arxiv: v1 [math.qa] 31 Aug 2018

Transcription

1 arxiv: v [math.qa] 3 Aug 208 A new approach to the SL n spider Stephen Bigeow September 3, 208 Abstract The SL n spider gives adiagrammatic way toencode therepresentation category of the quantum group U q(s n). The aim of this paper is to define a new spider that contains the SL n spider. The new spider is defined by generators and reations, according to fairy simpe rues that start with combinatoria data coming from the root system of SL n. Introduction A spider is an agebraic structure that can be used to encode the representation category of a quantum group. Kuperberg [6] gave generators and reations for spiders for ran two Lie agebras. Cautis, Kamnitzer, and Morrison [2] did the same for SL n. The aim of this paper is to define a new spider that contains a copy of the SL n spider. The precise definition of the term spider is not a that important in this paper. We ony need to define two specific spiders, and a map between them. We define a spider by defining its webs, and giving a ist of reations these webs satisfy. A web wi be some ind of graph drawn in a dis, with endpoints on the boundary of the dis. A reation wi be a forma inear reation between webs. A reation can be appied ocay inside a arger web, which remains unchanged outside the region where the reation is appied. We wi wor over the fied Q(q). The quantum integers are [n] = q n +q 3 n + +q n 3 +q n. We use Q(q) for the convenience of being abe to divide by quantum integers, but it might be possibe to prove our main resut over the ring Z[q ± ]. My motivation for the construction in this paper was to get a better understanding of spiders, which are currenty presented by generators and reations that seem somewhat ad hoc. The reations for the new spider are simper, and defined using the combinatoria data coming from the root system of SL n. However, there is much that sti remains mysterious. I do not now how to prove that the new spider contains the SL n spider without aready nowing generators and reations for the SL n spider. One

2 + + n n Figure : The four inds of vertex in a web approach might start by using the same new spider to encode the Hopf agebra U q (s n ), generaizing the n = 2 case from []. I aso do not now whether the new spider is a diagrammatic encoding of some other nown approach to the SL n spider. I thin it has something to do with the graph panar agebra, as defined in [4], but for paths in the root attice. With a more sophisticated definition, it shoud be possibe to encode the Ocneanu ces for the A (n) graph, as defined in [3]. A bonus feature of our approach is that it extends, with no extra effort, to webs with virtua crossings. These satisfy detour moves, but not virtua Reidemeister one. This eads to an invariant of rotationa virtua nots and ins, which is presumaby the same as the one defined by Kauffman [5]. 2 Webs A web in the SL n spider is a certain ind of graph drawn in the pane. Each strand is oriented and is abeed by an integer from {,...,n }. A web can have bivaent and trivaent vertices, of the forms shown in Figure. At a trivaent vertex, either strands abeed and fuse to a strand abeed +, or a strand abeed + divides into strands abeed and. At a bivaent vertex, strands abeed and n either both enter or both exit the vertex, and a tag points to one of the two sides of the vertex, breaing its rotationa symmetry. The reations are shown in Figure 2. Here, and throughout the paper, we omit some of the abes on strands, as ong as they can be deduced from context. We ca the reations: switching a tag, canceing a pair of tags, I = H, bursting a digon, bursting a square. We aow strands to be abeed n, with the convention any such strand can be deeted. Any trivaent vertex that had a strand abeed n then becomes a bivaent vertex with a tag on the side of the deeted strand. We aso impose the reations obtained by reversing a of the arrows in any of the above reations. 2

3 = ( ) (n ) = n n m = m = [] = +[ ] Figure 2: Web reations. Some abes are omitted, but can be deduced. Note that we have used a convention for tags that is different from that of [2]. To recover the convention in [2], switch the side of the tag on every bivaent vertex whose strands are oriented inward. We have aso used a smaer set of reations than in [2], so as to mae our job easier. Proposition. The above set of reations is equivaent to the defining reations given in [2], but with a different convention for tags. Proof. Our reations appear in [2] as equations (2.3), (2.2), (2.6), (2.4) for =, and (2.0) for r = s = =. Conversey, the defining reations (2.3) through (2.0) in [2] can be deduced from the reations given here. We eave this as an exercise, with hints. Tag migration (2.7) is a specia case of the I = H reation. The second version of tag migration (2.8) foows from the first, together with tag canceation. Square remova (2.9) is proved by induction on s, where the case s = foows from the I = H reation and our digon bursting reation. Removing a bigon (2.4) is proved by induction on, using the square remova reation. The other version of removing a bigon (2.5) foows from the first and tag canceation. For the square switching reation (2.0), note that we can burst either of the two squares in the web. 3

