain a contradiction. This contradiction proves a result. □

Proposition 1.13

Let L be a Leibniz algebra over a field F, whose subalgebras are ideals. Suppose that L is nilpotent and ncl(L) = 2. Then L = EZ where E is an extraspecial subalgebra, Zζ(L).

Proof

If we suppose that [a, a] = 0 for every element aL, then Lemma 1.9 shows that L = ζ(L), and we obtain a contradiction. Hence there exists an element a such that [a, a] = c ≠ 0. Lemma 1.2 shows that 〈a〉 = FaFc. Let B be a basis of L containing a, c. Then B = {aα|α < γ} for some ordinal α. We can put a1 = a, a2 = c. Consider the subalgebra 〈a1, a2, a3〉. If [a3, a3] = 0, then Lemma 1.9 shows that a3ζ(L). In this case, 〈a1, a2, a3〉 = 〈a1〉 ⊕ Fa3, where subalgebra 〈a1〉 is extraspecial, Fa3ζ(L).

Assume now that [a3, a3] = b ≠ 0. Lemma 1.2 shows that 〈a3〉 = Fa3Fb. In this case, dimF(〈a1, a3〉)≤ dimF(〈a1〉) + 2. If dimF(〈a1, a3〉) = dimF(〈a1〉) + 2, then 〈a1〉 ∩ 〈a3〉 = < 0 >, and Lemma 1.12 implies that in this case, L includes a subalgebra, which is not an ideal. This contradiction proves that dimF(〈a1, a3〉) = dimF(〈a1〉) + 1. If 〈a1, a3〉 ∩ ζ(L) ≠ Fc, then 〈a1, a3〉 ∩ ζ(L) = FcFd for some element dζ(L). In this case, 〈a1, a3〉 = 〈a1〉 ⊕ Fd. If 〈a1, a3〉 ∩ ζ(L) = Fc, then 〈a1, a3〉 is extraspecial.

Suppose that we have already constructed the subalgebras Lβ for all β < α satisfying the following conditions: avLβ for all vβ, Lβ = EβZβ where Eβ is an extraspecial subalgebra, ζ(Eβ) = Fc, Zβζ(L), EvEβ, ZvZβ whenever vβ. If α is a not limit ordinal, then α – 1 exists. Let η be aleast ordinal such that aηLα – 1. Consider a subalgebra Lα = 〈Lα – 1, aη〉. If [aη, aη] = 0, then Lemma 1.9 shows that aηζ(L). In this case,

Lα=Lα1Faη=Eα1Zα1Faη=EαZα

where Eα = Eα – 1, Zα = Zα – 1 ⊕ Faη.

If [aη, aη] = u ≠ 0. Lemma 1.2 shows that 〈aη〉 = FaηFu. In this case, dimF(Lα) ≤ dimF(Lα – 1) + 2. If dimF(Lα) = dimF(Lα – 1) + 2, then Lα – 1 ∩ 〈aη〉 = 〈0〉. In particular, 〈a1〉 ∩ 〈aη〉 = 〈0〉, and Lemma 1.12 implies that in this case L includes a subalgebra, which is not an ideal. This contradiction proves that dimF(Lα) = dimF(Lα – 1) + 1. If Lαζ(L) ≠ Fc, then Lαζ(L) = FcFv for some element vζ(L). In this case,

Lα=Lα1Fv=Eα1Zα1Fv=EαZα

where Eα = Eα – 1, Zα = Zα – 1Fv.

If Lαζ(L) = Fc, then Lα/Fc = Lα – 1/Fc ⊕〈aη〉/Fc. In this case, Eα = 〈Eα – 1, aη〉 is extraspecial and Lα = EαZα where Zα = Zα – 1.

Assume that α is a limit ordinal. Put Eα = ∪β < α Eβ, Zα = ∪β < α Zβ, Lα = ∪β < α Lβ. Then clearly Lα = EαZα, Eα is extraspecial, ζ(Eα) = Fc, Zαζ(L).

