Recently I read that all left invariant metrics on the Heisenberg group are equivalent up to scaling,however no reference was given for this result. I've made some attempt to prove this myself. In particular the Heisenberg group H can be represented as, $$H=\left\{ \begin{bmatrix}1&x&y\\0&1&z\\0&0&1 \end{bmatrix} \Big\vert\, x,y,z\in\mathbb{R}\right\}\tag{1}$$with $$\mathfrak{g}=\left\{\begin{bmatrix}0&x&y\\0&0&z&\\0&0&0\end{bmatrix}\Big| \,x,y,z\in\mathbb{R}\right\}\tag{2}$$its associated Lie algebra. Then we can define a left invariant metric $g$ by choosing a basis for $\mathfrak{g}$ and declaring it orthonormal and then translating. I've made a attempts at this but am not really sure where to start. I've tried starting with two choices of basis $\{E_1,E_2,E_3\}$ and $\{F_1,F_2,F_3\}$ with metrics $g_1,g_2$ respectively. I like to then say that if $\phi:\mathfrak{g}\rightarrow\mathfrak{g}$ is an automorphism I could extend that to an automorphism $\Phi:H\rightarrow H$ which will hopefully be an isometry. If you can point me in the right direction with either a reference or on the proof itself I would appreciate it.
2026-04-28 19:02:33.1777402953
Classifying left invariant metrics on the 3-dimensional heisenberg group
1.3k Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in DIFFERENTIAL-GEOMETRY
- Smooth Principal Bundle from continuous transition functions?
- Compute Thom and Euler class
- Holonomy bundle is a covering space
- Alternative definition for characteristic foliation of a surface
- Studying regular space curves when restricted to two differentiable functions
- What kind of curvature does a cylinder have?
- A new type of curvature multivector for surfaces?
- Regular surfaces with boundary and $C^1$ domains
- Show that two isometries induce the same linear mapping
- geodesic of infinite length without self-intersections
Related Questions in LIE-GROUPS
- Best book to study Lie group theory
- Holonomy bundle is a covering space
- homomorphism between unitary groups
- On uniparametric subgroups of a Lie group
- Is it true that if a Lie group act trivially on an open subset of a manifold the action of the group is trivial (on the whole manifold)?
- Find non-zero real numbers $a,b,c,d$ such that $a^2+c^2=b^2+d^2$ and $ab+cd=0$.
- $SU(2)$ adjoint and fundamental transformations
- A finite group G acts freely on a simply connected manifold M
- $SU(3)$ irreps decomposition in subgroup irreps
- Tensors transformations under $so(4)$
Related Questions in RIEMANNIAN-GEOMETRY
- What is the correct formula for the Ricci curvature of a warped manifold?
- How to show that extension of linear connection commutes with contraction.
- geodesic of infinite length without self-intersections
- Levi-Civita-connection of an embedded submanifold is induced by the orthogonal projection of the Levi-Civita-connection of the original manifold
- Geodesically convex neighborhoods
- The induced Riemannian metric is not smooth on the diagonal
- Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic notions of Harmonic maps.
- Equivalence of different "balls" in Riemannian manifold.
- Why is the index of a harmonic map finite?
- A closed manifold of negative Ricci curvature has no conformal vector fields
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
There are essentially two approaches to this problem, both of which will arrive at identical results. One relies on results pertaining to three-dimensional unimodular Lie groups that can be found in John Milnor's wonderful paper concerning the left invariant Riemannian metrics on Lie groups. The other approach is to directly exploit the automorphisms of the Lie algebra of the Heisenberg group. Since the Heisenberg group is nilpotent and the bracket structure is incredibly simple, the automorphism group is large and one can find a basis for an arbitrary left invariant metric that is of a particularly simple form. Using the automorphism group to find canonical forms for left invariant metrics on three-dimensional Lie groups has its limitations, however, as almost nothing can be said about the canonical forms of left invariant metrics on $SO(3)$ and $SL_{2}\left(\mathbb{R}\right)$ via an automorphism reduction. In these cases, the results of Milnor are truly wonderful.
I will outline both approaches below and I have provided a link to Milnor's paper at the end of this answer.