4 α, α i,j α i,j α i,j α i,j α, α j,i α j,i Figure 3: Virtua crossings and bivaent vertices in a cobweb. Equating the two outcomes impies the case r = s = of the square switching reation. The genera case then foows by induction. 3 Cobwebs Bioogists cassify spider webs into types. If the diagrams in the previous section are supposed to resembe the usua orb webs, then the diagrams introduced in this section more cosey resembe cobwebs, since they have no vertices except for bivaent vertices and virtua crossings. Let e,...,e n be the standard basis vectors in R n. The roots of the SL n root system are the vectors α i,j = e i e j for i,j {,...,n} with i j. Ca α i,j a positive root if i > j. A cobweb is a coection of strands drawn in the pane. Each strand is oriented and is abeed by a root. A cobweb can have virtua crossings and bivaent vertices, as shown in Figure 3. A virtua crossing is a point where a pair of strands pass through each other. A bivaent vertex has strands abeed α i,j and α j,i, oriented both in or both out, and has a tag that points to one side of the vertex. The reations are shown in Figure 4. These appy for any way to fi in the omitted orientations and abes, where the orientations and abes on a vertex or virtua crossing must be as in the Figure 3, and both sides of an equation must have the same pattern of orientations and abes on their boundaries. We ca the reations: switching a tag, canceing two tags, bursting a bubbe, three detour moves: virtua Reidemeister moves two and three, and siding a virtua crossing past a tag, smoothing a virtua crossing of two strands that have the same abe. We wi aso need the foowing sadde reation. 4

5 = ( ) = α i,j = q sign(i j) = = = α i,j α i,j = α i,j α i,j Figure 4: Cobweb reations. Unabeed strands can have any consistent orientations and abes. Proposition 2. The foowing is a consequence of the cobweb reations, where a strands have the same abe α i,j. = q sign(i j) Proof. Starting with the cobweb on the eft, use virtua Reidemeister two to introduce two virtua crossings, and then smooth both of these crossings, and burst the resuting bubbe. Other important consequences of the cobweb reations incude virtua Reidemeister one with a scaar, and bursting a negativey oriented bubbe. = q sign(i j) = q sign(j i). Here, a strands have the same abe α i,j. Whenever something is defined by generators and reations, it is worth checing that it is not trivia. The foowing proposition does this. Proposition 3. The space spanned by cosed cobwebs is one-dimensiona. Proof. It is easy to use the cobweb reations to reduce any cosed cobweb to some monomia ±q t times the empty cobweb. We wi describe how to compute this monomia in a competey canonica way. 5

6 It is best here to thin of each bivaent vertex as a pace where a singe strand changes its abe and orientation. With this convention, a cosed cobweb consists of a coection of immersed oops. Give each oop the overa orientation that is the same as a segments abeed by a positive root, and the opposite of a segments abeed by a negative root. With respect to these orientations, et s be the number of tags that are on the eft side of their oop, and et t be the sum of the turning numbers of a oops. Our desired monomia is then ( ) s q t. Note that we woud get the same answer if we counted tags on the right side ofoops, since there must be an even number of tags in tota. Our cacuation is easiy shown to be invariant under a cobweb reations. This impies that the vector space of cosed cobwebs moduo cobweb reations is precisey the vector space of scaar mutipes of the empty diagram. 4 The map We wi define a map that taes each web to a sum of cobwebs. We use a state sum. A state on a web is a way to assign a subset of {,...,n} to each strand such that the foowing conditions are satisfied. If a strand is abeed by the integer, then it must be assigned a set that has cardinaity. The strands at a trivaent vertex must be assigned sets K, L and K L, where K and L are disjoint. The strands at a bivaent vertex must be assigned sets K and L such that K and L are disjoint, and K L = {,...,n}. For every state, we define a corresponding cobweb as foows. If a strand is abeed by a set K then repace it by a coection of parae strands, with one strand abeed α i,j for every i K and j K. The orientation of these parae strands shoud be the same as that of the origina strand. Because of virtua crossings, it does not matter in what order they are arranged. Consider a trivaent vertex in which strands enter from the eft and right, and one strand exits to the top. Suppose the strands are assigned the sets K on the eft, L on the right, and K L on the top. We repace this vertex with a cobweb that has the foowing strands: for every i K and j K L there is a strand abeed α i,j going from the eft to the top, for every i L and j K L there is a strand abeed α i,j going from the right to the top, and for every i K and j L there are strands abeed α i,j and α j,i that come from the eft and right to meet at a bivaent vertex with a tag pointing up. For a trivaent vertex with one strand oriented in and two strands oriented out, simpy reverse a of the arrows in the above. Now consider a bivaent vertex with incoming strands entering from the eft and right, and a tag pointing up. Suppose the strands are assigned the sets 6