For α = γ we proved the result. □

Proof of Theorem A. Let C be a left center of L. By Lemma 1.5 C is a maximal abelian ideal of L and Corollary 1.4 shows that L/C is abelian. Since [C, L] = 〈0〉, AnnLleft(C) = AnnL(C) . Then Lemma 1.6 shows that a is a nilpotent ideal, ncl(A) ≤ 2, and dimF(L/A) ≤ 1. Suppose that L = A. By Proposition 1.13, L = EZ where E is an extraspecial subalgebra, Zζ(L). Lemma 1.11 shows that [a, a] ≠ 0 for every element aζ(E) = EC.

Suppose now that LA and choose an element dA. Put e = [d, d]. By Lemma 1.2 〈d〉 = FdFe and [d, e] = [e, d] = 0. Since C is abelian, Lemma 1.1 shows that there are the elements λ, ρF such that [d, c] = λ c, [c, d] = ρ c for each element cC. Since eLeib(L) ≤ ζleft(L), λ = ρ = 0. In other words, [d, c] = 0 for each element cC. This means that dAnnLleft(C) = A. But this contradicts the choice of d. This contradiction shows that L = A, which proves the result. □

2 Extraspecial Leibniz algebras and bilinear forms

We can connect a bilinear form to an extraspecial algebra in the following way. Let Z = ζ(L), V = L/Z and c be a fixed non-zero element of Z. Define the mapping Φ : V × VF by the following rule: If x, yL, then [x, y] ∈ Z, so that [x, y] = αc for some element αF. Put Φ(x + Z, y + Z) = α. This mapping is definitely correct. Indeed, let x1, y1 be elements of L such that x1 + Z = x + Z, y1 + Z = y + Z. Then x1 = x + c1, y1 = y + c2 for some elements c1, c2Z. Then

[x1,y1]=[x+c1,y+c2]=[x,y]+[x,c2]+[c1,y]+[c1,c2]=[x,y].

The mapping Φ is bilinear. In fact, let x, y, uL, [x, u] = λc, [y, u] = μ c. Then [x + y, u] = [x, u] + [y, u] = λc + μc = (λ + μ)c, so that

Φ(x+Z+y+Z,u+Z)=Φ(x+y+Z,u+Z)=(λ+μ)c=λc+μc=Φ(x+Z,u+Z)+Φ(y+Z,u+Z).

Similarly we can show that

Φ(x+Z,y+Z+u+Z)=Φ(x+Z,u+Z)+Φ(x+Z,y+Z).

Let βF, then [β x, y] = β[x, y] = β(α c) = (βα)c. It follows that

Φ(β(x+Z),y+Z)=Φ(βx+Z,y+Z)=(βα)c=β(αc)=βΦ(x+Z,y+Z)

Similarly we can show that

Φ(x+Z),β(y+Z)=βΦ(x+Z,y+Z).

By the definition of an extraspecial algebra we obtain that a bilinear form Φ is non-degenerate. Moreover, Lemma 1.9 shows that Φ(x, x) ≠ 0 for every non-zero element x.

Conversely, let V be a vector space over a field F and Φ be a bilinear form on V such that Φ(x, x) ≠ 0 for every non-zero element x. Put L = VF. Define the operation [,] on L by the following rule: if a, bV, α, βF, then [(a, α), (b, β)] = (0, Φ(a, b)). Put C = {(0, α)|αF}. Then dimF(C) = 1. By this definition [L, L] = [L, C] = ]C, L] = [C, C] = 〈0〉. It follows that the constructed algebra is a Leibniz algebra. Furthermore, Cζ(L). Moreover, C = ζ(L). Indeed, let (z, γ) ∈ ζ(L) and suppose that z ≠ 0. Then [(z, γ), (a, α)] = [(a, α), (z, γ)] = (0, 0), in particular, [(z, γ), (z, γ)] = (0, 0). But [(z, γ), (z, γ)] = (Φ(z, z), 0). Since z ≠ 0, (Φ(z, z) ≠ 0, and we obtain a contradiction. This contradiction proves the equality C = ζ(L).

