How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
SU(2) and SO(3) share roots but are not isomorphic
Statement refuted
Assume the Axiom of Choice. The compact connected semisimple groups and , which share the root system and are centrally isogenous, are isomorphic.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Assume the Axiom of Choice; the double cover with kernel .
and have the same root system and are centrally isogenous, the adjoint double cover being (Semisimple compact groups up to isogeny, Character lattices of SU(2) and SO(3)).
The centre of is : a central matrix commutes with every , so it is diagonal, and commuting with makes its diagonal entries equal; determinant one then gives . The centre of is trivial: commuting with the three coordinate half-turns makes a central rotation diagonal, and commuting with the cyclic coordinate permutation makes its three diagonal entries equal; orthogonality and determinant one then force . Finally, if is an isomorphism and , then commutes with every , so . [matrix multiplication, group axioms]
The character lattice of is while that of is (Character lattices of SU(2) and SO(3)).
Counterexample
Both groups are compact, connected and semisimple with root system , and they are related by the finite central isogeny of [L1]; so the root system and the isogeny class coincide.
An isomorphism would carry the centre of onto the centre of , which is trivial by [L2]; as has two elements and the trivial group has one, no isomorphism exists.
Equivalently, the two groups have different character lattices by [L3], and the fundamental weight of does not descend to ; the witness pair therefore refutes the claim that a shared root system determines a compact connected semisimple group up to isomorphism.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
30 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Anthony W. Knapp, Lie Groups Beyond an Introduction, 2nd ed. (standard reference, not scraped)