7 K on the eft and L on the right. We map this vertex to a cobweb with the foowing strands. For every i K and j L, there are strands abeed α i,j and α j,i coming from the eft and right to meet at a bivaent vertex with a tag pointing up. For a bivaent vertex with two strands oriented out, simpy reverse a of the arrows in the above. Note that, for any vertex with any state, the two or three strands map to parae sets of cobweb strands, and the vertex maps to a way to connect up the endpoints from these parae sets of strands. Thus, for any web with any state, the vertices and edges map to cobwebs that join up correcty to mae a singe compete cobweb. We can at east party expain where the definitions in this section come from. A strand abeed corresponds to the th exterior power of the defining representation of SL n. The weight system for this representation is the set of vectors λ K = i Ke i such that K has cardinaity. (Stricty speaing, we shoud project these vectors onto the hyperpane spanned by the roots, but this wi not mae any difference.) A strand assignedthe weight λ K is mapped to parae strands, with one for each root whose inner product with λ K is one. The rue for vertices is not so easiy expained. It is, in some sense, the simpest rue possibe, but the rea justification is that it wors, as we prove next. 5 The map is we-defined Proposition 4. The map defined in Section 4 is a we-defined injective map from the SL n spider to the cobweb spider. Proof. Assuming the map is we-defined, it is ceary not the zero map, since it taes the empty web to the empty cobweb, which is non-zero by Proposition 3. Injectivity then foowsfrom the factthat the SL n spider hasnonon-zeroproper ideas. To prove that the map is we-defined, we chec that it respects each of the web reations isted in Section 2. A set of boundary data on a reation is a way to assign a set to each of the strands on the boundary, where we assign the same set to every strand at any given position on the boundary. For a such boundary data, we repace each web by the sum of cobwebs over a states that are consistent with the boundary data. We then chec that the eft and right sides of the equation map to the same inear combination of cobwebs, up to the cobweb reations from Section 3. We must do this for every reation, and every choice of boundary data that extends to at east one state on at east one web in the reation. We wi repeatedy find ourseves computing the cobweb corresponding to a state on a web. It is easiest to do this one pair of roots ±α i,j at a time. We checcases based on where i and j ie. Cobwebstrands with abes ±α i,j appear wherever a web strand was assigned a set that contains exacty one of i and j. 7

8 5. Strands abeed n A strand that is abeed n must be assigned the set {,...,n}, and then mapped to an empty coection of parae cobweb strands. A of our cacuations wi be compatibe with the convention for strands abeed n. 5.2 Reversing a orientations The cobweb reations are invariant under switching a orientations and mapping q to q. The coefficients in the web reations are a invariant under mapping q to q, so a of our proofs wi aso appy when a orientations are reversed. 5.3 Tag operations The tag switching and tag canceing reations for webs foow immediatey from the same reations for cobwebs. Note that a strand abeed is mapped to (n ) parae cobweb strands, so a tag switch in the web corresponds to (n ) tag switches in the cobweb. 5.4 The I = H reation Assign the sets K, L, and M to the strands abeed, and m, and K L M to the strands at the top-right. Here, K, L, and M are disjoint and have cardinaities,, and m. We must then assign L M to the vertica strand in the I-shaped web, and K M to the horizonta strand in the H-shaped web. Each side of the equation is thus mapped to a singe cobweb. Let α i,j be a root. We want to show that the strands abeed α i,j and α j,i are the same for the I- and H-shaped webs. To be excessivey thorough, we coud chec sixteen cases, based on whether i ies in K, L, M, or none of them, and simiary for j. For exampe, if i K and j L then there are strands abeed α i,j and α j,i coming from the top-eft and bottom-eft, and meeting at a bivaent vertex with a tag to the right. If i K and j K L M then there is a strand abeed α i,j going from the top-eft to the top-right. The remaining cases are simiar. 5.5 Bursting a digon Assign the set K to the strands on the top and bottom of the webs. A state on the web on the eft side of the equation corresponds to a choice of a K. Namey, assign K \{a} and {a} to the eft and right sides of the digon. The corresponding cobweb has the foowing strands. For every i K and j K, there is a strand abeed α i,j going verticay from the bottom of the cobweb to the top. For every j K \ {a}, there are strands abeed α j,a and α a,j going up the eft and right side of the digon, and meeting at two bivaent vertices. We can cance the tags to get a positivey oriented bubbe abeed α a,j. 8

