Total positivity and conjugacy classes

Let G^{\text{uni}} be the set of unipotent elements in G. By [Lu94, Theorem 6.6],

Suppose that G is almost simple. Let w_1, w_2 \in W and g \in U^+_{w_1, >0} U^-_{w_2, >0}. Let J_i=\operatorname{supp}(w_i) for i=1, 2. We assume furthermore that J_1 \cap J_2=\emptyset. Then \dot w_{J_2} g \dot w_{J_2} ^{-1} \in U^+. If J_2\neq \emptyset and J_2 \neq I, then there exists i \in I-J_2 such that in the Dynkin diagram of G, the vertex corresponds i is connected to some vertex in J_2. In this case, w_{J_2}(\Phi_{J_1}) \cap \Phi_{\{i\}}=\emptyset and \dot w_{J_2} g \dot w_{J_2} ^{-1} \in U_{P^+_{I-\{i\}}}. Hence g is not regular.

Similarly, if J_1 \neq \emptyset and J_1 \neq I, then g is not regular. It is obvious that if J_1=J_2=\emptyset, then g=1 and hence is not regular. Finally if (J_1, J_2)=(I, \emptyset) or (\emptyset, I), then g is regular.

The “in particular” part follows from that the fact that \sqcup_{w \in W, \operatorname{supp}(w)=I} U^\pm_{w, >0} is connected and dense in U^\pm.

Let \ensuremath{\mathcal {B}}\xspace=G/B^+ be the flag variety of G. We denote the action of G on \ensuremath{\mathcal {B}}\xspace by g \cdot B:=g B g ^{-1}. Let \ensuremath{\mathcal {B}}\xspace_{>0}=U^-_{>0} \cdot B^+ \subset \ensuremath{\mathcal {B}}\xspace be the totally positive flag manifold and \ensuremath{\mathcal {B}}\xspace_{\geqslant 0}=\overline{\ensuremath{\mathcal {B}}\xspace_{>0}} be the totally nonnegative flag manifold. By [Lu94, Corollary 8.11], there exists B \in \ensuremath{\mathcal {B}}\xspace_{\geqslant 0} with g \in B. We have g^m \in G_{>0} for m \in \ensuremath{\mathbb {N}}\xspace. By [Lu94, Lemma 8.2], there exists a unique B' \in \ensuremath{\mathcal {B}}\xspace_{\geqslant 0} with g^n \in B'. Since g \in B, we have g^n \in B. Thus B=B'. By [Lu94, Lemma 8.5], B' \in \ensuremath{\mathcal {B}}\xspace_{>0}. Hence B=u B^+ u ^{-1} for some u \in U^-_{>0}. So u ^{-1} g u \in B^+. The uniqueness of u follows from the uniqueness of B.

Let u ^{-1} g u=u' t with u' \in U^+ and t \in T. We then have u u' t=g u \in G_{\geqslant 0}. Therefore we have u' \in U^+_{\geqslant 0} and t \in T_{>0}. Moreover, g^m=u (u' t)^m u ^{-1}=u u'_m t^m u ^{-1} for some u'_m \in U^+_{>0}. By [Lu94, Corollary 8.10], \alpha_i(t^m)>1 for all i \in I. Hence \alpha_i(t)>1 for all i \in I.

If J' \subset J, then we may take j to be any vertex not in J.

Now assume that J' \not \subset J. Set K=J \cap J'. Then J'-K \neq \emptyset. We consider J as a sub-diagram of the Coxeter diagram of I. Let C be a connected component of J' that contains some vertex j_1 in J'-K. Since J' \subsetneq I, there exists j \notin J' such that j is connected to a vertex j' in C.

Let \omega_{j_1} be the fundamental weight of j_1 with respect to \Phi and \omega_{J', j_1} be the fundamental weight of j_1 with respect to \Phi_{J'}. Then \omega_{j_1} \in \sum_{i \in I} \ensuremath{\mathbb {Q}}\xspace_{>0} \alpha_i and \omega_{J', j_1} \in \sum_{i \in C} \ensuremath{\mathbb {Q}}\xspace_{>0} \alpha_i. Note that w_{J'}(\omega_{J', j_1})=-\omega_{J', j_2}=\omega_{J', j_1}-(\omega_{J', j_1}+\omega_{J', j_2}) for some j_2 \in C. We have \omega_{J', j_2} \in \sum_{i \in C} \ensuremath{\mathbb {Q}}\xspace_{>0} \alpha_i and hence \omega_{J', j_1}+\omega_{J', j_2} \in \sum_{i \in C} \ensuremath{\mathbb {Q}}\xspace_{>0} \alpha_i. Since the restriction of \omega_{j_1} to the root system \Phi_{J'} equals to \omega_{J', j_1}, we have