Let V be a vector space over afield F, U a subspace of V and Φ be a bilinear form on V. Put

U={xV|Φ(x;u)=0forallelementsuU},U={xV|Φ(u,x)=0for  all  elements  uU}.

Clearly U and U are the subspaces of V, U is called left orthogonal complement of U in V, U is called right orthogonal complement of U in V.

Using usual methods of linear algebra the following proposition can be proved.

Proposition 2.1

Let V be a finite dimensional vector space over a field F, U a subspace of V and Φ be a non-degenerate bilinear form on V. If the restriction of Φ on U is non-degenerate, then dimF(U) = dimF(U) = dimF(V)–dimF(U).

Corollary 2.2

Let V be a finite dimensional vector space over a field F and Φ be a bilinear form on V. If Φ(a, a) ≠ 0 for each element 0 ≠ aV, then V has a let orthogonal basis.

Indeed, let U be an arbitrary non-zero subspace of V. If we suppose that a restriction of Φ on U is degenerate, then UU ≠ 〈0〉. Let 0 ≠ a ∈ ⊥ UU, then Φ(a, u) = 0 for all elements uU. In particular, Φ(a, a) = 0, and we obtain a contradiction. Hence the restriction of Φ on every non-zero subspace is non-degenerate, and we can apply Proposition 2.1.

We note that if V is a finite dimensional vector space and Φ is a bilinear form on V, such that V has a left orthogonal basis, then the matrix of a form Φ in this basis is triangular.

Proof of Theorem B.

Theorem B

Let V be a vector space over a field F, having countable dimension, and Φ be a bilinear form on V. If ϕ(a, a) ≠ 0 for each element 0 ≠ aV, then V has a let orthogonal basis.

Choose in space V an arbitrary basis aj|j ∈ ℕ}. Put Vj = Fa1 + … + Faj, jN. Since dimF(V2) = 2 is finite, Corollary 2.2 shows that V2 has a basis {v1, v2} such that [v2, v1] = 0. Since dimF(V3) is finite, Proposition 2.1 implies that dimF(V3V2) = dimF(VdimF(V2) = 1. By the above remarks, the restriction of Φ on every non-zero subspace is non-degenerate, which implies that (V3V2) ∩ V2 = 〈0〉. Let 0 ≠ v3V3V2, then {v1, v2, v3} is a basis of V3 such that [v2, v1] = [v3, v1] = [v3, v2] = 0. Using similar arguments, ordinary induction and the fact that V = ∩n∈ ℕ Vn, we proved the above statement. □

Corollary 2.3

Let L be an extraspecial Leibniz algebra over a field F, having countable dimension. If [a, a] ≠ 0 for every element aζ(L), then L has a basis {en|n ∈ ℕ} such that [e1, en] = [en, e1] = 0, [ej, en] ∈ Fe1 for all j, n ∈ ℕ, [ej, en] = 0 whenever j > n.

References

[1] Bloh A.M. On a generalization of the concept of Lie algebra. Doklady AN USSR-165 (1965), 471-473.Search in Google Scholar

[2] Bloh A.M. Cartan-Eilenberg homology theory for a generalized class of Lie algebras. Doklady AN USSR-175 (1967), 824-826.Search in Google Scholar

[3] Bloh A.M. A certain generalization of the concept of Lie algebra. Algebra and number theoy Moskov. Gos. Pedagogical Inst., Uchenye Zapiski-375 (1971), 9-20.Search in Google Scholar

[4] Butterfield J., Pagonis C. From Physics to Philosophy Cambridge Univ. Press: Cambridge, 1999.10.1017/CBO9780511597947Search in Google Scholar

