Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras

We construct vast families of orthogonal operators obeying pentagon relation in a direct sum of three n-dimensional vector spaces. As a consequence, we obtain pentagon relations in Grassmann algebras, making a far reaching generalization of exotic Reidemeister torsions.

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Datum:	2013
Hauptverfasser:	Korepanov, I.G., Sadykov, N.M.
Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	English
Veröffentlicht:	Інститут математики НАН України 2013
Schriftenreihe:	Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications
Online Zugang:	http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/149234
Tags:	Tag hinzufügen Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Назва журналу:	Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Zitieren:	Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras / I.G. Korepanov, N.M. Sadykov // Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications. — 2013. — Т. 9. — Бібліогр.: 16 назв. — англ.

Institution

Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

id	irk-123456789-149234
record_format	dspace
spelling	irk-123456789-1492342019-02-20T01:24:01Z Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras Korepanov, I.G. Sadykov, N.M. We construct vast families of orthogonal operators obeying pentagon relation in a direct sum of three n-dimensional vector spaces. As a consequence, we obtain pentagon relations in Grassmann algebras, making a far reaching generalization of exotic Reidemeister torsions. 2013 Article Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras / I.G. Korepanov, N.M. Sadykov // Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications. — 2013. — Т. 9. — Бібліогр.: 16 назв. — англ. 1815-0659 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 15A75; 57Q99; 57R56 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2013.030 http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/149234 en Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications Інститут математики НАН України
institution	Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
collection	DSpace DC
language	English
description	We construct vast families of orthogonal operators obeying pentagon relation in a direct sum of three n-dimensional vector spaces. As a consequence, we obtain pentagon relations in Grassmann algebras, making a far reaching generalization of exotic Reidemeister torsions.
format	Article
author	Korepanov, I.G. Sadykov, N.M.
spellingShingle	Korepanov, I.G. Sadykov, N.M. Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications
author_facet	Korepanov, I.G. Sadykov, N.M.
author_sort	Korepanov, I.G.
title	Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras
title_short	Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras
title_full	Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras
title_fullStr	Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras
title_full_unstemmed	Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras
title_sort	pentagon relations in direct sums and grassmann algebras
publisher	Інститут математики НАН України
publishDate	2013
url	http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/149234
citation_txt	Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras / I.G. Korepanov, N.M. Sadykov // Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications. — 2013. — Т. 9. — Бібліогр.: 16 назв. — англ.
series	Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications
work_keys_str_mv	AT korepanovig pentagonrelationsindirectsumsandgrassmannalgebras AT sadykovnm pentagonrelationsindirectsumsandgrassmannalgebras
first_indexed	2025-07-12T21:09:53Z
last_indexed	2025-07-12T21:09:53Z
_version_	1837476977538236416
fulltext	Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications SIGMA 9 (2013), 030, 16 pages Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras Igor G. KOREPANOV and Nurlan M. SADYKOV Moscow State University of Instrument Engineering and Computer Sciences, 20 Stromynka Str., Moscow 107996, Russia E-mail: paloff@ya.ru, nik56-74@mail.ru Received December 19, 2012, in final form April 05, 2013; Published online April 10, 2013 http://dx.doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2013.030 Abstract. We construct vast families of orthogonal operators obeying pentagon relation in a direct sum of three n-dimensional vector spaces. As a consequence, we obtain pentagon relations in Grassmann algebras, making a far reaching generalization of exotic Reidemeister torsions. Key words: Pachner moves; pentagon relations; Grassmann algebras 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 15A75; 57Q99; 57R56 1 Introduction Pachner moves [12] are elementary local rebuildings of a manifold triangulation. There are n+1 types of Pachner moves in dimension n, and a triangulation of a piecewise-linear n-manifold can be transformed into another triangulation using a sequence of these moves; a pedagogical introduction in this theory can be found in [11]. In dimension three, the Pachner moves are: • move 2 → 3, replacing two adjacent tetrahedra by three tetrahedra occupying the same place in the manifold, • inverse move 3→ 2, • move 1→ 4, decomposing a tetrahedron into four tetrahedra