I just began to learn something about classical polar spaces and now, I'm trying to understand three implications of Witt's theorem.
Let $V$ be an $m$-dimensional vector space over a field $K$ equipped with a non-degenerate quadratic, symmetric, alternating or Hermitian form. Then, Witt's theorem says that every isometry between two subspaces $U_1$ and $U_2$ of $V$ extends to an isometry of $V$.
I read that from Witt's theorem we can deduce some facts about the maximal isotropic subspaces of $V$ and the isometry group of $V$. But I don't see why. So, here are my three question:
- Why does Witt's theorem imply that every maximal totally isotropic subspace of $V$ has the same dimension, which defines the rank of a polar space?
- Why does Witt's theorem imply that every totally isotropic subspace lies in a maximal totally isotropic subspace?
- Why does Witt's theorem imply that the isometry group of $V$ acts transitively on every set consisting of totally isotropic subspaces of the same dimension?
The main thing to note in order to prove all of the statements you mentioned is the following:
Lemma. Let $U_1,U_2\subseteq V$ be totally isotropic subspaces, and $T:U_1\to U_2$ a bijective linear map. Then $T$ is an isometry.
The proof of the lemma is easy, since for any $u,w\in U_1$ we have that $$0=(u,w)=(Tu,Tw)=0,$$ where the first equality holds since $U_1$ is totally isotropic, and the last one since $U_2$ is.
Now, (3) follows, since any two subspaces of the same dimension are isomorphic, as vector spaces, which, by the lemma, is an isometry of these two space, and extends to an isometry of $V$. Thus, given two totally isometric subspaces of the same dimension, we have an isometry of $V$ mapping one to onto the other.
(1) follows from the lemma as well. For, if we assume towards contradiction that $U_1,U_2\subseteq V$ are maximally isotropic subspaces and $\dim U_1<\dim U_2$. Then, by linear algebra, we have an injective map $T:U_1\to U_2$ which, by the Lemma and Witt's theorem, extends to an isometry of $U_1$ onto a proper subspaces of $U_2$, both of which are maximally isotropic. A contradiction.
Finally, to prove (2), by the same argument as (1), it suffices to prove that some maximally isotropic subspace exists. For, given such a subspace $U$, and any totally isotropic subspace $W\subseteq V$, we may find an isometry $S:V\to V$ such that $SW\subseteq V$, and hence $W$ is included in the maximally isotropic subspace $S^{-1}V$. The existence of such a subspace follows, for example, from the existence of Darboux bases.