(Automorphism Reduction) Using your notation above, we take the following as a basis for the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$: $$ \mathbf{E}_{1} = \begin{pmatrix} 0&1&0\\ 0&0&0\\ 0&0&0\\\end{pmatrix}, \hskip.25in \mathbf{E}_{2} =\begin{pmatrix} 0&0&0\\ 0&0&1\\ 0&0&0\\\end{pmatrix} \hskip.25in \mathbf{E}_{3} = \begin{pmatrix} 0&0&1\\ 0&0&0\\ 0&0&0\\\end{pmatrix}, $$ and we observe that the Lie algebra structure of $\mathfrak{g}$ is completely determined by the non-zero bracket relations $$ \left[ \mathbf{E}_{1}, \mathbf{E}_{2}\right] = \mathbf{E}_{3}. $$ The corresponding structure constants $C_{ij}^{k}$ are defined by $\left[\mathbf{E}_{i}, \mathbf{E}_{j}\right] = C_{ij}^{k}\mathbf{E}_{k}$ (summation convention assumed), and we note that the only nonzero structure constant(s) is $C_{12}^{3} = 1$ (and $C_{21}^{3} = -1$).
Due to the number of structure constants of the Lie algebra that are zero, the group of automorphisms is quite large. We can take as the definition of an automorphism of $\mathfrak{g}$ to be an invertible linear transformation $A : \mathfrak{g} \to \mathfrak{g}$ that satisfies $A\left(\left[\mathbf{E}_{i}, \mathbf{E}_{j}\right]\right) = \left[ A\left(\mathbf{E}_{i}\right), A\left(\mathbf{E}_{j}\right)\right]$ for all basis vectors $\mathbf{E}_{i}$, $\mathbf{E}_{j}$.
Letting $A : \mathfrak{g} \to \mathfrak{g}$ be a linear transformation defined with respect to the given basis by $A\left(\mathbf{E}_{i}\right) = a_{i}^{j}\mathbf{E}_{j}$, we find that the entries of the matrix representation of $A$ must relate to the structure constants of $\mathfrak{g}$ as follows.
Computing the Lie brackets of the basis vectors first, we must have \begin{align*} A\left(\left[\mathbf{E}_{i}, \mathbf{E}_{j}\right]\right) &= A\left(C_{ij}^{k}\mathbf{E}_{k}\right)\\ &= C_{ij}^{k}A\left(\mathbf{E}_{k}\right)\\ &= C_{ij}^{k}a_{k}^{p}\mathbf{E}_{p}. \end{align*}
But calculating the Lie bracket $\left[A\left(\mathbf{E}_{i}\right), A\left(\mathbf{E}_{j}\right)\right]$ after mapping, we find that \begin{align*} \left[A\left(\mathbf{E}_{i}\right), A\left(\mathbf{E}_{j}\right)\right] &= \left[a_{i}^{r}\mathbf{E}_{r}, a_{j}^{s}\mathbf{E}_{s}\right]\\ &= a_{i}^{r}a_{j}^{s}\left[\mathbf{E}_{r}, \mathbf{E}_{s}\right]\\ &= a_{ij}^{r}a_{j}^{s}C_{rs}^{p}\mathbf{E}_{p}. \end{align*}
Thus, the entries of the matrix representation of $A$ and the structure constants $C_{ij}^{k}$ must satisfy the following system of equations: $$ C_{ij}^{k}a_{k}^{p} = a_{ij}^{r}a_{j}^{s}C_{rs}^{p}, \hskip.15in i, j, k, r, s, p = 1..3. $$ Again, due to the number of structure constants that are zero, the equations above are easily solved ad one finds that $A = \left(a^{i}_{j}\right)$ is an automorphism of $\mathfrak{g}$ if and only if $A$ has a matrix representation with respect to the chosen basis of the form $$ A= \begin{pmatrix} a^{1}_{1} & a^{1}_{2} & 0\\ a^{2}_{1} & a^{2}_{2} & 0\\ a^{3}_{1} & a^{3}_{2} & \Delta \end{pmatrix}, \hskip.25in \Delta =a^{1}_{1}a^{2}_{2} - a^{1}_{2}a^{2}_{1} \ne 0. $$
Now, if we start with an arbitrary left invariant metric $\mathbf{g}$ defined relative to the chosen frame $\mathbf{E}_{1}, \mathbf{E}_{2}, \mathbf{E}_{3}$ by $$ \mathbf{g} = \left(g_{ij}\right) = \left(\mathbf{g}\left(\mathbf{E}_{i}, \mathbf{E}_{j}\right)\right), $$ we can use elements of the automorphism group to change the basis of $\mathfrak{g}$ so that
Note that as opposed to starting with an arbitrary frame for the Lie algebra and declaring it to be an orthonormal frame that we turn into a left invariant metric $\mathbf{g}$ via left translation, we instead start with a particular frame for the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ and we let $\mathbf{g}$ be an arbitrary inner product that we turn into a left invariant metric via left translations. The distinction here is essential.
