Let $\mathfrak{g}$ be a simple, complex Lie algebra and let $\mathfrak{h}$ be a Cartan subalgebra of $\mathfrak{g}$ (defined to be the maximum abelian subalgebra of $\mathfrak{g}$ containing only ad-diagonalisable elements). Then we have:
If $X \in \mathfrak{g}$ and $[X,H]=0$ for all $H\in \mathfrak{h}$, then $X \in \mathfrak{h}$.
Can someone please help me out? Either by giving a proof or directing me to one, because I can't seem to find one anywhere. Thanks:)
(p.s. is the simple, complex part necessary for the result?)
To answer your last question first: Neither "complex" nor "simple" are really necessary. One can relax the conditions and has the following statement:
That those two definitions of Cartan subalgebras are equivalent is proposition 3.1.5 in my thesis, for which I combined ideas from Humphreys' book on Lie algebras with some from Seligman's "Rational Methods in Lie Algebras" and "A note on the centralizer ..."by Xiaoxi Xue. It is also exercise 3 to vol VII, §2 of Bourbaki's books on Lie groups and Lie algebras. The proof for the relevant part here goes like this:
Call $Z:=\mathfrak{z}_{\mathfrak{g}}(\mathfrak{h})$ that centraliser of $\mathfrak{h}$. First show that $Z$ is self-normalising, and that for each element $x$ it contains, it also contains its semisimple and nilpotent parts $x_s$ and $x_n$. (For these two facts, one only needs that $\mathfrak{h}$ consists of semisimple elements, not that it's maximal). Now by maximality it follows that every semisimple element of $Z$ must already be in $\mathfrak{h}$.
From this it follows that $Z$ is a nilpotent Lie algebra. Namely, if $x \in Z$, then we just noted that $x_s \in \mathfrak{h}$, hence the restriction of $ad(x)$ to $Z$ acts via the restriction of $ad(x_n)$, which is nilpotent, so all elements of $Z$ are $ad_Z$-nilpotent.
So we have shown that $Z$ is nilpotent and self-normalising, i.e. a Cartan subalgebra in the classical definition. But for those it's well-known (e.g. Bourbaki loc.cit. VII.2.4 Thm. 2) that all its elements are semisimple. But then the above implies that actually $Z=\mathfrak{h}$ all along, and we're done!
I admit that proof seems very indirect. I would be happy to see a more direct proof.