[5] Casas J.M., Pirashvili T Ten-term exact sequence of Leibniz homology J. Algebra-231 (2000), 258-264.10.1006/jabr.1999.8364Search in Google Scholar

[6] Chupordya VA., Kurdachenko L.A., Subbotin I.Ya. On some “minimal” Leibniz algebras. Journal of Algebra and Applications, 2016, in press.10.1142/S0219498817500827Search in Google Scholar

[7] Lie Theory and its applications in physic. IX International workshop, Editor V Dobrev-Springer: Tokyo 2013.Search in Google Scholar

[8] Noncommutative Structures in Mathematics and Physics. Proceedings of the NATO advanced research workshop. Editors S. Duplij, J. Wess. Springer Science + Business media Dordrecht 2001.Search in Google Scholar

[9] Frabetti A. Leibniz homology of dialgebras of matrices. Journal Pure Appl. Algebra-129 (1998), 123-141.10.1016/S0022-4049(97)00066-2Search in Google Scholar

[10] Kurdachenko L.A., Otal J., Pypka A.A. On some relationships between the factors of the canonical central series in Leibniz algebras. European Journal of Mathematics-2(2016), 565-577.10.15407/dopovidi2016.03.014Search in Google Scholar

[11] Loday J.L. Une version non commutative des algebres de Lie; les algebras de Leibniz. Enseign. Math. 39 (1993), 269-293.Search in Google Scholar

[12] Loday J.L., Pirashvili T Universal enveloping algebras of Leibniz algebras and (co)homology Math. Ann.-296(1993), 139-158.10.1007/BF01445099Search in Google Scholar

[13] Pirashvili T On Leibniz homology Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble)-44(2)(1994), 401-411.10.5802/aif.1403Search in Google Scholar

[14] Tomkinson M.J. FC-groups. PITMAN: Boston-1984.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2016-10-17
Accepted: 2017-1-17
Published Online: 2017-2-22