Observing that the columns of the matrix representation of an element in the automorphism group tell us exactly what we can do to a particular basis vector with an automorphism, we see that can arrange for the basis vectors $\mathbf{E}_{1}$ and $\mathbf{E}_{2}$ to be any two linearly independent vectors that are also linearly independent to $\mathbf{E}_{3}$.
Specifically, we can make a change of basis of the form \begin{align*} \tilde{\mathbf{E}}_{1} &= a^{1}_{1}\mathbf{E}_{1} + a^{2}_{1}\mathbf{E}_{2} + a^{3}_{1}\mathbf{E}_{3}\\ \tilde{\mathbf{E}}_{2} &= a^{1}_{2}\mathbf{E}_{1} + a^{2}_{2}\mathbf{E}_{2} + a^{3}_{2}\mathbf{E}_{3}\\ \tilde{\mathbf{E}}_{1} &= \Delta\mathbf{E}_{3},\\ \end{align*} so that that $\tilde{\mathbf{E}}_{1}$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{E}_{2}}$ are $\mathbf{g}$-orthogonal unit vectors that are $\mathbf{g}$-orthogonal to $\mathbf{E}_{3}$. Furthermore, note that a change of basis of the indicated form will only scale $\mathbf{E}_{3}$.
The matrix representation of the inner product $\mathbf{g}$ with respect to the new basis takes the form
$$ \mathbf{g} = \left(g_{ij}\right) = \left(\mathbf{g}\left(\tilde{\mathbf{E}}_{i}, \tilde{\mathbf{E}}_{j}\right)\right) = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 1 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & \mathbf{g}\left(\tilde{\mathbf{E}}_{3}, \tilde{\mathbf{E}}_{3}\right)\\ \end{pmatrix}. $$
Note that the selection of the basis vectors $\tilde{\mathbf{E}}_{1}$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{E}}_{2}$ to be orthogonal unit vectors that are orthogonal to $\mathbf{E}_{3}$ is unique up to a rotation about $\mathbf{E}_{3}$, i.e., an automorphism of the form $\begin{pmatrix} \cos \theta & -\sin \theta & 0\\ \sin \theta & \cos \theta & 0\\ 0 & 0& 1\\ \end{pmatrix}$, but applying such an automorphism will do nothing to improve the representation of the left invariant metric $\mathbf{g}$.
Finally, as you noted in your question, we can extend the automorphism of the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ to an automorphism of the Heisenberg group $H$. As such, we see that the left invariant metrics on the Heisenberg group are of the form
$$ \mathbf{g} = \left(g_{ij}\right) = \left(\mathbf{g}\left(\mathbf{E}_{i}, \mathbf{E}_{j}\right)\right) = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0\\ 0 & 1 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & \mathbf{g}\left(\mathbf{E}_{3}, \mathbf{E}_{3}\right)\\ \end{pmatrix}, $$ where the Lie algebra structure of $\mathfrak{g}$ is determined by the non-zero bracket $\left[\mathbf{E}_{1}, \mathbf{E}_{2}\right] = \mathbf{E}_{3}$.
Or equivalently $$ \mathbf{g} = \omega^{1} \otimes \omega^{1} + \omega^{2}\otimes \omega^{2} + \lambda \omega^{3} \otimes \omega^{3},\hskip.25in \lambda \in \mathbb{R}, \lambda > 0 $$ where $\omega^{1}, \omega^{2}, \omega^{3}$ constitute the coframe that is dual to $\mathbf{E}_1, \mathbf{E}_{2}$, $\mathbf{E}_{3}$.
Milnor's Approach (I will supply some details later tonight, but you can find the article linked here: Curvatures of left invariant metrics on Lie groups. The relevant material is in Section 4. If you try using the automorphisms of $SO(3)$ or $SL_{2}\left(\mathbb{R}\right)$ to reduce the left invariant metrics on either of the groups to somewhat canonical forms, you will gain an appreciation for how wonderful Milnor's result(s) is(are). The abstract of the paper also happens to be one of my favorite abstracts.)