with a new vertex inside it, • and the inverse move 4→ 1. A move 2 → 3 is depicted in Fig. 1: the left-hand side consists of tetrahedra 1234 and 1345, while the right-hand side – of tetrahedra 1245, 2345 and 1235. Figure 1. Pachner move 2→ 3. We call pentagon relation any algebraic formula that corresponds naturally to a move 2→ 3, in such way that there is a hope to move further and develop a theory that would give some sort mailto:paloff@ya.ru mailto:nik56-74@mail.ru http://dx.doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2013.030 2 I.G. Korepanov and N.M. Sadykov of manifold invariant. Specifically, this paper deals with pentagon relations in a direct sum of complex vector spaces, as in formulas (4) and (5) below (where matrix entries can be themselves matrices), and in a Grassmann algebra, as in formula (33). A subtle point is that a Grassmann- algebraic relation follows from a direct-sum relation if the latter is made of orthogonal operators, so the construction of such “orthogonal” relations, by means of ansatz (18), (21), involving some non-commutative algebra, is the central result of this paper. Remark 1. Our pentagon relations are thus slightly unusual, because usually pentagon relations are written in the tensor product of vector spaces, see for instance [5] and [2]. Nevertheless, paper [5] already contains an example of a relation in direct sum, as we explain in the end of Section 3. Remark 2. Experience shows that if an interesting formula corresponding to moves 2↔ 3 has been found, then, usually, its counterpart corresponding to moves 1↔ 4 can be found too. Below, • in Section 2, we explain how a pentagon relation in a direct sum follows if vector spaces are put in correspondence to plane polygons, with the condition that if two of them make together a larger polygon, then the two corresponding spaces are added directly, • in the warming-up Section 3, we obtain, in our own way, the Kashaev’s pentagon relation for orthogonal matrices in the direct sum of one-dimensional spaces, • in Section 4, we present a simple general construction of vector spaces needed for pentagon relation, but without the requirement of orthogonality, • in the central Section 5, we introduce an elegant Euclidian metric in these vector spaces, • in Section 6, we look more closely at the case where the space attached to each triangle is two-dimensional, and the (complex) Euclidian metric is introduced in terms of isotropic vectors that will correspond to fermionic creation-annihilation operators, • in Section 7, we briefly recall the fundamentals of Grassmann–Berezin calculus of anti- commuting variables, and write out a Grassmann-algebraic pentagon relation, • in Section 8, we write out formulas connecting a Grassmann–Gaussian exponent taken as a tetrahedron Grassmann weight, and an orthogonal matrix, • and in Section 9, we show that our construction includes the earlier introduced Grassmann tetrahedron weights related to exotic Reidemeister torsions. We plan to write one more paper, containing relations corresponding to moves 1–4, construc- tion of a TQFT, and calculations for specific manifolds. 2 Pentagon relation in a direct sum of based vector spaces: generalities We now want to interpret our Fig. 1 as a flat figure – projection of the two sides of the Pachner move onto the plane. Thus, for instance, the back surface of two tetrahedra in the left-hand side of Fig. 1 becomes a triangulated pentagon 12345, made of three triangles 124, 234 and 145; this is also shown as the leftmost pentagon in Fig. 2 or 3. We put in correspondence to this flat geometric picture the following algebraic objects. An n-dimensional complex vector space will correspond to each triangle with vertices in {1, . . . , 5}, and we require the following condition. Condition 1. If some triangles make together a triangulation of a greater polygon (quadrilateral or the whole pentagon), then the direct sum of the corresponding spaces depends only on this polygon, i.e., is the same for other triangulation(s). Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras 3 Figure 2. Flips in pentagon triangulation corresponding to the l.h.s. of Pachner move 2→ 3. Figure 3. Flips in pentagon triangulation corresponding to the r.h.s. of Pachner move 2→ 3. Thus, all convex quadrilaterals, as well as the pentagon 12345, acquire their vector spaces as well. Taking some liberty, we denote these spaces the same way as polygons, and write Condition 1 as 1234 = 124⊕ 234 = 123⊕ 134, 12345 = 124⊕ 234⊕ 145 = · · · , etc. (1) We further assume that our spaces corresponding to triangles are based – equipped with chosen bases. The bases will be written as columns made of basis vectors, for instance, f124 = f (1) 124 ... f (n) 124  . For a greater polygon, any decomposition like those in (1) provides a basis in the form of the ordered union of bases in triangles, written as, for instance, ( f124 f234 ) if we are considering the decomposition 1234 = 124⊕ 234. Remark 3. The specific order of bases in this union can be fixed in any convenient way. In the present paper, it always complies with the following rule: fijk goes before fi′j′k′ if i+ j+k < i′ + j′ + k′. Actually, this order arose when we were doing calculations in what we were seeing as the most natural way. We never meet here a situation where i+ j + k = i′ + j′ + k′. Remark 4. The vertices of a triangle ijk always go in this paper in the increasing order: i < j < k. Note that this order induces a consistent orientation of all triangles in all pentagons in Figs. 2 and 3. As we are dealing here only with five vertices and ten triangles, the orientation issues do not bring about any problems; we will, however, comment on their importance in a specific situation below in Remark 9. The l.h.s. of Fig. 1 can be seen as the tetrahedra 1234 and 1345 glued to the back surface 12345. In our flat picture, each tetrahedron corresponds to a flip, or two-dimensional Pachner move, in the triangulation of 12345; the sequence of these two flips is depicted in Fig. 2. 