Now \<w_{J'}(\alpha_j), \omega_{j_1}\>=\<\alpha_j, w_{J'}(\omega_{j_1})\> \in \<\alpha_j, \omega_{j_1}-\sum_{i \in C} \ensuremath{\mathbb {Q}}\xspace_{>0} \alpha_i\>=-\<\alpha_j, \sum_{i \in C} \ensuremath{\mathbb {Q}}\xspace_{>0} \alpha_i\>. Since \<\alpha_j, \alpha_i\> \leqslant 0 for any i \in C and \<\alpha_j, \alpha_{j'}\><0, we have \<w_{J'}(\alpha_j), \omega_{j_1}\>>0. Since j_1 \notin J, we have w_{J'}(\alpha_j) \notin \Phi_J.

We argue by induction on n.

If n=1, the result is obvious.

Assume now that n\geqslant2. Let c=a_{kk} and I_c=\{i\in[1,n];a_{ii}=c\}. Let (A_1,...,A_n)\in V_k. If A_n=0, then (A_1,...,A_{n-1}) satisfy a condition similar to that defining V_k. In this case, the statement follow from the induction hypothesis.

If n\notin I_c, then (a_{nn}-c)A_n=0 and A_n=0.

We assume that n\in I_c. If n-1\in I_c, then a_{n-1,n}A_n=0. Since a_{n-1,n}\ne0, we have A_n=0 and the statement follows again from the induction hypothesis.

Now we assume that n\in I_c,n-1\notin I_c. If n-2\in I_c, then we have the linear system

The determinant of this linear system is

It follows that A_{n-1}=A_n=0. In particular A_n=0 and we are done.

We then assume that n\in I_c, n-1\notin I_c, n-2\notin I_c. If n-3\in I_c, we have the linear system

The determinant of this system of linear equations is

Again the determinant is >0. It follows that A_{n-2}=A_{n-1}=A_n=0. In particular A_n=0 and we are done.

Thus we can assume n\in I_c, n-1\notin I_c, n-2\notin I_c, n-3\notin I_c. Continuing in this way we see that we can assume n\in I_c and n-1,n-2,...,1 are not in I_c.

Then we can choose A_n at random. From (a_{n-1,n-1}-c)A_{n-1}+a_{n-1,n}A_n=0 where a_{n-1,n-1}-c\neq 0 we determine uniquely A_{n-1}. From (a_{n-2,n-2}-c)A_{n-2}+a_{n-2,n-1}A_{n-1}+a_{n-2,n}A_n=0 where a_{n-2,n-2}-c\neq 0 we determine uniquely A_{n-2}. Continuing in this way we see that A_{n-1},A_{n-2},...,A_1 are uniquely determined by A_n. Hence \dim V_k=1.

We prove that

(a) Let w \in W, u \in U^+_{w, >0} and t \in T_{>0}. Let i \in J. If \alpha_i(t)<1, then there exists b>0 such that y_i(-b) t u y_i(b) \in s_i(t) U^+_{w, >0}.

Let c=\alpha_i(t)<1. We have \pi^+_{\{i\}}(u)=x_i(a) for some a>0. Set b=\frac{1-c}{c a}>0. By [Lu94, § 2.11], y_i(-b) t u y_i(b) \in y_i(-b) y_i(b') t' u' for some b'>0, t' \in T_{>0} and u' \in U^+_{w, >0}. In particular, y_i(-b) t u y_i(b) \in P^+_{\{i\}}. Then

Note that t \alpha_i^\vee(\frac{1}{c})=s_i(t). (a) is proved.

Now the statement follows from (a) by induction on \ell(w_{t, \operatorname{supp}(w)}).

It suffices to consider the case where that G is semisimple. Let \mathfrak g be the Lie algebra of G. For i\in I, let e_i\in\mathfrak g (resp. f_i\in\mathfrak g) be the differential of x_i (resp. y_i). Let \mathfrak h be the Cartan subalgebra of \mathfrak g corresponding to T. Let \mathfrak h_\ensuremath{\mathbb {R}}\xspace be the set of real points of \mathfrak h and let \mathfrak h_+ be the fundamental open Weyl chamber in \mathfrak h_\ensuremath{\mathbb {R}}\xspace. Let \exp:\mathfrak g \ifbool{@display}{\longrightarrow}{\rightarrow} G be the exponential map. By our assumption on C, we can find y\in\mathfrak h_+ such that \exp(y)=t.