9 Bursting these bubbes over a j K\{a} gives q to the power of the exponent: {j K j < a} {j K j > a}. Now tae the sum over a a K. The vertica strands of the cobwebs are the same in a terms, and the powers of q sum to []. This is the same as the right side of the digon reation. 5.6 Bursting a square Assign sets to each of the four strands on the boundary of the webs. There are three cases to consider. Case : Let K have cardinaity, and et y K. Assign K to the top-eft and bottom-eft strands of a webs, and {y} to the top-right and bottom-right strands. Let K = K \ {y}. A state on the web on the eft side of the equation corresponds to a choice of a K. Namey, assign {a} to the horizonta strands, {a,y} to the right side of the square, and K \{a} to the eft. By checing cases, the cobweb corresponding to the above state has the foowing strands. For a j K \{a}, there is a cosed oop made by strands abeed α a,j and α j,a meeting at two bivaent vertices. Every other strand goes verticay from the bottom of the cobweb to the top, after canceing a pair of tags in the case of α y,a. We can cance pairs of tags to convert the cosed oops to positivey oriented bubbes abeed α a,j. Bursting a of these bubbes gives q to the power of the exponent {j K j < a} {j K j > a}. Now tae the sum over a a K. The vertica strands are the same for every term, and the powers of q add up to [ ]. On the right side of the equation, the first term has no state that is consistent with the boundary data, and the second has one. The second term has a coefficient of [ ], and maps to the same cobweb as we got on the eft side of the equation. Case 2: Let K have cardinaity, and x,y K. Assign K {x} and {y} to the bottom-eft and bottom-right strands of a webs. Assign K {y} and {x} to the top-eft and top-right strands of a webs. There is ony one state on the web on the eft side of the equation that is consistent with the boundary data. Namey, assign {y} and {x} to the top and bottom sides of the square, and assign K and {x,y} to the eft and right sides. By checing cases, the corresponding cobweb has the foowing strands: for every j K {y}, there is a cup formed by strands abeed α x,j and α j,x that meet at a bivaent vertex with a downward tag, for every j K {x}, there is a cap formed by strands abeed α y,j and α j,y that meet at a bivaent vertex with an upward tag, and 9

10 every other strand goes from the bottom of the cobweb to the top. On the right side of the equation, the first term has one state that is consistent with the boundary data, and the second has none. The cobweb corresponding to the first term is the same as the cobweb corresponding to the eft side of the equation. Case 3: Let K have cardinaity, and y K. Assign K to the top-eft and bottom-eft strands of a webs, and {y} to the top-right and bottom-right strands. A state on the web on the eft side of the equation corresponds to a choice of a K. Namey, assign {a} to the top and bottom sides of the square, and assign K \{a} and {a,y} to the eft and right sides. After canceing tags, the corresponding cobweb has the foowing strands: for j K \{a}, there is a positivey oriented bubbe abeed α a,j, the strands abeed α a,y and α y,a form a cup and a cap with two bivaent vertices, and every other strand goes verticay from the bottom of the cobweb to the top. Use Proposition 2 and tag canceation to convert the cup and cap to vertica strands with a coefficient q sign(y a). This, and bursting a bubbes, gives q to the power of the exponent {j K j < a} {j K j > a} +sign(y a). Tae the sum these powers of q over a a K. If it were not for the sign(y a) term in the exponent of q, we woud get [n]. The sign(y a) changes this to [n ] but with one term repeated. Specificay, we get q m +[n ], where m = {j K j < y} {j K j > y}. The first term on the right side of the equation has one state consistent with the boundary data. In the corresponding cobweb, a strands go verticay from the bottom to the top with the foowing exceptions. For a j K, the strands abeed α j,y and α y,j form a cup and a cap with two bivaent vertices. Use Proposition 2 to convert each such cup and cap to q sign(y j) times vertica strands with a canceing pair of tags. These coefficients combine to give q m, with the same m as above. The second term on the right side of the equation has one state that is consistent with the boundary data. This term has a coefficient [ ], and has a corresponding cobweb that consists of ony vertica strands. In the end, a cobwebs have the same vertica strands, and the coefficients add up to q m + [n ] on either side of the equation. This competes the proof. 0

11 References [] Stephen J. Bigeow. A diagrammatic definition of U q (s 2 ). J. Knot Theory Ramifications, 23(6):450036, 9, 204. [2] Sabin Cautis, Joe Kamnitzer, and Scott Morrison. Webs and quantum sew Howe duaity. Math. Ann., 360(-2):35 390, 204. [3] David E. Evans and Mathew Pugh. Ocneanu ces and Botzmann weights for the SU(3) ADE graphs. Münster J. Math., 2:95 42, [4] Vaughan F. R. Jones. The panar agebra of a bipartite graph. In Knots in Heas 98 (Dephi), voume 24 of Ser. Knots Everything, pages Word Sci. Pub., River Edge, NJ, [5] Louis H. Kauffman. Rotationa virtua nots and quantum in invariants. J. Knot Theory Ramifications, 24(3):54008, 46, 205. [6] Greg Kuperberg. Spiders for ran 2 Lie agebras. Comm. Math. Phys., 80():09 5, 996.