4 I.G. Korepanov and N.M. Sadykov We denote these flips P and Q, and use the same notations for their corresponding matrices defined as the following change-of-basis matrices in 12345:f124 f234 f145  P7−→ f123 f134 f145  Q7−→ f123 f135 f345  . (2) Sometimes it will be convenient for us to write this also in the following “matrix× basis” form: P f124 f234 f145  = f123 f134 f145  , Q f123 f134 f145  = f123 f135 f345  . Similarly, the r.h.s. of Fig. 1 can be seen as the tetrahedra 1245, 2345, and 1235 glued to the back surface 12345. In our flat picture, this corresponds to the sequence of three flips in the triangulation of 12345 depicted in Fig. 3. We denote these flips R, S and T , and their corresponding matrices are determined by the following actions on bases of 12345:f124 f234 f145  R7−→ f125 f234 f245  S7−→ f125 f235 f345  T7−→ f123 f135 f345  . (3) Theorem 1. Matrices P, . . . , T have the following forms: P = ∗ ∗ 0 ∗ ∗ 0 0 0 1  , Q = 1 0 0 0 ∗ ∗ 0 ∗ ∗  , R = ∗ 0 ∗ 0 1 0 ∗ 0 ∗  , S = 1 0 0 0 ∗ ∗ 0 ∗ ∗  , T = ∗ ∗ 0 ∗ ∗ 0 0 0 1  , (4) where each zero, one or asterisk is an n × n matrix block, and the following pentagon relation in the direct sum holds: QP = TSR. (5) Proof. The form (4) of matrices is clear from (2) and (3), as well as the relation (5) that follows from the fact that both leftmost and rightmost bases in (2) and (3) are the same. � Remark 5. We can now forget about the space 12345 and its subspaces and consider matrices P, . . . , T simply as linear operators acting in the 3n-dimensional space of usual column vectors – the direct sum of three such n-dimensional spaces. Each of the matrices P, . . . , T acts nontrivially in the direct sum of two such spaces, and can be regarded, in the spirit of similar relations in mathematical physics, as a 2n× 2n matrix, identified when necessary with its direct sum with an identity matrix. Remark 6. Equation (5) for matrices (4) can be regarded as a simplified version of “dynamical Yang–Baxter equation in a direct sum”, introduced by one of the authors [7] in 1994. The latter equation appears at each step of evolution of an integrable dynamical system in discrete time, see [7, formulas (3), (4) and (10)], and proved its usefulness and fundamental character both in dynamical systems and constructing solutions to Zamolodchikov tetrahedron equation, enough to mention papers [4, 6, 10, 13, 14]. Thus, if we construct n-dimensional subspaces of a 3n-dimensional vector space as described in the beginning of this section, including Condition 1, we get matrices satisfying the pentagon relation in the direct sum. This turns out to be, in itself, quite easy; interesting complications come forward, as we will see, when there is additional requirement of orthogonality. Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras 5 3 Kashaev’s pentagon relation for orthogonal matrices in a direct sum of one-dimensional spaces In this section, we take the following space V as the space 12345 introduced in Section 2: by definition, V is the three-dimensional complex vector space of row vectors of length 5 f = ( f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 ) (6) subject to the conditions f1 + f2 + f3 + f4 + f5 = 0, ζ1f1 + ζ2f2 + ζ3f3 + ζ4f4 + ζ5f5 = 0, (7) where ζi are some constants, all pairwise different. We will be using the following notation for their differences: ζij def = ζi − ζj . (8) Remark 7. Our motivation for introducing the vectors (6) with conditions (7) here, and their generalizations below, was simply that we have already used such objects in our earlier works, although in a different context. It is enough to mention the paper [8] and formulas (8), (9) and the unnumbered one, next after (33), therein. For 1 ≤ i < j < k ≤ 5, choose vectors fijk with only i-th, j-th and k-th nonzero components. This means that, for instance, f135 = const135 ( ζ35 0 ζ51 0 ζ13 ) . Such a vector forms itself a basis in the one-dimensional space ijk, corresponding to the trian- gle ijk. At this stage, the nonzero constants constijk can be arbitrary. Now we define 3 × 3 matrices P , Q, R, S and T by the conditions (2) and (3), and get a solution to (5) nicely parametrized by numbers ζi. In particular, the matrix corresponding to a tetrahedron depends only on the four ζi’s at its vertices. Next, we want to make orthogonal operators from our matrices P, . . . , T . This is done in two steps. First, we introduce a scalar product between vectors (6), (7), and second, we choose constants constijk, in such way that the following