Let \mathfrak h/W be the set of orbits of the standard Weyl group action on \mathfrak h. For x\in\mathfrak g, the semisimple part of x is G-conjugate to an element x'\in\mathfrak h whose Weyl group orbit depends only on x; this defines a map \ensuremath{\mathcal {I}}\xspace:\mathfrak g \ifbool{@display}{\longrightarrow}{\rightarrow} \mathfrak h/W. Following [K], we define the set of “Jacobi elements”

By [K, (3.5.26)], we have \ensuremath{\mathcal {I}}\xspace(\mathfrak g_{>0})=\ensuremath{\mathcal {I}}\xspace(\mathfrak h_+). Hence any element in \mathfrak g_{>0} is regular semisimple and contained in an \ensuremath{\mathbb {R}}\xspace-split Cartan subalgebra and we can find x\in\mathfrak g_{>0} such that the semisimple part of x is G-conjugate to y; since x is semisimple we see that x is G-conjugate to y. Since \exp(y)\in C, we see that \exp(x)\in C.

It remains to show that \exp maps \mathfrak g_{>0} into G_{>0}. This property is stated in [Lu94, 5.8(c)] where a property close to it is proved (see [Lu94, 5.9(c)]). But as mentioned in [Lu94, p.550, footnote], a similar proof yields [Lu94, 5.8(c)].

By [Lu94, § 3.2], u \cdot V_{\geqslant 0} \subset V_{\geqslant 0}. Thus u \cdot (V_J)_{\geqslant 0} \subset (u \cdot V_J) \cap V_{\geqslant 0}. Now we prove the other direction. By definition, (V_J)_{\geqslant 0}=\sum_{b \in \beta \cap V_J} \ensuremath{\mathbb {R}}\xspace_{\geqslant 0} b. We recall the following result.

(a) Let i \in I and b \in \beta such that x_i(a) \cdot b=b for all a \in \ensuremath{\mathbb {R}}\xspace. Then \dot s_i \cdot b \in \beta.

This is a special case of the braid group action on the canonical basis [Lu96]. See also [BH, Lemma 2.8].

Let w=s_{i_1} \cdots s_{i_n} be a reduced expression. Since w \in W^J, for any j we have (s_{i_{j+1}} \cdots s_{i_n}) ^{-1} \alpha_{i_j} \notin \Phi_J. By definition, x_{i_j}(a) (s_{i_{j+1}} \cdots s_{i_n}) \cdot b=(s_{i_{j+1}} \cdots s_{i_n}) \cdot b for any 1 \leqslant j \leqslant n, a \in \ensuremath{\mathbb {R}}\xspace and b \in V_J. Thus by (a), for any b \in \beta \cap V_J, we have \dot s_{i_n} \cdot b \in \beta, \dot s_{i_{n-1}} \dot s_{i_n} \cdot b \in \beta, …, \dot w \cdot b \in \beta.

By definition,

Since w \in W^J, w(\Phi_J) \cap \sum_{j=1}^n \ensuremath{\mathbb {N}}\xspace s_{i_1} \cdots s_{i_{j-1}} \alpha_{i_j}=\{0\}. In other words, the only element in \{\dot w \cdot b'; b' \in \beta \cap V_J\} that occurs in the right hand of (b) with positive coefficient is \dot w \cdot b.

Let \sum_{b \in \beta \cap V_J} c_b b \in V_J with u \cdot \sum_{b \in \beta \cap V_J} c_b b \in V_{\geqslant 0}. Note that

Then c_b \geqslant 0 for all b \in \beta \cap V_J. Thus \sum_{b \in \beta \cap V_J} c_b b \in (V_J)_{\geqslant 0}. The Lemma is proved.

We prove the case where g \in G_{w_1, w_2, >0}. The case g \in G_{w_2, w_1, >0} is proved in the same way.