© 2017 Kurdachenko et al.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Regular Articles
  2. Integrals of Frullani type and the method of brackets
  3. Regular Articles
  4. Edge of chaos in reaction diffusion CNN model
  5. Regular Articles
  6. Calculus using proximities: a mathematical approach in which students can actually prove theorems
  7. Regular Articles
  8. An investigation on hyper S-posets over ordered semihypergroups
  9. Regular Articles
  10. The Leibniz algebras whose subalgebras are ideals
  11. Regular Articles
  12. Fixed point and multidimensional fixed point theorems with applications to nonlinear matrix equations in terms of weak altering distance functions
  13. Regular Articles
  14. Matrix rank and inertia formulas in the analysis of general linear models
  15. Regular Articles
  16. The hybrid power mean of quartic Gauss sums and Kloosterman sums
  17. Regular Articles
  18. Tauberian theorems for statistically (C,1,1) summable double sequences of fuzzy numbers
  19. Regular Articles
  20. Some properties of graded comultiplication modules
  21. Regular Articles
  22. The characterizations of upper approximation operators based on special coverings
  23. Regular Articles
  24. Bi-integrable and tri-integrable couplings of a soliton hierarchy associated with SO(4)
  25. Regular Articles
  26. Dynamics for a discrete competition and cooperation model of two enterprises with multiple delays and feedback controls
  27. Regular Articles
  28. A new view of relationship between atomic posets and complete (algebraic) lattices
  29. Regular Articles
  30. A class of extensions of Restricted (s, t)-Wythoff’s game
  31. Regular Articles
  32. New bounds for the minimum eigenvalue of 𝓜-tensors
  33. Regular Articles
  34. Shintani and Shimura lifts of cusp forms on certain arithmetic groups and their applications
  35. Regular Articles
  36. Empirical likelihood for quantile regression models with response data missing at random
  37. Regular Articles
  38. Convex combination of analytic functions
  39. Regular Articles
  40. On the Yang-Baxter-like matrix equation for rank-two matrices
  41. Regular Articles
  42. Uniform topology on EQ-algebras
  43. Regular Articles
  44. Integrations on rings
  45. Regular Articles
  46. The quasilinear parabolic kirchhoff equation
  47. Regular Articles
  48. Avoiding rainbow 2-connected subgraphs
  49. Regular Articles
  50. On non-Hopfian groups of fractions
  51. Regular Articles
  52. Singularly perturbed hyperbolic problems on metric graphs: asymptotics of solutions
  53. Regular Articles
  54. Rings in which elements are the sum of a nilpotent and a root of a fixed polynomial that commute
  55. Regular Articles
  56. Superstability of functional equations related to spherical functions
  57. Regular Articles
  58. Evaluation of the convolution sum involving the sum of divisors function for 22, 44 and 52
  59. Regular Articles
  60. Weighted minimal translation surfaces in the Galilean space with density
  61. Regular Articles
  62. Complete convergence for weighted sums of pairwise independent random variables
  63. Regular Articles
  64. Binomials transformation formulae for scaled Fibonacci numbers
  65. Regular Articles
  66. Growth functions for some uniformly amenable groups
  67. Regular Articles
  68. Hopf bifurcations in a three-species food chain system with multiple delays
  69. Regular Articles
  70. Oscillation and nonoscillation of half-linear Euler type differential equations with different periodic coefficients
  71. Regular Articles
  72. Osculating curves in 4-dimensional semi-Euclidean space with index 2
  73. Regular Articles
  74. Some new facts about group 𝒢 generated by the family of convergent permutations
  75. Regular Articles
  76. lnfinitely many solutions for fractional Schrödinger equations with perturbation via variational methods
  77. Regular Articles
  78. Supersolvable orders and inductively free arrangements
  79. Regular Articles
  80. Asymptotically almost automorphic solutions of differential equations with piecewise constant argument
  81. Regular Articles
  82. Finite groups whose all second maximal subgroups are cyclic
  83. Regular Articles
  84. Semilinear systems with a multi-valued nonlinear term
  85. Regular Articles
  86. Positive solutions for Hadamard differential systems with fractional integral conditions on an unbounded domain
  87. Regular Articles
  88. Calibration and simulation of Heston model
  89. Regular Articles
  90. One kind sixth power mean of the three-term exponential sums
  91. Regular Articles
  92. Cyclic pairs and common best proximity points in uniformly convex Banach spaces
  93. Regular Articles
  94. The uniqueness of meromorphic functions in k-punctured complex plane
  95. Regular Articles
  96. Normalizers of intermediate congruence subgroups of the Hecke subgroups
  97. Regular Articles
  98. The hyperbolicity constant of infinite circulant graphs
  99. Regular Articles
  100. Scott convergence and fuzzy Scott topology on L-posets
  101. Regular Articles
  102. One sided strong laws for random variables with infinite mean
  103. Regular Articles
  104. The join of split graphs whose completely regular endomorphisms form a monoid