conditions hold. Condition 2. Scalar product between vectors (6), (7) must be such that all three vectors in any column in formulas (2) and (3) become pairwise orthogonal. Condition 3. The normalizing constants constijk are such that all fijk become unit vectors. Condition 2 applies to vectors corresponding to triangles with disjoint interiors, i.e., any two triangles within any chosen pentagon in Figs. 2 and 3; it can be checked that Condition 2 for all such triangles follows from the five independent conditions 123 ⊥ 345, 234 ⊥ 145, 345 ⊥ 125, 145 ⊥ 123, 125 ⊥ 234. (9) As a symmetric 3×3 matrix determining the (complex) Euclidian metric in our three-dimensional space V has six independent entries, it is determined by the five linear conditions (9) uniquely up to a scalar factor. Then, Condition 3 determines uniquely all normalizers constijk. We do not present here explicit formulas for the scalar product and normalizing constants, as they are written out below (formulas (18) and (21)) in a more general case. The resulting pentagon relation for orthogonal matrices is:1 0 0 0 cosϕ1345 sinϕ1345 0 − sinϕ1345 cosϕ1345 cosϕ1234 − sinϕ1234 0 sinϕ1234 cosϕ1234 0 0 0 1  (10) 6 I.G. Korepanov and N.M. Sadykov = cosϕ1235 − sinϕ1235 0 sinϕ1235 cosϕ1235 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 cosϕ2345 sinϕ2345 0 − sinϕ2345 cosϕ2345  cosϕ1245 0 sinϕ1245 0 1 0 − sinϕ1245 0 cosϕ1245 , where the cosines and sines are the following square roots of cross-ratios: cosϕijkl = √ ζilζjk ζikζjl , sinϕijkl = √ ζijζkl ζikζjl , and the exact sense of square roots may be, for instance, as follows: assume ζ1 > ζ2 > ζ3 > ζ4 > ζ5 and take positive square roots. Computer algebra system Maxima1 was of great assistance in deriving and checking relation (10). Note again the nice parametrization: each of the matrices depends only on the ζi’s in the vertices of the corresponding tetrahedron. We emphasize this fact because this will be our goal in the more complicated situation of Section 5, where our ζi’s will be n× n matrices. A relation equivalent to (10) can be found in Kashaev’s paper [5, Example 3]. 4 A construction of based n-dimensional spaces yielding pentagon relation Let now matrix entries in (4) – zeros, ones and asterisks – be themselves matrices of size n× n. As long as we are not concerned about orthogonality, the construction of a pentagon relation goes practically the same way as in the beginning of Section 3. To be more exact, we now take for our space V = 12345 the 3n-dimensional vector space of row vectors of length 5n subject to 2n linear dependencies. The row vectors will be written as( f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 ) , (11) where each sans serif letter fi denotes, in its turn, a row vector of n components, and the linear dependencies are f1 + f2 + f3 + f4 + f5 = 0, f1ζ1 + f2ζ2 + f3ζ3 + f4ζ4 + f5ζ5 = 0, where ζi are n× n matrices, with the condition that all their differences ζij = ζi − ζj are invertible. We also introduce a notation for an n× 5n matrix made of n vectors of the form (11): f = f (1) 1 f (1) 2 f (1) 3 f (1) 4 f (1) 5 ... ... ... ... ... f (n) 1 f (n) 2 f (n) 3 f (n) 4 f (n) 5  = ( f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 ) , where each fi = f (1) i ... f (n) i  is, of course, an n× n matrix. 1Maxima, a computer algebra system, http://maxima.sourceforge.net. http://maxima.sourceforge.net Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras 7 In analogy with Section 3, we introduce block matrices fijk with only i-th, j-th and k-th nonvanishing n× n matrix components. This means that, for instance, f135 = ( f1 0 f1ζ51ζ −1 35 0 f1ζ13ζ −1 35 ) . (12) We also assume the n rows of such matrices to be linearly independent ; they form then a basis in a corresponding space ijk, for instance, space 135 in the case of matrix (12). Then we can define 3n × 3n matrices P , Q, R, S and T by the conditions (2) and (3), and these conditions again ensure the pentagon relation (5). Let us write out explicit formulas for the matrix P in the case where the bases in relevant spaces are chosen as f124 = ( 1 ζ14ζ −1 42 0 ζ12ζ −1 24 ) , f234 = ( 0 1 ζ24ζ −1 43 ζ23ζ −1 34 ) , f123 = ( 1 ζ13ζ −1 32 ζ12ζ −1 23 0 ) , f134 = ( 1 0 ζ14ζ −1 43 ζ13ζ −1 34 ) (13) (compare this to formula (12) with f1 set to identity matrix). Here we have left out the irrelevant (and zero) fifth matrix component of the vectors; recall also that, according to Remark 5, we identify matrices like P with their direct sums with identity matrices. A direct calculation shows that the condition P ( f124 f234 ) = ( f123 f134 ) leads to the following explicit expression: P = ( 1 ζ12ζ −1 23 ζ34ζ −1 42 1 −ζ14ζ−142 ) . (14) The problem of introducing a Euclidian metric making our operators P, . . . , T orthogonal is not so easy as in Section 3, and deserves a separate section. 