Let J_i=\operatorname{supp}(w_i). By Lemma 2.2, there exists u_1 \in U^-_{w_{J_2}, >0} such that u_1 ^{-1} g u_1 \in t U^+_{w_1, >0} for some t \in T_{>0} with \alpha_i(t)>1 for all i \in J_2. By Lemma 2.5, there exists u_2 \in U^-_{w_{t, J_1} ^{-1}, >0} such that u_2 ^{-1} u_1 ^{-1} g u_1 u_2 \in \bar t_{J_1} U^+_{w_1, >0}. By definition, w_{t, J_1} \in W_{J_1} \cap W^{J_2}. Thus \ell(w_{J_2} w_{t, J_1} ^{-1})=\ell(w_{J_2})+\ell(w_{t, J_1}). We set u_-=u_1 u_2 \in U^-_{w_{J_2} w_{t, J_1} ^{-1}, >0}. It is also easy to see that there exists u_+ \in L_{J_1} \cap U_{P^+_{I(\bar t_{J_1})}} such that

• the semisimple part u_+ ^{-1} u_- ^{-1} g_s u_- u_+ of u_+ ^{-1} u_- ^{-1} g u_- u_+ is \bar t_{J_1};

• the unipotent part u_+ ^{-1} u_- ^{-1} g_u u_- u_+ of u_+ ^{-1} u_- ^{-1} g u_- u_+ is in U^+_{\geqslant 0} \cap L_{I(\bar t_{J_1})}.

Let \bar t=\bar t_I and J=I(\bar t). Let w be the unique element in {}^{J_1} W^J with \bar t=\dot w ^{-1} \bar t_{J_1} \dot w. Hence the semisimple part of \dot w ^{-1} u_+ ^{-1} u_- ^{-1} g u_- u_+ \dot w is \bar t. Let H=Z_G(g_s). Since Z_G(\bar t)=L_J, we have H=(u_- u_+ \dot w) L_J (u_- u_+ \dot w) ^{-1}. The pinning \mathbf P_H of H is defined to be the conjugate of the standard pinning of L_J by the element u_- u_+ \dot w. In particular, H_{\underline{\mathbf P_H}, \geqslant 0}=(u_- u_+ \dot w) L_{J, \geqslant 0} (u_- u_+ \dot w) ^{-1}.

Since \bar t=\dot w ^{-1} \bar t_{J_1} \dot w, we have \Phi_{I(\bar t_{J_1})} =w(\Phi_{J}) \cap \Phi_{J_1}. Since w \in {}^{J_1} W^J, we have w ^{-1}(I(\bar t_{J_1})) \subset J. Therefore \dot w ^{-1} (U^+_{\geqslant 0} \cap L_{I(\bar t_{J_1})}) \dot w \subset U^+_{\geqslant 0} \cap L_J. Thus

Part (1) of Conjecture 3.1 is proved.

Let V be an irreducible finite dimensional representation of G and v be a highest weight vector of V. Let V_J \subset V be the L_J-submodule generated by v. Then V(\bar t, c_M)=V_J and V(g, c_M)=u_- u_+ \dot w \cdot V_J. The nonnegative part V(g, c_M)_{\underline{\mathbf P_H}, \geqslant 0} of V(g, c_M) determined by the pinning \mathbf P_H of H equals u_- u_+ \dot w \cdot V_{J, \geqslant 0}. Since \Phi_{I(\bar t_{J_1})}=w(\Phi_{J}) \cap \Phi_{J_1} and w \in {}^{J_1} W, we have \dot w ^{-1} u_+ \dot w \in U_{P^+_J}. Thus u_- u_+ \dot w \cdot V_J=u_- \dot w u \cdot V_J=u_- \dot w \cdot V_J for some u \in U_{P^+_J}. Thus

By the proof of Lemma 3.2, \dot w \cdot V_{J, \geqslant 0} \subset V_{\geqslant 0}. Since u_- \in U^-_{\geqslant 0}, we have u_- \cdot V_{\geqslant 0} \subset V_{\geqslant 0}. Thus V(g, c_M)_{\underline{\mathbf P_H}, \geqslant 0} \subset V_{\geqslant 0}.

On the other hand, let \beta be the canonical basis of V. Suppose that \sum_{b \in \beta \cap V_J} c_b b \in V_J with u_- \dot w \cdot \sum_{b \in \beta \cap V_J} c_b b \in V_{\geqslant 0}. By (b) in the proof of Lemma 3.2, we have

Thus c_b \geqslant 0 for all b \in \beta \cap V_J and \sum_{b \in \beta \cap V_J} c_b b \in (V_J)_{\geqslant 0}.

Therefore V(g, c_M)_{\underline{\mathbf P_H}, \geqslant 0}=u_- \dot w \cdot V_{J, \geqslant 0}=u_- \dot w \cdot V_J \cap V_{\geqslant 0}=V(g, c_M) \cap V_{\geqslant 0}. Part (2) of Conjecture 3.1 is proved.