  105. Regular Articles
  106. A new branch and bound algorithm for minimax ratios problems
  107. Regular Articles
  108. Upper bound estimate of incomplete Cochrane sum
  109. Regular Articles
  110. Value distributions of solutions to complex linear differential equations in angular domains
  111. Regular Articles
  112. The nonlinear diffusion equation of the ideal barotropic gas through a porous medium
  113. Regular Articles
  114. The Sheffer stroke operation reducts of basic algebras
  115. Regular Articles
  116. Extensions and improvements of Sherman’s and related inequalities for n-convex functions
  117. Regular Articles
  118. Classification lattices are geometric for complete atomistic lattices
  119. Regular Articles
  120. Possible numbers of x’s in an {x, y}-matrix with a given rank
  121. Regular Articles
  122. New error bounds for linear complementarity problems of weakly chained diagonally dominant B-matrices
  123. Regular Articles
  124. Boundedness of vector-valued B-singular integral operators in Lebesgue spaces
  125. Regular Articles
  126. On the Golomb’s conjecture and Lehmer’s numbers
  127. Regular Articles
  128. Some applications of the Archimedean copulas in the proof of the almost sure central limit theorem for ordinary maxima
  129. Regular Articles
  130. Dual-stage adaptive finite-time modified function projective multi-lag combined synchronization for multiple uncertain chaotic systems
  131. Regular Articles
  132. Corrigendum to: Dual-stage adaptive finite-time modified function projective multi-lag combined synchronization for multiple uncertain chaotic systems
  133. Regular Articles
  134. Convergence and stability of generalized φ-weak contraction mapping in CAT(0) spaces
  135. Regular Articles
  136. Triple solutions for a Dirichlet boundary value problem involving a perturbed discrete p(k)-Laplacian operator
  137. Regular Articles
  138. OD-characterization of alternating groups Ap+d
  139. Regular Articles
  140. On Jordan mappings of inverse semirings
  141. Regular Articles
  142. On generalized Ehresmann semigroups
  143. Regular Articles
  144. On topological properties of spaces obtained by the double band matrix
  145. Regular Articles
  146. Representing derivatives of Chebyshev polynomials by Chebyshev polynomials and related questions
  147. Regular Articles
  148. Chain conditions on composite Hurwitz series rings
  149. Regular Articles
  150. Coloring subgraphs with restricted amounts of hues
  151. Regular Articles
  152. An extension of the method of brackets. Part 1
  153. Regular Articles
  154. Branch-delete-bound algorithm for globally solving quadratically constrained quadratic programs
  155. Regular Articles
  156. Strong edge geodetic problem in networks
  157. Regular Articles
  158. Ricci solitons on almost Kenmotsu 3-manifolds
  159. Regular Articles
  160. Uniqueness of meromorphic functions sharing two finite sets
  161. Regular Articles
  162. On the fourth-order linear recurrence formula related to classical Gauss sums
  163. Regular Articles
  164. Dynamical behavior for a stochastic two-species competitive model
  165. Regular Articles
  166. Two new eigenvalue localization sets for tensors and theirs applications
  167. Regular Articles
  168. κ-strong sequences and the existence of generalized independent families
  169. Regular Articles
  170. Commutators of Littlewood-Paley gκ -functions on non-homogeneous metric measure spaces
  171. Regular Articles
  172. On decompositions of estimators under a general linear model with partial parameter restrictions
  173. Regular Articles
  174. Groups and monoids of Pythagorean triples connected to conics
  175. Regular Articles
  176. Hom-Lie superalgebra structures on exceptional simple Lie superalgebras of vector fields
  177. Regular Articles
  178. Numerical methods for the multiplicative partial differential equations
  179. Regular Articles
  180. Solvable Leibniz algebras with NFn Fm1 nilradical
  181. Regular Articles
  182. Evaluation of the convolution sums ∑al+bm=n lσ(l) σ(m) with ab ≤ 9
  183. Regular Articles
  184. A study on soft rough semigroups and corresponding decision making applications
  185. Regular Articles
  186. Some new inequalities of Hermite-Hadamard type for s-convex functions with applications
  187. Regular Articles
  188. Deficiency of forests
  189. Regular Articles
  190. Perfect codes in power graphs of finite groups
  191. Regular Articles
  192. A new compact finite difference quasilinearization method for nonlinear evolution partial differential equations
  193. Regular Articles
  194. Does any convex quadrilateral have circumscribed ellipses?
  195. Regular Articles
  196. The dynamic of a Lie group endomorphism
  197. Regular Articles
  198. On pairs of equations in unlike powers of primes and powers of 2
  199. Regular Articles
  200. Differential subordination and convexity criteria of integral operators
  201. Regular Articles
  202. Quantitative relations between short intervals and exceptional sets of cubic Waring-Goldbach problem
  203. Regular Articles
  204. On θ-commutators and the corresponding non-commuting graphs