5 Making operators orthogonal We begin with analyzing how to introduce complex Euclidian metric in the space 1234 where operator P acts nontrivially, aiming at making P orthogonal; the same reasonings will apply to the other operators Q, . . . , T , after obvious changes of indices. Space 1234 consists of 4n-row vectors( f1 f2 f3 f4 ) (15) with linear relations f1 + f2 + f3 + f4 = 0 and f1ζ1 + f2ζ2 + f3ζ3 + f4ζ4 = 0. (16) There are two conditions that can be considered separately, like we did with Conditions 2 and 3 in Section 3. Condition 4. The decompositions 1234 = 124⊕ 234 = 123⊕ 134 must be orthogonal: 124 ⊥ 234, 123 ⊥ 134. (17) 8 I.G. Korepanov and N.M. Sadykov Condition 5. The bases within each of the spaces 124, 234, 123 and 134 must be orthonormal. Condition 4 means that, for the matrices defined by formulas (13), the rows of matrix f124 must be orthogonal to the rows of matrix f234, and the rows of matrix f123 must be orthogonal to the rows of matrix f134. We are searching for some complex Euclidian scalar product between vectors (15), (16), and with as good properties as possible. It turns out to be a good idea to take this scalar product in the following form:(( f1 f2 f3 f4 ) , ( g1 g2 g3 g4 )) = f1XgT2 + g1XfT2 + f3Y gT4 + g3Y fT4 , (18) where X and Y are n× n matrices to be found. The orthogonality conditions are re-written as follows: X + ζ24ζ −1 43 Y ζ −T 24 ζ T 12 = 0, Xζ−T32 ζ T 13 + ζ12ζ −1 23 Y ζ −T 34 ζ T 13 = 0, (19) where we use the notation ζ−Tij def = ( ζTij )−1 . Eliminating Y , we get the equation for X: X = ζ12ζ −1 23 ζ43ζ −1 24 Xζ −T 12 ζ T 24ζ −T 34 ζ T 32. (20) Next good idea is to take all ζi, and thus ζij , symmetric: ζij = ζTij . Then equations (19) admit the following simple solution: X = ζ12, Y = ζ34. (21) Remark 8. Actually, equation (20), for symmetric ζi’s with invertible differences, can be solved completely, because it reduces to the form XAB = BAX. Our specific solution (21) seems, however, to be the best, because it also satisfies Condition 6 below. Recall that the rows of the first matrix in (13) form a basis in the space 124, whose vectors we will write, for a moment, like( f1 f2 f4 ) , f2 = f1ζ14ζ −1 42 , f4 = f1ζ12ζ −1 24 . (22) Theorem 2. Scalar product (18) for vectors (22), given our solution (21), can be written in three equivalent forms:( ( f1 f2 f4 ) , ( g1 g2 g4 ) ) = f1ζ12g T 2 + g1ζ12f T 2 = f2ζ24g T 4 + g2ζ24f T 4 = f4ζ41g T 1 + g4ζ41f T 1 . (23) Proof. Direct calculation. � Remark 9. Formula (23) shows that the orientation of the triangle edges is relevant here: edges 12, 24 and 41, with this order of their vertices, are oriented as they must be as parts of the boundary of triangle 124, according to the classical algebraic-topological definition: ∂(ijk) = jk − ik + ij = ij + jk + ki. Theorem 3. There exists a unique complex Euclidian metric in the space 12345 satisfying the following conditions: Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras 9 (i) any two spaces corresponding to triangles ijk with disjoint interiors in Fig. 2 or 3 are mutually orthogonal, (ii) the scalar product within a space ijk, where i < j < k, is given by any of the expressions in the second line of (23), with obvious changes 1 7→ i, 2 7→ j, 4 7→ k. Proof. First, we take one pentagon triangulation, for instance, the leftmost in Figs. 2 and 3, and define the scalar product within each of the three spaces corresponding to its triangles according to (ii), while setting – again by definition – these three spaces orthogonal to each other. Then, formulas (18), (21) and Theorem 2 (with proper changes of indices) show that the desired properties are preserved under any flip in Fig. 2 or 3. � In particular, we see that, in addition to Conditions 4 and 5, the following condition holds. Condition 6. The metric in a space ijk depends only on ζi, ζj and ζk. We now turn to Condition 5 and explain how to make the bases orthonormal within any space ijk, taking again 124 as example. We consider the Gramian – matrix of scalar products – for the rows of the first matrix in (13). This Gramian is, according to (23), G124 = (f124, f124) = ζ12ζ −1 42 ζ14 + ζ14ζ −1 42 ζ12 = 2ζ12ζ −1 42 ζ14, (24) here the last equality is an easy exercise. Theorem 4. There exists an n× n matrix c124 such that G124 = c124c T 124. (25) Proof. Gramian is, of course, symmetric: G124 = GT 124. So, there are many ways to find such matrix c124 (and there are many such matrices for n > 1). For instance, one can use the Takagi decomposition [15, 16]: for a complex symmetric n×n matrix A there exists a unitary matrix Q such that A = QΣQT, where Σ = diag(σ1, . . . , σn) with real nonnegative σi. Or, otherwise, the reader can show, as an exercise using the theory of equivalence and normal forms of matrices from textbook [3], that our nondegenerate symmetric matrix G124 can even be represented as a squared, and also symmetric, matrix c124. � Now the rows of matrix e124 = c−1124f124 (26) give the desired orthonormal basis in 124; similarly in other spaces ijk. We get this way a pentagon relation for orthogonal matrices, which we formulate as the following theorem. Theorem 5. Matrices P ′, . . . , T ′ of the following transitions between bases: P ′ ( e124 e234 ) = ( e123 e134 ) , . . . , T ′ ( e125 e235 ) = ( e123 e135 ) , and identified with larger matrices so that they acquire structure (4), are orthogonal and satisfy the pentagon relation Q′P ′ = T ′S′R′. Here bases eijk are defined according to formulas of type (26), and cijk are any matrices satisfying conditions of type (25). Explicit formulas for cijk – and thus for P ′, . . . , T ′ – are not so easy to obtain. Moreover, it may be more convenient, at least for an even n and if we want to pass to Grassmann algebras in the style of Section 8 below, not to use orthonormal bases in spaces ijk, but bases consisting of isotropic vectors – vectors of length zero. This is what we are going to do, for n = 2, in Section 6. 