Necessity of diagonalizability of adjoint representation of cartan subalgebra in definition

282 Views Asked by At

This is the definition of cartan subalgebra define in Brian Hall, Lie groups, Lie algebras and representations, 2nd Edition, Chpt 7, Sec 2, Def. 7.10.

I am assuming the ground field is $C$ or it does not make sense to talk about diagonalizability.

If $g$ is complex semisimple lie algebra(here he assumed semisimple=reductive+triviality of center), and $h\subset g$ is an ideal s.t. $(1)\forall H_i\in h$, $[H_i,H_j]=0$

$(2)\forall G\in g, [G,h]=0\implies G\in h$

$(3)$ For all $H\in h, ad_H$ is diagonalizable.(i.e. adjoint representation of $h$ is diagonalizable.)

It is clear that $(1)$ and $(2)$ are required to find maximal amount of joint eigenvalues of $ad_H$. However, since $[H_i,H_j]=0$ and $ad:g\to gl(g)$ is lie algebra homomorphism, certainly it suffices to demand only 1 particular $H$ s.t. $ad_H$ diagonalizable.

$\textbf{Q:}$ Do I always need diagonalizable condition? What is the counter example that I do need? Since there is requirement for lie algebra homomorphism for $ad$, there will be constraint on the structure of $ad$. Furthermore, if I do need diagonalizability, can I just use one per reasoning above?