  205. Regular Articles
  206. Quasi-maximum likelihood estimator of Laplace (1, 1) for GARCH models
  207. Regular Articles
  208. Multiple and sign-changing solutions for discrete Robin boundary value problem with parameter dependence
  209. Regular Articles
  210. Fundamental relation on m-idempotent hyperrings
  211. Regular Articles
  212. A novel recursive method to reconstruct multivariate functions on the unit cube
  213. Regular Articles
  214. Nabla inequalities and permanence for a logistic integrodifferential equation on time scales
  215. Regular Articles
  216. Enumeration of spanning trees in the sequence of Dürer graphs
  217. Regular Articles
  218. Quotient of information matrices in comparison of linear experiments for quadratic estimation
  219. Regular Articles
  220. Fourier series of functions involving higher-order ordered Bell polynomials
  221. Regular Articles
  222. Simple modules over Auslander regular rings
  223. Regular Articles
  224. Weighted multilinear p-adic Hardy operators and commutators
  225. Regular Articles
  226. Guaranteed cost finite-time control of positive switched nonlinear systems with D-perturbation
  227. Regular Articles
  228. A modified quasi-boundary value method for an abstract ill-posed biparabolic problem
  229. Regular Articles
  230. Extended Riemann-Liouville type fractional derivative operator with applications
  231. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  232. The algebraic size of the family of injective operators
  233. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  234. The history of a general criterium on spaceability
  235. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  236. On sequences not enjoying Schur’s property
  237. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  238. A hierarchy in the family of real surjective functions
  239. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  240. Dynamics of multivalued linear operators
  241. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  242. Linear dynamics of semigroups generated by differential operators
  243. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  244. Isomorphism theorems for some parabolic initial-boundary value problems in Hörmander spaces
  245. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  246. Determination of a diffusion coefficient in a quasilinear parabolic equation
  247. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  248. Homogeneous two-point problem for PDE of the second order in time variable and infinite order in spatial variables
  249. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  250. A nonlinear plate control without linearization
  251. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  252. Reduction of a Schwartz-type boundary value problem for biharmonic monogenic functions to Fredholm integral equations
  253. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  254. Inverse problem for a physiologically structured population model with variable-effort harvesting
  255. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  256. Existence of solutions for delay evolution equations with nonlocal conditions
  257. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  258. Comments on behaviour of solutions of elliptic quasi-linear problems in a neighbourhood of boundary singularities
  259. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  260. Coupled fixed point theorems in complete metric spaces endowed with a directed graph and application
  261. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  262. Existence of entropy solutions for nonlinear elliptic degenerate anisotropic equations
  263. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  264. Integro-differential systems with variable exponents of nonlinearity
  265. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  266. Elliptic operators on refined Sobolev scales on vector bundles
  267. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  268. Multiplicity solutions of a class fractional Schrödinger equations
  269. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  270. Determining of right-hand side of higher order ultraparabolic equation
  271. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  272. Asymptotic approximation for the solution to a semi-linear elliptic problem in a thin aneurysm-type domain
  273. Topical Issue on Metaheuristics - Methods and Applications
  274. Learnheuristics: hybridizing metaheuristics with machine learning for optimization with dynamic inputs
  275. Topical Issue on Metaheuristics - Methods and Applications
  276. Nature–inspired metaheuristic algorithms to find near–OGR sequences for WDM channel allocation and their performance comparison
  277. Topical Issue on Cyber-security Mathematics
  278. Monomial codes seen as invariant subspaces
  279. Topical Issue on Cyber-security Mathematics
  280. Expert knowledge and data analysis for detecting advanced persistent threats
  281. Topical Issue on Cyber-security Mathematics
  282. Feedback equivalence of convolutional codes over finite rings
Downloaded on 8.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/math-2017-0010/html
Scroll to top button