10 I.G. Korepanov and N.M. Sadykov 6 Explicit formulas for n = 2 and isotropic bases Let all ζi be symmetric 2× 2 matrices, and consider again the basis f124 in the space 124 given by the first formula in (13) and the Gramian (24). For reasons that will be seen in Section 8, we want to construct a new basis g124 = ( g (1) 124 g (2) 124 ) = a124f124 such that (g124,g124) = ( 0 1 1 0 ) . (27) Condition (27) means, in particular, that both g (1) 124 and g (2) 124 have zero Euclidian lengths, i.e., are isotropic. Denote the entries of a124 and G124 as a124 = ( x y x′ y′ ) , G124 = ( α β β γ ) , then (27) means the conditions( x y ) G124 ( x y ) = ( x′ y′ ) G124 ( x′ y′ ) = 0, ( x y ) G124 ( x′ y′ ) = 1. (28) The solution to (28) is( x y ) = c ( −β+ √ β2−αγ α ) , ( x′ y′ ) = c′ ( −β− √ β2−αγ α ) , (29) with any c and c′ such that cc′ = 1 2α(αγ − β2) . (30) Next, we define, the same way, isotropic bases in all other spaces corresponding to our triangles ijk, and define matrices P̃ , . . . , T̃ by conditions P̃ ( g124 g234 ) = ( g123 g134 ) , . . . , T̃ ( g125 g235 ) = ( g123 g135 ) . Due to the orthogonality conditions of the form (17) and isotropy and normalization conditions of the form (27), the matrices P̃ , . . . , T̃ satisfy P̃TJP̃ = · · · = T̃TJT̃ = J with J =  0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0  . (31) After identifying these matrices with 6 × 6 matrices, so that they acquire the form (4), they satisfy the pentagon equation Q̃P̃ = T̃ S̃R̃. Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras 11 It remains to say that, for instance, P̃ is expressed the following way P̃ = ( a123 0 0 a134 ) P ( a−1124 0 0 a−1234 ) , (32) in terms of P given by formula (14). Remark 10. The freedom in this construction is, first, in choosing the sign of square roots in (29) and, second, in choosing two values c and c′, obeying one condition (30), for every space ijk. 7 Grassmann–Berezin calculus and pentagon relation in a Grassmann algebra A Grassmann algebra over the field C of complex numbers is an associative C-algebra with unity, generators xi and relations xixj = −xjxi. In particular, x2i = 0, so an element of a Grassmann algebra is a polynomial of degree ≤ 1 in each xi. An even (odd) element in Grassmann algebra consists, by definition, only of monomials of even (resp. odd) total degrees. The exponent is defined by the standard Taylor series. For example, exp(x1x2 + x3x4) = 1 + x1x2 + x3x4 + x1x2x3x4. For every Grassmann generator xi, there are two derivations: left derivative ∂ ∂xi and right derivative ←− ∂ ∂xi . These are C-linear operations in Grassmann algebra defined as ∂ ∂xi (xif) = f, (fxi) ←− ∂ ∂xi = f, where the element f does not contain xi; in this case also, of course, ∂ ∂xi f = f ←− ∂ ∂xi = 0. More generally, there are the following Leibniz rules: for an even or odd f , ∂ ∂xi (fg) = ∂ ∂xi f · g ± f ∂ ∂xi g, (gf) ←− ∂ ∂xi = g · f ←− ∂ ∂xi ± g ←− ∂ ∂xi f, namely, the plus is taken for an even f , and the minus for an odd f . In some situations, the derivation in Grassmann algebra constitutes an analogue not to usual differentiation, but to integration. In such cases, it is called Berezin integral [1]; traditionally, Berezin integral is defined as the right derivative. In order to introduce the relevant notations, we also give its independent definition: it is a C-linear operator in Grassmann algebra satisfying∫ dxi = 0, ∫ xi dxi = 1, ∫ ghdxi = g ∫ hdxi, if g does not contain xi; multiple integral is understood as iterated one, where the Fubini rule is applied according to the following model:∫∫ xy dy dx = ∫ x (∫ y dy ) dx = 1. 12 I.G. Korepanov and N.M. Sadykov The Grassmann-algebraic pentagon relation we are dealing with in this paper looks as follows:∫ W1234W1345 dx134 = const ∫∫∫ W1245W2345W1235 dx125 dx235 dx245. (33) Here Grassmann variables xijk (generators of the Grassmann algebra) are attached to all two- faces ijk in Fig. 1; the Grassmann weight Wijkl of a tetrahedron ijkl depends on (i.e., contains) the variables on its faces, e.g., W1234 depends on x124, x234, x123 and x234. The integration in both sides of (33) goes over variables on inner faces (where the tetrahedra are glued together), while the result depends on the variables on boundary faces. Usually (compare, for instance, [8, formula (30)]), there appears also a numeric factor that cannot be included in a natural way in any W; we denote it const in (33). 8 Orthogonal operators from Grassmann–Gaussian exponents We denote Grassmann variables – generators of a Grassmann algebra – by letters x and y with subscripts. The operators of left multiplication by xi: f 7→ xif (34) and left differentiation w.r.t. xi: f 7→ ∂ ∂xi f (35) satisfy fermionic anticommutation relations [xi, xj ]+ = 0, [ ∂ ∂xi , ∂ ∂xj ] + = 0, [ xi, ∂ ∂xj ] + = δji , where the anticommutator of operators A and B is [A,B]+ def = AB +BA. Operators (34) and (35) make thus a realization of fermionic creation-annihilation operators, and these operators generate a Clifford algebra, see [1, Chapter I]. The canonical transformations of the mentioned operators – linear transformations that pre- serve the anticommutation relations – are given by orthogonal linear operators [1, Chapter II]. Specifically, right now we are going to deal with algebras generated by two variables. For one algebra, called X, the generators are called x1 and x2, and the anticommutation relations for the abovementioned operators can be written in the following matrix form  ∂ ∂x1 x1 ∂ ∂x2 x2  , ( ∂ ∂x1 x1 ∂ ∂x2 x2 ) + = J, where J is our old matrix (31). The operators ∂ ∂x1 , x1, ∂ ∂x2 and x2 are, of course, linearly inde- pendent, so a 4× 4 matrix M of an endomorphism of the subspace spanned by ∂ ∂x1 , x1, ∂ ∂x2 , x2, relative to this basis, preserves the anticommutation relations provided MTJM = J. Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras 13 We write such canonical transformation as ∂ ∂x1 x1 ∂ ∂x2 x2  7→M  ∂ ∂x1 x1 ∂ ∂x2 x2  . One more algebra, called Y, is a copy of X, with generators called y1 and y2. Note that we introduce below C-linear operators A, B and C acting in the following spaces: A : X→ X, B : X→ Y, C : Y→ Y, while A, B and C will be simply 4× 4 matrices. We are now interested in canonical transformations obtained from Gaussian exponents. First, consider the operator A of multiplying by the following Gaussian exponent, where a is a numeric coefficient: A : f 7→ exp(ax1x2)f. (36) As this operator obviously commutes with left multiplications by x1 and x2, while ∂ ∂x1 ( exp(ax1x2)f ) = exp(ax1x2) ( ∂ ∂x1 + ax2 ) f and ∂ ∂x2 ( exp(ax1x2)f ) = exp(ax1x2) ( −ax1 + ∂ ∂x2 ) f, the following canonical transformation arises from pushing (34) and (35) from left to right through (36): ∂ ∂x1 x1 ∂ ∂x2 x2  7→ A−1  ∂ ∂x1 x1 ∂ ∂x2 x2 A = A  ∂ ∂x1 x1 ∂ ∂x2 x2  , where A =  1 0 0 a 0 1 0 0 0 −a 1 0 0 0 0 1  . (37) Next, consider the operator B given by the following Berezin integral: B : f 7→ ∫ exp(b11x1y1 + b12x1y2 + b21x2y1 + b22x2y2)f dx1dx2. (38) Again, a simple calculation shows that pushing through (38) from left to right gives ∂ ∂y1 y1 ∂ ∂y2 y2  7→ B−1  ∂ ∂y1 y1 ∂ ∂y2 y2 B = B  ∂ ∂x1 x1 ∂ ∂x2 x2  , (39) where B = 1 ∆  0 −b11∆ 0 −b21∆ −b22 0 b12 0 0 −b12∆ 0 −b22∆ b21 0 −b11 0  , ∆ = b11b22 − b12b21. 14 I.G. Korepanov and N.M. Sadykov And our third operator C will be again like (36): C : f 7→ exp(cy1y2)f. (40) The analogue of (37) reads ∂ ∂y1 y1 ∂ ∂y2 y2  7→ C−1  ∂ ∂y1 y1 ∂ ∂y2 y2  C = C  ∂ ∂y1 y1 ∂ ∂y2 y2  , where C =  1 0 0 c 0 1 0 0 0 −c 1 0 0 0 0 1  . (41) The product CBA of operators (40), (38) and (36) corresponds to the following Grassmann weight of tetrahedron 1234: W1234 = exp(ax1x2 + b11x1y1 + b12x1y2 + b21x2y1 + b22x2y2 + cy1y2), (42) where we identify x1 = x124, x2 = x234, y1 = x123, y2 = x134, in the following sense: CBA : f 7→ ∫ W1234f dx1 dx2. (43) This operator makes, according to (37), (39) and (41), the following canonical transformation: ∂ ∂y1 y1 ∂ ∂y2 y2  7→ (CBA)−1  ∂ ∂y1 y1 ∂ ∂y2 y2  CBA = CBA  ∂ ∂x1 x1 ∂ ∂x2 x2  . We will need the explicit expression for CBA, which we also denote W1234: W1234 = CBA = 1 ∆  cb21 b11(ac−∆) −cb11 b21(ac−∆) −b22 −ab12 b12 −ab22 cb22 b12(ac−∆) −cb12 b22(ac−∆) b21 ab11 −b11 ab21  . (44) Both sides of (33) can be regarded as kernels of integral operators acting on functions of three Grassmann variables. To be more exact, there are three “input” variables, corresponding to three triangles in the leftmost pentagon in Fig. 2 or 3, and three “output” variables, corresponding to the triangles in the rightmost pentagon in any of those figures. The mentioned integral operators are products of two or three operators of the form (43), respectively, for the l.h.s. or r.h.s. of (33), and each operator in these products corresponds to a tetrahedron. Theorem 6. Let Gaussian exponents of the form (42) be taken for all Grassmann tetrahedron weights entering in (33) (of course, with its own parameters a, . . . , c for each tetrahedron). Then equality (33) holds, with a proper factor const, provided the five corresponding matrices (44) obey the pentagon relation in direct sum: W1345W1234 = W1245W2345W1235. (45) Proof. It is known from general theory (see again [1]) that if a C-linear operator K on Grass- mann algebra corresponds to a (linear) canonical transformation K in the manner like our A, B and C corresponded to A, B and C, then K is determined by K up to a scalar factor. So, (33) follows if we take for K first l.h.s., and then r.h.s. of (45). � Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras 15 9 A special case related to deformed exotic torsion In this section, we consider the case where all ζi’s have the form ζi = ( λi + µi iµi iµi λi − µi ) , i = √ −1. (46) Remark 11. All matrices of the form (46) commute. The usual Jordan form of matrix (46), if µi 6= 0, is ( λi 1 0 λi ) , see [3]. Matrix G124 has, according to (24), the same form (46), namely G124 = ( λ+ µ iµ iµ λ− µ ) , λ = 2λ21λ41 λ42 , µ = 2(λ241µ21 − λ221µ41) λ242 , where we write, in the style of formula (8), λij = λi − λj , µij = µi − µj . Possible matrices a124 are, according to Section 6, as follows: a124 = 1 2λ diag ( c124, c −1 124 )( 2 2i λ− µ −i(λ+ µ) ) , where c124 is an arbitrary nonzero constant. Then we calculate the matrices a234, a123 and a134 in the same way as we have done for a124, only changing the indices as required, then the matrix P according to (14), and finally P̃ according to (32). The result is P̃ = diag ( c124, c −1 124, c234, c −1 234 ) P̂ diag ( c−1123, c123, c −1 134, c134 ) , where P̂ =  λ32λ41 λ31λ42 0 −λ32 λ31 0 − λ21A λ31λ32λ242 1 − A λ31λ42λ43 −λ21λ43 λ32λ42 λ21λ43 λ31λ42 0 λ32 λ31 0 λ41A λ31λ242λ43 1 − A λ31λ42λ43 λ41 λ42  , (47) and A = ∣∣∣∣∣∣∣∣ 1 λ1 λ21 µ1 1 λ2 λ22 µ2 1 λ3 λ23 µ3 1 λ4 λ24 µ4 ∣∣∣∣∣∣∣∣ (again, Maxima has helped much in these calculations). The zeros in matrix (47), when compared with (44), show that ζi’s of the form (46) correspond to the case where ac− b11b12 + b12b21 = 0. (48) 16 I.G. Korepanov and N.M. Sadykov This is exactly the case for the Grassmann tetrahedron weights already introduced in [8, 9]. Re- call that the starting point in these papers was Grassmann weights related to Reidemeister tor- sion of some exotic chain complexes, and then a deformation, like in [8, formula (23)], makes them (up to a numeric factor) a Grassmann–Gaussian exponent for which the condition (48) can be easily checked. Actually, any Grassmann tetrahedron weight obeying (48) can be obtained from weights in [8, 9] by a proper scaling xijk 7→ constijkxijk of Grassmann generators. This shows that the present paper is about further nontrivial deformations of the exotic torsion weights. Acknowledgements The authors thank Rinat Kashaev for useful discussions, and the referees for careful reading of the first version of the paper and valuable comments. References [1] Berezin F.A., The method of second quantization, Pure and Applied Physics, Vol. 24, Academic Press, New York, 1966. [2] Doliwa A., Sergeev S.M., The pentagon relation and incidence geometry, arXiv:1108.0944. [3] Gantmacher F.R., The theory of matrices, Vol. II, Chelsea, New York, 1974. [4] Kashaev R.M., On discrete three-dimensional equations associated with the local Yang–Baxter relation, Lett. Math. Phys. 38 (1996), 389–397, solv-int/9512005. [5] Kashaev R.M., On matrix generalizations of the dilogarithm, Theoret. and Math. Phys. 118 (1999), 314–318. [6] Kashaev R.M., Korepanov I.G., Sergeev S.M., The functional tetrahedron equation, Theoret. and Math. Phys. 117 (1998), 1402–1413, solv-int/9801015. [7] Korepanov I.G., A dynamical system connected with inhomogeneous 6-vertex model, J. Math. Sci. 85 (1997), 1671–1683, hep-th/9402043. [8] Korepanov I.G., Relations in Grassmann algebra corresponding to three- and four-dimensional Pachner moves, SIGMA 7 (2011), 117, 23 pages, arXiv:1105.0782. [9] Korepanov I.G., Two deformations of a fermionic solution to pentagon equation, arXiv:1104.3487. [10] Kuniba A., Sergeev S.M., Tetrahedron equation and quantum R matrices for spin representations of B (1) n , D (1) n and D (2) n+1, arXiv:1203.6436. [11] Lickorish W.B.R., Simplicial moves on complexes and manifolds, in Proceedings of the Kirbyfest (Berkeley, CA, 1998), Geom. Topol. Monogr., Vol. 2, Geom. Topol. Publ., Coventry, 1999, 299–320, math.GT/9911256. [12] Pachner U., P.L. homeomorphic manifolds are equivalent by elementary shellings, European J. Combin. 12 (1991), 129–145. [13] Sergeev S.M., Quantization of three-wave equations, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40 (2007), 12709–12724, nlin.SI/0702041. [14] Sergeev S.M., Quantum curve in q-oscillator model, Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 2006 (2006), Art. ID 92064, 31 pages, nlin.SI/0510048. [15] Takagi T., On an algebraic problem related to an analytic theorem of Carathéodory and Fejér and on an allied theorem of Landau, Japan J. Math. 1 (1924), 83–93. [16] Takagi T., Remarks on an algebraic problem, Japan J. Math. 2 (1925), 13–17. http://arxiv.org/abs/1108.0944 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01815521 http://arxiv.org/abs/solv-int/9512005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02557327 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02557179 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02557179 http://arxiv.org/abs/solv-int/9801015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02355328 http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9402043 http://dx.doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2011.117 http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.0782 http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.3487 http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.6436 http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/gtm.1999.2.299 http://arxiv.org/abs/math.GT/9911256 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/40/42/S15 http://arxiv.org/abs/nlin.SI/0702041 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/IJMMS/2006/92064 http://arxiv.org/abs/nlin.SI/0510048 1 Introduction 2 Pentagon relation in a direct sum of based vector spaces: generalities 3 Kashaev's pentagon relation for orthogonal matrices in a direct sum of one-dimensional spaces 4 A construction of based n-dimensional spaces yielding pentagon relation 5 Making operators orthogonal 6 Explicit formulas for n=2 and isotropic bases 7 Grassmann-Berezin calculus and pentagon relation in a Grassmann algebra 8 Orthogonal operators from Grassmann-Gaussian exponents 9 A special case related to deformed exotic torsion References

Pentagon Relations in Direct Sums and Grassmann Algebras

Institution

Ähnliche Einträge